Gaming Steve

June 01, 2005

And ... we're back!

Sword of VermilionOkay, I think I finally got over E3 and I'm ready to start posting on a regular basis again. Also now that E3 is over we'll start actually getting "real" gaming news instead of the 37th "news article" about the Xbox 360 MTV special.

So what am I going to write about ... the Xbox 360 of course! First up, it seems that GameStop has actually listed Halo 3 as an upcoming release. Right now it's listed as a "pre-release ETA: 6/1/2006" and at a price of $59.99. I'm sure this is nothing more than a placeholder for now (I still remember when World of Warcraft was listed on the EB Games site for over two years before it actually came out).

Next up, Joystiq has word that the Xbox 360 will launch on November 2, 2005 along with games that have a MSRP of $59.99. Wow, that is expensive. Nearly everyone I know already buys most of their video games used, factor in a $10 price hike across the board and I have a feeling the used video game business is going to really take off ... big time.

Of course, I still remember spending $79.95(!) in 1989(!!) for the Sega Genesis game Sword of Vermilion (which was a piece of crap). And did you know that the original MSRP for Warcraft I was also $79.95! So when you compare the Xbox 360 game prices to those ancient games they're a steal! Damn, I should work for the Microsoft PR department.

And finally, something which has nothing to do with the Xbox 360 at all -- my next podcast. Look for part two of my interview with Will Wright within the next week. Until then ... just 50 more weeks until the next E3!

Posted by Gaming Steve at 11:00 PM | Comments (23) | Posted to Xbox | Add this story to del.icio.us
Comments

Yeah, I finally got over E3 two days ago.

Posted by RealmRPGer at June 2, 2005 12:15 AM

Do you feel that this years E3 was a bit of an anti-climax?

Posted by Devilmachine at June 2, 2005 01:06 AM

I heard on G4 today that most games for the xbow 380 would be priced at 59.99

that ain't a good sign for next gen.
(me i'm getting ps3)

Posted by Tarious at June 2, 2005 03:01 AM

How much do you think thatl translate to over her in the UK, our games here cost £40, which is $60 near enough anyway!

Posted by Gandysampras at June 2, 2005 07:36 AM

Actually dude, that's closer to 80USD at the current exchange rates. However, you get free health care so it's not all bad. I remember paying 70 pounds in 1997 for International Superstar Soccer on the Nintendo 64. All the early titles were around that price. Whew!

Posted by steven Richardson at June 2, 2005 08:42 AM

Wait, the podcast will be this week or next week?

Just curious. ^_^

Posted by Sensei Jinx at June 2, 2005 09:02 AM

E3 this year was so shallow. It was all this promis and hype and when it came to it it was a real let down. I think Nintendo had a good show, lost of people liked what they saw, but Sony and Microsoft seem to have had slim pickings. The only game I really heard about for PS2/XBOX was We Love Katamari Damacy. C'mon, the 360 is still 6 months away. Other games have to be comming out. Oh well, at least I got my DS and Gamecube to keep me company.

Posted by Zaphod at June 2, 2005 12:14 PM

I actually liked Sword of Vermillion. Took me months to complete but it was quite challenging and fun.

Posted by Snooty at June 2, 2005 01:33 PM

Well I can't say I'm shocked at this. Brand new PC games sel for around that much. or that could just be where I live.

Posted by Jujubee at June 2, 2005 02:52 PM

Hmm...I'm really not like the idea of having to pay $59.99 for a game. I bet it was stupid Microsofts idea.

Posted by Simman at June 2, 2005 04:40 PM

I remember paying 70 each for a couple games, course those were Mario 3 and Final Fantasy 3, and WELL worth it.

Posted by nomadharma at June 2, 2005 08:50 PM

I think the most i ever paid for a game was for tekken 3, on the day it came out, i paid £65 for it. That was a waste, i unlocked everything within a week.

Posted by Gandysampras at June 2, 2005 09:31 PM

Oh, ye, thats nearly $100 by the way

Posted by Gandysampras at June 2, 2005 09:32 PM

$60 isn't bad. it's the $300+ for the system itself that worries me. I'll probably just wait until the first round of price reductions. I'm not really excited about these systems anyway. Bring on spore.

Posted by Deep Lee at June 3, 2005 12:22 AM

$60 USD is not bad, console games are priced €60 here at least since the PS2 came out. And that is $73 USD. I'm in the Netherland FYI

Posted by Gil at June 3, 2005 06:10 AM

Yeah, I want to resist the price hike as a natural reaction. But when I really think about the cost of the games I kind feel stupid for doing so. Games here have been 49.99 for a long time now and reading the financial reports for Ubi and some others the other day, I don't see them making hand-over-fist profit and we all know they shaft their programmers pretty good on salaries.

I don't know. It will limit how many new games I buy, but common sense pretty much does that anyway for me these days.

This has been talked about and talked about since before MS even entered the market though. I'd be first to blame MS if it wasn't basically an absurd notion though. It's something that has been going around for a while.

Posted by Tim at June 3, 2005 04:42 PM

I think the industry should find a way to cut the cost, like Will Wright is doing with procedural generated content

Posted by Gil at June 4, 2005 01:12 PM

whats so bad about $50? thats what I pay for PCs all the time...but I'm kinda getting the feeling that just where I live.

Posted by jujubee at June 4, 2005 06:45 PM

€50 is a normal price for pc games here...that's $60

Posted by Gil at June 6, 2005 06:21 AM

Unless you have the cash to buy both systems, wait for the PS3. It will blow away the XBox 360 in every facet imaginable. The games will also be more affordable at around an avg. price of $39.99/game. And you know Sony will have way more games released (and better ones at that), than the XBox 360.

BTW i also paid the $70+ for Sword of Vermillion back in tha day, and i liked the game.

Posted by Lutz at June 7, 2005 05:02 AM

Wow, a lot of people really liked Sword of Vermillion. Hum, I'm not sure why I didn't like it so much. I just remember being semi-bored with the game and I never got into it. I don't remember the game very well ... but I sure remember the price I paid!

Posted by Gaming Steve at June 7, 2005 09:22 AM

I really liked you pod-cast, once again...

After I listened to you "How to get into the game industry" I'm not to sure it is the job I want...

Posted by Simman at June 7, 2005 07:52 PM

From what ive seen alot of people didnt like SOV. I think alot of these people are new age gamerz going back and playing some older RPG's for sh*ts and giggles, and not oldskool like me. So of course it pales in comparison to the newer games of the FF series. At the time SOV was revoluationary in that the battles were hands on, as opposed to simply clicking on "fight" or "run" like all previous RPG's. That alone is enough for me to give the game props for pioneering the road to something new and being unique.

I also recall paying $80 or so for Phantasy Star 3. That is another one many people didnt care for, but i loved.

BTW you've got a pretty good site here Steve. I just stumbled upon it the other day.

Posted by Lutz at June 9, 2005 04:02 AM