Talk:2009 in downloadable songs for the Rock Band series

And thus the Tiering headache begins.

I took a look at the in-game Music Store in RB2, and sure enough all of the songs in the store use the new 7-tier structure. However, going back to RB1, and sure enough they still have the 9-tier structure.

So we're at a point where we have to figure something out, otherwise we'll have a situation where editors using RB1 and those using RB2 will have different numbers. Recording both would be a headache. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 13:01, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Since we have conflicting info and it's not reasonable to have both in the table should we just drop tier? It's good information to have but not if we can't present it in a usable way. harlock_jds (talk) 13:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

My gut tells me its not a straight translation (that is, RB Tier 2 does not include all RB 1 Tier 8 or 9 songs), so falling back to one scale won't work (if it is, however, great!, we're able to incorporate that). Having two separate tables just to allow sorting via RB1 or RB2 is way too much. Instead, I think we need to a combined metric, sorting on the (more detailed) Tier 1. So each song in the RB1 list and this list would have "Tier 3/2" and we'd need to explain the first number is the RB1 tier, and second the RB2 tier. Sorting would be on this value represented by a decimal number: "3.2" working on the assumption that the songs in the RB1 scale map in the same difficulty order to the RB2 tier. --MASEM 13:14, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

This could be a pain for editors, having to pop in their RB1 disc every week just to find the RB1 tier. Oren0 (talk) 16:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Only one person per week needs to do that, and given how fast they go up after new DLC is out, I'm not particularly worried about this. (and at least until the PS3 version is out, there will be RB1 players still...) --MASEM 16:40, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I like the RB1/RB2 idea. It could potentially be a pain for some, but I know I wouldn't mind doing it. With my current living situation though, I am not able connect my Xbox to Xbox LIVE very often. Anyway, the point is I would like to think I am not the only editor that wouldn't mind popping my RB1 disc back in for a few more minutes. Rowdyoctopus (talk) 18:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

← I find the tiering information here incredibly useful, and am thus probably biased in any decision one way or another. It's a hassle to update EVERYTHING for RB2, and it's inaccurate to only present one or the other. Perhaps opinions from a neutral observer could be helpful? -- TRTX ^{T / C} 19:37, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been a neutral observer for a while, and was wondering why the tiers weren't up yet. Dur. The way I see it, there are two options: the Tier 3/4 (RB1/2) suggestion that was posited earlier, or an entirely separate page entitled List of Downloadable Songs For Rock Band 2. I like the former more. WhiteyMcTool (talk) 20:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm also a neutral observer, and I think that two separate pages will confuse people into thinking that the DLC for RB1 and RB2 are separate, when they are in fact the same exact files. I would also lean towards the first option. We should display both tiers somehow, but I think the tier information is very useful and shouldn't be taken away lightly. Dorkmaster Flek (talk) 21:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, do we really need to list both? Insofar as the information is useful, I gather it's because people use it to decide how hard a given song is; if that's the case, then why don't we just list the most accurate tier set, i.e. the one with the most tiers? That appears to be RB1. --Maxamegalon2000 22:10, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Because the tiers are so radically different. Example: If what's up right now is true, all the Megadeth songs are Tier 9 guitar, according to Rock Band 1. You'd think this would translate to Tier 7 across the board for 2. This is incorrect, as songs like "I Ain't Superstitious" are only Tier 5 guitar. We need a dual-tier system. WhiteyMcTool (talk) 22:39, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, well never mind then. I guess we need to list both then. --Maxamegalon2000 02:10, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Would it be possible to set up two separate collapsible tables, one for each game? I've seen this set up in other wikis, and it's quite useful for keeping a large amount of information in a relatively easy to manage state. While it would require the duplication of a lot of the information, the upkeep should be fairly straightforward. Additionally, it wouldn't run into the problem where the songs couldn't be ordered by RB2 difficulty (which would be the case if you combined them both in the same table.) Damienroc (talk) 03:29, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I had thought of this before, and forgot to mention it. I actually completely forgot I thought of this until now. That does seem like a decent idea. The only draw back I see is the one you mentioned with a lot of the information being duplicated. Rowdyoctopus (talk) 04:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

At some point we need to consider WP:GAMEGUIDE. Two tables? What is the encyclopedic value here? I understand the usefulness of the tiers but this is just overboard IMO. Why not just stick with Tier 1/2 as suggested above? Oren0 (talk) 07:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

that's exactly why i thought that removing the tier information was the best idea since this page is already feeling non encyclopedic in it's current state.harlock_jds (talk) 11:40, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I don't like the Tier 1/2 system because I think over time it will become difficult to manage, as well as difficult to process for readers. It's not gameguide territory because it's not about strategy (GH articles have provided the difficulty levels from day one). At this point, I think it'd be best to remove the tiering information to avoid confusion amoung both editors and readers. We could reword the lead (or the table) with a discussion of the different tiers in both games and include a note that difficulty is available in the Music Store at the time of purchase.

As for RB1, RB2, and the Track Packs...I'd say leave the tiers in there since both games have difficulties static within the game. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 12:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Another option in line with TRTX is to create an off-site wiki (Wikia can do) for RB and move the tier information, separately for both RB1 and RB2 there, and link to that from here (if there was a reliable third-party source such as IGN or GameSpot that did the same, that would be a viable option too). There, we can include one or two tables without the concerns of WP. Then on lists here, we simply strip the tiering info. (I would consider doing it for all RB tables; in the present GH lists you have at most 2 columns for difficulty because things are arranged by tiers in the game, but for RB, there's really no such structure, and the difficulty is as noted helpful but starts to border on gameguide materials.

There are several sites that track DLC difficulty, and reference the same sources that this wiki page currently does. But I would imagine concern there is reliability. If the second option (offsite wiki) is in line with WP I would be in support of that. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 14:25, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I caught this article that states HMX is getting ready to revamp the RB website, including an extensive section on disc and DLC songs. This may solve our problems. --MASEM 01:33, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Straight from the horses mouth, they posted an announcement on the official rock band forums. Here is the thread: http://www.rockband.com/forums/showthread.php?t=82614 and then the quote about song info: "Rock Band is all about music, right? So, we’ve devoted an entire section of the site to information about every available Rock Band track – both on disc and DLC. We’ll have over 500 tracks total by the end of the year so that’s a lot of tracks. In addition to the basic info about each song (including difficulty rankings for each instrument), we’ll have background information on each song, written by our own ace rock writer Brett Milano, and most song pages will even feature gameplay tips from our own staff." Rowdyoctopus (talk) 05:07, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Great news. When that goes live we can drop that content from ALL the articles. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 13:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

If I may make a suggestion, I think it would be not only cool, but also extremely helpful, if there was a button/link/thing that toggled between RB1 and RB2 tiers, mostly for this page, but also for the RB1 song list page. I thought it would be nice info to have, so I went through and got all the tiers for the 55 RB1 songs that can transfer to RB2. Getting all the DLC tier info will be somewhat of a pain, but I think we should have both sets of tiers listed, or else (at some point) it's only going to help half the users.149.169.112.210 (talk) 09:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey guys, I'm Chris, the guy in charge of RBDLC.com. I'm actually already about 20% done with the tiering info for RB2, and I'd estimate I'll be done with it by no later than tonight or tomorrow afternoon. It's all in a database, and I'd be happy to share the information with you in any way that would work best for you guys. -Chris Grenard (Chris.Grenard@gmail.com) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.51.209 (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC) Edit: Make that about 60%. Gonna be done by tonight. -Chris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.51.209 (talk) 21:43, 25 September 2008 (UTC) Okay guys, it's done. I could probably write a php script that would kick out wikipedia-style code with the entire section, then you could just access the page weekly to get new code. While I don't know wikipedia code that well, I'll see if I can manage to kick something out for you here as a test. -Chris —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.237.51.209 (talk) 16:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC) Okay, here's a test script. http://rbdlc.com/wikicode.php Just view the page source, it should be properly formatted for your stuff, but I'm not 100% sure, so it would be best to check it. If it works, then there you go, that's all the tier info you need.

Appreciate the help, but it sounds like the consensus is to use the official HMX page once it's been updated. I will definately use that personally though. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 18:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi folks. I'm a frequent visitor to the Rock Band DLC page and just want to comment that I feel having no tiers at all is worst than nothing. I think in the future it'll make sense to just use RB2 tiers straight up, but for now, it doesn't hurt anyone to just leave it alone and use the RB1 number. Special:Contributions (talk) 12:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

This information will be readily avialable via the relaunched Rock Band webstie put out by Harmonix. The problem with recording it here is that going forward there's both RB1 and RB2 to consider. Since DLC plays on both games, it would become a WP:NPOV issue if we choose one game over the other simply because it's "newer". And the page becomes incredibly cluttered and difficult to interpret with both sets of tiers. The ultimate decision was to remove them entire with a reference to the official source. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 14:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

What I'm thinking - myself as an avid Rock Band player / Wikipedia user but infrequent editor - is to keep the Rock Band 1 tiers for all DLC up through the release of RB2 on the PS3 / PS2 / Wii, then treat all future DLC in terms of the Rock Band 2 tiers. I play on the 360 so I'd rather see RB2 tiers now, but if we change the tier system upon the completion of the release, I think that'd be good. I know I'd rather have ANY tier than no tier at all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Soulpopped (talk • contribs) 23:03, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I've been contributing tiers on and off for awhile now, and I have to say that no tiers at all is so much worse than being at a disagreement. There seems to be a nasty trend in Wikipedia these days, not just on this article, that less is more. Removing the tiers altogether has diminished the quality of this article. It's no more WP:NPOV to prefer one tier over the other than it is to use kilometers for measurement instead of miles. There's plenty of instances where only one is used. If we can't reach a consensus then we should put tiers back up with what we started with, describe what scale we use, and let the debate continue. Sarysa (talk) 13:32, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I've got to agree with Sarysa. I've been using this page for a months now, and I use the tiers to figure out if I want to purchase the content or not. I tried to use the Rock Band website, but you have to open a new page for each song to see the individual instrument tiers. The tiers here were extremely useful and removing them makes this page a lot less useful. Oilytheotter (talk) 14:14, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention, the tier rankings are extremely useful for people who aren't as familiar with all the songs, when they ask "OK, how difficult is this song on (instrument I don't usually play), what level should I try it on?" Black Paladin (talk) 13:11, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Either 9 scale or 7 scale, this really should go back up. It very much helps to know how difficult the songs are.

Regards, Lamplan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lamplan (talk • contribs) 14:04, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Those that are interested in the tiering, we are considering moving this information to the Rock Band Wikia - same tables (now maybe even two for DLC for RB1 and RB2). The amount of information for tiering here on Wikipedia exceeds what is appropriate (that is, we are not a game guide), though we do recognize that at least one difficulty tier, in this case, the band, can help put the songs in perspective. The Wikia page will be linked from here for all the song lists and there are other sites that have this information as well, its just surprising the rockband.com site did not choose to sort on the instrument tiers. --MASEM 13:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure would like to be able to know what difficulty songs are. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.132.254 (talk) 22:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

BRING THE TIERS BACK!!I don't understand the difficulty of having the tiers.Just put the Rock Band 1 tiers back up.I base my purchases on that.If i see a 9 on drums I'll watch it on youtube and most likely get it.Now I have to watch all the songs just to see what's good.Before if I saw a 1 on drums or anything I'll just skip that and not bother with it.The tiers helped me out.Just putting the band tiers aren't as usefull as individual tiers.Put the RB1 or RB2 tiers up.Just put up the RB2 tiers.Say it's RB2 tiers and let the RB1 people figure it out.At least if they see a 7 they would be able to know it's a good song.If they see a 1 they can dismiss it.PLEASE JUST PUT SOME TIERS UP RB1 OR 2!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watawiddlebaby (talk • contribs) 19:57, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. A disclaimer should be added stating that it will be using Rock Band 2 classification. Speaking for myself, the difficulty also influences purchases, and it is very nice to know this information in advance to save me time since I only have Xbox Live available one day out of the week for only about 3 hours.

General Housekeeping suggestions

1) This page lists all the pages that had their redirects broken when that Grawp fellow moved the page. I was able to fix a few but I don't have time to fix all of them.

 Done Checked the link. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 13:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

2) Can somebody who knows the bots better set up MizaBot to auto-archive this page? I gave it a shot earlier this month to no avail, and this thing is getting hefty.

 Done Oren0 (talk) 21:33, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

3) I have to double check, but I think the Rock Band Tour Pack's official name is "Rock Band Live 2008 Tour Pack" or something like that. I'll look when I have a chance and correct if it hasn't by then. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 13:02, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done Title has been corrected. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 13:37, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

4) I think adding a genre column to the table would be very helpful. I use these lists for Rock Band parties and I think that would be a nice piece of info to have on there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.162.162.126 (talk) 20:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

You guys spelled receive wrong in the 20 free songs part. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.108.132.254 (talk) 22:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

"One of Those Nights" taken down?

I've read a few stories that "One of Those Nights" has been removed from the Music Store. Is this correct? Something about a mistake being made and HMX was given the wrong master to work with. I just saw a few stories today (so I'm probably behind if a change has been made). -- TRTX ^{T / C} 14:32, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hopefully it was. They screwed it up so bad. 129.10.116.80 (talk) 18:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it wasn't after all. On top of that, they didn't fix it or anything. 24.147.87.186 (talk) 13:26, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

"Cleanup" suggestions

Following the wrench in the works that is the AC/DC pack, I have the following suggestions with which we could rework the articles.

• Remove compatibility section from RB2 song list: This is now something both RB and RB2 are capable of. Instead. Mentions should be made in the List of songs in Rock Band and AC/DC Live: Rock Band Track Pack articles indicating these set lists are exportable. Footnotes regarding which songs are not available to export should be included in that article.

 Done - Reworked for inclusion in second point. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 00:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Export section in this article: A section in this article following the DLC lists should briefly mention the feature and how it works. Including "See Also:" links that point to the setlists for RB1 and AC/DC.

 Done - Pulled together the info from both RB2 and AC/DC articles and created List of downloadable songs for the Rock Band series#Exported setlists. I didn't include specifics on the excluded songs as that's in the main article. But I can see how there may be a benefit to calling them out here. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 00:40, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

• Rewrite promotions: Masem suggested earlier that this section could be removed or reworked. I like the idea of reworking. A brief lits of pack names and what songs were included, as well as appropriate references (which are all still in the article).

 Done - Was able to dig up an older source on the Disturbed pack. I can replace the "vauge" dates with exacts if people feel it's neccesary. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 17:35, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

• Tier Removal: Let's do this now, even if the site's not up yet. There's a LOT of content potentially changing in the next few days, so while we're overhauling why not take care of this piece?

 Done - I took out the tiers. Only took 15-20 minutes of monotonous and repetitive typing (down key 5 times, Shift+down 5 times, backspace, repeat 260+ times). Rowdyoctopus (talk) 22:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I Truly don't see the point in removing the tiers, because it is useful information, and with the same thought, the tiers should be removed from the rest of the Rock Band articles —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lemonik (talk • contribs) 05:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

We determined in another discussion that since there will be a new Rock Band website launching and will include information on each song, including their difficulties, and because every instrument of every song has a different difficulty ranking in Rock Band 1 vs Rock Band 2, that we should take it off the article and focus on more encyclopedic information. We are also planning to remove the tiers from the other articles as well. Rowdyoctopus (talk) 07:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

• Addition of Decade/Genre?: I question mark this one, as it's more akin to the original discussion of what goes in the tables. I'll include it here to get a discussion going.

• Rename: Since we've got additional songs (such as OXM and AC/DC) that are from places other than DLC, I agree a rename is in order. Perhaps List of additional songs for the Rock Band series as Masem suggested?

Hopefully this doesn't seem too much like red-tape, but we had some chaos during the original overhaul of the table and I think taking a step back to talk it through will help make it more organized than last time. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 15:40, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Everything seems fine here. I'll point out that decade and genre are things we can pull directly from the RB/RB2 stores, so it's not OR, and is of much more use to the general, non-gamer than tier listings. --MASEM 15:49, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I like the suggestions, and I agree that perhaps we need to rethink how we want to organize these lists of songs. With the release of the AC/DC game, track pack, or whatever it is, it's becoming more difficult to differentiate between the songs in games and the songs available through other means. In my opinion, it would probably be best to have all the songs available for the Rock Band platform on one page, but realistically, this might be too much information in one place, and the amount of info will only grow as time goes on. I'm hopeful that the update to the Rock Band website will solve some problems for us, so maybe we should hold off on moving and merging pages for the time being. - Runch (talk) 16:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

I was curious as I see the amount of MSP or price per track has been added if there will be a price listing for the albums as a whole. I only bring this up since some packs and all the albums have a reduced rate if purchased as a whole. JasonDX (talk) 16:58, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe the article already states that packs can be purchased at a discounted rate, but to begin adding prices to ever row gets to be excessive and unneccesary. The price before was indicated to be "1.99 unless noted", and since only a handful of songs at any given time are at that price (and since that handful is constantly in flux) it introduces a column that is essentially worthless. (It'd be like having a table that lists cities in Minnesota and then allows you to sort by state in which the city is located in). Originally this article included all of that information regarding prices, pack prices, and album prices, but in the interest and keeping the article focused, instead of turning into a shopping catalouge, it's been trimmed down to the information to help the reader get the best understanding. We've noted the typical price, and have noted prices can change. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 17:25, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Dr. Feelgood

Add the Dr. feelgood album by Mötley Crüe to unconfirmed. http://www.imeem.com/motleycrue/blogs/2008/09/30/I476yj9g/win_the_entire_catalogue_and_a_signed_copy_of_the_dirt

Something doesn't sound right about that (I get the feeling for some reason they're referring to the album as music and not as game content). But I will add it to that section. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 17:38, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

why would they mention Rock Band then? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.170.175.52 (talk) 17:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

i doubt they would just be offering the music alone for download in the rock band store since they have never done this before and have said nothing about offering music only downloads. harlock_jds (talk) 17:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking more along the lines of XBL offering Dr. Feelgood. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 18:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

X-Play on G4 "announced" the album. It could be they just read it on the blog like we did (I didn't actually see the announcement) but I would like to think they are a little more reliable than that blog. Either way, the album will just stay in the unconfirmed section until HMX announces it like all the other songs. Rowdyoctopus (talk) 19:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Nothing until it's from the horses mouth goes into confirmed. Unconfirmed, I wouldn't have a problem with.Ledgo (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It's basically semi-confirmed right now. http://rockband.com/battle-detail/week5_dlc. It'll be announced tomorrow, but still, that basically confirms the album. Fuelie79 (talk) 03:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Good find, but it only has three songs. That and it's not public as far as a I can tell (how did you find the link?) -- TRTX ^{T / C} 01:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

It's going around the Rock Band.com Forums. Fuelie79 (talk) 03:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind

I hope its ok to post here. This seems the best place. But since an album tab has been updated can you categorize the Nirvana album (nevermind) on there. Since all of the songs have been listed under unconfirmed could someone just list the album as unconfirmed? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.182.249.166 (talk) 19:58, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I'd agree, but it looks like On a Plain is the only song from the album not listed, so I'm not sure. --Maxamegalon2000 20:20, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

On a Plain isn't on the list because it is already part of the in game setlist for Rock Band 2. JasonDX (talk) 21:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

You're thinking of Drain You. --Maxamegalon2000 22:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

On a Plain should be there. It was in the list from the 2nd Punk Pack along with the other Nirvana tracks. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 00:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

We have no confirmation from anyone that nevermind is being released as an album (and in fact we have a statement clarfying that they never said it would be). Boston's debut album was never offered as a album download but most of the tracks were sold in a single pack. harlock_jds (talk) 21:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

That's why we're discussing adding it to the "Unconfirmed" section, since all but one of the songs that aren't already released are listed there already. --Maxamegalon2000 22:28, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

We have sources that come from HMX that stated that Nevermind was never confirmed, it was only to be an example of the type of album that would be made available (even if this is backtracking from previous statement). Regardless of the fact that we have several songs from that list way back (many that have come to light), we still cannot say that Nevermind will be an album. --MASEM 22:41, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The unconfirmed albums is for albums "revealed by sources outside Harmonix". All we have is the indivisual tracks on the album that have been 'revealed' in this way, not the album itself. Since we already have an example of a majority of tracks from an album being made available for download without them being offered as an 'Album download' there is no way we should add Nevermind to the unconfirmed albums list just because the tracks are on the list. harlock_jds (talk) 23:04, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

New Site is Live, and... well, crap...

The full list of songs is now live as part of the new site...

And it doesn't have sorting by individual instrument tiers (it gives them in the details of the song); nor does it give RB1 tiering.

Well, that changes the plans a bit. I'm still tempted to drop tiering and refer to this site for RB2 ones and another site (gamefaqs?) for RB1 versions just to make these tables easier. --MASEM 19:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Masem. Though the content isn't as readily available there as it is here, it's still available. We can remove tiers from all pages, and reference this page as well as some other source for RB1. I have a feeling that HMX is going to be adopting the 7-tier structure going forward based on this. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 19:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, here's my suggestion given all this. Let's move the tiering information to Wikia. There's already a [Rock Band Wikia], and they don't have any real song lists in there. We can link to both the new rockband.com website and to the Wikia site to provide accurate tiering information, though I am tempted to leave in just band tiers to reflect overall difficulty. (On the DCL list, this would be both RB1 and RB2 band tiers). --MASEM 13:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Overall difficulty wouldn't be a bad thing. It's provided on the site, and does reflect the idea of a quicklook assessment for any reader (if we say difficulty instead of teir in the column it will also be more obvious to non-RB players what it means). -- TRTX ^{T / C} 14:23, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. Move the tier info to the Wikia, where it doesn't do any harm, and don't list tiers on the Wikipedia page, just link to Rockband.com and the Wikia page. This makes the most sense to me.- Runch (talk) 16:47, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I will note that this means (tiering here only refers to the band tiering, no other instrument)

• RB1 list will only have RB1 tiering (however, I would not be against RB2 tiering for completeness)
• DLC list will have both RB1 and RB2 tiering
• RB2 list will only have RB2 tiering (durrrrr)
• RBTP list will have tiering as appears in the standalone title (presumably RB1 tiering for RBTP1, RB2 tiering for the AC/DC TP)

If we go through this way, these four pages should be transwikied (with tiering for all instruments in place) to the RB Wikia, before we start stripping the instrument difficulties out. --MASEM 17:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think the RB1 setlist needs RB2 tiers. It should just be noted in the RB2 article that a new tiering system was introduced and that difficulties for the RB1 exports are now available at (link to site). Also, the first Track Pack didn't use the 7 tier structure, instead it used it's own "Stage" system, with the 20 songs being split into 4 groups of 5. So the TP system is unique within the context of the game. Not so sure how AC/DC will work. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 12:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I think the new tier system for RB2 should not matter. The RB1 difficulties should be put back up and if someone wants to add the RB2 difficulties as well then no problem. Just do the 3.2 system that was talked about before. Besides with the RB1 difficulties up people with RB2 will at least have an idea of what the song will be like too. Just make a note saying the difficulties are only for RB1 that way there is no confusion. Or update the tiers with RB2 system and state that it represents that game. Either way the difficulties are important and need to come back —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watawiddlebaby (talk • contribs) 20:51, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I completely agree with Watawiddlebaby, just leave the RB1 rankings up and place a note. I don't have a lot of faith in humanity, but I hope people would be able to recognize the difference between RB1 and RB2 ratings, despite how stupid it was/is to change the system.

--64.136.181.173 (talk) 06:57, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The "3.2" system doesn't lend itself to ease of use (you can't sort any either tier individually). Take a look at WP:ELYES (specifically item 3) to see why the preferred approach at this time is to record the info off Wiki, and then supplement the article with links to Wikia and the official setlist. With the release of RB2, there is not "right" way to include both tiering systems without either cluttering the page beyond usability or implementing a POV type system where only RB users or regular editors "get" what is being done. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 12:29, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Offspring Pack song not available as a single?

There were issues yesterday with the Offspring pack that lead to it not being available immediately. Later in the evening I signed in to XBL to find that it was up, but only two of the songs were available as singles (I think it was Gone Away and Pretty Fly). I wasn't able to update at the time, and see the full pack and song selection is listed. Can somebody with XBL access at the moment confirm if all three songs are availbale as both singles and the pack. The same situation occured a few weeks back with the Tour Pack and Natural Disaster, which has since been resolved. If that's the same situation here it should probably be noted. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 17:13, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I grabbed my pack earlier today and all three were available as singles, although Gone Away (I think) was above the Pack, indicating it was added later.76.10.7.133 (talk) 21:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Motley Crue

Now confirmed, please change accordingly. thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.39.219.19 (talk) 17:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Song Rankings

What happened to the song ranking information for each instrument? This information was very valuable and should be added back to the page.

--Akwakeboarder (talk) 21:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

See the discussion here: New Site is Live.... -- TRTX ^{T / C} 00:21, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Added link to official Song list

In the interest of being bold, I've added the Official RB setlist (here) as an External link. I think it falls under WP:ELYES considering it is a far more detailed breakdown than this article can support. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 19:49, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Metallica Album?

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/live/nxe/

Under Game Marketplace in The New Xbox Experience, it says "Metallica: Download Full Album Today." Does this count as a leak? Fuelie79 (talk) 20:23, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... maybe not. http://www.rockband.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1410062&postcount=37. I wouldn't completely discount this though, there have always been rumors of a Metallica album, and though Microsoft have made some mistakes (The Offspring), there hasn't been anything this big of a mistake. I think he is covering up something potentially big. Fuelie79 (talk) 20:34, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

100% speculation. There's a full album up for Guitar Hero. Could just as easily be that one their referring to. The images are mockups anyway.

Suggested Re-working

This statement is a little confusing to people:

Harmonix announced it would release 20 free downloadable songs to those who purchased Rock Band 2.[5] Customers were asked to register for these tracks online starting October 1, 2008 using a code printed on the Rock Band 2 manual. Those who registered were told they would receive a redemption code "in a few weeks".[6]The following songs have been confirmed for release:

The statement itself is fine, but the formatting makes it seem like the Motley Crue album is part of the 20 songs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teancum (talk • contribs) 11:00, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

yeah, you're right. ill change it. Estemshorn (talk) 01:51, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

20 free songs

shouldn't this be under promotions?? Estemshorn (talk) 01:57, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Nirvana

Supposedly, a pack for Nirvana has been announced on this page, but there are no sources. It also seems odd that rather than a traditional 6-pack of songs, it has 7 songs.

--It makes sense however when you think of it this way. They will be releasing 7 songs on Tuesday (presumably), which will bring the total of Nirvana Nevermind songs up to 9. Now if you'll notice that they are leaving out the 3 main singles from this album (SLTS, CAYA and Lithium). I do believe these songs will be released within the free 20 downloadable songs in the near future, thus releasing the whole album in this scenario (TubbusMaximus)

IT's official. I'll update with a source if there isn't one yet. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 23:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Dueling Tracklists

Last week I made an edit which added 3 songs to the unconfirmed songs list. The source for these edits was a Kotaku article entitled Dueling Rock Band 2 Tracklists. The article features two tracklists. The first one is the correct Rock Band 2 tracklist. The second list features mostly identical, but not all the same songs as the first, but also a few songs the first does not. The differing songs are the following:

• Bad to the Bone by George Thorogood
• Push It by Static-X
• Suffer by Bad Religion
• Stop! by Against Me
• Holiday In Cambodia by Dead Kennedys
• Bandages by Hot Hot Heat
• Dammit by Blink 182
• All Right Now by Free

While it is true that both lists come from internet rumors of supposed playtesters, the songs have become self evident as five of these 8 songs have been released as DLC later on. The same post also correctly predicted 52 Rock Band 2 songs. I would argue that this confirms the truthfulness of this claim as insider information and the other three songs (Holiday in Cambodia, Dammit and Suffer) are also on their way to be released. Chaosof99 (talk) 07:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Smells like origional research. harlock_jds (talk) 00:49, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Agreed. There's absolutely NO reliable source attached to the Kotaku article, which is simply reporting on two seperate internet rumors. Those rumors were posted repeatedly on these very talk pages (go through the Archives to read the discussions), and every time they were rejected as speculation. This isn't like the list from the 2nd Punk Pack which was a rumor later proven to be true by an official statement by both Harmonix and EA/MTV. -- TRTX ^{T / C} 01:03, 19 October 2008 (UTC)