Twenty Dollars. (Destiny)

by Avateur , Tuesday, June 23, 2015, 03:44 (3681 days ago) @ Claude Errera
edited by Avateur, Tuesday, June 23, 2015, 03:50

I feel like this is similar to ODST, which also had a ridiculously inflated price at launch, was justified by fans (along with the "don't buy it then" crowd), but the fact of the matter is, it wasn't worth the actual price in relation to, say, Halo 3 itself.

See - you get annoyed when people say "don't buy it then" to you... but you're totally okay making statements like "teh fact of the matter is, it wasn't worth the actual price". (It's irrelevant what you put that in relation to... worth is inherently a subjective thing, and facts don't enter into it.)

Personal worth and economic worth are two different things in a market with pricing schemes that are set by publishers. I'm not talking about whether you or I felt that ODST was worth every penny. I'm not talking about whether you or I feel like Destiny itself is worth $1,000 based on our time playing it. Your own motivations whenever you reply to me doesn't change the economics, but you already know that. I'm talking about a video game's price in relation to another in real economic terms. ODST's pricing structure wasn't correct in relation to Halo 3's. I never spoke of or implied personal worth, especially when talking directly about whoever is actually setting the prices.

And big corporations have a history of "funny" pricing. I mean, Microsoft priced its Windows 98 upgrades at $89 even though it found that $49 was more than sufficient to get a profit. The upgrade definitely wasn't worth the $89, but Microsoft figured that they could probably get away with going for maximum profit in a market that they pretty much dominated (granted, they were wrong about that one in the end). Btw, I'm fully aware I'm discussing monopoly right now. And why?

Microsoft probably figured that they could get away with charging more than what ODST was truly worth charging for. A campaign you can beat on the hardest difficulty in three hours without speedrunning? The name itself implies it's an expansion of Halo 3? But if people want their Halo, they'll pay more than an expansion's price (based in comparison to relative expansion pricing within the video game market at the time). They clearly happened to be right based on sales! Oops to the consumer, though, right? But, as you're talking about, subjectively, who knows how many people thought it was worth every penny (or more)! Good for Microsoft, I guess. Consumers get suckered all the time. It sucks when consumers don't even question it, or just outright allow it. Other times, consumers can't do anything other than vote with their wallets (ideally), right? But again, that personal worth thing you're talking about is the subjective part that you're trying to make this about. I haven't been talking about that at all. I'm talking the actual pricing done by the corporation(s).

I wish you could see the parallels, and adjust your arguments accordingly. (I've been wishing that for years, though, and asking for that for years, and I've never gotten a response, so...)

I can't tell if you're being purposely or accidentally ironic with "never". Either way, very ironic.