id fully support the PC. Not only that, but they're also among the few who produce their games with Mac and Open GL compatibility. So I really don't know where you're getting that from. The biggest problem with id is how they were outsourcing everything. But hopefully now they're with Zenimax, that should now be at an end.

Ah well, I have a console anyway. But still, this blows.

Well, to be fair, it is a console game. It's not an FPS or, grud forbid, an RTS being released on consoles just because they think it will make more money. They're actually just releasing the game on the platforms it's best suited to.
If it was an FPS or RTS then I'd agree no matter who was behind it.

But Brutal Legend is not an adventure game, is it?

Why are 3rd person action games better on console? We have had thousands of them on PC, all with the same graphics/tweaks/options benefits of other PC games that don't need a mouse for control.

It's not so much that it's better on console. More that it wouldn't be better on PC. PC games aren't really the kinds of games you can play on the couch with friends, which is the kind of game this is.
I can't imagine the PC version would look a whole lot better either. If we're brutally honest, the game's not pushing any technical limitations like Uncharted 2, or something like that. So aside from a higher resolution, you wouldn't get much more out of it.
Basically, what I'm saying is: I can understand why PC gamers wouldn't be their target demographic for this title. And no, I don't own a console.

Yeah, I can agree with that I suppose. I guess my main line of thought was Tomb Raider and such, but I guess this isn't that type of game really.
Honestly I have no real interest in playing this game, I would just buy it to see what Schafer has been doing.

1. It doesn't have to be better on PC. I mean, a lot publishers already deliver a 1:1 conversion of their console titles, completely ignoring additional options like standard mouse / keyboard.
2. Better looking? Again, it just doesn't have to. Much less since it's based on a comical style which you could port 1:1 without anyone seeing it not fitting.
3. This is where we'll never share the same point of view. The target demographic is purely based on Heavy Metal. The style, the attitude, the setting, the characters... how this makes it a console only game is simply beyond me.
Since I first heard about it, I was interested in that game. However, it just WON'T happen, that I'll buy a console just for a game. If they release a PC-version, then it's a must-have for me. So as it stands right now, they won't get my money. Ever.

1. Sloppy ports don't exactly help the PC market grow. I'd rather see fewer, better ports than the PC end up like the Wii.
2. I'm not saying it has to look better. Just that it wouldn't. My comment was in reply to StingingVelvet.
3. I was referring to the gameplay rather than the theme. The theme doesn't matter anywhere near as much, so long as it doesn't alienate teenagers and metal certainly doesn't.
The bottom line is: there's nothing odd about this game winding up on consoles. If people bitched this much about games like Killzone not coming to PC then I'd understand. But Killzone is far more of a PC game than Brutal Legend is.

I'm with you on point 1. Still isn't a reason for a publisher though. :)
Gameplay however just won't work for me. There isn't a specific genre or gamestyle fitting the consoles more then on PC. It maybe the other way around with RTS or MMOs (at least the socialicing part), though this remains to be seen.
On your bottom line I call objection. It's just your personal opinion, which may be good enough for you - but just for you. :)

Even working under the assumption that console owners are a much larger target demographic than PC gamers with respect to this game, that in itself still doesn't make it sensible to not release for PC. To just a few made up numbers, say it's projected that 80% of the target demographic own a console, while only 20% are PC-only gamers. While that 80% should definitely be targeted heavily, completely writing off the PC release is still throwing away 20% of potential sales right from the start. The only way this makes sense is if the revenue that would be brought in by that 20% is less than what it would cost to develop the PC port. While it's possible that this is the case, for nearly all games that are expected to sell even moderately well the cost of porting the game is dwarfed by even a fraction of the game's total sales.
So to sum up, even if the PC market is not the major target demographic for the game, completely ignoring it is still likely to be a bad business decision.

True. But publishers make worse decisions all the time. Especially when it comes to the PC. They may want to see how well the game does on consoles - and finding out just how big that remaining 20% really is - before okaying a PC version.

Of course developers, publishers, etc make poor and irrational decisions all the time. That should go without saying. My comments were directed towards the idea that ignoring the PC market could be due to a calculated, rational market analysis, which as I already described just doesn't make much sense.

There is a ray of hope for a PC version as EA are publishing it. Unlike the idiots at Activision, EA like money. They infact like money an awful lot and if they think a PC version will make money then there will be a PC version.