Me three. As I said over there, we were just saying something similar internally today, but it may have to be one of those Ideas For The Future.Originally Posted by fredyellowone Go to original post
Me three. As I said over there, we were just saying something similar internally today, but it may have to be one of those Ideas For The Future.Originally Posted by fredyellowone Go to original post
We intentionally didn't do this, because this would create a fanboy flame war. "See, Josie & the Pussycats got more song votes than Jem & the Holograms, so like I told you, my band is better and your band sucks." Same reason we didn't list the bands in any ranking system other than alphabetically.Originally Posted by Master_Cylinder Go to original post
Calling out specific titles also puts a target on those songs. If Josie's camp sees a ranked song list, they could easily say "Oh, so that many fans want to hear 'Three Small Words,' eh? Raise the price!" It also removes our song team's ability to say "No, subjectively, we should do this song over that song" based on the six-point checlklist in the infographic. Instead, we'd get players complaining, "You even admitted we all wanted 'Stop Look and Listen,' so why aren't you doing what we tell you to do?" When you do something like this, you have to consider the irrational reactions almost more than the rational ones.
Simply put, it would create more harm than good. Being specific but not too specific made this tricky to put together.![]()
We intentionally didn't do this, because this would create a fanboy flame war. "See, Josie & the Pussycats got more song votes than Jem & the Holograms, so like I told you, my band is better and your band sucks." Same reason we didn't list the bands in any ranking system other than alphabetically.Originally Posted by Master_Cylinder Go to original post
Calling out specific titles also puts a target on those songs. If Josie's camp sees a ranked song list, they could easily say "Oh, so that many fans want to hear 'Three Small Words,' eh? Raise the price!" It also removes our song team's ability to say "No, subjectively, we should do this song over that song" based on the six-point checlklist in the infographic. Instead, we'd get players complaining, "You even admitted we all wanted 'Stop Look and Listen,' so why aren't you doing what we tell you to do?" When you do something like this, you have to consider the irrational reactions almost more than the rational ones.
Simply put, it would create more harm than good. Being specific but not too specific made this tricky to put together.![]()
Bass only would exclude guitarists. Guitar only would exclude bassists. We're really trying to generate content that lets every player play.Originally Posted by jagaroth40 Go to original post
Bass only would exclude guitarists. Guitar only would exclude bassists. We're really trying to generate content that lets every player play.Originally Posted by jagaroth40 Go to original post
Guitarists can play this!Originally Posted by DanAmrich Go to original post
Dan - fantastic job on the FAQ and the infographic. I truly appreciate the efforts you have made to connect with the community and I think you've really pushed the envelope here in terms of addressing concerns without divulging information that could harm the brand or the company down the road. Thanks!Originally Posted by DanAmrich Go to original post
A few questions:
1) I realize that note-tracking is time consuming and arduous, but has it ever been a show-stopper requiring you to ask for a different recording?
2) Regarding popularity metrics, is there a certain threshold you're looking for to consider a song? A lot of bands I really enjoy, and that would be perfect for RS in terms of techniques and interesting guitar/bass parts, are probably fringe-ish in terms of popularity by most measures. I've put in song requests anyway but I'm curious just what your team would define as "popular enough" for a song or band to be considered.
3) In terms of licensing, how many shades of gray are there between "No, your game sucks" and "Here take all our songs"? Before your arrival as CM, those of us who followed RS depended heavily on Paul Cross tweets for hints at future DLC, and it seemed he would often say something like - we're hoping to get [the song/artist in question] later this year, just waiting for it to clear. That seemed to imply that the necessary parties were in favor of licensing the song(s) but it would just take time. Is that an accurate perception? About how many songs are in the pipeline somewhere between verbal assent and note tracking at any given time?
Regarding licensing...
What about public domain songs in general?
I was just thinking about Robert Johnson; he died in 1932 (IIRC); would that make his music public domain and usable in game? I know he was acoustic but that doesn't mean his songs couldn't be played on an electric even if bass tracks had to be added. Do the acoustic only recordings make it a deal-breaker?
I'm sure there are plenty of decent public domains songs that could be a fit for RS...
Thx for all the info
cool..and figured as much....however, I do think some of our requests fall into the cracks because
you have already produced a song pack and you have so many new bands to schedule in.
I propose a new type of additional DLC
:-D
Call it Second helping
it would be nice if you offered additional singles from already released bands along with the
usual DLC release
hypathedical example
you release say zz top 3 pack or any other new to RS band
AND you also release 1 more song from say...green day
some bands just need more than a 3-5 pack
I agree, some bands need 10-20 packs.Originally Posted by fatherrock Go to original post![]()