Comments on: Why Do We Fuss Over Money So Much?

By: Tesh

Tesh — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:53:39 +0000

The backpack has more functionality?

The moral of the story? Spending money on cosmetic fluff is OK, spending money on useful stuff is eeeeevil.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 20:04:55 +0000

Yeah, more variety would be nice. I wonder if we’ll ever see a game that lets you either buy items/content in a shop or just pay a flat fee for everything?

By: Alex Taldren

Alex Taldren — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:20:55 +0000

It’s called the free market. Companies want/need to increase their profits. What would you prefer, that companies reduce their profit margins or sell products for the same amount as they cost to make? This idea that making a profit is evil is simply moronic. No profits means no business, which means no more games.

The horse is a single item, yes, but do you know how much time/work it took to design/model that thing? If anything, you’re getting it at a much cheaper price than it cost to make it. Let’s say a designer created that horse in 2 hours. That designer probably makes more than $13/hour right? And, that isn’t including the time/work involved in promotions for it, uploading it to the store, etc.

There is no “greed” issue here. Such arguments are spawned from predictable anti free-market ideals. Nobody is forcing anyone to pay for anything. It doesn’t impact gameplay at all, so that argument is gone. All that is left is what you feel is an appropriate price for such DLC. And, as I illustrated before, that point is moot since you really have no idea how much it cost to create the DLC they are charging $25 for you to download.

By: Tesh

Tesh — Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:24:45 +0000

Oh, sure, there will always be debates. Savvy companies can dodge some of the fuss by offering different models for the same game, like Wizard 101, Puzzle Pirates or DDO. Letting players pay the way they want to tends to make more money, since more people get involved.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:54:03 +0000

The funny thing is that everyone thought $20 for a backpack in Allods Online was too expensive yet $25 for a mount seems, well, understandable. What’s the difference between the two items? Not much really appart from a mount is a little more flashy.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:52:32 +0000

Great, thanks

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:52:04 +0000

It’s a very interesting perspective and something I can agree with. If I ignore the idea that all businesses just want to make more money, no matter what, it does make me wonder why Blizzard/Activision aren’t happy with what they have already and don’t instead focus their resources into making more free content for their loyal playerbase.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:50:24 +0000

Yeah, it’s the same slippery slope that worries me. I know it’s probably never going to happen with Blizzard but it is scary to think about.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:49:50 +0000

Totally agree – value is always going to be relative to individuals. Unfortunately, even concluding that, I don’t see the debates about microtransactions, F2P and subscription models ever going away. Someone is always going to dislike the way their favourite games company decides to conduct business.

By: Gordon

Gordon — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 11:47:47 +0000

ROFL