A few days ago, publication Forbes made waves when one of its writers, in a feature on Activision Blizzard CEO Bobby Kotick, referred to Rock Band as “a shameless knockoff of Guitar Hero.”
As anyone who pays attention knows, Harmonix created Guitar Hero, and wound up leaving Activision’s fold to work for MTV Games, implementing and expanding their concept into Rock Band.
GameDaily caught up with the writer of the article, Peter C. Beller, and allowed him the chance to explain/redeem himself:
My terming Rock Band a “shameless knockoff” of Guitar Hero was based on the fact that it came out after Guitar Hero and sported very obvious similarities with Guitar Hero, including color-coded prompts moving onscreen along a fret board. It even accepted the same Guitar Hero guitar controller, I believe.
If you define knockoff as “a copy or imitation of someone or something popular” the way Merriam-Webster does, then I think Rock Band fits the bill nicely.
I was aware that Harmonix designed both but Redoctane, then Activision, actually owned the game. When Harmonix sold to MTV and produced Rock Band it appears likely they took their know-how from Guitar Hero to create Rock Band along a similar vein. Which is a better game? Not for me to decide.
The point I was trying to make was that just because Bobby Kotick spent $100M for Guitar Hero, or has a long-running skateboarding franchise, doesn’t mean he can churn out sequels without the threat of competition. More broadly, creative talent, on which the industry depends, is quick to migrate to where it feels most appreciated and remunerated. — Peter C. Beller, to GameDaily
Most of that is well and good, but I still think the application of “knockoff” is a bit out of line. Surely a better term could have been used. Saying that the elements which make Guitar Hero were “repurposed” for Rock Band, maybe?
