Architect Archive
Thread: Demand is about to climb
Ciordia9
Made alot of assumptions
And blathered a bit
I'm an American, I have played games with countless Europeans and compared pricing on products, isps,and on connections. Don't make assumptions, just because I believe that Americans are technologically spoiled does not mean I am not an American.
Dont hold out to much hope for a flood of Euros hitting our servers.
My PA has a dozen Euros, 2 Japanese, and 4 Aussies. Everyone of them were in the game within two weeks after the US release.
I would imagine that most of the Euros will be using their own servers.
Just came in from Armorsmith land to say hi. Someone said they were making experimentation mean something, and I was laughing inside at how that would screw up Dalyn's Walmart world.
Adune,
I am all for experementation, because it makes architect more difficult. Architect is the second easiest elite class, it is no wonder that develoeprs dont make a lot of changes directed at us. The last thing they should do is make architect more attractive then it already is.
If I was a developer, architect would be way low on the priority list and the architect economy would be just about on the bottom. Which is why I dont expect to see decay right away.
Which is also why this change wont afftct my pricing at all, by selling 10% to 20% lower than most do, I will maintian my customers reguardles of this change.
Decay would increase demand, which would change things globally, then my prices might change, I would raise them as you raised yours as demand overtook supply.
But I would still be 10% to 20% less than the going rate.
( excuse all the mispellings, I am really busy today but love the conversations )
Much as I have disagreed with Dayln on some of the finer points, I think you guys seriously underestimate his understanding of business.
His pricing structure has NOTHING to do with 1 cpu.. and if you bothered actualy reading what he says you would know that.
He sells at a small amount (aprox 10-15%) below the prevailing rate.
Some, such as myself, would say that he does that unnecessarily..... but that doesnt make him an idiot.
In fact i am beggining to wonder if it isnt all the people that bash him constantly that are the poor businessmen. Are you all angry that you can't seem to make your business work or something?
Please.. he raises some good points, and its always good to hear differentviews.
Try debating instead of ridiculing... you would sound alot more mature.
I think there is a fundamental flaw in that demand doesn't automatically mean higher prices in a game.
I can charge whatever i want and have no consequences attached to them as has been proven time and again by many people here, including, i think, Dayin? Could be wrong there, can't think of a specific case of this so, sorry, if i'm misrepresenting you.
The reason people have been arguing for decay, from what I understand, is this is the only way to keep the profession around in the future. (My opinion on how to do this is different, but I'll speak from that point of view). Pricing has nothing to do with it.
As I've said time and again, If i have to replace something later on, I'm more likely to want to spend less on it... not more. Demand in this case is long term, not short term.... short term demand may drive prices higher, but long term demand (which is what decay offers) has little consequence on pricing... if anything it drives prices downward as people start thinking long term that they will need to replace it and the costs involved with that.
If 10 people want something and onlyl 1 guy makes it, he can charge just aobut anything, and if they want it bad enough they will pay for it.
If only 1 guy wants something and 10 people make it, he will buy it from the cheapest one.
You can take that same simple rule and apply it to a nationwide economy.
Supply over demand is a glut and prices fall, demand over supply is a lack of products and people will pay through the nose for it.
Decay on weapons hasn't driven the price down.
This is because the requirement to replace them (increased demand) has more than offset the decline in demand due to decay.
The demand is also pretty in-elastic, since almost everyone will need to at least defend themselves at some point.
Decay on houseswould depress demand a bit I think... But I doubt we will get decay on houses, more likely they wont be re-deedable.
Decay on harvesters would have to be VERY steep to put people off making the huge profts that they can mining. In fact they might just increase material prices to cover the difference. With a reduction in overall capacity due to these changes material prices are likely to riseanyway.
wow, i think someone made my point for me....
adding decay increases long term demand... true (I may dislike the afteraffects with the community but thats a different argument)
adding decay also makes the profession viable long term... true. so now, we still have a glut of architects feeding that demand.... and maybe we actually get more, rather than less since you made it a viable class long term.
so.... if there are still the same number of architects (or more) you still don't raise prices you just keep people in the class that would have moved on while providing a less than happy populace with something they really didn't want.
there are alternative ways that provide new demand (long term) and keep the populace happy.
everyone argues decay because others have it.... sure, if this had been in at release people would have a different view than they do now. But the fact is you are talking about a change to the existing way of doing things and you have to know that it will have a negative impact on many peoples opinions about us already greedy architects.
if weapons had not decayed at the beginning of the game do you think people would be for it? do you think that prices might be affected negatively when decay was added? its the same argument.... prices may have been dramatically different for weapons if they didn't decay away at the onset.