at last Wii owner can play the game... in a PS2-like version

So it seems in press releases for both versions of Rock Band(PS3 and Wii) Harmonix has gone on record to say Activision is holding up the compatibility issues with the guitars. I haven't seen Activision even once refute these claims, so we can probably assume they're true. If that is the case, then why is everyone blaming Harmonix for this? Unless you have proof to the contary that Harmonix is lying about compatibility issues, then take it at face value and put blame where it belongs, Activision.

@Entroper-You have to understand though that the changes Red Octane made to the Wii guitar were probably not divulged to Harmonix before they went to the press, which was pretty close to release. It doesn't really give Harmonix time to stop production, junk product and restart production to match Red Octane's new design.

I also believe the GHIII guitar for Wii was cheaper to make, so then I ask you, why did it cost the same? For every guitar you buy it was required to have a Wii-mote which costs $40. That is a tacked on price on top of a guitar that costs as much as it's 360/PS3 bredren with little of the same tech built in. Regardless of quality, it looks like Red Octane wanted to make a few extra bucks off Wii owners. Activision has shown one thing in this war with EA over music games and that's a large lust for money over customer satisfaction.

 http://wii.ign.com/articles/863/863040p1.html

For the last time you're wrong.  They're planning 20,000 songs at launch and 1000 each month after.  Obviously coding a song to be used in a karaoke game is much easier than coding a song for all four instruments in RB but then again nobody is asking for 20,000 songs at launch on RB.  Or any.  Just tell us you're working on it and we'll be happy. 

And even assuming that i'm proven wrong and Reggie comes out tomorrow and says explicitly "Guys it's my fault for no DLC", what is the excuse for no online play?  GH3 had online play on the Wii and it works fine.  This is just a cheap port from an older system and that's the problem not Nintendo holding them back.

This is such an old argument. Summary, Harmonix and Activision is both at fault. The reason the 360 Les Pauls works because Activision wasn't stupid enough to release a patch to brick those guitars and not come off looking like greedy corporate jerks. Believe me, Activision had the patch to brick the guitar so they would only work with Guitar Hero 3 games but I am pretty sure that Microsoft told them don't do it. And since Microsoft is running the show for now, they dare not piss them off and there exisiting customer base (Guitar Hero 2 owners) by making the people buy new Les Pauls when they had working X-plorers. But because PS3 never had a Guitar Hero peripheral released for it, they could "redesign" the interface so it would be incompatible with any game that wasn't Guitar Heroes'. Harmonix didn't know this or didn't know until it was to late and they had to release Rock Band as is until they could figure out a patch. They got a patch but Activision told Sony not to release it or they would suffer the lack of support from them. Sony suffering from the lack of sales isn't going to give Microsoft any more advantage that they already have. Sony held the patch and let it be known it was because Activision didn't want it released.

Now Rock Band is set to be release for the Wii and Activision and Harmonix is still at a stand still with neither side want to give to the others demands. Activision wants to get paid for Rock Band sells and Harmonix doesn't want to pay them for use a peripheral. To avoid a legal battle, Activision have stated they won't (not that they can't) put compatibility for the Wii Les Paul for legal reasons.

But the best part of all of this is GIBSON! They, the partners of Guitar Hero Red Octane, are suing everyone for a patent they sat on and didn't use ( don't get me started with patent trolls and how the patent office needs serious restructuring) but will get a chuck of license money from both of them. Everyone screws everyone...

But hey....

 The difference between the Sony scenario and the Nintendo scenario is that Sony didn't have a standard button configuration that GH3/RB used built into the system.  Nintendo did - it is the classic controller.  RB would be completely free to support a classic controller if they so desired, as Nintendo controls it, not Activision. 

 And Nintendo is in a much more powerful position than Sony.  If Activision threatened to remove support, Nintendo could say "Don't let the door hit you on the way out" and go back to counting their piles of cash.  At this point, Activision needs to support Nintendo more than Nintendo needs Activision's support.  If EA/Harmonix cared *AT ALL* about not ripping off their consumers, they would add support for all the GHWii owners out there who have an investment in both hardware and possibly being used to online play (like, for example, me.  I loves me some battles, and I only own one guitar.  You can do the math from there as to how I get my fix).

Saying that Activision has any say at all in whether or not Rock Band can support a classic controller is simply wrong.  Nintendo would not let another company claim to have rights over something they created.

@Qxymeth

The entire point of this thread was the fact that I got my WiiCuitar to work on my laptop with out any specialized code from Actvision. I can play frets on fire perfectly and all I used was a program that emulates the classic controller.
This means that compatability is in fact NOT up to Activision at all but rather a result of porting the PS2 version and them using the PS3 incident to cover it up.

@Alpha,

Activision does have a say if another company is trying to use its licensed products for profit with another IP. Why did you think Activision went after all those 3rd party guitar peripheral makers, because they weren't getting a cut of the fake Guitar sells that was for made to play Guitar Hero. You see console makers license out their peripherals with the rights to make a game for the console. No such agreement is there for for 3rd party developers who come up with own peripherals even though some companies use it, i.e. microphones, cameras and game controller devices. Yea it would be nice that all the companies would play nice and think about the consumers happiness, but let wake up in the real world here, they are out to make as much money as they can for the least amount of investment. EA could easily step in and start paying license fees to use the Les Paul controller but why would they? So you don't have to buy a peripheral that they are getting a chunk of cash for. Activision could easily allow Harmonix, the company who left them for MTV/EA, to incorporate the Guitar Hero code to use the guitar controller but why would they? So people can buy a game that is in direct competition with it and not receive any kind of fees for hardware creation, production and licensing fee for Gibson name rights.

Bottom line, Harmonix should never have promised something in the end that they have no control over, in this case another manufacturer property. Activision should be reasonable and work out an agreement that would benefit both parties and stop looking like jerks. (you can be one, but don't look like one)

As for Nintendo telling Activision what to do, it would be like Panasonic DVD makers telling Warner Bros Pictures what to do. That is the downside to a lot consoles on the market, there is always the other guy you can go sell your wares on. And in the great console wars, no one wants to be the company that doesn't have such and such publisher on it. Go ask Betamax, Sega game consoles, and more recently HD-DVD how well that has worked out for them.

@RPGJock

What I am saying is this:
EA could have their game support Classic Controller setup. That is, You can play the guitar part of RB with a classic controller. Voila! Now you are able to use your GH guitar with it, and Activision can't do anything. They aren't supporting the guitar, they are supporting the classic controller. Activision could do jack shit about it, and the consumer is happy.

If you honestly believe that Nintendo would let Activision determine who is able to implement the classic controller for use in games, you must not be looking at the same Nintendo I am.

Edit: Also, I forgot to say - Activision not supporting Wii would be more akin to a movie studio coming out now and saying 'You know what? Forget blu-ray - I want HD-DVD.".  They're perfectly within their rights to do it... they just might have a shareholder suit on their hands for deliberately sabotaging their ability to profit.  THAT is why I am saying Nintendo holds the upper hand; they don't need Activision.  Activision is nice to have, but Activision would be eliminating themselves from a large, profitable part of the industry if they didn't release on the Wii.  Judging by GH3 sales, they'd be losing about 2 million sales on GH4 by not releasing on Wii.  So while Nintendo would lose less than $20M from that (7 dollar license fees estimated at $10 for ease of computation, Activision would lose $70M (est. $35 per game sold)... not to mention the Wii's user base is growing faster than the other two consoles on the market.

Activision not supporting Sony would hurt Sony far worse than Activision.  Activision not supporting the Wii with a franchise that has been shown to have success on the Wii?  Definite cause for a shareholder lawsuit.

Its up to Activision if they own the rights to the product.  Just cause you used a non sanction program to get a peripheral to work with a freeware game doesn’t mean that Activision doesn’t care.  It means that Activision is not worried about those few individuals that goes through the trouble to hack a free game and the peripheral to play it on a PC.  What they do care about is another company sells a direct competition game that uses their Gibson licensed IP owned controller and makes a profit off of it with no share of the revenue.  That is the difference here.

 And if Activision is pushed into defending their license in court by a company ignoring thier wishes, then you will see a snowball effect where they will cut support for 360 version and your freeware game mod as they must show an across the board protection for their IP patent.  Just how Gibson has to sue Activision, EA/Harmonix, and retailers for selling the "interactive simulator with a peripheral device".  They have to show that they are protecting they patent.

I still don't see how activision could stop them if they usedthe built in classic controller software.

That's all I used. It's still BS

EDIT: Besides, another point I was trying to make was that Harmonix could have easily avoided compatability issues if they had made a guitar similar to activisions that used the Wii Remote for the electronics and connectin to the wii , had they done so this would not be a problem in the slightest.  It all boils down to them making a lazy port.  It is not Activisions fault and they should not be trying to pin it on them.