Should Be Free
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I agree with you. Notice the only people saying otherwise are mostly lemmings. It seems to me they are justifiying getting ripped off by live costs. Multiplayer has always been free. The only people that charge for it is microsoft becasue lemmings will pay for it. They don't realize if they didn't pay ms would make it free.Online play should be free end of story(not counting MMOs). Its been free since PC games. MS thought hey lets charge for online on our console people would pay for it and well they were right. If a game say it has online play on the box I shouldint have to dish out extra cash after paying 60 bucks. It would be like buying a sandwhich and after you pay for it in order to eat the other half you have to give the company extra cash.
finalfantasy94
[QUOTE="finalfantasy94"]
Online play should be free
speedsix
1. Again, should be free because I don't want to pay for it. Hardly a constructive argument is it?
2. You didn't pay for the right to use the online portion of the game when you purchased it, this is clear on the box I believe. How can you complain if you knew what you were paying for.. you did know this right?
Is this how you justify having to pay for online with xbox? Seriously I have been gaming since the apple iic 4 color, atari 2600, I am 30 so I have been gaming for a while. In my years of gaming multiplayer has always been free. You buy the game at the store you get what you paid for, plain and simple. The ONLY console to ever charge for online is xbox. You don't think that's strange. How can everyother game platform offer it for free for decades now? If i were a lemming, a cringing thought, I would be upset with ms for making me pay to play a game I bought. Not sticking up for them. Thats the problem you lemmings stick up for microsoft too much. Maybe if you didn't they would give in and offer it for free ...they do on pc.Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|MKLOLAGreed, it's the people defending ms and the xbox live price to play are the whole reason they can get away with the stuff they pull making people pay for online gaming. These people are trying to justify it to themselves. When you have been playing games since games first came out, and 20 years later a company who has been notorious for nickle and diming people (and has been trying to do the xbox live thing on pc for years, but pc people won't give in to that), does what xbox has done with making you pay to play, it makes you wonder why people would feel they should pay for this, when it is free everywhere else, and has always been free. Really don't encourge the game makers to charge us more, as thats what some of you are doing.
[QUOTE="MKLOL"]Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|world69star69AGreed, it's the people defending ms and the xbox live price to play are the whole reason they can get away with the stuff they pull making people pay for online gaming. These people are trying to justify it to themselves. When you have been playing games since games first came out, and 20 years later a company who has been notorious for nickle and diming people (and has been trying to do the xbox live thing on pc for years, but pc people won't give in to that), does what xbox has done with making you pay to play, it makes you wonder why people would feel they should pay for this, when it is free everywhere else, and has always been free. Really don't encourge the game makers to charge us more, as thats what some of you are doing.
I don't see the difference between lems defending Microsoft's business strategies and the cows that defend Sony's.
I'm agree with Spruce - if you don't see the value in a service or product, then don't buy it.
AGreed, it's the people defending ms and the xbox live price to play are the whole reason they can get away with the stuff they pull making people pay for online gaming. These people are trying to justify it to themselves. When you have been playing games since games first came out, and 20 years later a company who has been notorious for nickle and diming people (and has been trying to do the xbox live thing on pc for years, but pc people won't give in to that), does what xbox has done with making you pay to play, it makes you wonder why people would feel they should pay for this, when it is free everywhere else, and has always been free. Really don't encourge the game makers to charge us more, as thats what some of you are doing.[QUOTE="world69star69"][QUOTE="MKLOL"]Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|Kickinurass
I don't see the difference between lems defending Microsoft's business strategies and the cows that defend Sony's.
I'm agree with Spruce - if you don't see the value in a service or product, then don't buy it.
I think what the conscientuios (like me) fear is that Microsoft is exploiting people too stupid to know the difference--people who have never played PC online before and therefore don't realize there is another way. IOW, they feel Microsoft is taking advantage of blissful ignorance. Which begs the question, "How many people pay for Live knowing there are alternatives?"I think what the conscientuios (like me) fear is that Microsoft is exploiting people too stupid to know the difference--people who have never played PC online before and therefore don't realize there is another way. IOW, they feel Microsoft is taking advantage of blissful ignorance. Which begs the question, "How many people pay for Live knowing there are alternatives?"HuusAskingSorry, I have no sympathy *at all* for people who buy things without knowing something about them first. It's the consumers job to find out about things before they buy them, and if they don't, that is completely and utterly their own fault, since it's not like its hidden that Live costs money. You can easily find that information anywhere, including the stores that sell 360s.
So again, why should you care what I or anyone else spends their money on? Are you going to boycott Sunglass Hut because they sell Oakley sunglasses for $400 when you can buy a pair of cheap glasses for $5 somewhere? Are you going to write to Starbucks to lower their coffee to McDonald's prices? People pay for things they don't need all the time. I mean, we all bought superfluous game systems, didn't we? That was an unneeded expense, surely.
So again, how about people worry about what they spend their money on, and I will worry about what I spend my money on. If you think a fee for Live is outrageous, and it actually matters to you, do something worthwhile. Write MS a letter or call them. Or get a PS3 or PC and game there. Nothing works better than voting with your wallet for what you believe has the most value to you.
I think the problem is you all are arguing two different points. I actually agree with heretrix on this one. Its not a ripoff. Simple as that. You have the ability and the fore-knowledge to make a judgment if you want it or not. It is no different than Sony and adding Blu-Ray or Ninty and charging $250 for the Wii. If you bought it, it was worth that to you. If you don't want what it offers, the knee-jerk reaction is to call it a rip-off. Its not. Its what Sony or Ninty thought they could reasonably charge, and that is well within their right. Same with Live. If something is worth the cost to you, you get it. If its not, you don't. Would I ever pay $5 for a cup of coffee? No, but I won't begrudge someone their Starbucks or whine that they are spending that much on coffee because Starbucks might lower the cost if no one bought it. I live my life and worry about what I spend my money on, not what you spend yours on. So, if you like Live and don't mind the $50 a year, go for it. If you hate the idea, don't buy it and leave it at that. Simple, really.SpruceCabooseSO MUCH TRUTH in two paragraphs. Not that I'm surprised coming from you, Spruce. I remember one of your blogs. You said that people should not make complaints about what other people pay for or find value in. And it's completely true. Everyone of us have bought something that could very easily be labeled as "rip-off". Starbucks, a CE of a DVD (or a game), clothes, etc etc etc. People find the value on such things, even if you can argue you the "the same" for less somewhere else. It's up for each person's preference.
I'm back for more! lol
I just can't wrap my head around the people defending the fee. It's one thing to pay for it cause it's worth it to play your games online, you have no alternatives, you either pay or your 360 turns into a paperweight... like mine...
But defend the fee?
Does anyone doubt that if Silver members had online play included, and Gold members got Cross Game Chat, invites, and netflix stream, that more then half of the Gold members wouldn't pay next time they had too? It's a rip off cause Silver members get pretty much everything Gold members get excpet for peer to peer online play. So basicly you have to buy your game, and then pay MS to access half the content on the disc. How is this defendable when it doesn't happen anywhere else?
I think some of you are confusing things, MS isn't charging you for running a service, cause silver members don't pay jack, their charging you so you can host your own games and play online which is FREE everywhere else. Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. I'm positive if the 360 had a simple alternative for online play, hardly anyone would pay. But the fact that it's the only way to play online creates this false ilusion of value.
In conclusion I don't doubt some of you would pay 50 bucks a year for simple Cross game chat, and it would be worth every penny to you, but please dudes, most of us just want to play online every once in a while and having to pay for something that's been free since forever everywhere else is just ludicrious. I can't get past paying for a game with online and then having to pay MS to play online, and the fact that there is no other way to play online... It's downright sleezy. If MS had a single shred of decency, they'd offer free online play for silver members, and charge for extra features for Gold members, that way I'd understand people saying, "It's worth it so I pay". The way things are, I honestly think it's just you guys trying to justify paying for something that's free everwhere else. It's one big illusion of value cause it's the only way to play online.
[QUOTE="MKLOL"]Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|world69star69AGreed, it's the people defending ms and the xbox live price to play are the whole reason they can get away with the stuff they pull making people pay for online gaming. These people are trying to justify it to themselves. When you have been playing games since games first came out, and 20 years later a company who has been notorious for nickle and diming people (and has been trying to do the xbox live thing on pc for years, but pc people won't give in to that), does what xbox has done with making you pay to play, it makes you wonder why people would feel they should pay for this, when it is free everywhere else, and has always been free. Really don't encourge the game makers to charge us more, as thats what some of you are doing. What part of ripoff = subjective do you not understand? It is entirely within your right to say that it's a ripoff for you but it is not within your right to make that judgment call for anyone other than yourself. Companies have the right to charge what they want for their products and consumers have the right to decide whether that product is for them or not based on what the price is and what the product is/service offers. That's the core argument of the thread.
I Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. Eddie-Vedder
Yes, that exactly how it works. If I find the value on something, it's not a rip-off.
Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. . Eddie-Vedder...I wasn't serious with my prior accusations of you not comprehending subjective and personal value, but you're actually and truly serious, aren't you? I am incredulous.
Read my replies. You could label just about anything in gaming a rip-off. Plain and simple. Gaming is a business, and in a business you vote with your wallet. Think an iPod is too costly, buy a Sandisk MP3 player. Think a Samsung TV is too much, buy a Olevia, think a BMW costs too much, but a Honda. Its economics. You don't find the value in Live. Fine. I respect that completely. Then don't buy it. But don't come whining to me that I find value in it on the same stroke. I find value in Live. If I didn't, I would not pay for it. I have a PS3 and a Wii. I know online gaming is free on both of them. But you know what? I also find that $50 for Live is acceptable to me for what the service provides. Would I like it free? Of course. Who does not like free stuff? But it still holds value to me, whether or not you can wrap your head around people having different judgments of value.I mean, I also find the value in buying a Blu-Ray of a DVD I own because I see a difference that matters to me. Some people would say I am being ripped off there too, but to me, it has a value worth enough to justify it.I'm back for more! lol
I just can't wrap my head around the people defending the fee. It's one thing to pay for it cause it's worth it to play your games online, you have no alternatives, you either pay or your 360 turns into a paperweight... like mine...
But defend the fee?
Does anyone doubt that if Silver members had online play included, and Gold members got Cross Game Chat, invites, and netflix stream, that more then half of the Gold members wouldn't pay next time they had too? It's a rip off cause Silver members get pretty much everything Gold members get excpet for peer to peer online play. So basicly you have to buy your game, and then pay MS to access half the content on the disc. How is this defendable when it doesn't happen anywhere else?
I think some of you are confusing things, MS isn't charging you for running a service, cause silver members don't pay jack, their charging you so you can host your own games and play online which is FREE everywhere else. Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. I'm positive if the 360 had a simple alternative for online play, hardly anyone would pay. But the fact that it's the only way to play online creates this false ilusion of value.
In conclusion I don't doubt some of you would pay 50 bucks a year for simple Cross game chat, and it would be worth every penny to you, but please dudes, most of us just want to play online every once in a while and having to pay for something that's been free since forever everywhere else is just ludicrious. I can't get past paying for a game with online and then having to pay MS to play online, and the fact that there is no other way to play online... It's downright sleezy. If MS had a single shred of decency, they'd offer free online play for silver members, and charge for extra features for Gold members, that way I'd understand people saying, "It's worth it so I pay". The way things are, I honestly think it's just you guys trying to justify paying for something that's free everwhere else. It's one big illusion of value cause it's the only way to play online.
Eddie-Vedder
>
But there is one truth. I judge for *myself* what is and is not worth it. Not you, me. I don't judge for you what is valuable either, so extend the same courtesy.[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]Read my replies. You could label just about anything in gaming a rip-off. Plain and simple. Gaming is a business, and in a business you vote with your wallet. Think an iPod is too costly, buy a Sandisk MP3 player. Think a Samsung TV is too much, buy a Olevia, think a BMW costs too much, but a Honda. Its economics. You don't find the value in Live. Fine. I respect that completely. Then don't buy it. But don't come whining to me that I find value in it on the same stroke. I find value in Live. If I didn't, I would not pay for it. I have a PS3 and a Wii. I know online gaming is free on both of them. But you know what? I also find that $50 for Live is acceptable to me for what the service provides. Would I like it free? Of course. Who does not like free stuff? But it still holds value to me, whether or not you can wrap your head around people having different judgments of value.I mean, I also find the value in buying a Blu-Ray of a DVD I own because I see a difference that matters to me. Some people would say I am being ripped off there too, but to me, it has a value worth enough to justify it.I'm back for more! lol
I just can't wrap my head around the people defending the fee. It's one thing to pay for it cause it's worth it to play your games online, you have no alternatives, you either pay or your 360 turns into a paperweight... like mine...
But defend the fee?
Does anyone doubt that if Silver members had online play included, and Gold members got Cross Game Chat, invites, and netflix stream, that more then half of the Gold members wouldn't pay next time they had too? It's a rip off cause Silver members get pretty much everything Gold members get excpet for peer to peer online play. So basicly you have to buy your game, and then pay MS to access half the content on the disc. How is this defendable when it doesn't happen anywhere else?
I think some of you are confusing things, MS isn't charging you for running a service, cause silver members don't pay jack, their charging you so you can host your own games and play online which is FREE everywhere else. Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. I'm positive if the 360 had a simple alternative for online play, hardly anyone would pay. But the fact that it's the only way to play online creates this false ilusion of value.
In conclusion I don't doubt some of you would pay 50 bucks a year for simple Cross game chat, and it would be worth every penny to you, but please dudes, most of us just want to play online every once in a while and having to pay for something that's been free since forever everywhere else is just ludicrious. I can't get past paying for a game with online and then having to pay MS to play online, and the fact that there is no other way to play online... It's downright sleezy. If MS had a single shred of decency, they'd offer free online play for silver members, and charge for extra features for Gold members, that way I'd understand people saying, "It's worth it so I pay". The way things are, I honestly think it's just you guys trying to justify paying for something that's free everwhere else. It's one big illusion of value cause it's the only way to play online.
SpruceCaboose
>
But there is one truth. I judge for *myself* what is and is not worth it. Not you, me. I don't judge for you what is valuable either, so extend the same courtesy. You are the kind of consumer every business loves, lolYou are the kind of consumer every business loves, lolVideoGameGuyThe one that thinks for himself and does research on things before he buys them? I doubt it. I am sure I am quite the opposite to what businesses prefer.
[QUOTE="SpruceCaboose"][QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]Read my replies. You could label just about anything in gaming a rip-off. Plain and simple. Gaming is a business, and in a business you vote with your wallet. Think an iPod is too costly, buy a Sandisk MP3 player. Think a Samsung TV is too much, buy a Olevia, think a BMW costs too much, but a Honda. Its economics. You don't find the value in Live. Fine. I respect that completely. Then don't buy it. But don't come whining to me that I find value in it on the same stroke. I find value in Live. If I didn't, I would not pay for it. I have a PS3 and a Wii. I know online gaming is free on both of them. But you know what? I also find that $50 for Live is acceptable to me for what the service provides. Would I like it free? Of course. Who does not like free stuff? But it still holds value to me, whether or not you can wrap your head around people having different judgments of value.I mean, I also find the value in buying a Blu-Ray of a DVD I own because I see a difference that matters to me. Some people would say I am being ripped off there too, but to me, it has a value worth enough to justify it.I'm back for more! lol
I just can't wrap my head around the people defending the fee. It's one thing to pay for it cause it's worth it to play your games online, you have no alternatives, you either pay or your 360 turns into a paperweight... like mine...
But defend the fee?
Does anyone doubt that if Silver members had online play included, and Gold members got Cross Game Chat, invites, and netflix stream, that more then half of the Gold members wouldn't pay next time they had too? It's a rip off cause Silver members get pretty much everything Gold members get excpet for peer to peer online play. So basicly you have to buy your game, and then pay MS to access half the content on the disc. How is this defendable when it doesn't happen anywhere else?
I think some of you are confusing things, MS isn't charging you for running a service, cause silver members don't pay jack, their charging you so you can host your own games and play online which is FREE everywhere else. Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. I'm positive if the 360 had a simple alternative for online play, hardly anyone would pay. But the fact that it's the only way to play online creates this false ilusion of value.
In conclusion I don't doubt some of you would pay 50 bucks a year for simple Cross game chat, and it would be worth every penny to you, but please dudes, most of us just want to play online every once in a while and having to pay for something that's been free since forever everywhere else is just ludicrious. I can't get past paying for a game with online and then having to pay MS to play online, and the fact that there is no other way to play online... It's downright sleezy. If MS had a single shred of decency, they'd offer free online play for silver members, and charge for extra features for Gold members, that way I'd understand people saying, "It's worth it so I pay". The way things are, I honestly think it's just you guys trying to justify paying for something that's free everwhere else. It's one big illusion of value cause it's the only way to play online.
VideoGameGuy
>
But there is one truth. I judge for *myself* what is and is not worth it. Not you, me. I don't judge for you what is valuable either, so extend the same courtesy. You are the kind of consumer every business loves, lol Did you not read his reply? Like...any of it? you're right, he is the kind of consumer every business loves. It's because he sees some things as being worthy of spending his money on. And, seeing as you're on this forum about video games, I'm assuming you do the exact same. That is, unless you're some Tibetan monk, sending your posts via telepathy.
Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. Eddie-Vedder
And to take that type of logic a step further, just because you think the XBL fee is a rip off, doesn't mean it isn't worth it.
See what I did there? It's called subjectivity bro.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
There, just to help everyone out. :)
[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]
Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. The_Game21x
And to take that type of logic a step further, just because you think the XBL fee is a rip off, doesn't mean it isn't worth it.
See what I did there? It's called subjectivity bro.
I give up.
We understand the concept of subjectivity and the assignment of value. They don't.
Us: Whether XBL is a ripoff or not is totally up to the individual
Them: I dictate the definition of ripoff for everyone
[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]
[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]
Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. VoodooHak
And to take that type of logic a step further, just because you think the XBL fee is a rip off, doesn't mean it isn't worth it.
See what I did there? It's called subjectivity bro.
I give up.
We understand the concept of subjectivity and the assignment of value. They don't.
Us: Whether XBL is a ripoff or not is totally up to the individual
Them: I dictate the definition of ripoff for everyone
it's actually quite frightening. What society can last long with a good portion of its people not having comprehension of even the most basic of human traits?[QUOTE="The_Game21x"]
[QUOTE="Eddie-Vedder"]
Just because you think the price is more then worth it, doesn't mean it isn't a rip off. VoodooHak
And to take that type of logic a step further, just because you think the XBL fee is a rip off, doesn't mean it isn't worth it.
See what I did there? It's called subjectivity bro.
I give up.
We understand the concept of subjectivity and the assignment of value. They don't.
Us: Whether XBL is a ripoff or not is totally up to the individual
Them: I dictate the definition of ripoff for everyone
Your confusing a value judgment with a judgment of that value judgment. Of course a value judgement is up to the individual... but a ripoff is a judgment upon someones judgment of value, not the judgement of value it's self. "Oh they got ripped off because I payed 2.30 at place X" "I got that for free you got ripped off" You can't have a someone being "ripped off" if they didn't think it was worth it in the first place, and usually being "ripped off" is related to the one of the fundamental flaws of economics, imperfect information.You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus you learn that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption.
Your confusing a value judgment with a judgment of that value judgment. Of course a value judgement is up to the individual... but a ripoff is a judgment upon someones judgment of value, not the judgement of value it's self. "Oh they got ripped off because I payed 2.30 at place X" "I got that for free you got ripped off" You can't have a someone being "ripped off" if they didn't think it was worth it in the first place, and usually being "ripped off" is related to the one of the fundamental flaws of economics, imperfect information.
You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus you learn that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption.
GundamGuy0
I see ripoff as a judgment of value in itself, whether it's about the actual cost/feature comparison itself or the decision of the consumer. It's still a value judgment either way.
Value judgments are made on an individual basis. You are saying that your definition of a ripoff is law and no one has room to disagree.
Let's take a closer look at your last statement:
"You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus you learn that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption."
If by "you" you mean the individual, then you are conceding that it is the individual that is defining whether he is being ripped off or not. The problem with people in this thread, including yourself, is that your arguments actually say this instead:
"You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then I learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus Idetermine that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption."
You do not pass judgment on whether I reach the optimum level of consumption. I do.
[QUOTE="GundamGuy0"]
Your confusing a value judgment with a judgment of that value judgment. Of course a value judgement is up to the individual... but a ripoff is a judgment upon someones judgment of value, not the judgement of value it's self. "Oh they got ripped off because I payed 2.30 at place X" "I got that for free you got ripped off" You can't have a someone being "ripped off" if they didn't think it was worth it in the first place, and usually being "ripped off" is related to the one of the fundamental flaws of economics, imperfect information.
You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus you learn that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption.
VoodooHak
I see ripoff as a judgment of value in itself, whether it's about the actual cost/feature comparison itself or the decision of the consumer. It's still a value judgment either way.
Value judgments are made on an individual basis. You are saying that your definition of a ripoff is law and no one has room to disagree.
Let's take a closer look at your last statement:
"You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus you learn that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption."
If by "you" you mean the individual, then you are conceding that it is the individual that is defining whether he is being ripped off or not. The problem with people in this thread, including yourself, is that your arguments actually say this instead:
"You think you maximized your utility by consuming good X and Price P, and then I learn later that you can consume good X at price P-1. Thus Idetermine that you didn't actually reach the optimum level of consumption."
You do not pass judgment on whether I reach the optimum level of consumption. I do.
Interesting, but not exactly right. "When you say you were ripped off" then you are just pointing out the flaws in making value judgments, ie. due to imperfect information you can never know if your judgment is correct or not. This of course is not the same thing as saying that you can't think it's worth the value, just that your assumptions in making your judgment may have been faulty. Reaching the optimum level of consumption is a constrained optimization problem, which is based on value statements to set the slope of your indifference curve. However if someone points out that the price you payed for X is greater then the going price for X then your budget constraint was artificially decreased. Meaning you could have reached a more optimimum point.Interesting, but not exactly right. "When you say you were ripped off" then you are just pointing out the flaws in making value judgments, ie. due to imperfect information you can never know if your judgment is correct or not. This of course is not the same thing as saying that you can't think it's worth the value, just that your assumptions in making your judgment may have been faulty. Reaching the optimum level of consumption is a constrained optimization problem, which is based on value statements to set the slope of your indifference curve. However if someone points out that the price you payed for X is greater then the going price for X then your budget constraint was artificially decreased. Meaning you could have reached a more optimimum point. GundamGuy0
Trying to find an universal and "objective" way to define value is not possible.
Interesting, but not exactly right. "When you say you were ripped off" then you are just pointing out the flaws in making value judgments, ie. due to imperfect information you can never know if your judgment is correct or not. This of course is not the same thing as saying that you can't think it's worth the value, just that your assumptions in making your judgment may have been faulty. Reaching the optimum level of consumption is a constrained optimization problem, which is based on value statements to set the slope of your indifference curve. However if someone points out that the price you payed for X is greater then the going price for X then your budget constraint was artificially decreased. Meaning you could have reached a more optimimum point. GundamGuy0
However, I don't think my assumptions or information is imperfect or faulty at all. I can just as easily argue that your own assumption that XBL is equal to another service is faulty. Based on features and circumstances, XBL is not equal to others. That comparison drives my assessment of value.
Instead of using qualifiers like "faulty", I think it more accurate to say that your idea of value with online gaming is just different compared to mine. Neither viewpoint is right or wrong. Just different in ways that are personal to both of us.
.....subjectivity
Wow, stop defending something like this... What other multiplayer service makes you pay fees?(Exempt MMOs) Steam that is better then live? No, Xfire? No, GAME FOR WINDOWS? NO, So it's not all right to pay for something that is FREE everywhere else! defending this si like defending cancer saying that you don't have the right to live :|MKLOLif you don't like the service, then don't pay for it.
Why complaining?
You have a choice to pay or not. Nobody is forcing you to pay for online. If you don't want to pay buy a system which has free online.
yes! look, its not like MS sprang their online fees on anyone. its been around since the first Xbox. the consumer has always had an option not to buy it.
That's just too simple for them. They like this outraged consumer identity that they wear. Like their complaining about this for the betterment of all gamers, right. If it is just for themselves, then they need to grow up and realize that companies have a free right to charge for a service, and as Mick and the Stones said, "you can't always get what you want". I repeat my earlier post: I will defend the right to charge a fee, and the right not to pay one. I will not act like my opinion is law and say it should be free.Why complaining?
You have a choice to pay or not. Nobody is forcing you to pay for online. If you don't want to pay buy a system which has free online.
mamkem6
Wow so many people willing to get milked and don't mind. It's gotta be said no wonder this type of milking exists with these kind of people that are ready kiss butt and hand over the cash and get next to nothing in return. They've deluded themselves into thinking what they're getting is of value. Gotta feel sorry really. Kinda hilarious at the same time.
Wow so many people willing to get milked and don't mind. It's gotta be said no wonder this type of milking exists with these kind of people that are ready kiss butt and hand over the cash and get next to nothing in return. They've deluded themselves into thinking what they're getting is of value. Gotta feel sorry really. Kinda hilarious at the same time.
FloWeN-UK
So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]
Wow so many people willing to get milked and don't mind. It's gotta be said no wonder this type of milking exists with these kind of people that are ready kiss butt and hand over the cash and get next to nothing in return. They've deluded themselves into thinking what they're getting is of value. Gotta feel sorry really. Kinda hilarious at the same time.
Lance_Kalzas
So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
It's a ripoff cause it's false value, you don't have an alternative, thus you think it has value, but it's free everywhere. You guys are completly brainwashed.[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]
Wow so many people willing to get milked and don't mind. It's gotta be said no wonder this type of milking exists with these kind of people that are ready kiss butt and hand over the cash and get next to nothing in return. They've deluded themselves into thinking what they're getting is of value. Gotta feel sorry really. Kinda hilarious at the same time.
So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
Theres such thing as standards, I have standards on the level of any normal person. Lowering your standards any further is not really a good thing is it? Liking trash I mean? Accepting being ripped off simply because you like whats on offer, it only makes way for more trash. Sorry but liking mediocrity is not normal in any sense. It's like going through a trash can and saying you like the stuff inside it. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Personal standards, meaning what you will and will not accept/purchase/etc, are opinions. Your opinions. They're not universally applicable to every single person in the world. They're just your opinions. I am not saying Xbox Live should be free or shouldn't be free but I am saying we live in a free market world. A world where every company or person has the right to charge what they want for a product or service just as in you have the right to buy it or not buy it based your personal standards/preferences or OPINIONS. Whether or not something is a ripoff is something you personally define hence it's not a fact.i dunno how many of these people who accept this were pc gamers prior to this..
it seems like peer pressure here, all my friends have it, so it's worth it because I can play with all my friends on a unified system
it's like bill gates and his $1,000 jeans.. all his friends have them, so it's worth their value to him because if he is caught in anything less than $1,000 jeans they won't play games with bill.. and since you have the option not to support it, you shouldn't offend their support even though that very support is what is keeping it from being free or even cheaper for everyone.. these people have the right to their opinion that the $1,000 jeans aren't a rip off.. but it doesn't mean they're right and they're keeping the price of these jeans inflated
I see a lot of support for MS when really it's crippling the devs and their opportunities.. you won't see more games like shadowrun or anything like q3, and they have a smaller audience to market DLC or even their games to
there is nothing but condesention and a feeling of entitlement coming from these supporters, the OP itself labeling anyone opposing this service as a whiner.. basically whining themselves for 20 pages that people "just don't understand".. support business profiting(unless it's the devs), support freedom(even for lobbyists).. anyone who opposes is a terrorist
[QUOTE="Lance_Kalzas"][QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]
Wow so many people willing to get milked and don't mind. It's gotta be said no wonder this type of milking exists with these kind of people that are ready kiss butt and hand over the cash and get next to nothing in return. They've deluded themselves into thinking what they're getting is of value. Gotta feel sorry really. Kinda hilarious at the same time.
Eddie-Vedder
So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
It's a ripoff cause it's false value, you don't have an alternative, thus you think it has value, but it's free everywhere. You guys are completly brainwashed. Wait, it's free everywhere, but you don't have an alternative? How does that make sense? Why is it so hard to understand your opinion, no matter how strong you feel about it, is not everyone else's opinion. That doesn't make them wrong or you right. Your right for you, and others are right for them. Why do you think your opinion is the gospel truth? Why can't others judge value for themselves without it hurting you apparently? Did you even read or understand those definitions of subjective and objective?[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"][QUOTE="Lance_Kalzas"]Theres such thing as standards, I have standards on the level of any normal person. Lowering your standards any further is not really a good thing is it? Liking trash I mean? Accepting being ripped off simply because you like whats on offer, it only makes way for more trash. Sorry but liking mediocrity is not normal in any sense. It's like going through a trash can and saying you like the stuff inside it. You're misunderstanding what I'm saying. Personal standards, meaning what you will and will not accept/purchase/etc, are opinions. Your opinions. They're not universally applicable to every single person in the world. They're just your opinions. I am not saying Xbox Live should be free or shouldn't be free but I am saying we live in a free market world. A world where every company or person has the right to charge what they want for a product or service just as in you have the right to buy it or not buy it based your personal standards/preferences or OPINIONS. Whether or not something is a ripoff is something you personally define hence it's not a fact.So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
Lance_Kalzas
My opinions I'm sure are shared by many. What I'm saying is some peoples opinions that break the barriers of being remotely normal. Shouldn't be accepted in the business world. Those are the opinions that ONLY serve as means to make money, they don't bring anything creative or positive. And frankly all I can say to people with incredibly low standards, is get better standards because it's borderline stupid that you accept anything no matter the quality. You should always aim for the good stuff.
[QUOTE="Lance_Kalzas"][QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]
Wow so many people willing to get milked and don't mind. It's gotta be said no wonder this type of milking exists with these kind of people that are ready kiss butt and hand over the cash and get next to nothing in return. They've deluded themselves into thinking what they're getting is of value. Gotta feel sorry really. Kinda hilarious at the same time.
FloWeN-UK
So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
Theres such thing as standards, I have standards on the level of any normal person. Lowering your standards any further is not really a good thing is it? Liking trash I mean? Accepting being ripped off simply because you like whats on offer, it only makes way for more trash. Sorry but liking mediocrity is not normal in any sense. It's like going through a trash can and saying you like the stuff inside it.There is a problem with this sides argument. You seem to believe in this general view of normal standards or your view of mediocrity means that it's the law. Why can't you guys accept everyone has the right to there own standards, no matter what your OPINION of them is. That doesn't make them wrong. It's their call in their life. Why does it bother you that they differ from you?[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"][QUOTE="Lance_Kalzas"]Theres such thing as standards, I have standards on the level of any normal person. Lowering your standards any further is not really a good thing is it? Liking trash I mean? Accepting being ripped off simply because you like whats on offer, it only makes way for more trash. Sorry but liking mediocrity is not normal in any sense. It's like going through a trash can and saying you like the stuff inside it.There is a problem with this sides argument. You seem to believe in this general view of normal standards or your view of mediocrity means that it's the law. Why can't you guys accept everyone has the right to there own standards, no matter what your OPINION of them is. That doesn't make them wrong. It's their call in their life. Why does it bother you that they differ from you? Don't even bother with him, it's already been established that he thinks so highly of himself and his views that neither can be wrong, and are facts of life. it's quite sad, really.So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
cainetao11
. You guys are completly brainwashed. Eddie-VedderWe're not the one's who have no concept of subjective value here. You're one to accuse us of being 'brainwashed' with such views. I mean, for Christ's sakes, here you are, worrying how OTHER PEOPLE are spending a few bucks a month. Do you have any idea how pathetic that comes across?
My opinions I'm sure are shared by many. What I'm saying is some peoples opinions that break the barriers of being remotely normal. Shouldn't be accepted in the business world. Those are the opinions that ONLY serve as means to make money, they don't bring anything creative or positive. And frankly all I can say to people with incredibly low standards, is get better standards because it's borderline stupid that you accept anything no matter the quality. You should always aim for the good stuff.
FloWeN-UK
When your personal opinion is shared by many, that's not a universal standard of quality. That's called a concensus.
In terms of XBL, if the length of this thread is any indication, there is obviously no base line for "normal", so no concensus as to what the "good stuff" is when it comes to online gaming.
[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"][QUOTE="Lance_Kalzas"]Theres such thing as standards, I have standards on the level of any normal person. Lowering your standards any further is not really a good thing is it? Liking trash I mean? Accepting being ripped off simply because you like whats on offer, it only makes way for more trash. Sorry but liking mediocrity is not normal in any sense. It's like going through a trash can and saying you like the stuff inside it.There is a problem with this sides argument. You seem to believe in this general view of normal standards or your view of mediocrity means that it's the law. Why can't you guys accept everyone has the right to there own standards, no matter what your OPINION of them is. That doesn't make them wrong. It's their call in their life. Why does it bother you that they differ from you?So your opinion is the only one that matters? No one else's? Here's the definition, again of subjective and objective to help you out.
Subjective: –adjective. Existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought (opposed to objective ). Pertaining to or characteristic of an individual; personal; individual: a subjective evaluation. Placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective: Not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased: an objective opinion. Intent upon or dealing with things external to the mind rather than with thoughts or feelings, as a person or a book. Being the object of perception or thought; belonging to the object of thought rather than to the thinking subject (opposed to subjective ).
cainetao11
It bothers me because it does effect the games industry, it effects quality of games, it effects pricing, it effects everything basically. Nintendo have basically just done a big eff you on real gamers that like real games. And are catering to people with standards of that of a monkey or a moth thats attracted light. Sony and Microsoft will follow soon. I know it's all completely unavoidable. It just makes me angry when people try to defend such things.
What I'm saying is some peoples opinions that break the barriers of being remotely normal. FloWeN-UKSo, who or what was it that gave your opinions some apparent superiority over others? If opinions are the make-or-break point in determining anything, as you are implying, then can I have some opinions from other people that state that your opinions are inheritently better than others? If not, then you're just another poster who fancies himself on a pedestal. A pity the pedestal is made of toothpicks and scotch tape.
Wait how am I wrong for supporting freedom? Explain that to me. I fought for freedom, kid. I'm keeping the price of these jeans inflated? If you can't afford these jeans and there are no others then fine. But there are others. The PC ones or the Sony ones. Why must every service be as you value them? What makes you fit to decide pricing and value for the global free market? Because you think it's unfair or a rip off? Grow up , buddy. You have the best freedom of all. The one of choice, and you can't see how enforcing your opinion as the right one is negating that freedom for others. I will fight for that.i dunno how many of these people who accept this were pc gamers prior to this..
it seems like peer pressure here, all my friends have it, so it's worth it because I can play with all my friends on a unified system
it's like bill gates and his $1,000 jeans.. all his friends have them, so it's worth their value to him because if he is caught in anything less than $1,000 jeans they won't play games with bill.. and since you have the option not to support it, you shouldn't offend their support even though that very support is what is keeping it from being free or even cheaper for everyone.. these people have the right to their opinion that the $1,000 jeans aren't a rip off.. but it doesn't mean they're right and they're keeping the price of these jeans inflated
I see a lot of support for MS when really it's crippling the devs and their opportunities.. you won't see more games like shadowrun or anything like q3, and they have a smaller audience to market DLC or even their games to
there is nothing but condesention and a feeling of entitlement coming from these supporters, the OP itself labeling anyone opposing this service as a whiner.. basically whining themselves for 20 pages that people "just don't understand".. support business profiting(unless it's the devs), support freedom(even for lobbyists).. anyone who opposes is a terrorist
voxware00
It bothers me because it does effect the games industry, it effects quality of games, it effects pricing, it effects everything basically. Nintendo have basically just done a big eff you on real gamers that like real games. And are catering to people with standards of that of a monkey or a moth thats attracted light. Sony and Microsoft will follow soon. I know it's all completely unavoidable. It just makes me angry when people try to defend such things.
FloWeN-UK
This statement is not support by facts, logic or reason. It's composed entirely of your opinion and your opinion is equal to anyone else's. The fact that you think your opinion is so much greater and more important than everyone else's is what the problem is. There are actually facts that prove you wrong in that Nintendo has quality games that can be purchased for the Wii and the same goes for Sony and Microsoft.
[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]
[QUOTE="heretrix"]I get drinking water for free, but I'll be damned if there aren't 25 different brands of bottled water in the grocery store.
heretrix
What if you can get even better bottle water (PC) yet still not get charged for it? ;)
Is there really such a thing as 'better" water dude?No but there's such a thing as better online service :|
[QUOTE="heretrix"]
[QUOTE="W1NGMAN-"]
What if you can get even better bottle water (PC) yet still not get charged for it? ;)
Is there really such a thing as 'better" water dude?No but there's such a thing as better online service :|
That's a possibility but that is a subjective statement.There is a problem with this sides argument. You seem to believe in this general view of normal standards or your view of mediocrity means that it's the law. Why can't you guys accept everyone has the right to there own standards, no matter what your OPINION of them is. That doesn't make them wrong. It's their call in their life. Why does it bother you that they differ from you?[QUOTE="cainetao11"][QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"] Theres such thing as standards, I have standards on the level of any normal person. Lowering your standards any further is not really a good thing is it? Liking trash I mean? Accepting being ripped off simply because you like whats on offer, it only makes way for more trash. Sorry but liking mediocrity is not normal in any sense. It's like going through a trash can and saying you like the stuff inside it.FloWeN-UK
It bothers me because it does effect the games industry, it effects quality of games, it effects pricing, it effects everything basically. Nintendo have basically just done a big eff you on real gamers that like real games. And are catering to people with standards of that of a monkey or a moth thats attracted light. Sony and Microsoft will follow soon. I know it's all completely unavoidable. It just makes me angry when people try to defend such things.
Have enjoyed any games recently? If not why stay with this hobby? It's affecting the gaming industry? I won't even say your wrong because I don't know that you are. It still comes down to freedom. If this whole gaming thing is failing you no matter why, you have the freedom to say I won't be a part of it anymore. The whole "I know it's all completely unavoidable" argument sums it up for you. Get out of gaming. You admit yourself you can't stop it's downfall. The truth is, you don't know anymore than anyone else. But some of us, like Lance_Kalzas and I have realized let others be and our opinions are just that, opinions. Not law, or right or wrong.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment