(Also, everyone who in all seriousness uses the word "synergy"...)

 Reply

At this rate, I'm not sure which I would rather have happen.

 Reply

I keep asking myself "those every new/sequel game really needs MP just for the heck of it"

 Reply

@Curse_Lily:

Multiplayer's a big one. Forcing everything into the first person viewpoint is also another one, as are "create your own character" systems. It's ironic how most of these decisions come at the expense of deep, nuanced single-player campaigns with compelling storylines and developed characters. Ironic and depressing.

 Reply

The point is, just because the mass market likes something doesn't mean it's good. Just means it's marketed well, or they're too stupid to tell the difference. Sometimes the mass market and quality do overlap, but lately, that's getting less and less frequent.

 Reply

And I think the reason so many games are so middling is because so many games are just like every other game. It's because of this that they have to resort to marketing it to stupid people. How else will you move copies of "generic sci-fi shooter #371"?

For now, the "Games as Art" argument is over, and Ebert has won. There has been little this generation or last generation that has convinced me that video games involve more creative thought than my grocery list.

 Reply

How would I NOT be cynical or full of contempt? I've been playing games since before I could write. The past few years of my gaming career have been equivalent to being a Star Wars fan after the release of Episode 1.

 Reply

No, really. I don't care what Gerstmann likes. He gave Kane and Lynch a 6 FFS. That game should have gotten about a 2.5. No wonder no one gives a crap what the guy likes.

Now, on the other hand, I DO like to see Heidi Klum in her under garments, so, point there.

 Reply

RB has backwards compatibility, and you can export songs from different track packs to build onto the game library. RB has better graphics, visual effects, and animations, though some of these may be subjective. RB has 5x (guesstimate) as more DLC than GH.

The one thing that GH has that RB doesn't is song creation.

Quality and quantity wise, it's quite obvious that RB exceeds GH in virtually every aspect. For most people, though, it really comes down to what songs you want from the game.

 Reply

Backwards compatability is a plus, but I really don't mind swapping disks, not enough to really put one title over the other.

Graphics, visual effects, animations etc. .. that's just eye candy it has no influence on the game whatsoever if you ask me.

Song selection is a big thing, on disk I prefer the GH selection (it helps that they have a lot more titles out) but in terms of DLC RB has the best selection. Then again, your taste in music may vary so again that one is completely subjective.

There are other important things worth considering for these games though. Note charts is probably one of the biggest issues in the games, and whilst GH3 had horrible charts, they've drastically improved since to the point that they're probably better in GH now.

Neither game is "better" than the other, anyone who says otherwise has heavy bias one way or the other.

 Reply

"Song creation is a plus, but I really don't use this feature, not enough to put one title over the other"

See what I did there?

UI eyecandy might be subjective, but I'm mostly talking about it's functional aspect, simple things like song difficulty bars or the way songs are displayed and organized in GH vs. RB. Eyecandy, while not important to you, is important to a lot of people, and is still a pretty good argument in determining which game is better than the other. You can't disregard anything you don't like, don't use or don't care about and leave it out of the equation - it's the whole package, not selected bits and pieces of it.

 Reply

Eyecandy might be important, but it's definitely a subjective one and you have to also consider that both games can be considered at the very least "good" in that respect, so any differentiation between the two is purely a matter of personal preference. I prefer GH on that end because a lot of the special effects that happen in RB in the background are distracting, others might enjoy them.

As a whole package, both games have elements that the other does not, which elements you prefer are the ones that are going to help you decide which is better. So, your statement that RB is better in quality and quantity is just plain wrong because you highlight features that RB has whilst not mentioning ones that GH has.

Compare: RB solo sections vs GH slider sections.

RB solo sections only effect those with a RB guitar, otherwise it's just another section of notes with a slightly different background and a different way of scoring. GH slider sections on the other hand are almost the same, except can simply be tapped on any guitar for those that don't have the GTWT guitar.

In practise, that makes the note charts for GH better because it can turn what would have been long sections of hammer ons into slider sections which can be tapped out and is less punishing when you miss a note.

So that is a feature that both games have, which has been implemented differently and thus greatly effects the core mechanic of the game offering a clear advantage to one title over the other in that section.

I can find other elements that RB is better at (exporting vs disc swapping), but like I said before, it's a matter of working out which are better for you, because objectively the games are pretty much on par.

 Reply

To be perfectly honest, this is getting as bad as the Sony vs MS debates.

 Reply

But then again, this could go on for quite a while, if we started highlighting "unique" features from both sides.

The one thing I was trying to do here is show the subnet6 that you can't just come out and say "X game is better than Y" without any arguments. Also, like I said before "You can't disregard anything you don't like, don't use or don't care about and leave it out of the equation - it's the whole package, not selected bits and pieces of it.", is my other point I was trying to make to you, on my previous post.

As long as I got through those two things, I really don't care which one is better, as I still prefer RB because of it's extensive DLC and backwards song imports. Like I said, it really all comes down to the songs.

 Reply

To quote my earlier posts:

"Neither game is "better" than the other, anyone who says otherwise has heavy bias one way or the other."

"but like I said before, it's a matter of working out which are better for you, because objectively the games are pretty much on par."

You're the one who came in and said that Rock Band was better than Guitar Hero, all I've said is that I prefer Guitar Hero.

 Reply

Yes, the games are very on par, I agree. But I never said that RB was leaps and bounds greater than the other one. There really isn't a HUGE difference, just a smaller (but quite obvious) one. Heck, if you want, I'll go on and say that the GH:M interface was huge a huge improvement, but that would be bringing in a different game.

I did say that quantity and quality-wise, RB was better, with lots of arguments to go with it. I even threw in a GH one, and then you mentioned the note charts, which I completely agree with.

I'm still waiting for more arguments from subnet6 as to why "GH is better than RB". And I've never even mentioned either of the companies or that I'm biased against a specific one - which in my case, I'm not.

And thus we start all over again. *Sigh*, I guess I didn't get through at all.

 Reply

You've said that RB is better based on several features and a few subjective elements, which I'm fine with. I don't agree that those differentiate the two titles though because for me the only things that matter are the song selections and the note charts which I consider the core elements of the game.

On disc, I prefer (across the whole series) the songs available in GH, but for DLC I prefer the RB songs (overall GH:M tips GH over the edge as best song selection though). For the note charts, it varies from game to game, with GH:M being the best and GH3 is the worst but on average GH and RB are about the same (GH2, GHWT, RB and RB2 are all about the same in quality for this one).

Thus, I consider the games pretty much equal because I'm talking about as a series on the whole.

subnet6 gave you his reasons why he thinks GH is better than RB, I don't know why you need more than what he's given, I haven't asked more reasons why you prefer RB just pointed out that because this is all subjective people are allowed to pick and choose as they please.

The reason I mention bias and the whole Sony vs MS thing is that this always happens when GH or RB gets mentinoed. Someone will state their preference for one, leading to someone saying they're wrong and it ends up being this big old flame war when neither wants to relent that the other is right about their game of choice.

That's the point you're not getting, all my first post was meant to do was show you that whilst the things you considered important enough to make RB "better" were not that important to other people.

 Reply

See, I'm not talking about what elements I prefer, or even you or him. It's what elements make the game as a whole that much better. Those elements I mentioned that make RB "better" ARE what's important to people, that's how review scores come to be.

If that is not a way to find if a game is better than the other one, then care to tell everyone how EXACTLY we can find that, when everyone else (mind you, people who dedicate their life to this sorta thing, people who's JOB it is to find out) seems to think RB>GH?

 Reply

Have them play both and make up their own minds.

Shocking concept I know.

Also, why are you so adamant on trying to convince me that RB is superior? The only person's whose opinion I consider on that matter is my own and my mind is quite obviously made up.

 Reply

As for your way of showing that one game is better than the other, it only shows what a specific person might prefer. Here I'm trying to establish, with arguments and facts, which game is superior. And guess what? It CAN be done.

And why are you so adamant in trying to convince me that RB==GH? You stated this as a fact, to start with, so you're not very different from me when I'm trying to say that RB>GH. Seriously, before you criticize my statements, you'd better check your own, 'cause we're doing the exact same thing here.

See, I'm not trying to change anyone's OPINION on which game is better, don't feel attacked. I'm just stating as a FACT which game is superior, backed with quite a lot of arguments and what not. If your mind is not going to change, and it's made up, then good for you! You are kindly welcome to have your own opinions about stuff.

One game can be more fun than another one, sure, but that doesn't mean it's superior, or "better". It's like, pizza to a bowl of fruit. Sure, everyone prefers pizza, but we all know the bowl of fruit is better for quite a lot of reasons.

Once again, this is not about opinions, but facts. If you are going to state as a FACT that RB==GH, you'd better be prepared to defend that argument instead of contradicting yourself.

 Reply

The fact is, the aggregate scores for these two games even from reviewers are withing a couple points of each other 86 vs 91? If you don't think harmonix fanboys can create this small of a gap, you're delusional.

Also, no one mentioned that the GH:WT instruments are vastly superior and improve the experience immensely.

 Reply

But yeah, I was going for the boner joke...

 Reply

I love you guys.

 Reply