backtop


Print 47 comment(s) - last by acase.. on Mar 9 at 5:46 PM

Music fans and gamers will be delighted to hear that a Rock Band video game featuring The Beatles finally has a release date

Gamers will finally be able to get their hands on a Rock Band video game based around The Beatles, one of the most popular bands of all time.

The new game will have "an unprecedented, experiential progression through and celebration of the music and artistry of The Beatles," it was said in a statement.

The Beatles: Rock Band will be released around the world on September 9.  The game by itself will ship for $59.99, and another $99.99 will snag gamers a guitar, bass, mic and drums so they can jam alongside the Fab Four.  Older Rock Band instrument controllers will still be able to work with the new game.

This is the first time music from The Beatles will be used in a video game, with Sir Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr the remaining two living members of the band.  Both McCartney and Starr, alongside Yoko Ono and Olivia Harrison, the widows of John Lennon and George Harrison, contributed input into the video game.

"The project is a fun idea which broadens the appeal of The Beatles and their music," McCartney originally said when the game was first announced.  "I like people having the opportunity to get to know the music from the inside out."

The Beatles have been hesitant over the years to allow their music to be sold online or featured in a video game, but the band's officials have finally agreed on money issues with game studios and music producers.  The band has sold more than 600 million albums across the world.  The video game was made possible when Harmonix and Viacom were able to complete a deal with Apple Corps, Ltd. -- rumors of a possible Beatles-based game been swirling for quite some time.

The game will be released for the Microsoft Xbox 360, Sony PlayStation 3 and Nintendo Wii video game consoles. 



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

yawn
By Barfo on 3/6/2009 2:18:33 PM , Rating: 1
*yawn*




RE: yawn
By Motoman on 3/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: yawn
By bighairycamel on 3/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: yawn
By TreeDude62 on 3/6/2009 3:40:34 PM , Rating: 4
Your not putting the music into the context of the time. People didn't shred on the guitar in their day. Their songs were simple, but had a lot of meaning behind most of them. Mame me a band in the 60's that was better than The Beatles.


RE: yawn
By Reclaimer77 on 3/6/2009 3:49:05 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
They were the Backstreet Boys of their generation... only difference was they played instruments (very mediocrely I might add) and their fame lasted more than 15 minutes.


Blasphemy.

And I'm not a Beatles fan, but anyone saying this is just trolling or ignorant.


RE: yawn
By SpaceRanger on 3/6/2009 3:50:53 PM , Rating: 5
*Hits The Rolling Stones With a Bus*

THERE! Mamed another band that was better...

Better is always objective in nature..


RE: yawn
By TreeDude62 on 3/6/2009 4:04:28 PM , Rating: 2
I suppose your right. I never really cared for the Stones myself (they have songs I like, but many of them I don't). But can anyone really argue The Beatles as at least being one of the most influential (if not THE most) bands, ever?


RE: yawn
By Reclaimer77 on 3/6/2009 4:11:01 PM , Rating: 1
Stones are so overatted. Calling themselves 'the greatest rock band of all time' is such a joke.


RE: yawn
By omnicronx on 3/6/2009 4:06:10 PM , Rating: 2
He asked about the 60's, and the Beatles were THE band of the 60's.

The Stones are a great band, and as a whole I like them better, but nobody can take away the 60's from the Beatles, it was their decade.


RE: yawn
By ebakke on 3/7/2009 7:15:40 PM , Rating: 2
subjective?


RE: yawn
By bighairycamel on 3/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: yawn
By Lord 666 on 3/6/2009 4:25:47 PM , Rating: 2
The Doors?!?!?!


RE: yawn
By Mortando on 3/6/2009 4:38:55 PM , Rating: 5
In related news, Beethoven is *totally* overrated because he couldn't play guitar like Hendrix.


RE: yawn
By bighairycamel on 3/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: yawn
By Mortando on 3/6/2009 5:32:10 PM , Rating: 2
Okay, I'll slow this down for you. The Beatles weren't particularly influential because of their ability to sing or play an instrument or their stage performance, it was their *songwriting ability* (specifically their pop/rock&roll songwriting ability). No one on your list has a legacy that comes close to the Beatles in that respect (and I say that as a fan of pretty much every one of them).


RE: yawn
By Spuke on 3/6/2009 7:04:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
No one on your list has a legacy that comes close to the Beatles in that respect
Not even Eric Clapton?


RE: yawn
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 3/6/2009 5:36:23 PM , Rating: 2
yes, most of these people groups were influenced by the works of the Beatles... So, the student sometimes can put something out better then the teacher your point?

By the way, outside of Elvis, all these listed above wish they had as many hits as the Beatles.


RE: yawn
By xsilver on 3/6/2009 9:06:11 PM , Rating: 2
Elvis only wished for another sandwich?

Anyways I find it odd that the above list only has 2 non americans.

That and also the fact that even if we only take on board that the beatles were "only" a 60's band try to think of a consensus "best" band for any decade after that. I simply cannot do it. (note I said "best" not biggest; the beatles were both)


RE: yawn
By omnicronx on 3/6/2009 4:03:12 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
Despite what anyone thinks or wants to think, based on talent I would argue The Beatles are the most overrated band in the history of music.
If by overrated you mean one of the most influential bands ever, then sure, I agree. Your favorite artists today would not be the same if not for the Beatles.
quote:
They were the Backstreet Boys of their generation... only difference was they played instruments (very mediocrely I might add) and their fame lasted more than 15 minutes.
I hope you realize how much of a moron you are making yourself out to be. Unless you listen to country, almost every single rock band you listen to on the radio was in some way or another influenced by the Beatles either actively or passively (i.e whether their favorite bands were influenced by the Beatles, or they were influenced directly).

Even if you don't like the Beatles, you cannot take away what they have done for the music industry.


RE: yawn
By bighairycamel on 3/6/09, Rating: -1
RE: yawn
By omnicronx on 3/6/2009 5:15:31 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
but don't spit in the face of Eric Clapton, Jimi Hendrix, or Stevie Wonder and tell me they weren't as equally influential as The Beatles?
No.. they are not.. Those are all great artists of their time, but none of them were as inflential as the beatles.

Furthermore, Clapton was good friends with Harrison, played guitar for the album version of 'While My Guitar Gently Weeps' and there were even rumors that he was going to replace John Lennon. His style of music was very much so influenced by the Beatles in one way or another.

Hendrix is the same, the song She's So Fine was a Beatles tribute.

No disrespect to all the great bands of our past, but the Beatles have always stood out like the Beatles did, especially when you consider they had and still have fans all around the world. Guys like Clapton and Stevie Wonder did not.
quote:
I'm talking about musical talent, not musical influence.
And I disagree, in my books they go hand and hand..
quote:
I don't know who in our generation decided it would be "hip" to like the beatles, but sit back and reflect on their musical ability and tell me it has any substance worth mentioning today.
They were worldwide stars, how can't you understand that. No other band in history has had the same worldwide appeal as the Beatles. The US is not the world, don't forget that.


RE: yawn
By Reclaimer77 on 3/7/2009 9:10:56 AM , Rating: 2
He's preaching about influential artists but spits on the Beatles and leaves David Bowie out of his list ?

Epic fail.


RE: yawn
By someguy123 on 3/6/2009 8:42:20 PM , Rating: 2
you have no idea what you're talking about.

the innovators who were more interested in new sounds and lyrics than in hitting the perfect notes have less talent than people who are clearly influenced by them and/or downright copy them?

Aristotle is overrated because scientists nowadays have perfected the scientific model he created? his model is so inaccurate man, why do people talk about him?!?!


RE: yawn
By someguy123 on 3/6/2009 8:43:42 PM , Rating: 2
whoops i meant method


RE: yawn
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 3/6/2009 4:07:50 PM , Rating: 2
You don't know much on the Beatles do you? A very large percentage of current musicians (people that play instruments and sing - not boy bands or rappers) get their foundation from the Beatles. Also, their 15 minutes of fames as you say, was 12 years of the group being together... and about 60 years of out selling every other band.... That is a huge testimony to their overall talent – something current bands are still trying to achieve a small fraction of. Anytime they put out a revised/new Beatles CD it still outsells any new bands CD sales for that year. Let's see them try to do that with the Backstreet Boys.
The band was the biggest thing since the wheel. They could not even tour for the last five years they were together. It was to difficult to secure the events and people where getting hurt. Things that many take for granted in the music world today are that way because the Beatles created those things.

You don't have to like them, however you should show them respect for their achievements...


RE: yawn
By bighairycamel on 3/6/09, Rating: 0
RE: yawn
By iamted on 3/6/2009 5:14:07 PM , Rating: 2
ok so im only 31 and cant remember but i think that most of the bands that have been compared to the beatles came after the beatles were around, so infact the very bands that they are compared to were influenced by the beatles. yes clapton stones hendrix all came after the invasion. the beatles were more than a band, in that they also helped to define an era, they had the hair, the attitude, and they were young, elvis was already around for years before they were. they had an edgey new style, that wasnt refried beans like most of the music of their day. or of our day. they were doing things that no one else dared to try.

is their music primitive, well ofcourse. for the most part the eletric guitar was a new instrument, so they were pioneers. if your going to compare the beatles to someone, then do it compared to charlie chaplin, he wasnt the first actor, but youd be hard pressed to name someone that was better in his day.


RE: yawn
By omnicronx on 3/6/2009 5:17:58 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
And popularity has NOTHING to do with talent.
In the Beatles case, I disagree, without talent they would have never breached the US market. It sure was not their cheap bowl haircuts..


RE: yawn
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 3/6/2009 5:30:53 PM , Rating: 2
Go back and read my post... I said that their fame lasted more than 15 minutes (in reference to the Backstreet Boys who's fame didn't last more than 15).

A better idea... Go back and read my post. The area you quoted from my post more directly. My point was, it's because of their talent that their fame has lasted so long and so strong. 30 years from now, no one will know the name of the Back Street boys, but I bet the Beatles will still be played on the radio and/or their songs still covered. Back in the 50's and 60's you were not but on a record unless you were talented... I was way too expensive.


RE: yawn
By GlassHouse69 on 3/6/2009 8:10:32 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, until they finally got other people to WRITE THEIR MUSIC, they were the backstreet boys of their generations. I have an older friend who wrote 3 of their songs for them. He is an author and songwriter for broadway now. If you look at the pre-big money years, they were way to simple to be taken seriously. Look at HendrixXXXx at this time!! Come on!!

even the rolling stones had 20x more depth. I love the later Beatles work, but that is when they had massive production companies and countless writers and arrangers on staff.


RE: yawn
By Hulk on 3/7/2009 12:14:10 AM , Rating: 1
You're 21 years old and love Coldplay or some other lamo band right?

Oh the ignorance.

Have you ever even listened to the Beatles? Do you realize the influence on pop music that Lennon/McCartney had and still have? You think Beatles songs are simple? You are obviously not a musician. Oh wait, you can kill rock band. Oh sorry I forgot you know your shit musically.

I could school you on chord structure, harmony, use of dissonance, variation of themes, .. but what's the use. You don't know shit about music and don't care to listen to anything but something that's right in your face. Hey I like Greenday too but the Beatles they are not.


RE: yawn
By acase on 3/9/2009 5:46:31 PM , Rating: 2
Oh, he made you angry. I don't like you when you're angry!

The whole point of the original post was *YAWN*. Who the hell cares if they could write songs or were very "influential." The game will be more boring than the last two Hulk movies combined.


RE: yawn
By anotherdude on 3/7/2009 1:53:20 PM , Rating: 1
pure ignorance


RE: yawn
By AlexWade on 3/7/2009 9:40:58 PM , Rating: 1
Do yourself a favor. Listen to Revolution #9, which is the last track on the White Album, really really late at night.

That song, if you can call it that, still gives me nightmares. I can hear it now "Number 9, number 9, number 9, ..." and that isn't the scary part.


RE: yawn
By ExarKun333 on 3/6/2009 4:11:28 PM , Rating: 2
Will this come with Beatles-esque wigs for everyone to wear while rocking out to theie highly overrated songs?

Yawn...


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki