In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

Shredder46 — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 19:44:08 GMT

wow, nice songs, if yhey weren't stupidly expenisive then i might get them...

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

steve — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 08:06:26 GMT

My Chemical Romance is made of fail and aids.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

jclast — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 17:32:21 GMT

Now you're talking. I'd pay for an 80s career with a few extra achievements! Hell, I'd pay a couple thousand points for that!

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

biXen — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 13:43:02 GMT

I don't think the price is that bad. But I don't like My Chemical Romance, although I enjoyed dead. My big annoyance is the 3 song pack. From the other packs I usually wanted one song, they force me to pay for all, and it's expensive if it's one song you want and two you don't want. I'd be pretty pissed if I had to buy two more songs when I wanted a song at iTunes. That's my main beef. I also think they could release the 80s tracks for GH2 on 360, should be a fairly simple fare. I'd pay for that.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

bamaredwingsfan — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 05:42:38 GMT

Im through with anything in the Guitar Hero franchise. Rockband all the way baby!

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

LoTECH — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 04:36:43 GMT

Meh...The MCR song in the original 'packed-in' game was one of the most fun songs to play in the whole set. Not to mention the fact that they're performed by MCR, and not some brutal faker. Still, I would rather buy Ecco the Dolphin and save a couple bucks.

Now, if they had a Rage Against the Machine pack that was 'performed by:'...

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

jason — Thu, 16 Aug 2007 02:12:21 GMT

They suck. This is the worst pack to come out.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

eVOLVE — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:49:03 GMT

I have a feeling there is a deeper value missing from the packs beyond 'rubbish songs' or 'inflated prices'. Yes they are more expensive in a price per song sense, but even more than that, one of the great pulls for me with GH2 that encouraged me to play through was to gain the achievements, and unlock further songs. The bonus songs that you can buy with virtual money have got comparatively little playing.

So when we get a pack of new songs, their value isn't as high to us as the ones we've had to unlock, or the ones that can grant us further achievements. Imagine a big pack of GH1 songs is released for the same price as the original game. It still wouldn't be as good value unless you had the option to unlock them through a new campaign, with new achievements unlocked as you are doing it. We'd get a lot more play out of them for a start, rather than just playing the songs if you actually wanted to play those specific songs at that specific time. I'm still only playing all of the songs in coop to unlock those new bass guitars.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

ORBEG0SO — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 22:08:21 GMT

Actually Red Octane did listen. If you guys were smarter you would understand. First you pissed and moaned about the price. Then when explained why the price is reasonable you started to complain about packs being random songs grouped together containing one good song. And now they release a pack containing more then one good song containing an actual theme and not just randomness. But now you continue to complain, this time again about the price blaming Microsoft.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

Lola Inferno — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 20:07:27 GMT

K well 500 msp is pretty expensive, but MCR totally kicks ass so it is so worth it! I have been WAITING AND WAITING for them to come out with something like this! Keep it up and I will totally be splurging on GH3 and Rock Bands instead of paying my rent. lol! >.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

ncBadrock — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:19:19 GMT

What I do not understand is: Why don't they charge 500 Points in the first two or three months after the release and after that reduce the price to let's say 300. This way you could reach a lot more consumers (those willing to pay 500 points and those willing to pay 300). As a side effect they would avoid the bad image they get from being called greedy.

But what do I know after 4 years of business studies at the university O_o.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

jclast — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:01:57 GMT

@leo78 - That's not true at all. A pic costing 80 points didn't stop Ninja Bee (or whoever published Band of Bugs) from releasing its expansion for 250 points. And for those points you get 10 new missions (the original had 20) and 2 new unit types.

What I'd really like to see is publishers dropping prices on DLC after a few months on the market just like what happens with physical games to move a few extra units. I know there are a lot of arcade titles that I'd like to play, but I just can't warrant 800 points on them, and I'd like the GHI packs for GHII, but they're not worth 500 points to me (I currently have 0 and would like all 5).

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

leo78 — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:36:06 GMT

Everyone that says Microsoft has no blame in the DLC pricing issues doesn't realize that MS set the markets "penny standard" by making themes and pics so pricey. If a gamer pic is going to be 80 pts ($1), then the songs have to cost more since you can do more with them. Pics, themes, and horse armor killed the prices.

While the graphics and power argument for next gen consoles is far from over, Microsoft has won hands down on nickel and dimeing their customers to death. I understand that these are businesses and they are around to make money, markup happens, but how do they justify saving on costs by going to digital distribution but then charging the customer more to get it that way?

Just helps prove that Microsoft really could care less about the consumer once they have gotten your money. I thought that their gaming division was different , but I guess not. How long did it take them to admit to a problem with the RRoD, and they still try to spin that.

I'm sure some fan-boy is going to post that I'm wrong or "if you don't like it don't buy it". But these people don't notice that their posts look worse than anyone complaining. They just try to justify why they purchased the DLC, when if it was at a good value justification wouldn't be necessary.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

I kauan I — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:01:38 GMT

Sad, sad, really sad... Any more comments are useless at this moment, they won't listen to us. And I'll never buy a 3 songs pack at this prices (as thousands of people), worse for them.

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

Tigger — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 12:20:44 GMT

More BS pricing....

More BS excuses....

re: In Game Content: Guitar Hero II

fastmode — Wed, 15 Aug 2007 08:17:18 GMT

If these songs are by the original artist, wouldn't that be more expensive? Then why are they the same price as the other ones? Because they overcharge for the re-recorded ones. And these too IMO. I echo those who say the game would cost well over $100 if all the songs were priced this way. Look at the 80's expansion priced as a full game on PS2 despite the fact that it has way fewer songs and uses basically the same code as the original game. I hope Rock Band gets it right and puts GH to bed.