Shane Kim on Shadowrun's $10 PC to 360 price difference

by Ross Miller on May 14th 2007 7:52PM

Some men should be given a reward for giving eloquent and elongated responses to questions without ever really answering them. Take Shane Kim, for example.

When asked by Newsweek's N'Gai Croal why Shadowrun on the Xbox 360 cost $10 more than the identical PC version, Microsoft Games Studios' corporate vice president could have simply said "because we can." (Remember, folks, before Gears of War, Microsoft was selling their first-party titles for the old standard of $49.99.)

Nay, this wordsmith saw a canvas on which he could be poetic! "[These] 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."

Do we have an answer as to how Microsoft can justify screwing console owners out of ten dollars? No. Have we witnessed a moment of linguistic triumph? Yes. Brilliant!

Source

Tags: brilliant, guinness, microsoft, n'gai croal, N'gaiCroal, news week, NewsWeek, PC, shadow run, ShadowRun, shane kim, ShaneKim, Xbox-360

Reader Comments (34)

Ack, the whole main page has been italicized after this new post! Save yourselves!

No way am I paying $60 for a 1st party multiplayer-only game. Max price should be $40. I still wouldn't buy it, but it would be a fair price.

Also, what a lame ass answer to the price question. And I really like the, "We don’t even know what Warhawk will really be when it finally releases, but we do know that Shadowrun is offering an amazing, innovative gaming experience with groundbreaking connectivity" response. I think the PS3 currently sucks, but Warhawk looks to be badass.

The way I look at it, it's a rip off that they are charging so much for either. There is no campaign, only online play and even though I buy games for online play mostly, I still like me some campaign and or CO-OP. Knock $20 or $30 off and I will pick it up for the Xbox 360.

why couldn't he just say "PC Cost > Xbox 360 Cost"

Real answers as to why most studios, even third parties, often charge more for console than PC versions:

-consoles have high licensing fees (to pay MS, Sony, or Nintendo), PCs have none
-PC gamers are more gaming-literate, and thus more fickle. You might be able to sell hundreds of thousands of copies of a very mediocre game on a console (maybe its based on a movie license for example), but that shit wont fly with PC gamers.
-more competition with piracy.

are there any more real reasons?

I thought that was just how PC games worked. for as long as I can remember, I'd get a shiny new console game for $50, then on my way out, wistfully pass the PC version as it's $40 price tag taunted me. Saying "Mark, I'm cheaper, buy me instead" only to find that my computer wasn't equipped to handle the polygons the game was throwing at it. Why is the 360 version $10 more expensive? Because it just works. No need to install DirectX10 or update the drivers for my video card. at best, there's a system update, but not counting the occasional bricked console, they're hassle free compared to dealing with windows.

Yes, but PCs have a higher piracy rate, so the prices should be higher to offset the losses due to piracy.

Another thing to add, if they are going to make a game cross-platform where you can play on the Xbox 360 or a PC and in the near future on handhelds and cell phones and whatever else they come up with, they need to make the game that you buy be able to work on all for one price. I don't want to have to purchase the same game on a each of platforms I want to play it on, that would get costly. For $60 buck, it better work on the PC as well as my Xbox 360!!!

They tested the waters with all the "limited edition versions" a few years ago and console gamers coughed up the money.

So, it's actually the gamers fault for showing them that they are willing to shell out more $$$

Or, it could be because Microsoft takes a cut/charges licensing fees for the 360 version, whereas no such 1st-party licensing charge exists for the PC version.

It comes down to wheather or not you want the game. Don't like the price don't buy the game. Remember Gaming is a business first and it's based on supply and demand, not "Gee, I've spent alot of money on this game developing it so lets give it away". Sorry but most of you guys here do more complaining rather than anything else.

If I were him, I'd say "We expect to sell about 20% more copies of the game on PC than on Xbox360, so we priced it the way we did in order to keep total revenue consistent across all platforms."

That's just an eloquent way of telling it like it is.

Whoops, the PC version has the Games for Windows branding, so they prolly have to pay licensing for that too... nm my previous post!

#8 I really like that idea. It's not that it would be unheard of. Sony talked about with movies that are UMD and DVD in one package, and HD-DVD does it with the combo discs, even cd's do it with dual discs. Why can't we have 360 on one side PC-DVD on the other with a download code for our cell. Let's get our live anywhere already.

It's called licensing costs, you know. It's nothing console gamers should really complain about, think of it as a tradeoff for getting cheaper hardware.

Lisencing cost? Are you serious? Its a first party game, who do they pay a fee to? The only reason it cost more is because they think people will buy just as many as if it was 50.

Charlie has it right. PC gamers tailor their rig to play games to their fullest.
I'm really surprised no one has brought up the real issue that gets brought up in most every other 'Devs say this' article....

Install base.

While the 360 hovers around 10M, there has to be 3 billion+ PC's in the world. Yes, they may not all be "game worthy" but even if 5% of that are worthy, that is 50M PC's. That is a substantially bigger pool to draw from.

piracy?
excuse me, last i checked... any idiot could walk into gamestop and buy console games used
no pc games used there...
and devs dont see a dime of profit from used game sales

is piracy as big of an issue as this? i doubt it, especially for multiplayer games

Just wait until the game is marked down or on sale.

The real bad part is for their $10 less Windows players get free non-cross-platform multiplayer while 360 users get to pay a $10 premium for the game along with a $50 charge to play it online.

Anyway the game looks great but with no single player campaign and no split-screen multiplayer I won't be picking it up (and even if it had free Xbox Live play I still wouldn't because I don't care about playing online with a bunch of screaming and cursing 13 year olds).

P.S. Console development should be cheaper than PC development because the post-launch PC support cost will be a fraction of what the console versions is. Remember when developing for a PC you have to support a much wider range of hardware than when you develop for a console.

I thought owners of the PC version still had to pay the $50 for "Windows Live" to be able to play, or is that only for the cross-platform action?

I cannot justify purchasing a FPS multiplayer only game like this for $60 personally. It's just feels like like a rip off to me. Maybe if enough people feel the same way and do not purchase the game, pricing on it will change but I doubt it. If it's worth that much to you by all means, I just feel like they are trying to milk us, even if the game is great.

Lulz, looks like I'll wait and buy a used copy. Enjoy not getting any of my money, Microsoft. There's no excuse as to why it couldn't be 10 dollars cheaper. They don't really have to pay licensing fees (to themselves) and they don't have to spend time/money on writers/voice actors/cutscenes/scenarios. The least they could have done was add co-op...

Shane, I have a 360, but I'm not gonna buy your crap. I decided not to buy anything I can play on my PC, especially if it's cheaper (and better) on PC. Hopefully there will be some 360 titles that are completely exclusive to 360. Like Gears and Halo. Oh wait.

Consoles are sold at a loss. They make all their money on games. PC hardware is sold at a game. There are no licensing fees for 3rd parties or hardware costs for 1st parties to make back. Didn't everybody know that? Simple differences in economics between the platforms. PC versions of games are typically cheaper for some of those very reasons.

MS is not making money with the entertainment division, so it isn't like they are "screwing" their fanbase too bad, what with them basically giving us their money and all.

Microsoft Gaming Division 21 billion dollars in the hole, nuff said....................................

This game looked insanely lame, I can't believe it's first party. Give it to the ps3 for all I care, it didn't look like it should cost more then $20/copy.

"Lisencing cost? Are you serious? Its a first party game, who do they pay a fee to?"

I dunno, maybe the company that holds the copyright to the Shadowrun franchise that has existed for a LOOOONG time....

#29
What you say used to be true, but I guess you forgot about xbox live, which is raking in 99% pure profit every month from a good chunk of it's 5 million users.

The really simple answer that he was thinking but wouldn't say;

"Because dumbasses will pay it"

Don't want to pay $10-$20 more for a console game than the PC version costs? Simple, don't pay it. Show just a little patience and wait for the price drop or buy it used. And don't forget to email the developer and let them know WHY you did what you did.

Of course most people will probably be too impatient to wait an extra month to play a game and too lazy to write an email so things will likrly never change.

Shane Kim on Shadowrun's $10 PC to 360 price difference

Reader Comments (34)

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:01PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:08PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:12PM SeNiLe said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:13PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:17PM Charlie W said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:16PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:28PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:31PM SeNiLe said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:31PM RobAccomando said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:32PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:37PM bigd7387 said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:39PM In A World said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:41PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:42PM severian00 said

Posted: May 14th 2007 8:55PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:12PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:13PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:13PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:14PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:21PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:29PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:38PM joevill said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:48PM Twist said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:51PM Twist said

Posted: May 14th 2007 9:55PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 10:21PM jaysins said

Posted: May 14th 2007 10:22PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 10:29PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 14th 2007 10:57PM sand0789 said

Posted: May 14th 2007 11:25PM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 15th 2007 12:28AM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 15th 2007 12:12AM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 15th 2007 12:29AM (Unverified) said

Posted: May 17th 2007 7:17PM Scatter said

Info

Description

MSRP

Release Date

Genre

Developer

Publisher

Rating

Breaking News

WB conjures up Harry Potter for Kinect this fall

Featured Stories

Editorial: 38 Studios and the Dunkin delusions

Our own Alexander Sliwinski talks 38 Studios with Fox 25 News

The politics of making games: Disconnect between 38 Studios and Rhode Island in quotes

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW