bit-gamer.net

THQ: PC isn't getting the attention it deserves

THQ: PC isn't getting the attention it deserves

Producer Frank De Lise is confident that the PC version of Homefront won't be just another port.

GamesCom 2010: THQ reaffirmed its commitment to the PC platform today at GamesCom 2010 in Cologne, Germany, with Digital Extremes producer Frank De Lise revealing that there was a team of 30 developers working on just the PC version of THQ's Homefront.

"The PC platform isn't really getting the attention it deserves," said De Lise after a presentation of the upcoming shooter.

"There's a team of 30 or so developers at Digital Extremes just working on the PC build of this though," said De Lise, who promised that the PC version of Homefront will have been essentially remade for the platform.

Homefront on the PC will feature clan support, a different UI, DirectX 11 content and a bunch of other features for the PC SKU, hinted De Lise.

Homefront is set in the year 2027, when a Unified Korea has successfully invaded the United States and begun occupying the territory. Players take the role of US insurgents tasked with moving jet fuel from Colorado to San Francisco in order to help stage a counterattack.

Homefront is being developed for consoles by Kaos Studios and optimised for PC by Digital Extremes. Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

23 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
r3loaded 18th August 2010, 15:32 Quote
Hear that sound THQ? It's the noise of PC gamers' wallets snapping open! :)
wafflesomd 18th August 2010, 15:44 Quote
This is like when Activision were naming off special 'features' that the PC version of the game has liked "Mouse support".

"Homefront on the PC will feature clan support, a different UI, DirectX 11 content and a bunch of other features for the PC SKU, hinted De Lise. "

Oh boy, clan support and a different UI. Thanks for the special features that we expect in a game from 2000.
Canon 18th August 2010, 15:55 Quote
Do we really want the attention though? t's nice in our little corner with a significant lack of 12 year olds slandering us via voice comms. It's crowded enough as it is or maybe I'm just a bit of a cynic.
sear 18th August 2010, 15:59 Quote
It's too bad that Homefront is by far the stupidest game concept ever dreamed up.

Also, Dead Space on PC had a "dedicated team" working on it. That got us a game capped at 30 FPS, a new UI with inconsistent key input, and probably the worst mouse controls ever seen in a PC game since the days of MS-DOS. It's definitely nice to see the effort made, but I'll be sceptical until they actually pull it off. Execution is just as important as intent and it doesn't matter that you have a team of 100, if they have no idea what they're doing.

I for one would like to see a console port that does not suffer from the following issues:

- mouse lag in game and in the menus/UI
- capped framerate/forced v-sync
- broken netcode
- no dedicated servers
- low-resolution textures left over from console versions
- keys that cannot be bound properly (I'm looking at you, Bad Company 2)
- widescreen issues like HUD stretching, vert- implementation, low FOV, and broken/poor multi-monitor support
- bugs and a lack of post-release support
- absurdly steep hardware requirements given the game's console origins

You guys want to show you care about the PC, then try making a game that doesn't suffer from those problems, because they are all common and all have a very detrimental effect on the game, to the point where sometimes the game's content can be damaged or even undermined by them (Dead Space, Red Faction: Guerrilla and BioShock on PC are great examples). Making a good PC game requires just as much thought and effort that goes into making a console game, but it's not fundamentally more difficult to do - it's simply a question of knowing what to do. PC gamers are more than willing to tell you their grievances with the state of the games being released on their platform.
Blanx3_Bytex 18th August 2010, 16:23 Quote
At least THQ has realised that the PC isn't just a fancy console.
Ross1 18th August 2010, 16:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sear
It's too bad that Homefront is by far the stupidest game concept ever dreamed up.

Also, Dead Space on PC had a "dedicated team" working on it. That got us a game capped at 30 FPS, a new UI with inconsistent key input, and probably the worst mouse controls ever seen in a PC game since the days of MS-DOS. It's definitely nice to see the effort made, but I'll be sceptical until they actually pull it off. Execution is just as important as intent and it doesn't matter that you have a team of 100, if they have no idea what they're doing.

I for one would like to see a console port that does not suffer from the following issues:

- mouse lag in game and in the menus/UI
- capped framerate/forced v-sync
- broken netcode
- no dedicated servers
- low-resolution textures left over from console versions
- keys that cannot be bound properly (I'm looking at you, Bad Company 2)
- widescreen issues like HUD stretching, vert- implementation, low FOV, and broken/poor multi-monitor support
- bugs and a lack of post-release support
- absurdly steep hardware requirements given the game's console origins

You guys want to show you care about the PC, then try making a game that doesn't suffer from those problems, because they are all common and all have a very detrimental effect on the game, to the point where sometimes the game's content can be damaged or even undermined by them (Dead Space, Red Faction: Guerrilla and BioShock on PC are great examples). Making a good PC game requires just as much thought and effort that goes into making a console game, but it's not fundamentally more difficult to do - it's simply a question of knowing what to do. PC gamers are more than willing to tell you their grievances with the state of the games being released on their platform.

good post, but makes me a bit sad at how bad some ports are.... RF: guerrilla in particular, that seemed like it could have been a good game.
DragunovHUN 18th August 2010, 16:42 Quote
Soo basically they're outsourcing the PC port to another company? Because that worked so well in the past (yes i'm looking at you Saints Row 2)
fingerbob69 18th August 2010, 17:59 Quote
Wouldn't be nice to hear about a major release being developed and fully optimised for PC and only then, dumbed down ...sorry I mean ported... to console.
Centy-face 18th August 2010, 18:02 Quote
Well this is good news for me I actually like the concept of the game and Frontlines was ok on the rare occasion when the tech didn't go wonky a proper PC version is just what was needed. I will certainly be following this with interest.
PegasusM 18th August 2010, 18:21 Quote
This has potential, don't ruin it Digital Extremes!
I'd like to see high res textures on the PC version.
bobwya 18th August 2010, 20:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ross1

good post, but makes me a bit sad at how bad some ports are.... RF: guerrilla in particular, that seemed like it could have been a good game.

I loved RF 1. The 3rd part of that franchise almost felt worse than the 2nd... It had console port written all over it...

Hopefully THQ won't f**k this one up.
frontline 18th August 2010, 20:44 Quote
I actually thought that this was pretty positive news - designing a version of the game from the ground up for PC, surely that in itself will address a lot of the issues mentioned above.

Whether the game itself is any good is another matter, however if they can get that aspect right and it has proper multiplayer support on dedicated servers with the relevant tools for clan matches (including a demo recorder), then i would be very interested.
Ph4ZeD 18th August 2010, 21:14 Quote
THQ fail. Try supporting a game (Supreme Commander and FA) which you published.
Bazz 18th August 2010, 22:18 Quote
They'll change their minds when they see that consoles make more money for them.

PC gaming has been dying slowly due to crapy consoles entering the market, and most top developers looking at a quick buck or two.
leveller 18th August 2010, 22:25 Quote
We're getting to the end of the lives of Xbox 360 and PS3 so I expect a lot more interest in PC-everything over the next year or so, at least until the next gen arrives. DX11, 3D, super-resolutions, multi-monitors, CPU & GFX card advances ... it's all rosey for PC right now.
wuyanxu 18th August 2010, 23:00 Quote
well, at least Homefront will be a less consolfied game. than liking of CoD, UT3.

the statement though, is only an attempt to grab headlines.
Krayzie_B.o.n.e. 18th August 2010, 23:40 Quote
Oh Wow look at that. Just a few months ago the PC was dead, a niche market, Piracy riddled, and only for RTS and MMO's.

But after Battlefield Bad Company 2 and Starcraft 2 sell millions all of a sudden the PC isn't getting enough attention. What happen Microsoft abandoned it's crapbox 360?

THQ go die a horrible death. We don't need your horrible console ports with keyboard/mouse support.

If you wanna game for the PC it's easy, first start with innovation and a commitment to quality then make a graphics engine that's DX11 from the ground up. Dedicated servers Lan support and a few other basic PC options that are requirements and not features.

Otherwise no one is going to buy your crappy game, so save the butt kissing for the CONSOLERS.
Yslen 19th August 2010, 01:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by leveller
We're getting to the end of the lives of Xbox 360 and PS3 so I expect a lot more interest in PC-everything over the next year or so, at least until the next gen arrives. DX11, 3D, super-resolutions, multi-monitors, CPU & GFX card advances ... it's all rosey for PC right now.

Didn't Microsoft say a couple of months ago "we think there's 5 years left in the 360"?

Hope you're right though!
HyBry 19th August 2010, 07:06 Quote
That is something positive.
But I must agree to the most here that in the end it will all come down to two things, how good the game is in general and how good of the job they have done on the PC.

Must say the the most important thing to me might be UI adapted for PC. As long as that includes all the interfece, menus, HUD, getting online, and so on. Last game for me that I played and was horrid was Borderlands. Had it on Steam (no problem there), then having to sign up to GameSpy, opening ports to host a game, and worst of all manageing weapons ingame and driving...
Xir 19th August 2010, 08:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by sear
I for one would like to see a console port that does not suffer from the following issues:
...
- absurdly steep hardware requirements given the game's console origins

Yup, I've got LEGO Batman (stop snickering, it's fun) stuttering on the rig in my sig and its from the bloody WII.
BobsLawnService 19th August 2010, 14:14 Quote
Someone just saw the recent digital distribution sales number and decided the PC isn't dead afterall. What a pity Homefront looks like it is going to be shite so it will only sell a handful of copies prompting THQ to give up on the PC again.

Or am I a bit too cynical?
knownballer 21st August 2010, 06:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canon
Do we really want the attention though? t's nice in our little corner with a significant lack of 12 year olds slandering us via voice comms. It's crowded enough as it is or maybe I'm just a bit of a cynic.

Good point but on the flip side developers focusing on consoles suck especially with how much power the best pcs put out. Heck crisis still is probably the best looking game. But when integrated graphics and solitare are all most people know then this is what you get. Fusion should change things for the better and one very simple solution to the game problem... Microsoft buy steam and make it part of windows.
Xir 23rd August 2010, 12:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by knownballer
Microsoft buy steam and make it part of windows.

...and a Chill filled the room...
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums