• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

If charging as much as possible is corporate greed, then wanting to spend as little as possible is consumer greed

I

Imp the Dimp

Gold Member
Cope and seethe because I'm correct. Both sides will always seek to maximize their outcome. I will always seek to pay the lowest price possible, producers of goods will always charge the max they can. Depending on market conditions that price might be closer to the consumer's prefered price (which is $0) or the producer's preferred price. Since gaming is a very competitive market, the prices have generally been deflationary and haven't even kept up with inflation. The GPU market on the other hand is a good example of what an uncompetitive market can look like.

"Greed" doesn't explain anything because we are all outcome maximizing all the time, therefore it cannot explain changes in price.
 
Loomy

Loomy

Member
I don't think someone wanting to spend less because they can't afford to spend more should be called greed. Being sensible and price conscious isn't being greedy. Wanting to save/make money isn't inherently greedy. You're trying to paint a very complex scenario black and white and, unfortunately, things don't always fit that nicely.
 
Salty Popsicle

Salty Popsicle

Member
Billy Madison Shut Up GIF
 
Kataploom

Kataploom

Gold Member
I personally agree with you. It's ok to want to buy cheap, who doesn't want cheaper stuff?

The problem is: Whenever a company wants to profit from their success, highly emotional beings starts calling them names as if a company, which ONLY reason to exist is to make money, should stand by individuals standards.

The same example always comes up, Nintendo, people don't like their games staying at full price and call them "greedy", but I never saw someone call From Software, Bethesda, Square Enix and Rockstar the same, even though Skyrim was full price or almost full price for years until it started coming down in price and BOOM! they released the PS4/Xbone remaster at full price again. Same for GTAV and the rest barely lower their prices.

Companies are "greedy" by nature because they don't any other purpose than make money, all of them, and that's not a bad thing because it's all they need to exist, calling them names is like calling animals "greedy" for wanting to breath, eat and drink.

Cases like current Unity fiasco isn't because they are "greedy", it's because they want to pass by contracts with a deal nobody wants but everyone would be happy to give them more money if they get successful.

TL;DR: It's ok to want cheaper things but to DEMAND it from companies is just dumb if it's not first need thing (food, health, etc.)
 
MagiusNecros

MagiusNecros

Gilgamesh Fan Annoyance
Meh.

The 3rd Rule of Acquisition clearly states never spend more for an acquisition then you have to. Ergo wait for a nice deal. To not do so is being irresponsible with your money.

It really isn't a surprise people don't want to pay more due to inflation. I mean they might if everyone made more money in relation to inflation but companies aren't going to pay their workers 30%-50% more.

What was $40 years ago is $70 today and most of the games coming out are really only worth $20-$30.

Can't really fault people for waiting for a good bargain to get the most bang for their buck.

People are just getting smarter and reading what's on the label instead of blindly buying what's new and trendy.

Game companies don't care about you. Just your money.
 
Robb

Robb

Gold Member
Not always true, people buy similar but more expensive things just to spite/brag to their neighbors/colleagues all the time, for example. It’s more about maximizing utility than minimizing price.
 
Sanepar

Sanepar

Member
That is a dumb vision that many think are smart, spend $1 with gamepass until u are locked in and it is your only option, then u pay $50 a month to rent games.
 
GymWolf

GymWolf

Gold Member
MagiusNecros said:
Meh.

The 3rd Rule of Acquisition clearly states never spend more for an acquisition then you have to. Ergo wait for a nice deal. To not do so is being irresponsible with your money.

It really isn't a surprise people don't want to pay more due to inflation. I mean they might if everyone made more money in relation to inflation but companies aren't going to pay their workers 30%-50% more.

What was $40 years ago is $70 today and most of the games coming out are really only worth $20-$30.

Can't really fault people for waiting for a good bargain to get the most bang for their buck.

People are just getting smarter and reading what's on the label instead of blindly buying what's new and trendy.

Game companies don't care about you. Just your money.
Click to expand...
captain-america-meme.png
 
Dacvak

Dacvak

No one shall be brought before our LORD David Bowie without the true and secret knowledge of the Photoshop. For in that time, so shall He appear.
Corporate greed seems to be more about getting as much as possible and maximizing profits. But consumer “greed” (as in being frugal, trying to spend as little as possible) seems more like self-preservation.
 
Last edited:
Setsuna Mudou

Setsuna Mudou

Member
Uh... yeah... it is. Recognizing a fair price for the thing you want and supporting the people that deliver the thing you want more of is kind of the healthy middle ground.

So right, both exist, no need to be predatorial to the point you want to exploit everyone around you unless you're a really bad place in life.
 
C

Cashon

Gold Member
Imp the Dimp said:
Cope and seethe because I'm correct. Both sides will always seek to maximize their outcome. I will always seek to pay the lowest price possible, producers of goods will always charge the max they can. Depending on market conditions that price might be closer to the consumer's prefered price (which is $0) or the producer's preferred price. Since gaming is a very competitive market, the prices have generally been deflationary and haven't even kept up with inflation. The GPU market on the other hand is a good example of what an uncompetitive market can look like.

"Greed" doesn't explain anything because we are all outcome maximizing all the time, therefore it cannot explain changes in price.
Click to expand...
Which one of these has a greater impact on the highest number of people?
 
DrFigs

DrFigs

Member
it's definitely underapreciated that consumers can take advantage of companies, especially in monopsony scenarios. does it apply to gaming? idk, but it's one of the reasons some firms form cooperatives.
 
Last edited:
R

Reizo Ryuu

Member
Yes, some of my friends are the cheapest mfkers on the planet and they don't want to pay for anything, they don't care if hundreds of people worked on something, if they can get it for free (piracy) then that's what they do; if something's not on gamepass they'll be hard pressed to spend, even if it's some big release.
Movies and tv shows? forget about it, they pay for streaming services and just pirate everything else.
 
Ev1L AuRoN

Ev1L AuRoN

Member
People pay how much they deemed worth it. I pay 70 day one for some games, but I don't spend more than 10 in others. Greedy, maybe, but at the end I rather pass on a game then overpay for it. I have a huge backlog of games that I pay 60 bucks for it play a couple of hours and said, I'm good, not really liking this game. Today, I am a bit more selective before spending my hard-earned money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[GI.biz] Analysts offer predictions for 2023 in games
16
2K
Magic Carpet replied
GAFStreetBets | Collecting/Investing games for fun & profit
Business
3
414
U n i o n 0015 replied
A record of Segas reactions, mistakes, missteps, poor or misguided decisions, JUST in 1996.
2 3
138
11K
kvltus lvlzvs replied
The Chronic Hate Cycle (<Insert latest release here>)
2
50
2K
Kev Kev replied
  • Locked
[MarketWatch] Microsoft faces battle for Activision deal, especially if ‘Call of Duty’ is destined for Xbox exclusivity
2 3 4 5
219
25K
Bo_Hazem replied
Top Bottom