Comment Re:The "more sales - lower price"-argument is flaw (Score 1) 453
That is exactly my point.
Because software companies control the supply they also control the price and they have no incentive to lower prices for a popular product. Why in the world should they do that?
I am not saying that Quake 3 should be priced lower, that is for ID Software to decide how they price their products. Hell, I even bought it when it came out, played it a lot, and felt that I got my money's worth.
I am just saying that increased sales of software won't make the prices go down. On the contrary, high sales of a game would imply to the company that the price of the product was actually right since it sold a lot. And thus, it would be an incentive to price coming products at the same level (or maybe even higher?).
You say I am babbling away but it seems to me that this is an easy way for you to not answer the important question: Will bigger sales of computer games lower prices? What do you think?
Because software companies control the supply they also control the price and they have no incentive to lower prices for a popular product. Why in the world should they do that?
I am not saying that Quake 3 should be priced lower, that is for ID Software to decide how they price their products. Hell, I even bought it when it came out, played it a lot, and felt that I got my money's worth.
I am just saying that increased sales of software won't make the prices go down. On the contrary, high sales of a game would imply to the company that the price of the product was actually right since it sold a lot. And thus, it would be an incentive to price coming products at the same level (or maybe even higher?).
You say I am babbling away but it seems to me that this is an easy way for you to not answer the important question: Will bigger sales of computer games lower prices? What do you think?
