• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Harmonix: Activision Blocked Rock Band PS3 Guitar Compatibility Patch

I don't really plan on buying RB. but from what I've read, let me get this straight...

Activision are apparently assholes for NOT wanting to help out a competitor who was tight assed enough to ASSUME everyone would own Activision's game and therefore just use THEIR peripheral?

Not to mention Harmonix they didn't make a decent version of theirs in the first place?

:lol


Oh yes, Activision, you evil evil company you.
 
olubode said:
I'm sorry, but EA is paying Activision a fee for each copy of Rock Band sold?
Click to expand...

No, they're not.

Your point appears to be that Activision's interest in this is that they are trying to snuff out sales of Rock Band (which is viewed as a competitor to Guitar Hero) by preventing GH controllers from operating with RB. Activision's hope is that people will become discouraged by this and pass on Rock Band, figuring, "Well, golly gee willikers, I suppose I've got no choice but to buy GH3 instead! It's the only music game on the market, you know!"

The thing is, Rock Band is already out there and people know it. Anyone who has his heart set on playing RB is going to buy RB, regardless of the existence of GH3. RB isn't going to lose the sale here. GH3 is going to lose the sale because Activision is failing to look at the bigger picture, that they are selling GH3 guitars (which just happen to be bundled with GH3 games and sell for $100) to people who otherwise would not have bought them at all.

Is it better to have 100% of a smaller pie, or 60% of a pie that's twice the size?
 
Shpeshal Ed said:
I don't really plan on buying RB. but from what I've read, let me get this straight...

Activision are apparently assholes for NOT wanting to help out a competitor who was tight assed enough to ASSUME everyone would own Activision's game and therefore just use THEIR peripheral?

Not to mention Harmonix they didn't make a decent version of theirs in the first place?

:lol


Oh yes, Activision, you evil evil company you.
Click to expand...

The only reason I bought GH3 was to use the included controller as a Rock Band controller. Now Activision would like to see support for that controller removed from the 360 version of the game, and I shouldn't be angry at them?
Your handle describes you perfectly.
 
Sony should just go ahead and release the patch anyway. What's Activision going to do, threaten to cease PS3 development over this issue--an issue that can only help them by attracting new sales? There's no logical reason why Activision would want to deliberately limit their options. If Activision yanked PS3 support, they'd almost certainly be losing their customers to EA, as people who would've bought Guitar Hero, Call of Duty, and Tony Hawk (Activision's three biggest franchises) would instead migrate to Rock Band, Medal of Honor, and Skate. That's why any such threat from Activision would be hollow, and can safely be disregarded.
Click to expand...

This is all true, but weighing your options in a situation like this is for the best. I just picked up RB for my PS3 today (oh the irony) so here's hoping this all works out!
 
HokieJoe said:
This sounds like a well-timed squeeze job to me. Surely EA didn't undertake development for the PS3 without some sort of assurance that compatibility wouldn't be an issue? Activision is protecting their turf here. This gives them some possible leverage to choke some loot out of EA.
Click to expand...

GH3 wasn't out yet, there was no way Harmonix could test compatibilty
 
Agent X said:
No, they're not.

Your point appears to be that Activision's interest in this is that they are trying to snuff out sales of Rock Band (which is viewed as a competitor to Guitar Hero) by preventing GH controllers from operating with RB. Activision's hope is that people will become discouraged by this and pass on Rock Band, figuring, "Well, golly gee willikers, I suppose I've got no choice but to buy GH3 instead! It's the only music game on the market, you know!"

The thing is, Rock Band is already out there and people know it. Anyone who has his heart set on playing RB is going to buy RB, regardless of the existence of GH3. RB isn't going to lose the sale here. GH3 is going to lose the sale because Activision is failing to look at the bigger picture, that they are selling GH3 guitars (which just happen to be bundled with GH3 games and sell for $100) to people who otherwise would not have bought them at all.

Is it better to have 100% of a smaller pie, or 60% of a pie that's twice the size?
Click to expand...
What is the sense in allowing a strong publisher and competitor to gain any kind of traction on a market you effectively own 100% of? Time and time again, we have seen publishers prefer to try and control the market by any means. (Hello thar NFL exclusivity) GH3 is going to effectively sell regardless of the sales of RB. If you think it's a good business strategy to risk your dominance in a market now, just to make a few extra bucks (which is exactly what your suggesting), good luck with that.
 
Activision is the new Electronic Arts. :lol

Edit: Beaten by a post a few ahead of mine . . . actually, I've probably been beat several times to that statement.
 
Link316 said:
GH3 wasn't out yet, there was no way Harmonix could test compatibilty
Click to expand...


Apparently they didn't think it would be big deal then? I can't fathom why any company would make such a leap of faith.
 
What ticks me off is how this move by Activision affects a gamer such as myself, someone who is buying both GH and RB, and was planning on continuing to buy subsequent releases in both series. I'm not to be won or lost to one side or the other. I wanted compatibility so that I can have my Les for GH, and my Strat, drums and mic for RB, and then use my Les as a bass for RB as well. I save money, and Activision loses zero potential profit from me.

Now instead of ever spending money on GH again, I'll be using that cash to buy a second Strat for RB, which is, from all impressions and what I've seen, the better game.

Hence, good for you Activision, you just lost a customer, completely unnecessarily.
 
What blows my mind is that they can't be making that much money on the hardware - the software HAS to be more profitable and having more people with compatible guitars assures more software sales, right?

I just don't understand it.

Oh well, I have 2 strats now so I'm cool, but I'm not buying another GH game till they work with them.
 
Agent X said:
No, they're not.

Your point appears to be that Activision's interest in this is that they are trying to snuff out sales of Rock Band (which is viewed as a competitor to Guitar Hero) by preventing GH controllers from operating with RB. Activision's hope is that people will become discouraged by this and pass on Rock Band, figuring, "Well, golly gee willikers, I suppose I've got no choice but to buy GH3 instead! It's the only music game on the market, you know!"

The thing is, Rock Band is already out there and people know it. Anyone who has his heart set on playing RB is going to buy RB, regardless of the existence of GH3. RB isn't going to lose the sale here. GH3 is going to lose the sale because Activision is failing to look at the bigger picture, that they are selling GH3 guitars (which just happen to be bundled with GH3 games and sell for $100) to people who otherwise would not have bought them at all.

Is it better to have 100% of a smaller pie, or 60% of a pie that's twice the size?
Click to expand...


Agent X has the right idea. See, to me, it wasnt Guitar Hero that made the games great, it was Harmonix. Initially I had no plans of ever getting guitar hero, but I entertained the idea to complete the RB set. This is the demographic that they are missing. Read through this thread and look at the people they've fucked. Not only will they lose sales from those who would have gotten RB, but there are also those who already bought the game who wont buy the next in the series.

To me, I see this as they are truly scared of RB. They know that Harmonix was the one that made it good and if they arent careful, the guitar hero name wont have any value. Essentially thats all that GHIII has going for it; its name. But that can be taken away very easily. In doing this, the weaken the chance of RB gaining traction among the casual gamer and prevent RB from replacing the GH name.
 
What ticks me off is how this move by Activision affects a gamer such as myself, someone who is buying both GH and RB, and was planning on continuing to buy subsequent releases in both series. I'm not to be won or lost to one side or the other. I wanted compatibility so that I can have my Les for GH, and my Strat, drums and mic for RB, and then use my Les as a bass for RB as well. I save money, and Activision loses zero potential profit from me.

Now instead of ever spending money on GH again, I'll be using that cash to buy a second Strat for RB, which is, from all impressions and what I've seen, the better game.

Hence, good for you Activision, you just lost a customer, completely unnecessarily.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the situation I'm in. Despite not having much fun with Guitar Hero 3, I was willing to give Activision the benefit of the doubt for the inevitable future iterations. Unless things change, I will not be buying further GH games, depriving them of my future revenue.
 
M3wThr33 said:
That wasn't Activision.
Click to expand...

Yep, GH1 was published by RedOctane.
 
olubode said:
What is the sense in allowing a strong publisher and competitor to gain any kind of traction on a market you effectively own 100% of?
Click to expand...

They don't own 100% of that market, though. Rock Band already exists, so there is no monopoly. People who have the game now, who want a second guitar, cannot buy one now because there are no guitars sold separately. Activision could be selling guitars to these people, but instead they are deliberately choosing not to.

Interestingly enough, if Activision allowed this patch, they would have 100% of third-party guitar accessory sales on PS3, since they would be the only company right now that could provide guitars to these people. Instead, you have people who are satisfied with waiting for EA's separate guitars to become available.

Then again, I don't need to be the one making this point. Just read the previous posts in this thread so far. Judging from reactions here, it appears this decision will negatively impact Activision's sales far more than it will EA.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Why didn't Sony just make a Bluetooth adapter for you to use your PS2 wired controllers?
Click to expand...

Attaching a bluetooth adapter to the end of a a cord is kind of dumb don't you think? The cord would just be dangling on the ground. If anyone/thing happens to walk by they would kick the cord around your living room.
 
Agent X said:
They don't own 100% of that market, though. Rock Band already exists, so there is no monopoly. People who have the game now, who want a second guitar, cannot buy one now because there are no guitars sold separately. Activision could be selling guitars to these people, but instead they are deliberately choosing not to.

Interestingly enough, if Activision allowed this patch, they would have 100% of third-party guitar accessory sales on PS3, since they would be the only company right now that could provide guitars to these people. Instead, you have people who are satisfied with waiting for EA's separate guitars to become available.

Then again, I don't need to be the one making this point. Just read the previous posts in this thread so far. Judging from reactions here, it appears this decision will negatively impact Activision's sales far more than it will EA.
Click to expand...
I'm just going to state a couple of points, but I do want to thank you for keeping this disagreement honest and thoughtful with me.

Prior to RB shipping, GH owned this market in NA. Rock Band sales are going to be nowhere near those of GH3 for this holiday season due to its' price and any advantage that Activision can keep in maintaining it's sales and image lead of RB, Activision will take. Activision absolutely does not want to help EA gain any kind of foothold in the music peripheral market. So yes they sacrifice some unknown benefit in cash now, but Activision clearly feels its insignificant to the long term fight.

Also, while I think highly of Neogaf, this last couple of week has shown me that once they find a successful product, publishers in this industry care little about upsetting the hardcore enthusiast gamers found on forums like this one.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Why didn't Sony just make a Bluetooth adapter for you to use your PS2 wired controllers?
Click to expand...
Okay, I don't really know much about anything, but wouldn't there need to be some way to friggin power the things? Or can that shit be done wirelessly now too?

olubode said:
Also, while I think highly of Neogaf, this last couple of week has shown me that once they find a successful product, publishers in this industry care little about upsetting the hardcore enthusiast gamers found on forums like this one.
Click to expand...

You would have a point were this any other product. Not only did a hardcore fanbase pretty much create the success GH has had, GHIII isn't anything remotely approaching casual friendly. RB pretty much has it beat on both fronts, pissing people off isn't something Activision should be doing right now.
 
For those supporting their Activision's decisions, what possible advantage can pissing off countless PS3 owners provide. I want to hear their statement concerning this.

"We're sorry for being such dicks, but this is business. BTW thanks for your money."
 
Son of Godzilla said:
Okay, I don't really know much about anything, but wouldn't there need to be some way to friggin power the things? Or can that shit be done wirelessly now too?
Click to expand...

It would have to be battery powered.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Or USB powered.
Click to expand...

If you're attaching the Bluetooth adapter to the PS2 controller cord, and then powering the adapter through USB, then it's just a glorified USB adapter. You can plug PS2 controllers into your PS3 via a USB adapter and the system recognizes it. I thought you wanted the Bluetooth in order to make it wireless?
 
Son of Godzilla said:
You would have a point were this any other product. Not only did a hardcore fanbase pretty much create the success GH has had, GHIII isn't anything remotely approaching casual friendly. RB pretty much has it beat on both fronts, pissing people off isn't something Activision should be doing right now.
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely, hardcore gamers made GH the success it is. It also could be argued that most of the people purchasing this third incarnation outnumber the hardcore.
 
i'm probably going to get Rock Band only now. and get Guitar Hero III for PS2 when its like 20 bucks so i can just use my old guitar.
 
LJ11 said:
If you're attaching the Bluetooth adapter to the PS2 controller cord, and then powering the adapter through USB, then it's just a glorified USB adapter. You can plug PS2 controllers into your PS3 via a USB adapter and the system recognizes it. I thought you wanted the Bluetooth in order to make it wireless?
Click to expand...

Oh, I thought they all had to be Bluetooth to work. I was mostly referring to the Guitar Hero 1/2 guitars not working with the PS3. If Sony made those work then no one would care about this issue besides a few random gripes about it not being wireless... but it would still work.
 
OldJadedGamer said:
Oh, I thought they all had to be Bluetooth to work. I was mostly referring to the Guitar Hero 1/2 guitars not working with the PS3. If Sony made those work then no one would care about this issue besides a few random gripes about it not being wireless... but it would still work.
Click to expand...

You can use USB adapters to get your guitar working with GH1, but the problem is getting the guitar to function properly with GH2. RedOctane changed the way the game was coded so it only operated in a specific way with the guitar. When you use an adapter with GH2 you can't use hammer ons and pull offs, which makes the game unplayable on higher difficulties. At least that's how my adapter works.
 
Stand-alone RB sitting on shelves never looked right to me anyway. Why release a game that solely depended on a competitor's peripheral to play? I think if EA didn't do such a boneheaded thing, Activision would not have cared as much about their guitars being compatible. Necessary vs optional gives Activision cause to not want to support EA's sale.
 
BLAH BLAH BUSINESS INTERESTS BLAH BLAH

The only thing that matters to me is that I have two guitar controllers and could easily use both to play Rock Band except for Activision's whining about Harmonix trying to patch their own damn game. I'm not sure why some folks are having a hard time understanding why we're upset about this.

When was the last time we saw such a blatantly antagonistic move towards gamers on the part of a publisher?
 
Mr_Furious said:
Stand-alone RB sitting on shelves never looked right to me anyway. Why release a game that solely depended on a competitor's peripheral to play? I think if EA didn't do such a boneheaded thing, Activision would not have cared as much about their guitars being compatible. Necessary vs optional gives Activision cause to not want to support EA's sale.
Click to expand...

A few years back Red Octane was in the same situation when they released In the Groove for PS2. They sold a stand alone and a package with a dance pad. The people buying the stand alone would have to use the DDR konami pad. RO did sell a stand alone dance pad but the sku without the pad we being marketed to the people that already had Konami pads.
 
Why should activision have assumed you'd all want to use your guitar hero controllers? Further, when stand alone guitars are available next year what's to stop people buying their guitar but not their game? They know they have a non-crappy peripheral and want to tie it to sales of their own game, and while I can sympathise with all of you I understand why they'd maybe want to block it. And who knows, maybe a deal will be knocked out still...

But if not, think of it this way, how many developers made games compatible with another publisher's musical peripherals? Konami (there were cheap knock offs of the dance mats instead and it was just mapped to buttons anyway), Sega's maracas, Namco's taiko drum, Nintendo's bongos, etc

When EA bought Harmonix maybe they should have negotiated there and then to use the previous products peripherals!
 
what i don't understand is this. How can Sony as the Platform holder allow any 3rd party peripheral company dictate who can use that controller on Sony's platform.
I mean seriously who's fucking in charge over there Sony or Activision.

I really don't see MS allowing any 3rd party company dictate the terms of use to MS of a custom controller on MS's system.

How can anyone defend Activision in this or Sony for letting it happen.
You'd think somewhere theres a clause that says "We let you make controllers for our system, therefor any of our partners can program the use of any controller that works with OUR system.
 
I still don't understand how Activision is so evil with this decision. If Harmonix/EA/MTV would have made standalone peripherals for sale at launch this wouldn't be a problem. Why should Activision have to give in to Harmonix because of that?
 
Super_Chicken said:
You never know, would Microsoft want to lose Activision as a developer? Especially after Cod4 and GH3's (well I don't know about now) Success?
Click to expand...

They still need a market for their games. What are they gonna do, release these games as PS3 exclusives? :lol :lol

Either way, it's EA's fault for not making a standalone guitar for their own game. This is a huge release for EA and for them to lack the foresight of having their own peripheral ready is absolutely hilarious because it's EA.
 
mysticstylez said:
I still don't understand how Activision is so evil with this decision. If Harmonix/EA/MTV would have made standalone peripherals for sale at launch this wouldn't be a problem. Why should Activision have to give in to Harmonix because of that?
Click to expand...
Why would you, as a consumer/gamer, want to purchase two seperate, functionally identical controllers to play two nearly identical games?

No one wins. Except for some disgustingly rich companies, I suppose.
 
mysticstylez said:
I still don't understand how Activision is so evil with this decision. If Harmonix/EA/MTV would have made standalone peripherals for sale at launch this wouldn't be a problem. Why should Activision have to give in to Harmonix because of that?
Click to expand...

Because most of the people in this thread are gamers. They don't care about the business side, who screwed who, or who fucked up. They just want to add a fourth member to their band, and right now Activision is standing in their way.

Activision allowed their guitars to remain functional with Rockband on the 360, why shouldn't they do the same for the PS3? Using your logic, Activision should disable 360 RB functionality because EA & Co fucked up, so the burden is on them to supply the peripheral and not Activision.

Is any of this fair to gamers, probably not. Is it a shrewd business tactic, absolutely. I tend to side with the gamers.
 
Activision is brilliant in the evil genius way. The average moron casual gamer is going to see the GH3 Les Paul's lack of compatibility and automatically assume the fault lies with Harmonix.

Seriously, fuck Activision. What a bunch of assholes. Blizzard is doomed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

AC Shadows PSSR2 TOGGLE vs PATCH
25
369
Bojji replied
Xbox asks for backward compatibility suggestions
Opinion Retro Game Dev  2 3 4
192
251
kindaGoth replied
Latest Rocket League patch ups performance for Nintendo Switch 2
0
151
Banjo64 replied
Cyberpunk 2077 getting a PS5 Pro patch
2
94
1K
Spukc replied
Fallout 4 switch 2 DLSS patch out now
15
316
Hip Hop replied
Top Bottom