Slashdot Mirror
While My Guitar Gently Beeps
theodp writes "As the world prepares to meet the Beatles all over again on 9-9-9, the NY Times Magazine takes a look at the making of The Beatles: Rock Band, and asks a Fab Four tribute band to take the game for a test drive. (Not surprisingly, they fare well.) 'As huge as Guitar Hero and Rock Band have been over the past few years,' says Harmonix Music Systems co-founder Alex Rigopulos, 'I still think we're on the shy side of the chasm because the Beatles have a reach and power that transcends any other band.' The Beatles: Rock Band follows the group's career from Liverpool to the concert on the roof of Apple Corps in London in 1969 (trailer). The first half of the game recreates famous live performances; the second half weaves psychedelic dreamscapes around animations of the Beatles recording in Studio Two. 45 songs deemed the most fun to play, rather than the band's most iconic numbers, come with the game."
it's boring and easy listening.
i don't get it why there's such a hype around that band.
I just don't get the 'fun' involved in pressing buttons in time to music. It's not a game. It's like a kids toy or something. like simon.
Maybe if you were real drunk and were playing to fuck around with some friends. maybe... but i don't think most people 'play' it like that.
And theres all this self-important bullshit surrounding these games too. And every new game ammounts to... hey more songs! wooo!
I just don't get it.
Good artists borrow; great artists steal. It's cliched because it's the absolute truth.
What a load of garbage. Do us all a favor, if you will. Please cite a few examples of where the following great artists stole:
Picasso
Shakespeare
Monet
Beethoven
Da Vinci
Michaelangelo
etc etc
You can, of course, sue to get your Tasty Monies...Hope your ego can hold up to that notion.
What is your problem? I'm sorry if it bothers you that there are artists who would like to be able to derive some sort of income from creating and sharing music. Perhaps it's some jealousy on your part, perhaps your father was a musician who paid more attention to his instrument than you, or perhaps you're just a jerk...who knows? Your argument just doesn't hold up at all, and furthermore, its arrogance is quite astounding. You seem to feel that you (or others) has some inherent 'right' to do whatever the heck they want with anyone else's work. I would ask that you apply this same formula to what you do for your income and see what you think about it. Imagine someone gets to put your hours on their timecard and get paid for them as well as you (meanwhile you were the one who did the work). Wouldn't feel too good would it?
Trent Reznor wasn't cool with Johnny Cash performing Hurt. Doesn't matter now, does it?
You are mistaken. Seems Trent was fine with it, and more importantly he was asked first. That's the point that you, and a lot of others, tend to miss. This isn't about trying to stick it to anyone, and it isn't about trying to hit the lottery for one song. It's about not allowing others to decide what will or won't be done with something I've created. I resent the implication that my efforts should benefit someone else unless I agree to the terms.