Shadowrun for Vista 50usd, for 360 60usd - MGS 'explains' Options

[Xbox-Scene]

Shadowrun for Vista 50usd, for 360 60usd - MGS 'explains' Posted by XanTium | May 14 23:02 EST | News Category: Xbox360

From newsweek.com: [QUOTE] Last week, Microsoft announced that Shadowrun, its multiplayer-only first-person shooter, had finally gone gold and would arrive in stores on May 29th. We wondered how Microsoft could justify charging Xbox 360 gamers $60 for Shadowrun when PC gamers would only have to pay $50 for precisely the same game? Rather than simply speculate or opine, we dashed off a few questions to Microsoft Game Studios corporate vice president Shane Kim. Here's what he emailed back. * Since Microsoft is the first-party publisher of Shadowrun, the company doesn't have to pay itself the customary console royalty on the 360 version of the game. Why, then, do Xbox 360 gamers have to pay $60 for the same game that PC gamers only have to pay $50? Is this the pricing strategy that consumers should expect for future 360/PC cross-platform titles from Microsoft? * The $59.99 for Xbox 360 and $49.99 for Windows Vista price points are our standard pricing for each platform. This pricing structure is not uncommon in the multiplayer-only first-person shooter genre, as numerous titles have seen success at this price point and gaming model. I think it's premature to speak to pricing for all future projects, but as of now this is our pricing structure for our marquee titles like Shadowrun. Additionally, MGS has the same development costs as other developers and publishers out there. One advantage other publishers have that we do not is that they can leverage their marketing and development costs over all platforms, while we are focused on Windows and Xbox 360 as a first party publisher. [/QUOTE] Full Story: newsweek.com

[bigmac_375]

sounds like m$ is banking on the fact that they think it is the next counter strike.
i guess we'll see...

[RGSPro]

Shadowrun sucks, I was in the beta- it should be around $39. To complicated and not that fun.

[mlapaglia]

^^ agreed. in cs there is a bomb... in this game there is all kinds of stuff..

[mlmadmax]

It's lame they should both be 50 bucks.

[SnackyCakes]

Didn't realize they raised the first party game price to 60. Guess they'll try to see if they can get away with it.

[0794]

that explanation is a really poor attempt at some BS reasoning for the price differential...he needs to go back to PR school and learn some more lessons on how to sound even close to honest while lying to us directly...and this was by email so he had time to create his response...so sad...

[trey85stang]

the whole cross platform gaming idea is simply moronic.

[Master Reefed]

no explanation wouldve been better, because at least that way they're not bullshittin ya.

[OffRoader23]

It makes sense because you have to spend a lot more to make your computer play the game compared to a 360, but the fact that you need Vista is stupid, because Microsoft is fucking retarded for creating a monopoly WITH THEMSELVES. It is fucking bullshit, I don't want to have to buy an operating system just to play games, I thought that was why I used windows in the first place? Now I have to buy ANOTHER one? WTF is that bullshit? Fucking Microsoft you money grubbing piece of shit monopoly.

[UltimateNinja9]

Now let's see if we can get them to explain why they charge $50 or more a year for laggy, player-hosted online gaming.

And I agree with OffRoader23, Vista does suck. I'm all for them making a new and improved version of windows, but the fact is Vista uses so much more system resources than XP that it pretty much makes the average pc unable to play games. I hope a lot of pc companies copy Dell and start offering linux. That would be a real slap in the face to Microsoft.

[Modiller]

one thing I never understood about people complaining about Vista was there reasoning behind it...

it's a new OS... going to be running on computers for the next 4-5 years.

When XP came out, did everyones computer run it super smooth? No, people had to upgrade and purchase new machines, why would Vista be any different?

I understand if people complain about Vista's functionality, new look, security problems, bugs, exploits the list goes on...

complaining it's a resource hog is rather stupid though, as any recent hardware is able to support it. Just because your computer you built 2 years ago for 1.5k doesn't run it smoothly... that doesn't really say much.
All recent CPUs from Intel and AMD will run Vista just fine, grab yourself 2gb of ram... and you'll be good to go.

If your computer is worth $500 or less, then why would anyone go out and spend $500 on an OS? That just doesn't make sense.

This post has been edited by Modiller: May 15 2007, 06:15 AM

[OffRoader23]

My hate towards Vista isn't directed towards having to upgrade my PC. I have a dual core with 2 GB of ram and a 512 mb x1800 xt, so that isn't it. I just don't want to have to BUY a new OS to run DirectX 10 just because Microsoft doesn't want to code it for XP, so everyone that wants it HAS to buy Vista, FORCING people to upgrade when they don't want to, don't have the money, or in my case, Vista won't even run. I tried Vista. It BSODs every 2 minutes. I have never had any problems with XP unless my overclock was set too high. I have turned that off and Vista STILL freezes and restarts my PC. It is COMPLETELY UNUSABLE. It is crap like that that really makes me mad, because it should run fine, but it doesn't, so even if I do want to use it, I can't, because it's too buggy. I want Halo 2 for PC, and maybe ShadowRun. But can I get it? No, because Vista doesn't work right. It is shit like that that makes me hate Vista with a passion. I'm upgrading to a Core 2 Duo soon from my AMD dual core, hopefully that will fix my problems, then maybe I can try to get a key somewhere or from someone because I am not ready to spend 200$ on something that I don't want to be FORCED to use.

This post has been edited by OffRoader23: May 15 2007, 07:22 AM

[andi_06]

How many times do we have to hear microsoft dribble shit, why not answer the question. Simple.

The pc platform owes them nothing, bit dfferent with the 360. You could be loyal to microsoft all your life and they'd still stab you in the back and steal your wallet.

[incognegro]

So am I the only one that is not surprised since PC games have always been $10 cheaper than console games?

Man, gamers are getting more and more fickle by the day