Board 8 > Is there a topic where we keep ridiculous things SMuffin has said or something

(+) Yeah! (+)

Because I really want to keep his "If you've ever bought $100 worth of food before, then you can't say you wouldn't pay $100 for a Big Mac" posts.

--
SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996
Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif

It's called ulti's My Documents folder

--
_foolmo_
'so I can potentially win the guru without getting the final right?' - BlAcK TuRtLe

Ulti, get on it. The $120 video game topic. Gogogo.

--
SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996
Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif

Beaten to the punch.

--
http://img.imgcake.com/nio/26leonpngat.png
http://img.imgcake.com/nio/daigohadoupnguj.png

Oh cool this topic exists. I got to the $120 video game topic too late to comment on his nonsense.

--
My Japanese alter-ego.
Hey all this is Bartz btw.

From zero to mentioning Ulti in 2 posts.

Literally. Obsessed.

--
Besides, marijuana is far more harmful than steroids. - BlitzBomb
I headbang to Bruckner.

From: Not_an_Owl | #007
From zero to mentioning Ulti in 2 posts.

Literally. Obsessed.

nice alt bro

--
_foolmo_
'I love you so much' - SineNomine

Wouldn't it be easier to keep track of sensible things he says?

--
See You In Another Life, Brother.

From: Cloud and Squall | #009
Wouldn't it be easier to keep track of sensible things he says?

Not as funny though.

--
"So cold. I am always by your side."
"There ain't no gettin' off of this train we on!"

I actually agree with SMuffin on the $120 video game thing. I understand how elasticity works but a lot of that happens due to emotional attachment/not thinking rationally. I don't understand why you wouldn't just set money aside and buy half the number of video games.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

Theon_Greyjoy posted...
I actually agree with SMuffin on the $120 video game thing. I understand how elasticity works but a lot of that happens due to emotional attachment/not thinking rationally. I don't understand why you wouldn't just set money aside and buy half the number of video games.


You realize that he's saying that, without a doubt, if you've ever bought $120 worth of games, then you'd definitely pay $120 for one, and that anybody saying otherwise is stupid and doesn't know basic math.

He seriously doesn't understand that two or more games for $120 =/= one game for $120.

And then he actually equated it to food when somebody said they wouldn't pay $120 for a Big Mac, basically saying "Yes you would because you already have."

--
SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996
Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif

Because a lot of people place a value on how much ONE thing costs, not multiple things, regardless of price points.

One video game for $120 is pretty much unacceptable for a lot of people, regardless of whether you'd pay $120 for two games.

--
Support Squirtle (Pokemon R/B/Y) for Character Battle IX!
http://img832.imageshack.us/img832/8463/banner2squirtle.jpg

From: Theon_Greyjoy | #011
I actually agree with SMuffin on the $120 video game thing. I understand how elasticity works but a lot of that happens due to emotional attachment/not thinking rationally. I don't understand why you wouldn't just set money aside and buy half the number of video games.

This doesn't work. Many consumers would have trouble valuing any game at $120. Me personally, if gaming were that expensive and I made the same amount I do now, I would find another hobby. No video game is worth that much money to me.

--
My Japanese alter-ego.
Hey all this is Bartz btw.

He seriously doesn't understand that two games for $120 =/= one game for $120.

I know that demand would decrease by more than half. I just don't think it should.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

UltimaterializerX posted...
I deleted all that crap ages ago. SMuffin is an awesome dude these days.

O_O

how things change

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

Oh, well, saying you think it shouldn't and Muffin saying it wouldn't are two completely different things. Especially when he accuses us of not knowing math and then pulled out the Big Mac whopper.

Get what I did there.

--
SEP Nash, Smelling Like the Vault since 1996
Step FOUR! Get Paid! http://img.imgcake.com/stevenashgifpu.gif

Why shouldn't it?

If Y amount of your money got you X amount of product, but now would only get you X/2 amount, and it wasn't a necessity, why not just stop buying it all together?

From: StealThisSheen | #018
the Big Mac whopper.

Mmmm, a Big Mac Whopper

--
"Why must we always choose between certain death and probable death?"
"I'm in an epic battle to the death, FIGURE IT OUT YOURSELF!"

From: Theon_Greyjoy | #011
I actually agree with SMuffin on the $120 video game thing. I understand how elasticity works but a lot of that happens due to emotional attachment/not thinking rationally. I don't understand why you wouldn't just set money aside and buy half the number of video games.

This is assuming that $60 game purchases are entirely rational.

--
Donny: Are they gonna hurt us, Walter?
Walter: No, Donny. These men are cowards.

pjbasis posted...
Why shouldn't it?

If Y amount of your money got you X amount of product, but now would only get you X/2 amount, and it wasn't a necessity, why not just stop buying it all together?

Maybe I'm just thinking about back before college when I had so few games but replayed them constantly. Having few games did not decrease my game playing time. And if prices doubled I would have saved up my money to buy games, but half the amount.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

Value doesn't work that way. It's just that simple.

It's more like this:

There's a good movie showing at the theater.
At $10.00 you decide to go and see it.
But if the theater suddenly raises it to $20.00 you might decide to wait for it on DVD.

Now on one hand, you could just cut out going to the movies by half -- go every other week instead of every week.

On the other.. you could decide that it's not worth $20.00 going to the movies at all. Therefore... where you'd normally spend $40 a month on going to the movies, you now cut it out altogether, and can spend it on something that you think is properly valued.

--
See You In Another Life, Brother.

I think you're the one that thinks of video games weirdly.

edit: to theo

Cloud and Squall posted...
Value doesn't work that way. It's just that simple.

It's more like this:

There's a good movie showing at the theater.
At $10.00 you decide to go and see it.
But if the theater suddenly raises it to $20.00 you might decide to wait for it on DVD.

Now on one hand, you could just cut out going to the movies by half -- go every other week instead of every week.

On the other.. you could decide that it's not worth $20.00 going to the movies at all. Therefore... where you'd normally spend $40 a month on going to the movies, you now cut it out altogether, and can spend it on something that you think is properly valued.

I understand this is how people view it. I still don't believe it's the right way to go about it.

Value is not proportionate across all forms of entertainment. People complain when they raise the price of paperbacks to $8 or whatever but those have much more lasting value than a movie at the movie theater.

If I ever think I spent too much on a video game, I would just not go out to the bars that weekend and save myself ~$50.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

Theo what you are stating is how people should act if they value everything the same way that you do. To you, video games are worth $120. To most people, they aren't. Everything is valued differently by different people, that's why elasticity exists. Value is entirely subjective.

I know. I figured that most people here really enjoyed video games, and if they were really looking forward to a game that cost double, they would buy it and replay it. Maybe they wouldn't but I would.

Isn't there a B8er named Theo? If so, I am not he.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

I couldn't put my finger on it, but that's exactly what it is.

60 dollars is currently undervalue for him, so he's buying twice as much as he normally would.
Honestly, 60 dollars is overvalue for me though, so I don't buy anything unless it's cheaper than that.

LeonhartFour posted...
Beaten to the punch.

So was Ulti >_> <_<

--
SephirothG, channeling awesomeness from Mershiness.
The Resurrection

60 dollars is currently undervalue for him

This is true. Buying rounds of shots at the bars really changed my perspective of value. I think video games and especially books are worth much more than their price.

--
EndOfDiscOne
http://www.newsgroper.com/files/post_images/Thom_Yorke---.jpg

Theon is just demonstrating the concept of supply and demand.

Suppose that there are 200 people in a group who would purchase a game for $60, and only 15 of those people would purchase the game for $120. Theo is just one of the 15, that's all.

--
My Japanese alter-ego.
Hey all this is Bartz btw.

From: Theon_Greyjoy | #026
I understand this is how people view it. I still don't believe it's the right way to go about it.

Value is not proportionate across all forms of entertainment. People complain when they raise the price of paperbacks to $8 or whatever but those have much more lasting value than a movie at the movie theater.

If I ever think I spent too much on a video game, I would just not go out to the bars that weekend and save myself ~$50.

Theon what you are stating is how people should act if they value everything the same way that you do. To you, video games are worth $120. To most people, they aren't. Everything is valued differently by different people, that's why elasticity exists. Value is entirely subjective.

--
My Japanese alter-ego.
Hey all this is Bartz btw.

I don't think I've spent more than $20 on a video game in years.

the thing you're not taking into account is other alternatives . the reason you wouldn't spend 120 dollars on the game is because 120 dollars could be used on other forms of entertainment . your video game budget would decrease not stay the same

--
yE frE me Kweku Ananse Papa
me:http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1508/masterplumgm3.jpg

Obviously this is shy the food argument is stupid. You can't substitute food

--
yE frE me Kweku Ananse Papa
me:http://img235.imageshack.us/img235/1508/masterplumgm3.jpg