76 réponses à ce sujet

[MprezdNZ]

Peeker2009 wrote...

I don't want to get into the price of DLC issue myself as I've already read enough about it in other threads, and really don't have much to add - except that I saw DA:O selling for AU$110 in EB games today. Probably the most expensive game I have ever seen in EB. I'm not implying that it isn't worth it, just an info update.

However, people keep bringing up the 6 years of work put into DA, and often using the figure to justifiy pricing. Can someone please tell me if this 6 years was a full time, all-hands-on-board, nose-to-the-grindstone type effort, or was it more of a snowball effect; ie, starting very small and gradually picking up size and pace as the years went by? Was DA:O a top priority during that time, or was Bioware's attention mostly elsewhere? The claim of 6 years work is rather vague.

On the one hand, it could be something to be proud of, suggesting a quality experience for the player, that every detail was lovingly hand-crafted and thoroughly tested, while on the other it could be a little embarrassing; For example, should a game that was 6 years in the making require a patch at all? Or, in all that time did no one think that having to reset a ranger pet's tactics every time would be a nuisance (and that's all it is), and spent a couple of hours, days or weeks to fix it? I'm obviously not a games developer, and would have no idea how long that would take.

Please don't misunderstand me, I loved the game - probably the best I've played in years, but if the figure of 6 years is used to help justify cost in a discussion such as this, it would be helpful to know what that means exactly.

Perhaps this has already been thrashed out in another thread, or maybe there are some relevant records that are available to the public. If anyone could point me in the right direction, I would be grateful.

I don't think there really is much info on this. The story and dialogue would have no doubt taken quite a while (including building the world etc). They have been talking about it for 6 years. They haven't really released many games int eh past 6 years, so you would guess while it hasn't been a 24/7 project for 6 years there would have been a lot of effort put in over time.

But for cold hard figures I doubt you will find anywhere with info. 

[Eisberg1977]

I chow down a $4/$5 meal down faster then it takes to complete the DLC. I have paid $13-$15 for 1.5 hour DvD movie, spent more then that when I saw the movie at the theatre.



To ggRechen. DLC help with second hand sales, and non internet based piracy (which would be far bigger then Internet piracy if it wasn't for these kinds of measures.

[RetrOldSchool]

MprezdNZ wrote...
Are you talking value in terms of time played though? Because for me, the Fallout dlcs were all rubbish.

it is all a matter of perspective and there isn't a right/wrong answer, but at the end of the day if you like the game and you want to play it, then as long as the amount is not exorbitant then you should get it.If it is only a 30 minute play through but you play it more than once than you have to factor in that value. At the end of the day no one can tell you to attribute a value to it because it is your personal enjoyment.
Personally, I never played F3 with more than 1 character because it didn't interest me that much. I have every intention of playing DA with every single character - apart from maybe the mage.

I really enjoyed Point Lookout, both story wise and for the change in setting. I

 dont think only going for game time is a very good way of deciding whether or not a DLC is worth the money spent. I think if you dont like Point Lookout, you probably already was a little fed up with Fallout 3 when you started to play it, since it offers all things that F3 offers. And a DLC like that is what I'd love to see for DA:O (and we will probably get it too, in the future, according to BW statements they plan to do all kinds of DLC from short to mid to long).

Like many other in this thread, I'd rather see a 1 hour game play DLC with a good story than a 2 hour dungeon crawler with very little story.

What I'd like to see is mid-sized (like PL for Fallout3) DLC with some of the things Point Lookout offered:
- A large new area with both dungeons and friendly areas
-Multiple NPC's to talk to
-Multiple quests and a good story
-A couple of choices

A DLC like that could be 3 hours long (comparing to PL ~5) and I would still pay 1200 MS Points for it without hesitating.

I'm with you on the replayability factor though, I started a 2nd playthrough of Fallout3, to be evil, but it wasn't as good the 2nd time around and I got bored with it pretty quickly, while Im already planning my other playthroughs of DA:O. I think the fact that your choices in class and build (along with what companions to use) really changes the gameplay is the main factor of why Im looking forward to more playthroughs.

[ArathWoeeye]

Point Lookout and The Pitt were the "good" DLCs for F3 methinks. Plus they fit in the fallout world more than the game itself.

[archonsod]

ggRechen wrote...
- Publishers believe that DLC will reduce piracy - (for most games except Guitar Hero / Rock Band, I don't agree in this point).

 It also generates the publisher revenue from the second hand market, which is a bigger issue for them than piracy.

[MerinTB]

There are already several very lengthy threads about the price of the DLC and the Expansion.

Did we need another?

Really, OP, go read some of the others and respond on those lengthy threads.  You are going to see most of the same arguments rehashed here.

[Coldcall01]

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...

MprezdNZ wrote...

So you are saying Bioware shouldn't try to make money?

That's a really daft reading of what i said. Where did i say they should not make money? Are you saying they dont make money on the £35-£40 retail game?

Please if you cant make an intelligent comment - dont bother.

And you think you sound intelligent by comparing dlc to the original game? It is no different to anything else; if you can hook people on to anything then you can test the waters to see w

hat people will/won't pay for. Why shouldn't they try to get more money out of gamers for the 6 years of work they have done developing this game? 

Are you trying to say that any other business doesn't try to grab an audience and then try and see how much money they can get out of them? The difference is a lot of businesses haven't put 6 years of work into their products. 

They can't expect that everyone who buys this game will be faithful to it for the next 2 years. They need to 'strike while the is hot' so to speak and obtain what they can, while they can. 

How do you work out a cost per hour price when everyone plays it differently?

Am i saying any of those things you claim above? No, I'm not. Read my original post again. When you learn to communicate without being a disingenous moron - let me know.

[Yozaro]

Coldcall01 wrote...

Am i saying any of those things you claim above? No, I'm not. Read my original post again. When you learn to communicate without being a disingenous moron - let me know.

You're counting the prices with the amount of time it takes to finish the content? That's the first point that makes you look like an idiot. You shouldn't expect anyone to take you seriously.

[MprezdNZ]

Coldcall01 wrote...

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...

MprezdNZ wrote...

So you are saying Bioware shouldn't try to make money?

That's a really daft reading of what i said. Where did i say they should not make money? Are you saying they dont make money on the £35-£40 retail game?

Please if you cant make an intelligent comment - dont bother.

And you think you sound intelligent by comparing dlc to the original game? It is no different to anything else; if you can hook people on to anything then you can test the waters to see w

hat people will/won't pay for. Why shouldn't they try to get more money out of gamers for the 6 years of work they have done developing this game? 

Are you trying to say that any other business doesn't try to grab an audience and then try and see how much money they can get out of them? The difference is a lot of businesses haven't put 6 years of work into their products. 

They can't expect that everyone who buys this game will be faithful to it for the next 2 years. They need to 'strike while the is hot' so to speak and obtain what they can, while they can. 

How do you work out a cost per hour price when everyone plays it differently?

Am i saying any of those things you claim above? No, I'm not. Read my original post again. When you learn to communicate without being a disingenous moron - let me know.

your post: 

qualify yourself as a bioware fan so you don't
come off like a whinger

whinge about dlcs not being good value because the
big bad company is charging more for this than the original game based on a
cost per hour basis

Apologise for saying something that is in about
10,000 other threads.



So basically, Bioware have created what they think
is a quality product which they spent a number of years developing. They sold a
hell of a lot of copies of the game based on positive reviews, and the first
dlc uptake was huge. They see this game as a 2 year project to a: recover costs
and b: make money. 

Given that they know they
will not keep a lot of players for the lifespan of the product they feel they
need to (again cliched) strike while the iron is hot. 



You basically accuse them of profiteeting
(which is the only reason you could think they would dare charge $7 for an add
on to a hugely popular game), with no proof. And even if they are - so what?
Hello, they are a business. They are not just there to make you feel warm and
fuzzy on the inside. 



If you think that the price they are charging is
too high, don't buy it. As I said in another post - it is all a matter of perspective and there isn't
a right/wrong answer, but at the end of the day if you like the game and you
want to play it, then as long as the amount is not exorbitant then you should
get it.If it is only a 30 minute play through but you play it more than once
than you have to factor in that value. At the end of the day no one can tell
you to attribute a value to it because it is your personal enjoyment. 

[spearoflight]

No offense to the OP but I'm getting really tired of these threads. The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy. If you think the DLC, expansion or whatever is overpriced then don't buy it. That's the best way to comment on the price.



Personally I think that $5 for DLC with professionally voiced actors is a great price. I'd pay more than that for a pizza.

[Elphaba]

spearoflight wrote...

The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy.

When you confuse corporate profits with political philosophy, we all lose.

[Coldcall01]

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...

MprezdNZ wrote...

So you are saying Bioware shouldn't try to make money?

That's a really daft reading of what i said. Where did i say they should not make money? Are you saying they dont make money on the £35-£40 retail game?

Please if you cant make an intelligent comment - dont bother.

And you think you sound intelligent by comparing dlc to the original game? It is no different to anything else; if you can hook people on to anything then you can test the waters to see w

hat people will/won't pay for. Why shouldn't they try to get more money out of gamers for the 6 years of work they have done developing this game? 

Are you trying to say that any other business doesn't try to grab an audience and then try and see how much money they can get out of them? The difference is a lot of businesses haven't put 6 years of work into their products. 

They can't expect that everyone who buys this game will be faithful to it for the next 2 years. They need to 'strike while the is hot' so to speak and obtain what they can, while they can. 

How do you work out a cost per hour price when everyone plays it differently?

Am i saying any of those things you claim above? No, I'm not. Read my original post again. When you learn to communicate without being a disingenous moron - let me know.

your post: 

qualify yourself as a bioware fan so you don't
come off like a whinger

whinge about dlcs not being good value because the
big bad company is charging more for this than the original game based on a
cost per hour basis

Apologise for saying something that is in about
10,000 other threads.



So basically, Bioware have created what they think
is a quality product which they spent a number of years developing. They sold a
hell of a lot of copies of the game based on positive reviews, and the first
dlc uptake was huge. They see this game as a 2 year project to a: recover costs
and b: make money. 

Given that they know they
will not keep a lot of players for the lifespan of the product they feel they
need to (again cliched) strike while the iron is hot. 



You basically accuse them of profiteeting
(which is the only reason you could think they would dare charge $7 for an add
on to a hugely popular game), with no proof. And even if they are - so what?
Hello, they are a business. They are not just there to make you feel warm and
fuzzy on the inside. 



If you think that the price they are charging is
too high, don't buy it. As I said in another post - it is all a matter of perspective and there isn't
a right/wrong answer, but at the end of the day if you like the game and you
want to play it, then as long as the amount is not exorbitant then you should
get it.If it is only a 30 minute play through but you play it more than once
than you have to factor in that value. At the end of the day no one can tell
you to attribute a value to it because it is your personal enjoyment. 

Listen moron, you have completely missed the point of my post and gone off the deep end accusing me of arguing that games developers should'nt make money. You want to write a novel digging your way out of it, you go ahead and waste your time :-)

[Coldcall01]

spearoflight wrote...

No offense to the OP but I'm getting really tired of these threads. The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy. If you think the DLC, expansion or whatever is overpriced then don't buy it. That's the best way to comment on the price.

Personally I think that $5 for DLC with professionally voiced actors is a great price. I'd pay more than that for a pizza.

These forums are meant for all views, positive and negative. Howabout you take your own advice then and not READ any posts which might be slightly negative. How's that for your sense of democracy?

[MprezdNZ]

Coldcall01 wrote...

Listen moron, you have completely missed the point of my post and gone off the deep end accusing me of arguing that games developers should'nt make money. You want to write a novel digging your way out of it, you go ahead and waste your time :-)

oooh, obviously hit a nerve as you resorted to name calling twice. And you can't even come up with a different name. it must burn you deep down. 

The thing is, you don't really have a point apart from the fact that you believe the dlc is overpriced based on a cost per hour basis, and you wanted to start a whinge thread like 10,000 other ones. If you want to base your purchasing decisions based on a cost per hour basis, that is your decision. 

the fact is you accuse them of profiteering, with no proof to back that up. You have no idea on their pricing models, their costs, or whether they have made their money back, and if they have made it back, how much actual profit they have made. 

At the end of the day you know squat about what they actually have to do to produce a dlc, but you are quire happy to make assumptions anyway. 

ps I'm not wasting time. I am at work, and all my tasks are done. So don't worry your little head about me, sunshine. 

[MprezdNZ]

Coldcall01 wrote...

spearoflight wrote...

No offense to the OP but I'm getting really tired of these threads. The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy. If you think the DLC, expansion or whatever is overpriced then don't buy it. That's the best way to comment on the price.

Personally I think that $5 for DLC with professionally voiced actors is a great price. I'd pay more than that for a pizza.

These forums are meant for all views, positive and negative. Howabout you take your own advice then and not READ any posts which might be slightly negative. How's that for your sense of democracy?

And another nerve hit. The fact is there are a ton of other threads on this same topic, so you had no reason to start your own. Simple, if you think it is overpriced, don't buy it. If you want it, but don't want to pay for it, then either suck it up and pay for it, or suck it up and go without. But, I reiterate, there was no reason to start your own thread when there are plenty of others here talking about price. 

You are obviously over-sensitive if SoF's post got to you. 

[Coldcall01]

ggRechen wrote...

- I'm afraid complaining about prices is quite hopeless. You give your vote via buying or not buying, because pricing is based on sales numbers and not on opinions. Basically: enough buyers = high prices. Too few buyers = lower prices.
As long as a product is not essential (like food), it's not the companies that make the prices, it's the customers. A company would charge 5.000.000 US$ per game if we were willing to pay. Obviously we are not, so they don't. They charge what we are willing (or not) to pay.
- I don't see the point in calculating price / game duration. By that logic you could lengthen play-time by dropping in endless waves of mobs, thus achieving a better price / value balance. It doesn't really work that way, does it? 1 hour of great gameplay/story is more worth to me than 3 hours of monster-slaying.
- DLC has become an important source of income for many companies in the gaming industry and this will increase in 2010.
- Publishers believe that DLC will reduce piracy - (for most games except Guitar Hero / Rock Band, I don't agree in this point).

Just on your last point. I think the idea that overpriced DLCs will reduce piracy is really a pipe-dream. If anything the more that gamers (PC mainly) feel they are being ripped off the more they will likely revert to illegal torrents.

Game publishers have actually contributed to piracy when they started cutting down manual/instructions size (about 6-7 years ago), not printing maps, or proper full instruction manuals. If the retail version comes as one dvd with either digital or a flimsy instruction manual people might as well just donwload it as a torrent. What are they not getting in the torrent they dont get in the retail payed for version?

So Im afraid your belief that DLCs will reduce piracy is based on false logic. Equally people pirate mor when they think something is overpriced for what it is. They've done it with CD music and almost ruined the industry and I could see the exact same thing happening with games publishers now that they are all owend by large corporrate interests, looking to exploit obsessed gamers.

[MprezdNZ]

Coldcall01 wrote...


Just on your last point. I think the idea that overpriced DLCs will reduce piracy is really a pipe-dream. If anything the more that gamers (PC mainly) feel they are being ripped off the more they will likely revert to illegal torrents.

Game publishers have actually contributed to piracy when they started cutting down manual/instructions size (about 6-7 years ago), not printing maps, or proper full instruction manuals. If the retail version comes as one dvd with either digital or a flimsy instruction manual people might as well just donwload it as a torrent. What are they not getting in the torrent they dont get in the retail payed for version?

So Im afraid your belief that DLCs will reduce piracy is based on false logic. Equally people pirate mor when they think something is overpriced for what it is. They've done it with CD music and almost ruined the industry and I could see the exact same thing happening with games publishers now that they are all owend by large corporrate interests, looking to exploit obsessed gamers.

That depends to some degree. PC users see Bioware (even though they are owned by EA) as the last bastion of hope for pc developers. Blizzard isn't seen in the same light because, quite frankly, almost everyone hates Activision more than EA. I have lots of friends I will freely admit pirate games. Often just to try them because there is no demo, and most they wouldn't play much past the point of what a demo would have been anyway. But all of them buy every single Bioware game. They have since relented and pirated RtO, but they all have bioware points and all plan on getting the proper version when it is released. 

While they all agree that the dlc is overpriced, they do not feel it is exorbitantly so, and they want to support Bioware. There will always be pirates that just don't care, but Bioware is generally seen in a slightly different light to most. If we let them fall over, pc gaming is all but dead really. 

Modifié par MprezdNZ, 26 janvier 2010 - 01:25 .

[Coldcall01]

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...

spearoflight wrote...

No offense to the OP but I'm getting really tired of these threads. The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy. If you think the DLC, expansion or whatever is overpriced then don't buy it. That's the best way to comment on the price.

Personally I think that $5 for DLC with professionally voiced actors is a great price. I'd pay more than that for a pizza.

These forums are meant for all views, positive and negative. Howabout you take your own advice then and not READ any posts which might be slightly negative. How's that for your sense of democracy?

And another nerve hit. The fact is there are a ton of other threads on this same topic, so you had no reason to start your own. Simple, if you think it is overpriced, don't buy it. If you want it, but don't want to pay for it, then either suck it up and pay for it, or suck it up and go without. But, I reiterate, there was no reason to start your own thread when there are plenty of others here talking about price. 

You are obviously over-sensitive if SoF's post got to you. 

And again you prove the champ of missing the point. His point was that he sees the choice to purchase a DLC as democratic. My point back at him was then he should take his own advice and not read posts which are negative, as he was saying how tired of them he is. Its the same stupid argument you fool.

Geddit? No, that would be asking too much from you surely.

[MprezdNZ]

Coldcall01 wrote...

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...

spearoflight wrote...

No offense to the OP but I'm getting really tired of these threads. The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy. If you think the DLC, expansion or whatever is overpriced then don't buy it. That's the best way to comment on the price.

Personally I think that $5 for DLC with professionally voiced actors is a great price. I'd pay more than that for a pizza.

These forums are meant for all views, positive and negative. Howabout you take your own advice then and not READ any posts which might be slightly negative. How's that for your sense of democracy?

And another nerve hit. The fact is there are a ton of other threads on this same topic, so you had no reason to start your own. Simple, if you think it is overpriced, don't buy it. If you want it, but don't want to pay for it, then either suck it up and pay for it, or suck it up and go without. But, I reiterate, there was no reason to start your own thread when there are plenty of others here talking about price. 

You are obviously over-sensitive if SoF's post got to you. 

And again you prove the champ of missing the point. His point was that he sees the choice to purchase a DLC as democratic. My point back at him was then he should take his own advice and not read posts which are negative, as he was saying how tired of them he is. Its the same stupid argument you fool.

Geddit? No, that would be asking too much from you surely.

 deleted

Modifié par MprezdNZ, 26 janvier 2010 - 02:33 .

[Coldcall01]

MprezdNZ wrote...

Coldcall01 wrote...


Just on your last point. I think the idea that overpriced DLCs will reduce piracy is really a pipe-dream. If anything the more that gamers (PC mainly) feel they are being ripped off the more they will likely revert to illegal torrents.

Game publishers have actually contributed to piracy when they started cutting down manual/instructions size (about 6-7 years ago), not printing maps, or proper full instruction manuals. If the retail version comes as one dvd with either digital or a flimsy instruction manual people might as well just donwload it as a torrent. What are they not getting in the torrent they dont get in the retail payed for version?

So Im afraid your belief that DLCs will reduce piracy is based on false logic. Equally people pirate mor when they think something is overpriced for what it is. They've done it with CD music and almost ruined the industry and I could see the exact same thing happening with games publishers now that they are all owend by large corporrate interests, looking to exploit obsessed gamers.

That depends to some degree. PC users see Bioware (even though they are owned by EA) as the last bastion of hope for pc developers. Blizzard isn't seen in the same light because, quite frankly, almost everyone hates Activision more than EA. I have lots of friends I will freely admit pirate games. Often just to try them because there is no demo, and most they wouldn't play much past the point of what a demo would have been anyway. But all of them buy every single Bioware game. They have since relented and pirated RtO, but they all have bioware points and all plan on getting the proper version when it is released. 

While they all agree that the dlc is overpriced, they do not feel it is exorbitantly so, and they want to support Bioware. There will always be pirates that just don't care, but Bioware is generally seen in a slightly different light to most. If we let them fall over, pc gaming is all but dead really. 

Yes i too previously  viewed Bioware as a last bastion of the old time game developers.

Its interesting you menion that your friends pirated RTO. Because while their intent might now be to buy the DLc when it comes out; do you really think all of them will  bother? Not only that, but now they know how to pirate Bioware DLCs and that knowledge or sources will pass to others etc... Thats not good ffor Bioware and games industry in general.

Personally i think pirating is a disgrace since a lot of it would severely hurt the industry which now has huge running costs, which they did not have in the old days. Compare the difference in production costs between BG1 and say DAO. I bet we are talking of a 5:1 ratio minimum.

All im saying is Bioware need to be more thoughful about how the DLCs are viewed by gamers from a monetary perspective.

Bioware have a reputation to loose and my point was that while their games are still amongst the best, there are many folks unhappy about feeling as if they are being manipulated into buying many seperate nickel & dime DLCs, which when added up together are way more expensive than the original game.

[bzombo]

Coldcall01 wrote...


Frist of all I am a big Bioware fan and own most games going back to late 90s, so I'm not complaining for the sake of it, but after having analysed the amount DLCs cost ,and the cost of distributing them, compared to retail game and packaging costs; it would appear DLCs are not good value from a gamer's perspective.

Lets looks at it purely on bang for buck terms. I paid £35 for the retail packaged game which comes in a box, dvd, and small game manual. An honest appraisal of gameplay time would be say 50 hours. So in effect one is paying about £2 per hour of game. Now compare the avergae cost of a 1 hour long DLC such as Wardens Keep. It costs $7 US, and Bioware need not print or manufacture any DVDs or packaging materials.

So the DLCs are 3-4 times more expensive than the actual retail game. I see a lot of dedicated gamers complaining about the costs of DLCs and i think they have a point. One would think EA/Bioware would be trying to make DLCs more affordable and considering they are way better on the enviroment (way less carbon created through DLC release) there is just no excuse (other than profteering) to charge $7 for an hour-long DLC.

Another reason the DLCs should not cost that amount is that they are built with an editor by the folks who created the editor for gamers to create content. The devs at Bioware can probably whip through that editor creating great new content far faster than expansions were created a few years back.

Sorry but had to be said - regardless of how much i like DAO (its a great game).

based on what you're saying, they should charge $2. i think $5 is perfectly fair. bioware seems to have learned from warden's keep and has kept pricing at $5 for rto. accusations of profiteering is just plain ridiculous. bioware wants to profit. making a profit should not be stigmatized.

[MprezdNZ]

[quote]Coldcall01 wrote...

[quote]MprezdNZ wrote...

Yes i too previously  viewed Bioware as a last bastion of the old time game developers.

Its interesting you menion that your friends pirated RTO. Because while their intent might now be to buy the DLc when it comes out; do you really think all of them will  bother? Not only that, but now they know how to pirate Bioware DLCs and that knowledge or sources will pass to others etc... Thats not good ffor Bioware and games industry in general.

Personally i think pirating is a disgrace since a lot of it would severely hurt the industry which now has huge running costs, which they did not have in the old days. Compare the difference in production costs between BG1 and say DAO. I bet we are talking of a 5:1 ratio minimum.

All im saying is Bioware need to be more thoughful about how the DLCs are viewed by gamers from a monetary perspective.

Bioware have a reputation to loose and my point was that while their games are still amongst the best, there are many folks unhappy about feeling as if they are being manipulated into buying many seperate nickel & dime DLCs, which when added up together are way more expensive than the original game.
[/quote]

They will. I think all but one of them actually pirated the game itself prior to release as well from memory. Maybe a couple didn't. But they all bought it, even though in NZ it was like $120 for the Collectors. And they all bought Collectors. And they all bought WK even though they tried that too. While I don't approve of their methods, and I am also against pirating, they were friends long before piracy, and i'm not going to give up that because of a moral/ethical difference in opinion. But they all firmly believe in Bioware and don't want pc gaming to die.

They could well be the exception, but I do believe that many others who could have pirated the game didn't for the same reason. For all their self entitlement sometimes, pc gamers still don't want to end up with nothing. 

Modifié par MprezdNZ, 26 janvier 2010 - 02:32 .

[bzombo]

Elphaba wrote...

spearoflight wrote...

The fact is DLC is a great example of democracy.

When you confuse corporate profits with political philosophy, we all lose.

political and economic philosophies tend to go hand in hand. democratic societies tend to be capitalist. communist/socialist societies tend to have disdain for capitalism. dictatorships tend to have hybrid economies to suit what the dictator wants or is able to allow to keep power.

[bzombo]

you may want to reread what you posted because i got the same impression, and i think many others did as well. when you accuse a company of "profiteering", there is a stigma with that word that implies your beliefs as well as your opinion of the company you're talking about.

Modifié par bzombo, 26 janvier 2010 - 04:45 .

[MprezdNZ]

bzombo wrote...


you may want to reread what you posted because i got the same impression, and i think many others did as well. when you accuse a company of "profiteering", there is a stigma with that word that implies your beliefs as well as your opinion of the company you're talking about.

lol, learn to quote properly 

I ignored what was in the box and was reading the rest thinking ...this sounds familiar....

hey no fair, you edited!

Modifié par MprezdNZ, 26 janvier 2010 - 04:51 .