159 réponses à ce sujet

[Schroing]

95Headhunter wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

That's what's nice about this whole freedom of choice thing. I can happily say yes and there's not a damn thing you can do about it

I can do many things about it, sir. Literally speaking, anyway.

[95Headhunter]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

Capitalism is an economic and SOCIAL system for society.  It rewards hard work, inteligence, and creativity.   

No, it does not. If you're lucky enough to have rich parents, you get a better education and if you inherit a lot of money, you can basically live off interest. So under the right circumstances you need none of those qualities and if you come from a very poor family, they will probably be of little use to you, you will probably stay poor. 

mcsupersport wrote...
 I am sorry you find it Unjust, how quaint, and agree it is pointless to discuss it here.  You probably believe life should be fair, and if not someone should make it fair.   Capitalism is by far the best system for humans in present day moral system and unless we undergo some Star Trek morphasis, I don't see any system working better, for the VAST majority of people.   

Uncontrolled Capitalism is by far not the best system. At least there should be enough regulations to prevent the capitalists from exploiting the other 90% of society. Also it is not working as the current financial crisis shows. As Marx already wrote more than a hundred years ago, Capitalism will one day destroy itself, because it can't sustain itself forever. Because for Capitalism to work you need constant growth of income, which can be achieved by either cutting costs or upping profits. Even if you exploit your workers, that can only work for so long... it won't work forever and if it breaks down, there will be hell...

To paraphrase the great Mal Reynolds, "my days of taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

[Schroing]

OverlordNexas wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

By that logic you shouldn't even have bought ME2.

I really shouldn't have.

[KillaKow]

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

Well I'd rather give Bioware two dollars than give two dollars to Africa in aid that's going to get stolen by armed militants the instant it gets there and will never reach it's intended destination.

Someone's Mr. Jaded.

Jaded? Hardly. Just when you take into account that Ghana is pretty much the only country in central Africa not currently experincing some form of civil war, it seems unlikley that the aid given will get to its intended recepients. Now if you're talking about giving money to Ghanean children, trust me, they don't need it. Their country just found a ****load of oil! Which history has shown brings nothing but profit, not corporate explotation and political instability.
No, that never happens.

[TheTrooper1138]

95Headhunter wrote...

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

Capitalism is an economic and SOCIAL system for society.  It rewards hard work, inteligence, and creativity.   

No, it does not. If you're lucky enough to have rich parents, you get a better education and if you inherit a lot of money, you can basically live off interest. So under the right circumstances you need none of those qualities and if you come from a very poor family, they will probably be of little use to you, you will probably stay poor. 

mcsupersport wrote...
 I am sorry you find it Unjust, how quaint, and agree it is pointless to discuss it here.  You probably believe life should be fair, and if not someone should make it fair.   Capitalism is by far the best system for humans in present day moral system and unless we undergo some Star Trek morphasis, I don't see any system working better, for the VAST majority of people.   

Uncontrolled Capitalism is by far not the best system. At least there should be enough regulations to prevent the capitalists from exploiting the other 90% of society. Also it is not working as the current financial crisis shows. As Marx already wrote more than a hundred years ago, Capitalism will one day destroy itself, because it can't sustain itself forever. Because for Capitalism to work you need constant growth of income, which can be achieved by either cutting costs or upping profits. Even if you exploit your workers, that can only work for so long... it won't work forever and if it breaks down, there will be hell...

To paraphrase the great Mal Reynolds, "my days of taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

So you disagree with what I said? Give reasons.

[Mnemnosyne]

Schroing wrote...

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

Yes.  Absolutely.  If those needy children want my $2, they can sell me a product worth the money.

[95Headhunter]

Schroing wrote...

95Headhunter wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

That's what's nice about this whole freedom of choice thing. I can happily say yes and there's not a damn thing you can do about it

I can do many things about it, sir. Literally speaking, anyway.

Yeah, fair point . Should've said '...a damn thing you can do to stop it'. That's kinda cheesy villain, though. Bah, well I've been put in my place. I trust you know what I meant though .

[Schroing]

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

Well I'd rather give Bioware two dollars than give two dollars to Africa in aid that's going to get stolen by armed militants the instant it gets there and will never reach it's intended destination.

Someone's Mr. Jaded.

Jaded? Hardly. Just when you take into account that Ghana is pretty much the only country in central Africa not currently experincing some form of civil war, it seems unlikley that the aid given will get to its intended recepients. Now if you're talking about giving money to Ghanean children, trust me, they don't need it. Their country just found a ****load of oil! Which history has shown brings nothing but profit, not corporate explotation and political instability.
No, that never happens.

Africa isn't the only third-world country, you know. There are plenty not involved in civil wars, and plenty of those are occupied partially by children.

[KillaKow]

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

Well I'd rather give Bioware two dollars than give two dollars to Africa in aid that's going to get stolen by armed militants the instant it gets there and will never reach it's intended destination.

Someone's Mr. Jaded.

Jaded? Hardly. Just when you take into account that Ghana is pretty much the only country in central Africa not currently experincing some form of civil war, it seems unlikley that the aid given will get to its intended recepients. Now if you're talking about giving money to Ghanean children, trust me, they don't need it. Their country just found a ****load of oil! Which history has shown brings nothing but profit, not corporate explotation and political instability.
No, that never happens.

Africa isn't the only third-world country, you know. There are plenty not involved in civil wars, and plenty of those are occupied partially by children.

Yes, there are, but you distinctly said African children. If you want to send some money to some child in a stable third world country, be my guest.

Edit: I just realized that, in a topic that is supposed to be about wether or not we are going to be buying some paid DLC or not, we have gotten into a debate about the economic and political stability of Africa. 

How the hell did that happen? 

Modifié par KillaKow, 20 mars 2010 - 01:37 .

[Sigma Tauri]

KillaKow wrote...
That said, I'm willing to pay two dollars for skins and seven dollars for Kasumi so that EA is satisfied, and Bioware can keep giving us things like the Firewalker pack and Zaeed for free.

It still feels "wrong," like if we endorse this they'll charge us for crap. What if Firewalker and Zaeed DLCs are only part of their honeymoon era to promote the game, and they'll charge every DLC they release afterward? And we're talking about Bioware here, who has made some snafus with DLCs (Return to Ostagar).

If DLC-buggy Bethesda realized that charging horse armor was a bad idea, Bioware should take that as an example. This has to be taken with suspicion.

[Schroing]

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Schroing wrote...

KillaKow wrote...

Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?

Well I'd rather give Bioware two dollars than give two dollars to Africa in aid that's going to get stolen by armed militants the instant it gets there and will never reach it's intended destination.

Someone's Mr. Jaded.

Jaded? Hardly. Just when you take into account that Ghana is pretty much the only country in central Africa not currently experincing some form of civil war, it seems unlikley that the aid given will get to its intended recepients. Now if you're talking about giving money to Ghanean children, trust me, they don't need it. Their country just found a ****load of oil! Which history has shown brings nothing but profit, not corporate explotation and political instability.
No, that never happens.

Africa isn't the only third-world country, you know. There are plenty not involved in civil wars, and plenty of those are occupied partially by children.

Yes, there are, but you distinctly said African children. If you want to send some money to some child in a stable third world country, be my guest.

Edit: I just realized that, in a topic that is supposed to be about wether or not we are going to be buying some paid DLC or not, we have gotten into a debate about the economic and political stability of Africa. 

How the hell did that happen? 

I actually disticntly said "Africa or something." I'm kind of surprised that you'd miss that, since you went up there in the pyramid and bolded a part of it...

[95Headhunter]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

95Headhunter wrote...

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

mcsupersport wrote...

Capitalism is an economic and SOCIAL system for society.  It rewards hard work, inteligence, and creativity.   

No, it does not. If you're lucky enough to have rich parents, you get a better education and if you inherit a lot of money, you can basically live off interest. So under the right circumstances you need none of those qualities and if you come from a very poor family, they will probably be of little use to you, you will probably stay poor. 

mcsupersport wrote...
 I am sorry you find it Unjust, how quaint, and agree it is pointless to discuss it here.  You probably believe life should be fair, and if not someone should make it fair.   Capitalism is by far the best system for humans in present day moral system and unless we undergo some Star Trek morphasis, I don't see any system working better, for the VAST majority of people.   

Uncontrolled Capitalism is by far not the best system. At least there should be enough regulations to prevent the capitalists from exploiting the other 90% of society. Also it is not working as the current financial crisis shows. As Marx already wrote more than a hundred years ago, Capitalism will one day destroy itself, because it can't sustain itself forever. Because for Capitalism to work you need constant growth of income, which can be achieved by either cutting costs or upping profits. Even if you exploit your workers, that can only work for so long... it won't work forever and if it breaks down, there will be hell...

To paraphrase the great Mal Reynolds, "my days of taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle."

So you disagree with what I said? Give reasons.

*Sigh*  I really shouldn't be doing this. This thread is already way off topic. Right, reasons:

I don't see the same exploitation you do. I think your definition of what constitutes capitalism is a little off. I feel your view has been slanted more by the ideals of others you wish were your own, and less by your own experience of the world. I feel that anyone who tries to quote Marx like the man knew what he was talking about is a moron. I think you're rather naive. I think you're letting a sense of moral obligation cloud your judgement of what 'fair' really is, or at least prevents you from seeing what a subjective term it is.

[OverlordNexas]

monkeycamoran wrote...

KillaKow wrote...
Right. Because your entire disposable income is $5.00 right now and you just absolutley have to save that $2.00 to purchase the Kasumi pack.

...Right <_<

$2 ain't a problem. I'm wiling to buy Kasumi for $5. I also expected the Firewalker pack to have a cost, but I was delighted to know it's free. I also paid for $10 DLCs like Broken Steel, or expansions like Shivering Isles for $30. I also paid $1 for Spell Tomes. I paid for Bring Down the Sky. No regrets in what I bought because I'm getting something out of this: extended gameplay (even if it's only half an hour.) I mean Zaeed was free, and we got a whole loyalty mission. Can't you realize there's something not right by charging people reskins?

So you'd rather they charge for Zaeed and the Firewalker pack and give the costumes away for free? These costumes add nothing to the game whatsoever. The other free content on the other hand does. Zaeed and Firewalker give the player more opportunity's to gain experience and credits, something that has an actual effect on game balance. The eviscerator shotgun arc projector  are powerful and balanced weapon that could prove useful to players. I'd much rather be forced to pay for something that will only have a cosmetic effect on the game rather than pay for something that will have an real and actual affect on the gameplay.

[KillaKow]

monkeycamoran wrote...

KillaKow wrote...
That said, I'm willing to pay two dollars for skins and seven dollars for Kasumi so that EA is satisfied, and Bioware can keep giving us things like the Firewalker pack and Zaeed for free.

It still feels "wrong," like if we endorse this they'll charge us for crap. What if Firewalker and Zaeed DLCs are only part of their honeymoon era to promote the game, and they'll charge every DLC they release afterward? And we're talking about Bioware here, who has made some snafus with DLCs (Return to Ostagar).

If DLC-buggy Bethesda realized that charging horse armor was a bad idea, Bioware should take that as an example. This has to be taken with suspicion.

Yes, but if nobody buys the current paid things, then EA is going to make everything cost money in an attempt to rake in as much profit as possible. But if we pay for a few things and give EA enough, they'll probably let Bioware keep a good bit of free DLC in the Cerberus network, and only charge us for some of the DLC.

It's almost like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" style situation. If we do buy it then there's always the chance EA won't do what I said above and just be massive ****bags about the entire DLC situation, but if we dont buy it than it's almost garunteed that they'll make the rest of the DLC paid to try and make more profits.

[KillaKow]

[quote]Schroing wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]Schroing wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]Schroing wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]Schroing wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]Schroing wrote...

[quote]KillaKow wrote...

[quote]Aryck1095 V2 wrote...

You guys are a bunch of slack-jawed idiototic cheap-skates. You're seriously turning a matter of TWO DOLLARS into an argument about economics and capitalism? I'm sorry, but that is just ridiculous.

I'm pretty sure I can dig up two dollars in pennies if I dig through my piggy bank. Hell, I'll give 'em THREE dollars if they would just get rid of those stupid sunglasses. I'll even throw in a bag of Skittles.

By the way, doesn't Jack's new duds remind you of Mission Vao from KOTOR? Just a thought. Hmmm... I wonder if they'll come up with some Mandalore-style armor for Zaeed...[/quote]

Thank god. Someone else who realizes how much two dollars is actually worth.

[/quote]

Every two dollars I spend on this is two dollars I didn't spend on something else.
[/quote]

Because two dollars is such a huge fraction of your total income that you have to save it incase you need it for another purchase. <_<

[/quote]

It's more than enough. You know, I could sponsor a needy child in Africa or something for a whole damn month.
Are you saying Bioware deserves my money more than needy children?
Are you?
[/quote]

Well I'd rather give Bioware two dollars than give two dollars to Africa in aid that's going to get stolen by armed militants the instant it gets there and will never reach it's intended destination.

[/quote]

Someone's Mr. Jaded.

[/quote]

Jaded? Hardly. Just when you take into account that Ghana is pretty much the only country in central Africa not currently experincing some form of civil war, it seems unlikley that the aid given will get to its intended recepients. Now if you're talking about giving money to Ghanean children, trust me, they don't need it. Their country just found a ****load of oil! Which history has shown brings nothing but profit, not corporate explotation and political instability.
No, that never happens.

[/quote]

Africa isn't the only third-world country, you know. There are plenty not involved in civil wars, and plenty of those are occupied partially by children.
[/quote]

Yes, there are, but you distinctly said African children. If you want to send some money to some child in a stable third world country, be my guest.

Edit: I just realized that, in a topic that is supposed to be about wether or not we are going to be buying some paid DLC or not, we have gotten into a debate about the economic and political stability of Africa. 

How the hell did that happen? 

[/quote]

I actually disticntly said "Africa or something." I'm kind of surprised that you'd miss that, since you went up there in the pyramid and bolded a part of it...
[/quote]

*looks back up the pyramid*
Oh, you did... wow, I feel like an Idiot now.

Ok, well I'd say stick with the "or something" when donating that $2.00.
Me, I'll be laughing at the fact that Thane can't see **** because he's essentially wearing two paris of sunglasses.

[Tooneyman]

I will pay for extra armors as long as the future ones can take their helmet off. I don't know how many times I'm going to state this yes. Skinns for my character nahh!

[Sigma Tauri]

OverlordNexas wrote...
So you'd rather they charge for Zaeed and the Firewalker pack and give the costumes away for free? These costumes add nothing to the game whatsoever. The other free content on the other hand does. Zaeed and Firewalker give the player more opportunity's to gain experience and credits, something that has an actual effect on game balance. The eviscerator shotgun arc projector  are powerful and balanced weapon that could prove useful to players. I'd much rather be forced to pay for something that will only have a cosmetic effect on the game rather than pay for something that will have an real and actual affect on the gameplay.

Pfft, dude. I'd rather I get everything for free. But, that's a pipe-dream. You know that free DLCs with actual gameplay effects aren't going to be the norm for long. You'll eventually have to be charged for that kind of content.

[Lumiya03]

I am appalled at the response of the majority of postings here. If you don't want the skins fine don't buy them. Please don't QQ at Bioware for trying to make an extra buck, should there maybe have been more than 3 costumes? yeah probably, but to complain about this is absolutely bat**** crazy. We have gotten An extra character, 2 extra weapons, an extra set of armor (even though bioware needs to release armore in pieces and not as a single suit), and then e are getting the hover tank and 5 free missions on tuesday. Please go cry elsewhere that this should be free, Bioware has been more than generous in their free content offerings and most of you are a bunch of ungrateful whiny little girls.

/end rant



p.s. thanks for all the stuff you have given us bioware, there is at least 1 appreciative person behind you!

[TheTrooper1138]

95Headhunter wrote...
*Sigh*  I really shouldn't be doing this. This thread is already way off topic. Right, reasons:

I don't see the same exploitation you do. I think your definition of what constitutes capitalism is a little off. I feel your view has been slanted more by the ideals of others you wish were your own, and less by your own experience of the world. I feel that anyone who tries to quote Marx like the man knew what he was talking about is a moron. I think you're rather naive. I think you're letting a sense of moral obligation cloud your judgement of what 'fair' really is, or at least prevents you from seeing what a subjective term it is.

Well, I do see the exploitation. If you don't might I suggest the film "Wall Street" by Oliver Stone?  
Also just look at the whole music industry for example. Who's making the big money? Usually (apart from some stars) not the artists, but the lawyers, producers etc.. How is that fair? And that's how most of our economy works.
And I don't believe in "Marxism", but some of what Marx wrote is true. And I know enough hard-working people who have just enough to make a living, while some company or studio bosses make millions and billions... or look at professional athletes, making hundres of thousand a week, while a hard working "normal" person makes less than a hundred thousand a year... 

[mcsupersport]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...


Uncontrolled Capitalism is by far not the best system. At least there should be enough regulations to prevent the capitalists from exploiting the other 90% of society. Also it is not working as the current financial crisis shows. As Marx already wrote more than a hundred years ago, Capitalism will one day destroy itself, because it can't sustain itself forever. Because for Capitalism to work you need constant growth of income, which can be achieved by either cutting costs or upping profits. Even if you exploit your workers, that can only work for so long... it won't work forever and if it breaks down, there will be hell...

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

No, it does not. If you're lucky
enough to have rich parents, you get a better education and if you
inherit a lot of money, you can basically live off interest. So under
the right circumstances you need none of those qualities and if you
come from a very poor family, they wil lprobably stay poor.

And where does the money inherited come from??  Did it just appear, or did someone earn it in the past using creativity, guts, intelligence, and hardwork??  The best thing about capitalism is that while you may start poor, you can if you work hard, smart, and creativitly become the rich person who leave his children enough money they never have to work.  Just because your family is poor, doesn't mean you will stay poor if you make smart decisions and are willing to work for it.  My father's family was poor, not dirt poor, but close, he isn't and he raised me in better style because of the 80 hr work weeks he was willing to put in. 


I happen to agree with  you on uncontrolled capitalism, simply because of the nature of humans it seems there will always be predators looking to take what the can, in every system.  Regulation needs to exist to protect people, but NOT prevent the inherent advantages of capitalism.

And for Marx, most communist facist, and socialist experiments have failed for various reasons, lasting nowhere near the 200+ years the Capitalist base system the United States and Great Britain has.  Most of the greatest scientific advancements in the last 100 years have happened because of Capitalism.  Is it perfect NO, but it is better than the rest when you factor in humans, and what makes them tic.  Most of the utopian society writers ignore the human condition and all
its ugliness.  Maybe if we lived in Star Trek's world it would work,
but we have too much evolving to do at this point for any of them to
fly.  And it is very doubtful that computers and computer games would have advanced to their current level without capitalism, because there is nothing to push for change without capitalism and the push to make money from offering products to consumers. 

Final note, and then I am done with this subject for this week, and am going to play ME2....The financial crisis in the US was a combination of activist government and greedy capitalist, both having their heads up someplace very dark on their body.  Government wanted to push an agenda, and used regulation to encourage a particular group to buy houses and capitalist saw a way to make a bunch of money on the new regulation and exploited it to the extreme.  The problem then compounded when Government regulators got in bed with the capitalist and swore all the way to the end that nothing was wrong, and they wouldn't change the regulation to protect the public.  We(The United States of America) have lost control of our own government, and who runs it, meaning we are more concerned with American Idol than who is running for office, and what they are doing in it.










The DLC for 2.00 doesn't cost an extreme amount but I still don't see any personal worth to me that would cause me to spend the money.  Now the Kasumi pack will probably get my money, and if they packaged the skins in with a Liara or other expansion DLC it would encourage me to buy them, but not just by themselves.  To me they just don't look all that great, and all they would be is a change from the norm of what I run now, and of course the ability to fix Garrus's armor for his Loyalty mission and squad screen(about the only times I see him.)

[Sigma Tauri]

KillaKow wrote...
Yes, but if nobody buys the current paid things, then EA is going to make everything cost money in an attempt to rake in as much profit as possible. But if we pay for a few things and give EA enough, they'll probably let Bioware keep a good bit of free DLC in the Cerberus network, and only charge us for some of the DLC.

It's almost like a "damned if you do, damned if you don't" style situation. If we do buy it then there's always the chance EA won't do what I said above and just be massive ****bags about the entire DLC situation, but if we dont buy it than it's almost garunteed that they'll make the rest of the DLC paid to try and make more profits.

There's no real burden on us on their future actions. Their actions are always going to be geared for maximum profit; everything else is a promotion. The fact they encouraged people to buy new copies of ME2 with a CerbNet incentive says they'd rather people pay $50/$60 than have that money go to Gamestop for used.

[mortons4ck]

I'd be okay with it if they had the 3 - skins attached to the Kasumi DLC as an incentive bundle for $7.


Then just have the next DLC have 3 different character skins attached to the next premium DLC and sell that as a bundle.

Modifié par mortons4ck, 20 mars 2010 - 02:07 .

[DrunkenGoon]

I don't see anything wrong with this.. Too many people are making WAY too big a deal out of this. If you don't like it why even give a ****.. I mean its only $2 and they have already given you a ton of free content..



Personally I would buy this if it had Miranda and a new casual outfit for Shepard that looked good. $2 is chump change people.. You could go beg out on the street and get that much in 10 minutes.. Seriously this shouldn't be such a big deal..

[95Headhunter]

TheTrooper1138 wrote...

95Headhunter wrote...
*Sigh*  I really shouldn't be doing this. This thread is already way off topic. Right, reasons:

I don't see the same exploitation you do. I think your definition of what constitutes capitalism is a little off. I feel your view has been slanted more by the ideals of others you wish were your own, and less by your own experience of the world. I feel that anyone who tries to quote Marx like the man knew what he was talking about is a moron. I think you're rather naive. I think you're letting a sense of moral obligation cloud your judgement of what 'fair' really is, or at least prevents you from seeing what a subjective term it is.

Well, I do see the exploitation. If you don't might I suggest the film "Wall Street" by Oliver Stone?  
Also just look at the whole music industry for example. Who's making the big money? Usually (apart from some stars) not the artists, but the lawyers, producers etc.. How is that fair? And that's how most of our economy works.
And I don't believe in "Marxism", but some of what Marx wrote is true. And I know enough hard-working people who have just enough to make a living, while some company or studio bosses make millions and billions... or look at professional athletes, making hundres of thousand a week, while a hard working "normal" person makes less than a hundred thousand a year... 

I do see where you're coming from, I really do. But athletes are only payed exorbitant fees because we as a society are willing to pay to see them, and because businesses with money can afford and are willing to pay massive sponsorship deals. Thos businesses get their money because we as are society are willing to pay for that wonderfully vague business term, 'value added'. I disagree with you on the music thing. For every naive band exploited by the lawyers and record company that have lured them into a contract that effectively owns them, there's a band like Led Zeppelin where the artists have more money than they know what to do with (trust me on that, Rob Plant plays tennis at the club where I go to the gym). That's just the way it is though. You can't very well stop it; not without simply removing the money from those sectors, and that's not fair either. It's not capitalism per se that's at fault, it's more a problem with society.

I'm totally prepared to admit that I'm fundamentally selfish. I wasn't lying when I said I'd rather give a quid to Bioware than to some charity for Afrian kids. I don't try and kid myself that that's not the case, and I don't burden myself with guilt. I'm not saying that's right, but I'm happy with it.

[TheTrooper1138]

mcsupersport wrote...

And where does the money inherited come from??  Did it just appear, or did someone earn it in the past using creativity, guts, intelligence, and hardwork??  The best thing about capitalism is that while you may start poor, you can if you work hard, smart, and creativitly become the rich person who leave his children enough money they never have to work.  Just because your family is poor, doesn't mean you will stay poor if you make smart decisions and are willing to work for it.  My father's family was poor, not dirt poor, but close, he isn't and he raised me in better style because of the 80 hr work weeks he was willing to put in.  

You might get a better living situation if you work hard and do everything right (until the next crisis comes and your hard-earned money becomes worthless ), but you will always be at a disatvantage to someone who's born into a rich family or who happens to be CEO at some major company because he has the right connections...

mcsupersport wrote...
And for Marx, most communist facist, and socialist experiments have failed for various reasons, lasting nowhere near the 200+ years the Capitalist base system the United States and Great Britain has.  Most of the greatest scientific advancements in the last 100 years have happened because of Capitalism.  Is it perfect NO, but it is better than the rest when you factor in humans, and what makes them tic.  Most of the utopian society writers ignore the human condition and all
its ugliness.  Maybe if we lived in Star Trek's world it would work,
but we have too much evolving to do at this point for any of them to
fly.  And it is very doubtful that computers and computer games would have advanced to their current level without capitalism, because there is nothing to push for change without capitalism and the push to make money from offering products to consumers.  

Well, I doubt it. Many big inventions were made before Capitalism existed. And for example most of our Mathematics go back to the Ancient Greek philosophers. Gunpowder was invented by the Chinese and "re-invented" by a European monk. There is always progress, you don't need Capitalism for that. Of course these systems weren't much better (most were worse, though I kinda like the Anicent Greek and Roman "democracy"), but it shows that it's got nothing to do with Capitalism.