Any change in Hmx anti-PC stance?

[Darkone83]

I beg to differ on screen size that is. i have my ps2 running thru my 15" laptop at work and me and 2 other friends were able to play just fine with 3 players 4 might be pushing it lol i will attach a picture so you all can see. I was playing quick play but heres a idea of how it looks. Btw i also have a youtube video of the setup in action for all of you non-belivers. PS this played on my PS2 and audio has been removed for copyright reasons.

My proof of concept video.

http://foleyconsulting.freewebhostin...om/img/rb1.jpg

http://foleyconsulting.freewebhostin...om/img/rb3.jpg

http://foleyconsulting.freewebhostin...om/img/rb4.jpg

http://foleyconsulting.freewebhostin...om/img/rb6.jpg

[rvashko]

Very nice. Do you have any screenshots with the three of you playing together?

I don't think anyone doubts that a PC monitor would suffice for solo play. But since Hmx has positioned RB as "party" game a la DDR, I think the real debate on PC viability comes in when you start talking MP.

I wonder what kind of Return on Investment EA would need to make a <b>good</b> PC port worth its while. I mean, as much as I like RB, it isn't a "killer app" that's gonna make me run out and drop $300+ on a console just to play one game.

Is EA that bearish on the profitability of a PC port that they're OK with folks defaulting to a FoF-like freeware RB clone? Or perhaps do they plan on a PC version, but have put it on the back-burner while they devote time and resources toward World Tour MP and a Wii version?

[Darkone83]

Heres a multiplayer vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gl-Ppjhvp-M

[Ihmhi]

You're seriously telling me that they can get a game to work on the PS2, which has the following specs:

294 MHz processor
32 MB of RAM
147 MHz Graphics Chip

A system that came in out 2000... and you can not get it to work on a modern computer that is literally 10-20 times more powerful? The latest computers (and even a generation or two back) are always more powerful than consoles, albeit not as optimized to use that power.

Thing is, though, that Rock Band on the PC would be ridiculously easy to bootleg. Why buy DLC when you can just download it off of the net? And, of course, that would start modding, what with people making their own DLC, skins, mods, etc. The last thing RB needs is its own Hot Coffee because some idiot wanted nipples on his female guitarist.

[DesiredFX]

There's one reason I wouldn't make this game for the PC.

I wouldn't want to have to provide the level of support PC users require.

You can put the minimum requirements on the box, but it doesn't matter. You can tell someone they need to have the latest DirectX, and it won't matter.

You will get calls.

And calls.

And calls.

From people who are having problems not with your game, but with their PCs because they didn't bother to read the requirements.

This game focuses a lot on casual users. Casual users are notorious for not researching the requirements of a product, much less whether their equipment actually meets those requirements.

Just look at how many posts there are from the PS3 users that haven't been following the Guitar Hero Les Paul drama, who still don't understand why the Les Paul doesn't work, and you'll have an idea of why Harmonix really wouldn't want to put out a PC version.

[rvashko]

I guess I don't find that "tech support" argument persuasive. Under that line of reasoning, if support for PC is so onerous, why would <i>any</i> game developer <i>ever</i> make a PC game? Why not simply make Bioshock or Crysis or Half-Life 2 console-exclusives?

I would think the casual, unsophisticated user wouldn't be messing with a PC in the first place, opting for the cheaper and less complicated plug-n-play console platform. I would further think that the much smaller PC gaming market would, by necessity, have to be a bit more tech-savvy, and thus willing and able to troubleshoot simple issues on their own.

Finally, I doubt the closed-system of consoles stops people from making stupid-ass tech support calls that would be unnecessary if they simply read the instructions closer. True, a closed system might be easier and quicker to troubleshoot, but that's unrelated to people making the call in the first place, tying up lines and dragging out the queue.

And given how much larger the console gaming market is compared to that of the PC, I wonder if there are actually MORE stupid-ass calls coming in from console users.

I agree with your idea that what's holding up a PC version is not a technical limitation, but a business decision. I don't think anyone doubts it would be relatively easy to port it over.

Still, I'd love to hear their official stance on their plans (or lack thereof) for the PC.

[DesiredFX]

So if the casual user isn't going to play on the PC, and the game is targeting party crowds and casual users, you've just cut out the target demographic by going PC, and developing RB for PC is an awfully big investment to make to produce a game that a relative handful of users are going to play on that platform.

Every game that's going to be on the PC weighs the tech-support aspects against the obvious advantages of being a PC game (more processor and graphic power, many more options for game controls).

Not to mention that many of the most successful PC games are MMO games that require a subscription price and therefore have the tech support paid for by the users.

This is meant to be a plug-n-play game for people who aren't very tech savvy. They just want to hook up and jam.

Despite the PS2's native network capability at this point, they left out online support for the PS2, in part because of processor power, but also because networking on the PS2 is far from a breeze.

USB plug, USB port, disc in drive, and play. That's what they're going for--maximum ease of use.

My question is...why would you want it on a PC, anyway? What's the benefit to it? It's certainly not more convenient than a console. The only real argument I can see in its favor is "I already have a gaming-quality PC."

It seems to me that Harmonix is smart enough to weigh all the questions before making a decision like this, so I doubt the decision came entirely down to whether the game interface would fit on a PC display, especially since a PC display is capable of going above and beyond 1080p.

[rvashko]

So if the casual user isn't going to play on the PC, and the game is targeting party crowds and casual users, you've just cut out the target demographic by going PC, and developing RB for PC is an awfully big investment to make to produce a game that a relative handful of users are going to play on that platform.

I 100% agree that the lion's share of money made off this game will come from consoles, but is a PC version really that big of an investment with that little profit potential? The existing controllers can work with PCs, and software publishers sure aren't shy about cranking out PC ports that are almost identical to the Xbox version. If the PC gaming market was that weak, and ports were that unprofitable, they'd never bother with them in the first place, would they?

Every game that's going to be on the PC weighs the tech-support aspects against the obvious advantages of being a PC game (more processor and graphic power, many more options for game controls).

I don't believe anyone wanting to play RB cares about a step-up in graphics for a PC version. I think folks would be more than happy with a carbon-copy Xbox port.

Not to mention that many of the most successful PC games are MMO games that require a subscription price and therefore have the tech support paid for by the users.

WoW is the obvious reference in recent successful PC games, but again, I point to stuff like Crysis, Call of Duty, Far Cry, Bioshock, F.E.A.R., etc. I'm hard-pressed to think of an MMO that has rocked the charts lately besides WoW.

This is meant to be a plug-n-play game for people who aren't very tech savvy. They just want to hook up and jam.

I think even tech-savvy people would like to just hook up and jam in this game. It is fun, after all. And I would bet the farm that if RB doesn't accomodate these people, then hackers/modders will. Again, money left on the table.

USB plug, USB port, disc in drive, and play. That's what they're going for--maximum ease of use.

I agree. My point is that all this is possible on the PC as well as consoles.

My question is...why would you want it on a PC, anyway? What's the benefit to it? It's certainly not more convenient than a console. The only real argument I can see in its favor is "I already have a gaming-quality PC."

That's exactly it. I'll pony up the $170 for RB, but the game isn't so cool that I'd also drop another $300 on a console simply to play one title.

I'll concede that the console gaming market is much more robust than the PC gaming market, but PC gaming isn't exactly chump change to leave on the table either. Again, if that were the case, then the publishers wouldn't even bother with the ports.

It seems to me that Harmonix is smart enough to weigh all the questions before making a decision like this, so I doubt the decision came entirely down to whether the game interface would fit on a PC display, especially since a PC display is capable of going above and beyond 1080p.

Well, we really don't know exactly what their reasons are. All we have are some off-hand non-committal comments that we see on YouTube. To my knowledge, there's no official word, one way or the other, on a PC version.

If they said something like "We don't think we'd make enough money off a PC port to make it worth our while", I'd accept that as being perfectly valid, even though it would bum me out. Or if they said "We wouldn't mind doing it, but right now, we need to focus time and money toward MP World Tour and a Wii version", that would also make sense.

But I think the PC display issue, by itself, is a weak reason not to do it.

[DesiredFX]

I see what you're saying. I was just trying to offer a stack of reasons why HMX might shy away from a PC version that were more credible than questions of whether a "standard" PC display can handle the RB visuals.

The minimum everyone I know runs in these days is 1280x960. There's your 720p right there.

[rvashko]

Thanks. Those are all good points - much better than the "PC display" reason by itself.

And you're quite right - I'm sure EA has, or eventually will, review the viability of a PC port. Given their proclivity for "quickie ports" in the past, I think RB is worth doing, but as a PC-only user, I admit to being a bit biased.

I'm sure whatever official word they might release would be be something along the lines of "We are excited at the possibilities of bringing Rock Band to the PC, and we will look closely at this possibility over the coming months." *sigh*