379 réponses à ce sujet

[Phonantiphon]

Godeshus wrote...

bassmunkee wrote...

It's not worth $5 to me either, it's worth £3.19! :OD
And I think the DLC is great, but again, if you don't want it, don't buy it. No one is forcing you.
So long as they keep making it, and it's good - I will keep buying it.

OMG FANBOI!!!!   :o:o:o:o:o:o:o



godeshus

Maybe so, but I enjoy the game, so why not...

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
The seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue.  This is based on a lot of factors, not the least of which is the price elasticity of demand.

There is no direct analog for this from the buyer's perspective.  The seller wants to sell it at a price buyers generally will pay.  No seller will sell a product for nothing, so that desire you describe (wanting the prduct for free) is nonsensical.

This is just plain wrong. Indeed the seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue. What's the maximum revenue? All the money that the buyer has. Of course, that will never happen. Alternatively, if the seller were offing it for free, the buyer would not see to pay for it. The buyer would just accpet it, assuming that the buyer wants to have it.

The vast majority of the time, niether of these things will happen. So the buyer seeks the lowest price that the seller will accept and the seller seeks the highest price that the buyer will accept. I'm sure you've heard of the concept of haggling before? Or is that another thing you insist doesn't exist since you can't touch it? 

[Rictras Shard]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
The seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue.  This is based on a lot of factors, not the least of which is the price elasticity of demand.

There is no direct analog for this from the buyer's perspective.  The seller wants to sell it at a price buyers generally will pay.  No seller will sell a product for nothing, so that desire you describe (wanting the prduct for free) is nonsensical.

This is just plain wrong. Indeed the seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue. What's the maximum revenue? All the money that the buyer has. Of course, that will never happen. Alternatively, if the seller were offing it for free, the buyer would not see to pay for it. The buyer would just accpet it, assuming that the buyer wants to have it.

The vast majority of the time, niether of these things will happen. So the buyer seeks the lowest price that the seller will accept and the seller seeks the highest price that the buyer will accept. I'm sure you've heard of the concept of haggling before? Or is that another thing you insist doesn't exist since you can't touch it? 

Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

[Wilkin the Wanderer]

oh, DLC again. nothing against it, some people buy it, some dont, nothing wrong with that - BUT! one way it is built in DAO annoyed the hell out of me: the guy that is asking for help in the camp, but you can only help him after you download the DLC at extra costs. What´s next? A scene, where some badguys are beating a dog - but you can only step in, if you go and pay for the DLC? This would undoubtly raise the downloads, i for my part would throw the dvd out of the window.

[the_one_54321]

Rictras Shard wrote...
Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

Thank you Captain Obvious. We've already talked about that more than once in this thread.

Wait a minut, you're not Captain Obvious? Where's Captain Obvious?

[Rictras Shard]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Rictras Shard wrote...
Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

Thank you Captain Obvious. We've already talked about that more than once in this thread.

Wait a minut, you're not Captain Obvious? Where's Captain Obvious?

Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

[the_one_54321]

Rictras Shard wrote...
Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

Yes, and I didn't buy it. What's your point? Or is this something I can classify as harassment and report?

Modifié par the_one_54321, 16 février 2010 - 03:57 .

[Rictras Shard]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Rictras Shard wrote...
Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

Yes, and I didn't buy it. What's your point? Or is this something I can classify as harassment and report?

Well, since you keep repeating the same argument over and over despite being shown its flaws...

Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

[the_one_54321]

Rictras Shard wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...

Rictras Shard wrote...
Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

Yes, and I didn't buy it. What's your point? Or is this something I can classify as harassment and report?

Well, since you keep repeating the same argument over and over despite being shown its flaws...

Yes, but if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

What the heck are you even talking about?  The last couple posts were about the interactions between buyers and sellers in the market place. They didn't have anything to do with any "argument."

Seriously, this is harassment, and if you're going ot keep quoting and responding to me with the same sentence over and over I'm going to report you to a dev.

[Rictras Shard]

the_one_54321 wrote...
What the heck are you even talking about?  The last couple posts were about the interactions between buyers and sellers in the market place. They didn't have anything to do with any "argument."

Seriously, this is harassment, and if you're going ot keep quoting and responding to me with the same sentence over and over I'm going to report you to a dev.

If repeating the same argument over and over is harrassment, report me, then report yourself as well. Until then...

Well, if you don't like it, don't buy it.

[Eurypterid]

That's enough of that. It's getting to the point of trolling. So if you've no new points to make, move along.

[Rictras Shard]

Eurypterid wrote...

That's enough of that. It's getting to the point of trolling. So if you've no new points to make, move along.

My apologies, but it was not intended as trolling. It was intended to drive home a couple of points. The first was that he was not being forced to buy the DLCs. The second is that he was doing the exact same thing I've been doing today, just that he was being more wordy about it.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

This is just plain wrong. Indeed the seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue. What's the maximum revenue? All the money that the buyer has.

This is patently false.  The seller wants to maximise revenue, yes, but the price you're describing doesn't do that.  The price you describe will destroy all demand for the product and the seller will get nothing.

You're doing incredibly shallow analysis.

Let's go back to my sandwich example.  If I sell sandwiches for $10,000 each, I will sell zero sandwiches, and thus my revenue will be zero.  That's not the price at which I want to sell my sandwiches.

If there are 40 people who want to buy sandwiches, but 10 of them will pay no more than $3 each, 10 others will pay no more than $5 each, and 20 others who are willing to pay $7 per sandwich, the price that will maximse revenue is $5 per sandwich (this assumes I have to sell them all for the same price).

Those 10 people who won't pay $5 for a sandwich don't get a sandwich.  What you're saying is that the seller always wants the price to be higher, but that's simply not true.  In this example, the seller earns an extra $10 by lowering the price from $7 to $5 because he's then appealing to a broader audience.  But appealing to an even broader audience by lowering the price to $3 ends up costing him money, so he doesn't do that.

The seller doesn't price his product without considering what effect that price will have on demand.

The vast majority of the time, niether of these things will happen. So the buyer seeks the lowest price that the seller will accept and the seller seeks the highest price that the buyer will accept.

If I'm selling one thing to one customer, yes, but if I'm selling a great many units to a broad audience, and they can all see each other so I'm required to sell them the items at the same price, that's not how it works at all.

I'm sure you've heard of the concept of haggling before?

Sure.  I just don't see its relevance here given that we're talking about a mass-market product with a consistent price.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
...

You're not disagreeing with me, you're mostly just being contrary, though I don't think you're doing it on purpose. You're saying roughly the same thing I am. You're just saying it with examples.

Buyer wants the lowest price the seller will accept. The seller wants the highest price the buyer will accept. That all fits into all the arguments I made earlier.

[Sylvius the Mad]

the_one_54321 wrote...

You're not disagreeing with me, you're mostly just being contrary, though I don't think you're doing it on purpose. You're saying roughly the same thing I am. You're just saying it with examples.

Buyer wants the lowest price the seller will accept. The seller wants the highest price the buyer will accept. That all fits into all the arguments I made earlier.

I disagree with your conclusions.  We seem to agree on how the market works, but you then go beyond that and make assertions about what prices are appropriate without regard to what the market price is.

I don't understand how you get from point A to point B.

[the_one_54321]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
I disagree with your conclusions.  We seem to agree on how the market works, but you then go beyond that and make assertions about what prices are appropriate without regard to what the market price is.

I don't understand how you get from point A to point B.

Because DLC is still a young experiment and the final accepted market price is not yet fully determined. Especially with BioWare, as they have had serious backlash in the community. Maybe not from the majority of the community, but from a considerable volume.

[AlanC9]

the_one_54321 wrote...

Sylvius the Mad wrote...
The seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue.  This is based on a lot of factors, not the least of which is the price elasticity of demand.

There is no direct analog for this from the buyer's perspective.  The seller wants to sell it at a price buyers generally will pay.  No seller will sell a product for nothing, so that desire you describe (wanting the prduct for free) is nonsensical.

This is just plain wrong. Indeed the seller wants to sell it for the price that maximises revenue. What's the maximum revenue? All the money that the buyer has. Of course, that will never happen. Alternatively, if the seller were offing it for free, the buyer would not see to pay for it. The buyer would just accpet it, assuming that the buyer wants to have it.

The vast majority of the time, niether of these things will happen. So the buyer seeks the lowest price that the seller will accept and the seller seeks the highest price that the buyer will accept. I'm sure you've heard of the concept of haggling before? Or is that another thing you insist doesn't exist since you can't touch it? 

Huh? Sylvius plainly mentioned the price elasticity of demand.

[the_one_54321]

AlanC9 wrote...
Huh? Sylvius plainly mentioned the price elasticity of demand

We've since reconciled the discrepincies. Just now, actually.

[Darkest Dreamer]

It pretty much only starts bordering on unreasonable somewhere around fifteen dollars and over for me and that's subject to change depending on the quality and substance of the product, not on "OMG, TEH EVIL CORPORATION WANTS MOAR MONEYZ!!!??"

Modifié par Darkest Dreamer, 16 février 2010 - 06:57 .

[Darkest Dreamer]

To add to that, all I can say is that currently I'm happy with whatever scales Bioware is using to judge the price of their games.


And no, this isn't some poor attempt at hiding my shameful double post. As if I'd ever!

Modifié par Darkest Dreamer, 16 février 2010 - 06:58 .

[Sabriana]

Well, I happen to think it's quite a good attempt, DarkestDreamer

However, regarding the sales. People will be drawn in by the name. But along the way, more and more people will fall off if the expectations do not meet the actual product. It's a circle I've seen, and was saddened about, but that is the way it goes.

People trust a certain developer. They will buy what that developer puts out. But only until they reach a point of no return. I/O psych can teach a lot about that. If the product keeps on declining, the buyers will too, especially if it's a familiar and trusted product.

As soon as the quality reaches a point where there cannot be anymore excuses, the product will die. And the leech moves on to another company to be swallowed up whole. Why do they do that? Simply because they can. Profit is the name of the game. The decision makers who helped kill a sub will all be happily ensconced in places that have nice white sand, and umbrella drinks. Do they care that an old and beloved franchise bit the dust? Well, you be the judge.

Modifié par Sabriana, 16 février 2010 - 07:12 .

[Phonantiphon]

In fairness, for the amount that the DLC costs you could get a mahoosive bag of fat fries, a massive coke, and a huge burger.
So you are in effect doing yourself a favour - for the price of potential heart failure in later life you can purchase an enjoyable extension to a very good game. I bet some of you who are complaining would think nothing of squeezing out a fiver for a keg of beer, or whatever it is over the pond...

Modifié par bassmunkee, 16 février 2010 - 09:50 .

[the_one_54321]

Sjubi wrote...
And going to a snack bar for some fries with
sauce is 3 euro's. So instead of spending the money on getting fat, I
get 1 hour game time.

bassmunkee wrote...
In fairness, for the amount that the DLC costs you could get a mahoosive bag of fat fries, a massive coke, and a huge burger.

........ ...............AAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ok......

Economic price comparisons don't work that way. There is an in depth discussion about it in the rest of the thread. Really. Feel free to read it.

[DomiiMai]

Dear lazy people who complains about something as small as a $5 DLC.

Which is pathetic..

Anyways.. Let's leave at this. It's going to stay at $5. End of story.

Will we support it? Yes. We will.

We don't care if a few complains or whines or threats that they're not going to buy it

That is 1 out of... 10 people who will buy it.

We will continue to support it.

So you might as well stop crying because it wont change.



Don't want it. Don't buy it.

We don't care if you don't want it.

More fun for those who does have a job.



Have a lovely day.