The cost of Optional MODS in a Free Market Place by Third Party Modders *Spawn*

[Albuquerque]

Wanting a sustainable business is not the same thing as 'always chase maximum profit' as you initially claimed.

If you outlive your competitors, you've maximized profit pretty handily. Nobody would be making more than you... The challenge is, as much as we all would prefer it otherwise, making a fantastic product for low prices and low margins can often end up in being acquired or being undercut by being drowned in shitty product for even lower prices using far more ethically-questionable methods (overseas labor, materials which are horrible for the environment, etc.) There are examples aplenty in our world today.

I've not seen any DLC for $30 that's only a few hours long. That's expansion DLC pricing. Whether you think it's good or not is a whole different question.

You obviously understood the reference, pendanticism aside.

I mean, that's definitely not what is going on. Their CPU's are not $1000+, and they would offer a proper new product/better product if one was available. You're acting like they're purposefully sandbagging progress or something, which isn't true.

All depends on perspective. Funny story: they WERE in the $1000 range before AMD finally came with something competitive, for a while Intel's i9's were back into the $499 pricing category. Unfortunately prices are already creeping back up again, thanks to (checks notes) seven different flavors of the mostly-identical i9-14900 processor. Yeah, sure, those are ALL SO DIFFERENT and thus warrant such a spread in SKU. Despite how many of the same-ish processors Intel cranks out each gen, they're all x86-64 and the IPC increases are waning at best. Point still stands; the top-end of processor prices continues to rise with questionable relation to their performance.

There's nothing illegal about being greedy. And certainly talking about legal ramifications for some throwaway microtransactions seems highly excessive. I'm all for big government and all, but this would be a big overreach.

Nope, there aren't any laws against greed. And because there aren't any laws against greed, literaelly everything being railed against earlier about expensive maps and expensive expansions and paying money for mods et al is much ado about nothing. Don't like a $10 single mission? Don't buy it. Don't like someone's expensive video cards? Don't buy them. Don't like expensive processors? Don't buy them.

But so long as other people do buy them these cost-premium items will continue to be sold, whether any of us think it's unethical, immoral, objectionable, reprehensible, or any other adjective you'd like to apply.

 

[Seanspeed]

If you outlive your competitors, you've maximized profit pretty handily. Nobody would be making more than you... The challenge is, as much as we all would prefer it otherwise, making a fantastic product for low prices and low margins can often end up in being acquired or being undercut by being drowned in shitty product for even lower prices using far more ethically-questionable methods (overseas labor, materials which are horrible for the environment, etc.) There are examples aplenty in our world today.

No, that's not what 'maximize profits' means. Come on man. It was just a bad argument.

All depends on perspective. Funny story: they WERE in the $1000 range before AMD finally came with something competitive, for a while Intel's i9's were back into the $499 pricing category. Unfortunately prices are already creeping back up again, thanks to (checks notes) six different flavors of the mostly-identical i9-14900 processor. Yeah, sure, those are ALL SO DIFFERENT and thus warrant such a spread in SKU. Despite how many of the same-ish processors Intel cranks out each gen, they're all x86-64 and the IPC increases are waning at best. Point still stands; the top-end of processor prices continues to rise with questionable relation to their performance.

CPU's are probably one of the worst examples of 'greed' in the current situation. CPU's are probably in a better value spot than almost any other PC component out there right now. You can get like 90-95% of the performance of the most expensive processors by just going with very reasonably priced midrange options. This is a good situation, and I dont care at all that some suckers overspend on the bad value high end options just to have the very best.

And because there aren't any laws against greed, literaelly everything being railed against earlier about expensive maps and expensive expansions and paying money for mods et al is therefore much ado about nothing.

This situation is not because of lack of legislation. You cannot really legislate this stuff, and you even pointed out quite correctly that it's the consumers who ultimately determine whether such pricing works or not. At some point, consumers need to take responsibility for themselves, cuz government/laws cannot protect them from their own bad choices.

Stuff like this is also super inconsequential in comparison to some of the more egregious practices going around, anyways. As I said, this $10 quest or whatever will get ignored by the vast majority, and Bethesda themselves will absolutely not be trying to market it heavily or anything. It's just a throwaway microtransaction content piece for a few starving fans. Low effort for low reward. Not a good practice, but hardly the end of the world.