Acti planning Guitar Hero: Metallica for Q1 2009

by Dustin Burg { Jun 3rd 2008 at 9:45AM }

Those sneaky business execs over at Activision are really putting their Red Octane purchase to good use lately. Not only are they releasing both Guitar Hero: Aerosmith and Guitar Hero: World Tour later this year, but we just learned that there's another Guitar Hero game scheduled for release early next year and it's guaranteed to have Lars Ulrich's seal of approval.

Gamespot is reporting on industry analyst Michael Pachter's discovery, where (after sifting through Activision's recent SEC filings) he found mention of a new game called Guitar Hero: Metallica that is set to release by fiscal end on March 31st, 2009. No other details were revealed in the filing, other than the obvious fact that Metallica will be a part of the new edition and that it'll probably further dilute the franchise that Activision is hell-bent on milking dry. Yes, we want fuel and yes, we want fire, but we don't think we desire a new Guitar Hero game every nine weeks. Sorry ...

[Via Joystiq, Thanks to everyone who sent this in]

Tags: activision, guitar-hero, guitar-hero-metallica, neversoft

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Edd @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:59AM

Wow just wow I was actually thinking of getting Guitar Hero world tour since I don't have rock band and I really wanted to play with the drums. After this though their intentions are alittle more obvious and alot more sickening so I would refrain from giving them more money to continue this crap. I hope soon that whatever next guitar hero they make ends up where the first E.T games reside now.

Dick @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:41PM

I Agree one hundred percent.

I have no beefs with any artist trying to make money (though I did have a severe dislike for Lars' whiny anti-napster phase). I also have no beefs with a company that makes crap games; they gotta eat too.

My problems come from the complete Rip-Offery that is occurring. Rock Band, made by GH's FIRST PARENTS, is now being ripped off by GH. Its called Guitar Hero, not Rock Band.
Then you have this haberdashery - Metallica, Aerosmith, 80's, GH 4, 3 all coming out in a year.
What the Hell man? Flood the market with rhythm guitar games, we'll be sick of these things before they actually get good.

I'm gonna go play a real drumset

Timur Tabi @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:05AM

The Metallica tracks in Rock Band are hard enough as it is, I can't imagine what they'd be like in GH (which is supposed to be harder than RB).

I'm still waiting for Red Octane to do something that interests me. I'm quite happy with RB and I'll be happy with them for a long time.

Tony L @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:06AM

Oh, hell yes!

Metalilica FTW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

mEgAsHoT @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:26AM

Joystiq, you guys complain about Activison "milking the franchise dry", what else are they supposed to to? You want them to just release one GH game every year? Or do you want them to release a game and not release another one for two-five years? You don't call every yearly edition of Madden "milking". I think you guys are just biased against Guitar Hero, due to the fact that it's as popular as ever and it's selling well. You know what? I've figured out that this whole site is biased against anything Guitar Hero and Sonic the Hedgehog. Given the overly negative posts that constantly pop up on this site whenever a new Guitar Hero or Sonic is mentioned, it just makes me sick that you can even keep an objective stance on things when you get gaming news before Gamespot, IGN, etc. Who could blame Activision for trying out a new direction in the series with GH Metallica and GH World Tour? As long as there is 1 or 2 GH games every so often, I don't see what's the big deal here. I wouldn't call it "milking" the franchise. As long as it turns out to be a good, quality product, that's all that matters. If it was pure junk, though, then I would agree on using that sort of a term. How many times has Mario been milked? He's been in hundreds of different spinoff's and crap and yet you don't call that "milking"? Give me a break.

mikazi @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:39AM

I completely agree with you unfortunately. People have been complaining too much about Guitar Hero. First, you guys complained that GH would never be better than RB because it didn't have extra instruments, and now that it has the extra instruments you don't stop knocking them for having it.

I DeX I @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:40AM

I've just been smacked in the face with a wall of text. I think that there will be permanent scarring.

You just go ahead and keep on giving your money to them, MegashOt.

Matthew @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:07AM

A new GH every 2-5 years? You do realize there has a been a new GH every year for the past 4 years already right? Within the next 8 months Activision will have THREE GH products released. THAT is milking a franchise. Mario games have been spread out fairly evenly over the past 20 years.

As an article stated yesterday, GH: Aerosmith is basically GH3 all over again. The Metallica edition will most likely be the same way, so Activision is in no way taking the series in any new direction. GH:WT is Activisions way of winning back a huge chunk of people they lost to RB and/or people who haven't bought RB yet.

You think these sites are biased against GH and Activision, when in fact they're again companies ruining once great franchises. Wise up, kid.

tan @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:14PM

you're right.
everyone complains about guitar hero 3 for stupid reasons, i can't even remember why now=S
i mean its a good game, its not THAT hard once you get good at it and its not easy as pie like rock band.

they're all fussing that rock band is WAY better for having drums and mic and being so cool
now guitar hero has them too and you all fuss!
when gears brought in a great cover system everyong loved it! and now loads of games have them.

zourskittles @ Jun 3rd 2008 9:00PM

Before we put this in terms of music games, lets just put it in terms of music. With itunes and other online music distributors, including all those online streaming music sites popping up nowadays, its becoming pretty clear that music is becoming much more popular in digital downloads. Meaning know one physically wants the music on a C.D., just as a purchasable online file. So why doesn't Guitar Hero make like Rock Band and sell FAIRLY PRICED online songs instead. Rock Band has had an incredible amount of positive feedback for its surplus of fairly priced content. Now the Guitar Hero people are planning on releasing three GAMES in the next year. Do you want discs lying around everywhere when all you want to do is play another song? Your fucking retarded.

Brian @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:41AM

Milking the franchise would be releasing a new Guitar Hero game with third-rate artists (eg: Guitar Hero: Tracy Chapman; Guitar Hero: Fisbone) or branching out to new genres (Pan-flute Hero: George Zamfir, Soul Hero featuring Aaron Neville).

Thrombo19 @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:14AM

Coco butttttaaaaaa

Gemini Ace @ Jun 3rd 2008 10:42AM

Best thing ever is if they include the entire St. Anger album. lol!

And I really hope I can pirate the game in some way.

Dick @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:34PM

LOL
my thoughts exactly.

I guess Lars likes new technology if itll line his swedish pockets. (He's from up there, right? Norway, Sweden, denmark... All just extra white cold people)

Octantis @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:02AM

I am a big RB fan. I think they really captured lightning in a bottle. I think the fan base feels a little miffed because GH is copying the RB idea. Couple that and the might that is the GH franchise and Acti has the power and market share to get exclusives from artists eg Aerosmith and Metallica. I think the RB fans feel like GH could be eating their lunch if this continues.

A good analogy would be Tivo. They invented the whole DVR concept yet why aren't they leading DVR market?

If people buy the game and Acti makes money more power to them. They run the risk of market fatigue and might pay the price because of it. I will probably pick up Aerosmith from the used game rack in the future.

Thrombo19 @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:18AM

My biggest prob with GH's strategy is that all these releases should really just be DLC for the 360. U shouldn't have to grab a $50 disc if u want some of the Aero songs. Put em up ala carte so peeps can grab Love in an Elevator and not have to buy a cover from cheap trick or something.
Rock Bands DLC releases is the biggest reason to like that franchise more. Even if I'm not buying most of em, there are tons of options from a bunch of genres. Big ups RB

Sunny @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:55AM

While I agree with you somewhat, I'd personally rather they do it this way. There would have to be a way to sample the tracks before I'd give them my money, after Guitar Hero 3 turned out to be such a piece of crap. I would have to spend a lot of time with it before I would consider buying it to have it around all the time.

At least they're developing some kind of 'story' around these games so they aren't just bare-bones track packs like GH: Encore 80s was.

Boff @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:39AM

While I wholeheartedly embrace a Metallica verison of GH, I'm starting to wonder why they keep doing it this way rather than with DLC.

If they made each new version 'backwards compatible' with the previous ones that would be something.
(Boot up GH: Metallica, then stick in your GHII disc and play those tracks - without leaving the GH: Metallica interface.)

And I agree with others on the RB bias of this site!! Especially as I'm a GH man due to Europe getting shafted with RB. But each to their own ;o)

Deck @ Jun 3rd 2008 11:57AM

Roflz....this is full of lulz.

Activision just doesn't stop!

jose_edwaldo @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:15PM

This is no different to EA releasing a new FIFA every year, then putting out stuff like Champions League, European Championship, and World Cup, in between........

tan @ Jun 3rd 2008 12:14PM

yay
i dont care what you all say i love guitar hero and will buy aerosmith and world tour and now this!

i also have rock band.

they're not milking it because the games they are releaseing now arent like gh:80's where it was just not up to a good standard , they are releasing games that different people may buy and if you don't like aerosmith just don't buy the game!
same with this.

also i prefer buying it on disc rather than dlc.

Derek @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:06PM

I find it funny how so many people are either griping about GH or RB. Personally, I think both games are cool, and I don't think GH is being milked. But I don't think that Madden is being milked either.

Both games have their pros and cons, I think that both are still overpriced, and need to focus more on a single player experience, but I still put aside a little money each check for GH4 and the RB bundle because they are both entertaining.

I know several people who have both, and many more who all share the same opinions. Rock band on the Guitar is too easy, and everyone I know just throws out the RB guitar in favor of the GH guitar. The information that the RB interface gives is better than GH, but GH still looks better and not as plain. GH doesn't have as many downloadable songs, or instruments yet. I've seen people buy RB, and then buy two GH guitars. One friend even bought a used copy of the RB disc and a set of drums because that was all he was interested in, when he wants to use the guitar, he pops in GH still, unless RB has a song he likes.

What it all boils down to is that you can't have everything in one package, and even if you did, someone would still complain.

While I wouldn't give you a nickel for a truck load of the Metallica edition, (I'd just pirate it for Lars Ulrich's sake) I still wouldn't mind buying the Aerosmith Edition. I have read the articles that say it is like GH3, but those articles also say that that is mostly when multiplayer is used. For the campaign, you have to work your way up to the Aerosmith songs, and complaints about GH3 difficulty and dependence of pulls and hammers have been addressed. The interface and graphics have also been upgraded. I like GH Artist editions, what they have done with Aerosmith is cool, I would kill for them to do that with other artists. I would reserve right now an Aaron Neville edition of either game.

Basically, stop griping, no one is forcing you to use either product. Both products are good, use while one you want, or not.

Paul @ Jun 3rd 2008 1:22PM

these comparisons you guys are making to sports games is silly. first of all, if guitar hero releases these new games like aerosmith and metallica, there might only be a few songs on each game that i like. but since they put it on a 60 dollar disc rather than as a la carte dlc i can't get them without buying the entire game. with these sports games you either like that sport game or you don't. especially since its the same company (EA or whoever) releasing the soccer games so the gameplay is going to be very similar if not the exact same as well. so stop making those comparisons please as it is a pathetic argument.

Odog4ever @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:00PM

I started with GH2 and 3 and now I've graduated to Rock Band. I think I'll stick with RB because off the DLC. I don't fault people for sticking with GH is that's their preference.

For those who incorrectly perceive hate for GH, I think people are upset with Activision because of their aggressive approach towards competition. Instead of competing on superior game play, they feel like hand-cuffing bands and peripherals to their brand is a better option.

Why not have all bands songs available on both GH and RB and picking the game that had the instrument peripherals you liked the most or the better career mode, etc?

People still have a bad taste in their mouth from the whole PS3 guitar patch fiasco where Harmonix essentially extended an olive branch GH customers and Activision promptly slapped it away and said "Fuck you, pay me" Now Harmonix is going to have to stoop down to Activision level and go the whole proprietary route.

offday @ Jun 3rd 2008 2:25PM

I would get this, but there's a lingering fear of getting sued 1,000 dollars for every time I play one of their songs on GH.

Thrombo19 @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:06PM

he he, i liked it :)

ronnie @ Jun 3rd 2008 5:00PM

I totally agree. I like dlc as much as anyone but if u have a 360 as i do and u experienced the red ring of death and u send ur console to microsoft only to get a refurb back then to find out u have to have ur console connected to the internet ALL the time in order for rb to play ur dlc tracks... im just saying what happens when u get tired of the game and trade it in on a new one? u lose all that money from the dlc. btw there not milking the franchise if they're putting out quallity games and they sell well. also 75 percent of rb dlc is CRAP. GH Metallica is what ive been waiting on since the beginning. Rock on metal heads!

Ryan @ Jun 3rd 2008 7:32PM

"u send ur console to microsoft only to get a refurb back then to find out u have to have ur console connected to the internet ALL the time in order for rb to play ur dlc tracks..."

MS is going to launch a program soon that allows you to transfer any content you have to another console without DRM limitations.

"im just saying what happens when u get tired of the game and trade it in on a new one? u lose all that money from the dlc."

Why the hell would you ever trade in Rock Band? If you get tired of a game like that, then you need to just avoid that genre completely. Plus, there are tons of other games that have DLC where the same thing could happen, so that argument is really worthless.

"btw there not milking the franchise if they're putting out quallity games"

Not anymore.

"also 75 percent of rb dlc is CRAP"

To each his own, but according to you that would still mean that 25% is good, which would account for about 32 songs right now, which isn't very bad.

But there have been 10 songs to break the 100,000 download mark, and 33 that have more than 50K, on just the 360 alone, so apparently very few people agree with you.

TomB @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:09PM

Let's talk about this "milking" thing and the other name drops some of you have been spouting, like Mario etc. If you look at Mario games, you'll notice that there is only about 1 Mario (just Mario) for each nintendo platform (excluding the NES and SNES). Then you have the spin offs like Mario Party, Tennis, Golf, etc. These games aren;t "milking" Mario, these are just nintendo's ways of making fun sports games using their flagship characters, AND these games are very different from the Super Mario games themselves, the only simularity would be the characters you get to play as.

Now look at GH. We had GH1, and it was good. We had GH2, it was even better, and whoever got to play the 80's could say that it was a small change of pace. We get GH3, and I have to say, I wasn't all that impressed with the tracks you get to play. I was playing through the career mode just waiting for a song I actually liked to pop up, which only happened about once or twice. I felt like GH has lost it's flavor. I wasn't pissed about it not having other instruments or a create a character, I was pissed because it was the same game I was playing for the past 3 years. The only difference was the "boss battles" which in my opinion were intirely useless and there were only 2, the devil was not a famous guitar player, we all know he died, we've all seen the Tenacious D video here.

Now we have 3 new ones coming out, which all claim to be new. I guess its not the fact their releasing 3 GH's one after another so soon, but it's the fact that Activision won't admit that Rockband is a formidable oponent and claims their game sucks, when in all truth, their are trying to make the exact same game. And to add another kick in the preverbial pants, their drumset won't work with Rockband, and vice versa, because Activision wants more green in their wallets and added an extra button to hit.

Another thing you have to look at is DLC. So we'll have three GH games coming out, all with DLC (as so I've heard). Why would you spend your precious MSP if this game will just be re-made in the next two months? Where with Rockband we've had plenty of content INSTEAD of making a new game so fast, and I'm still playing the game since it came out last year! I give it a whole 3 months until GH:WT is replaced by GH:Modern Combat.... which could actually be a fucking cool game now that I think about it.... So if you guys see the next GH game called THAT, then you know where it came from, and that Activision really does like stealing ideas.

So now that I've built this wall of text, feel free to knock it down. (damn Mongrowrians!)

And btw... EA is just as bad as Activision for their Maddens and such, so don't flame the fuck out of me for THAT!

taco @ Jun 3rd 2008 4:18PM

Yeah, all these should just be released as DLC. I don't want to fumble for a disc and wait for a whole different game to boot just because I feel like playing Master of Puppets after Dream On. Especially when the actual game itself is virtually indistinguishable. These are party games, people!