Activision wants $$$ for PS3 guitar patch
We still don't understand what Activision has to lose by making the guitars compatible with each other. With so many Rock Band players desperate for another guitar controller, we're pretty sure they'll give Activision the sweet cash they're looking for by buying the game. Isn't that free money for them?
[Via Joystiq]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
Byron517 @ Dec 20th 2007 12:11PM
This is a perfect example of the phrase
C.R.E.A.M
*Cash Rules Everything Around Me*
That's sad... it doesn't hurt Activision to just make a patch for the people that already DISHED out money to play their product... that's just poor service but whatever.. I won't be getting another Guitar Hero or Rock Band anymore.. They can enjoy what I have given them but they can kiss my &#@&*!
Trev @ Dec 20th 2007 12:29PM
The thing is, they don't even need to make the patch. Harmonix already has it made, they just aren't allowed to release it. Activision wants to get paid for SOMEONE ELSE doing the work to make their guitar work with another game, ignoring all the additional sales of that guitar they would get out of it.
They can't even handle being GREEDY very well. Not only are they not going to get paid to allow the patch to be released, they're not going to make money on the extra controllers they would sell. That's just stupid.
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 3:48PM
It's true, I was about to run out and get GH3 weeks ago, when HMX said they finished the patch.
But it's not so terrible... what I really really want is another Rock Band guitar, not the shatty (in design *and* quality) GH3 guitar anyways.
Of course it would be nice for other people who don't mind the GH3 guitar.
Sora57 @ Dec 20th 2007 12:17PM
Bobby Kotick: How many yachts can you waterski behind?
PhillyVu @ Dec 20th 2007 12:20PM
That pretty much makes me think twice on any future purchases from Activision/Red Octane. If ever.
They are right, I would not have bought their guitar in the first place, but would have bought GH if my RB guitar worked on it.
Popfrogs @ Dec 20th 2007 12:42PM
It's like watching Cartman eating a pot pie.
No Harmonix it's myyyyy guitar. NO HARMONIX THAT'S A BAD HARMONIX!
HAAS599 @ Dec 20th 2007 12:52PM
Can we revise the dumbest business decision list still?
this has to be top 5
Solace @ Dec 20th 2007 12:53PM
so, they want money?
like the money they get in royalties from when we buy their peripheral?
am i missing something, or are they saying that we can only play the way they want us to play?
barstards.
captain underpants and the bringdown gang @ Dec 20th 2007 12:54PM
Does this make anyone else sick to their stomach? to think that this company merged with blizzard? If they are going to do that I might have to obstain from buying a blizzard/acitivision game ever again.
Darkdrium777 @ Dec 20th 2007 2:07PM
Basta! There are no guitar controllers for StarCraft ][ thankfully.
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 3:35PM
They didn't merge with Blizzard, they merged with Vivendi (the company that owns Blizzard, among other things). However, they decided to call the result not Activision-Vivendi, but Activision-Blizzard due to Blizzard being a more household name than Vivendi. Of course in my experience, the company name that comes second is almost always dropped after a while.
Rudetrooper @ Dec 20th 2007 1:07PM
Why should Activision make it easy to port over their customer base to a competitors product? To help EA sell more games? If EA is having hardware issues (bad guitars) the last thing Activision should do now is resolve it for them. EA is trying to expand their customer base and sell software only versions of RB. Activision is right to ask a large piece of the pie.
Nate @ Dec 20th 2007 5:04PM
This post screams Activision plant.
Activision doesn't have to *do* anything to help EA/Harmonix. What they are doing is actively *hindering* EA/Harmonix.
The guitar troubles are over. They've been over. New bundles of rock band have perfectly functioning guitars and they're replacing guitars with free second day shipping. I requested mine on Monday and got it yesterday, which means it mailed out the same day I asked for it.
All this is Activision saying "screw you, PS3 music game fans, we're going to actively try to stop something that costs us nothing because we're too greedy to let it go without a fee"
RSly @ Dec 20th 2007 2:14PM
This isnt hindering Harmonix at all. How in the world is refusing to help a company for free "actively hindering" another company? So if Microsoft asks Apple for some of their technology and Apple asks for compensation, then they are wrong to ask for money? Everyone should share everything and play nice? These are competing businesses trying to make money.
If Harmonix needs guitars, they can easily make the guitars. Theres no reason for Activision to help Harmonix and make Rock Band more appealing and draw sales away from Guitar Hero.
JerJerBinks @ Dec 20th 2007 2:58PM
Its plain and simple:
Les Paul Guitar for X360 -- Works in Rock Band
Les Paul Guitar for PS3 -- Does not work in Rock Band
The current problem is equity, PS3 customers are currently being descriminated against due to Activision's policy of greed. Fix the balance between console users, and there will be less of an issue.
Also, Activision is in a place where technically they are losing sales. If the GH Guitar bundle were to work with Rock Band, people would shell out money to have that extra guitar and heck maybe even play GH3 and get some DLC. Its just bad business sense.
In the end this all adds up to me being pissed off that neither of my GH3 guitars work with Rock Band, even though there is probably a 5 MB patch that would fix that. I am pissed enough that I would never buy a Activision product again if they hold this stalemate for long enough.
Activision ..|..
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 3:41PM
RSly, your analogy is flawed. Mine isn't great, but maybe it'll help bring the point across.
Think of it this way. Ford makes steering wheels for their cars. Now imagine someone wants to make a steering wheel cover. Simple enough, just figure out how to make it fit, then make it and ship it to stores. Now imagine Ford halting their products from shipping because they want royalties for that company to make the steering wheel covers work with their steering wheels.
RSly @ Dec 20th 2007 3:44PM
Bad business sense? What is the objective of every single company everywhere? Make money.
And Activision is not losing any sales from this. Nobody is going to buy a brand new $100 Guitar Hero III bundle just for the guitar to use with Rock Band. They are going to use their existing GH controllers or buy them on eBay. No new money is going to Activision.
It seems the only people who are mad at this situation are Rock Band owners who should be angry with Harmonix for not having separate guitars for sale and having to recall their own guitars is their problem. This patch was a free solution for them to fix it and Activision wisely said no.
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 3:48PM
Oh, also, how on earth would it draw sales from Guitar Hero??? It would do nothing but add sales.
For one thing, there is people who already own both and they'd like to just have 2 controllers that work with both games instead of having to buy an extra controller for each and storing 4 in there house, only 2 of which are usable at a time.
And another thing is that there's people like me who bought Rock Band but never planned on getting Guitar Hero. However, if the Guitar Hero controller worked with Rock Band, you bet I'd run out and buy it.
Also, Harmonix publicly stated several times (when RB and GH3 were in production) that they would love to design their guitar to be compatible with GH3, but Activision refused.
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 4:02PM
Are you an Activision employee?
"Activision is not losing any sales from this. Nobody is going to buy a brand new $100 Guitar Hero III bundle just for the guitar"
Why the hell not? A stand-alone guitar is like $70, I'd much rather pay $100 and get a whole new game with it!
"This patch was a free solution for them to fix it and Activision wisely said no."
a) patches aren't free, writing code takes time, and then there's testing and other red-tape. All that == $$$.
b) that 'solution' causes no ill to Activision whatsoever. Even if people did go out and buy used GH3 guitars and not new ones, how would that affect Activision? Do you really think that these products are competing on the same level? I have never once heard anyone debate on whether they should buy GH3 or Rock Band.
RSly @ Dec 20th 2007 4:04PM
Larz,
But your analogy doesn't take into account that Guitar Hero III and Rock Band are the same product and also the main competitor of each other. Its not Ford steering wheels and steering wheel covers. In this case, it would be Ford steering wheels and Chevy steering wheels.
Harmonix isnt another company creating a product(wheel covers manufacturer) to be used with an already existing product (Ford steering wheel). They are creating a solution to better their own product (Rock Band) from the supplies of their main competitor (Activision)
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 5:01PM
Yeah, I said my analogy wasn't very good either, however, although they share some similarities, they are NOT the same. Ok, let's think of it another way.
Let's say Ford makes gasoline and cars, and Yamaha makes OHV's and gasoline.
Lets assume: gasoline = peripherals, vehicles = software.
So, someone might buy a car, some might buy an OHV, some might buy both. They both have distinct differences/advantages/disadvantages.
Now Ford says "we're happy to make our gas work in your OHV's and vice-versa, as this will benefit everyone."
Yamaha says "no thanks, I don't see the benefit there."
Ford says "ok, whatever, but to benefit consumers we'll still make our cars run on your gas. Even though we'll lose money by not selling our gas, consumers will be happy, and they'll be able to get gas at more stations."
Yamaha says "no, absolutely not... unless you pay us."
Seems absurd, but this is exactly the situation.
Oh, and let me further it by pointing out that Chevy cars (Xbox360) will run on either gas, yet Yamaha (Activision) doesn't seem to care about that.
WhinyB4stard @ Dec 20th 2007 1:20PM
the internet is a good place to vent, and its good to see that people are venting their frustrating @ activision's greed. but you all know that you are STILL going to buy Warcraft IV or CoD5. Give me a break. stop complaining when you know that you are not going to sell/give up your guitar hero in protest.
linebeginstoblur @ Dec 20th 2007 3:39PM
I know this is random, but I found the irony of your post compared to your username quite funny. :)
Larz @ Dec 20th 2007 4:07PM
Meh, the only thing Blizzard did that I really liked was Warcraft 2.
Now, Blizzard North on the other hand...
JKPierce @ Dec 21st 2007 1:53AM
The Internet is also good for broad generalizations without any prior knowledge.
So yeah, but no; Activision will not receive mine or my family's patronage.
RangerPrimeX @ Dec 20th 2007 1:21PM
Given the small number of Rock Band sold let alone the smaller number on PS3, I do not see why they do not just let the patch be released. I do the see the danger for them as many people will get GHIII and just purchase the Rock Band game but in the end it would be better customer relations to let the patch be released.
gibson355 @ Dec 20th 2007 1:22PM
Dear Activision spokeswoman:
You said: "We believe we should be compensated for the use of our technology."
I say: "I believe you will be justly compensated in ill will."
It's a bonehead move. Making the patch available will not cost Activision sales of GH. Sell the GH peripheral to a PS3 user and its likely just a matter of time before they buy the GH standalone game...especially when they want to rock out alone.
But to announce you want to get paid for the use of your technology on the PS3? When the 360 GHIII Rock Band controller is fully compatible with Rock Band on the same? Stupefyingly short-sighted..if I have to wait till the end of January for my second Harmonix guitar controller, I will..but why would I buy GHIII and a GHIII controller at that point?
Mis dos centavos.
Broken Haiku @ Dec 20th 2007 1:28PM
I was so getting Guitar Hero III for Christmas (as a present to myself), but now I'll just get Rock Band instead. Activision, I fart in your general direction. Profane and crude, but then again it's on your level.
wonway01 @ Dec 20th 2007 2:27PM
Its probably simple business. You don't give things away for free, even if it isnt costing you anything. I can't ask MS to give me a copy of win95 for free as nobody buys it anymore and it won't cost them any sales.
Or maybe they think there device will get played more and they could ave increased warentee issues that will cost $.
wonway01 @ Dec 20th 2007 2:29PM
Aslo consider why would they want to make a competeing product more fun? Maybe more would be inclined to buy the next version of the other companies product. The other company knows there are alot of people out there with a device out they can take advantage of to sell products for.
Terry @ Dec 20th 2007 2:54PM
It would be great if a Harmonix employee took the initiative to leak the patch online, as a big FU to Activision. He would be a hero to the RB users, and be seen as a martyr (hopefully not though).
linebeginstoblur @ Dec 20th 2007 3:40PM
I think Harmonix has done all they can now. Isn't the patch still in Sony's confused hands?
Kellian @ Dec 20th 2007 3:38PM
suh-nap.
Christian @ Dec 20th 2007 3:38PM
I have a great and simple solution. EA pays 5 million USD to Activision for the use of the GH guitar in Rockband and at the same time Activision pays 5 million USD to EA for the use of the Rockband guitar in GH. And everyone is happy.
linebeginstoblur @ Dec 20th 2007 3:41PM
Good solution! Can't we all just get along?
Kuritorisu @ Dec 20th 2007 4:28PM
I just emailed Maryanne Lataif at mlataif@activision.com. She's the one that said "we believe we should be compensated for the use of our technology". All of you should email her too and tell her what we "believe" they should do.
AK @ Dec 20th 2007 6:42PM
you aren't even reading the comments here are you?...
Rudetrooper @ Dec 20th 2007 4:49PM
Maybe Activision should release a patch that will allow RB DLC to work on GH. It would be only driving more EA sales right? Oh yeah EA has made an investment to create that content and it might hurt their future sales as people would be playing the content with another title.
andrew @ Dec 20th 2007 5:01PM
The fact that GH3 controllers work with Rockband on the 360 stems from the fact that the 360 only has one way of recognizing wireless inputs(thank you M$), in which, whoever makes a wireless peripheral has to pay M$ compensation to use it. PS3 doesn't have any restrictions on wireless, so basically we're being punished because sony didn't really care about putting restrictions on wireless for ps3.
Those who don't think that activision would sell more guitar hero III bundles with this patch is retarded. I myself(and I know I'm not alone here) refused to buy GHIII for ps3 unless I knew for damn sure it would work with rockband. Now I'm sitting here not having bought either game waiting for the collective minds to sort this pissing contest out or until rockband sells individual peripherals in late jan/early feb. Instead I would've easily plopped down 270 bucks for rockband and ghIII bundle.
Oh well, guess activision doesn't need my money since GHIII is fun but definately a step in the wrong direction gameplay wise. All my money will be going towards rockband instead. Good job activision, way to protect your assets.
ron @ Dec 20th 2007 5:03PM
I agree with activision on this mainly because rock band is from EA and I hate EA with a burning passion.
The more EA has to pay to other companies, the better!
Zombie Huggles @ Dec 20th 2007 5:03PM
Why are all these big developers turning into assholes? Square is whining about the PS3 not being "clearly" advertised, Capcom forgot who their fans were, Rockstar is taking Bribes from Microsoft, EA just sucks for the most part as normal, and now Activision wants to be compensated for something that would make them money anyway...
I wasn't too interested in Guitar Hero 3, given that I played GH2 to-death, but now all interest has flown out the window. Looks like another game I'll buy used. If I'm not mistaken, Harmonix made Guitar Heroes 1 and 2, seems like they should have the right to make GH3 guitars work for their game. If it wasn't for them, GH3 wouldn't exist. Activision, you just lost another customer, ME!
Rudetrooper @ Dec 20th 2007 5:20PM
If EA really wanted to win this guitar war they would put out a PS2/PS3 converter that would allow the 2 million+ PS2 guitar controllers to work with RockBand.
Sorry this patch is not so well disguised attempt to grab market share from the GH franchise. They want GH owners to play RB plain and simple.
AK @ Dec 20th 2007 6:45PM
"GH owners"
exactly, they've already bought the game, what does activision lose if they stop playing it?
Rudetrooper @ Dec 20th 2007 8:17PM
Its about the "GH Owners" next purchase. By allowing the GH guitar compatible they in essence reduce the price of RB to $59. Thats the game only sku that much more profitable that the instrument bundle. Breaking the price barrier for people who they know are their target market would be a huge advantage for EA.
EA believes they have the better product. What is the fastest way to add players? Convert your target market or find new buyers? EA believes that once they have them playing they think they can keep them with DLC and the community/band aspect of the game.
AK @ Dec 21st 2007 9:11AM
i guess you have forgotten that the xbox360 is the main platform for both these games.
activision doesnt care about the 360 guitars working on both.
the ps3 versions are the minority. activision just think "oh noes! we let them use our guitars, they'll sell more games and we wont sell anymore! let's charge them for the money we are going to lose"
now if anything, making the patch available will increase sales of guitar hero 3, so in reality, activision should be paying compensation to harmonix, since the inclusion of the guitar hero compatibility will make most consumers not buy a second rock band guitar.
anybody that wont buy guitar hero 3 after it's patch is someone who doesn't want to buy guitar hero 3 at all.
plain and simple. activision are telling harmonix to pay up to use another game's peripheral, i dont see how they got the idea. "if they let our guitars work in their game, our guitars wont sell as much!"
it is nothing but pure greed, sure they may have the legal means to ask for money, but the moral side is just plain wrong.
Autopsy15 @ Dec 21st 2007 1:56AM
Activision just McSgrooge'd us.
Doh, humbug.
James @ Dec 21st 2007 11:03AM
This is simply Activision waving their lawyers menacingly over their heads as a blunt instrument against smaller competition (who, IIRC, is doing quite a bit better in the review press). If the Rock Band folks just went ahead and included the patch, I cannot possibly see how they would lose a court battle over this.
Well, OK, I can -- Activision has more money to fritter away on their legal team, so even though they're obviously on the wrong side of the law, they'd probably win by hiring the ghost of Johnny Cochran or something. In a fair and just world, the EFF would back up Harmonix just to make sure a precedent for this sort of thing was effectively set, to make it harder for this sort of bullshit intimidation to work in the future.
As an aside, the Penny Arcade guys did a comic about this (Monday, I think?), with Gabe saying Tycho's a communist for siding with Harmonix. Personally, I think "commie" is one of the worst insults you can hurl at somebody, but I think Harmonix is right as well. I don't think it's the place of the law to help companies intentionally segment markets to the detriment of consumers at large.
Easo @ Dec 21st 2007 3:42PM
Why is this not an issue on the 360? Did Activision get paid, or was there just no way to stop the 360 guitars from being compatible?
Mark @ Dec 22nd 2007 12:34PM
hearing this just pisses me off.
rbfan275 @ Jan 23rd 2008 9:23PM
I agree with many of the folks who have expressed frustration with Activision over this situation. But the reality is Activision is in competition with Harmonix and they are not going to be motivated to help Harmonix in any way unless there is some financial benefit. In the short term Activision might stand to benefit from some extra GH3 sales, but eventually Harmonix will have a standalone guitar available for ps3, and at that point Activision will not see much benefit. I'm going to assume that Activision already did the math on what kind of cash they can get in the short term if they allow the patch. Obviously whatever that number is, it's not enough to satisfy Activision.
But to me all of that is irrelevant to those of us who already bought RB for PS3. As far as I am concerned, Harmonix is the one who claims support for 3rd party guitars, therefore they are the ones who should be responsible for making sure they exist. Why did Harmonix assume that Activision would cooperate when they are a direct competitor? If Harmonix did not have guitars available yet, then they should not have released RB for ps3 yet! It's is actually the greed of Harmonix that caused this situation, as they wanted to release RB for ps3 in time for all the christmas sales. Now it should be 100% on Harmonix to fix the situation, whether that means paying Activision to allow the release of the patch, or to get a standalone guitar on the market asap. The bottom line is the fault here in my mind lies with Harmonix, not Activision.