Has anyone here ever played Clash of Games, that little-known game from 2-3 years ago that is one of the most popular games on ios and Android? Or how about This Means War?
In each one of those games (and probably many more I don't play)one can buy a form of protection against being invaded and having one's resources taken using in-game resources. Those resources can be slowly earned (or quickly and in large volume bought for real cash). In TMW they are called "Shields" and in Clash of Clans something else. In both of these games "Players can spend hours collecting resources in-game to build up their mother base with weaponry, staff, and other defenses" and then "...other players can not only invade, but steal resources..."
What makes the version of this in this game so very different as to constitute a horrible "microtransaction?" Or did Techdirt just have a slow day?
Remarkably, in 2015, a movie studio, having spent a few hundred million dollats to make and distribute a movie, is allowed under the laws of a free society to do the following:
1) Make a movie 2) Distribute it as permitted under the laws of the various countries, at whatever date it wishes to.
Without being forced to choose between being pirated or reducing the anticipated gross revenue its highly paid financial analysts feel will maximize the revenue.
When Techdirt starts having skin in this game, say by contributing a million or two or fifty towards the production, or owning a major portion of the common stock of a studio, then it should have a binding say in how and when the movie is distributed.
One hardly needs a course in basic Economics to realize that the quoted material below does not constitute a valid argument:
" Pharmaceutical companies enjoy massive profit margins, much more than would be expected if they were faced with meaningful competition. The lie is exposed when patents expire. Prices fall dramatically once the market is opened, including that of the original manufacturer's. "
Any time a market opens up prices will invariably fall, now that there are new competitors. This is not an argument that there are "massive profit margins" that are inappropriate given the large R&D that is done for both the specific drug and all the others that failed.
Although this seems on its face to be outrageous, what about all the drugs whose costs have NOT been recouped? Do you assume all drugs make outrageous profits, or is a company supposed to price a drug without considering all other costs the company bears, such as for R&D for the much larger majority of drugs that failed along the path to approval, or even after approval?
There's nothing smart or homemade about a kid taking a 1973 digital clock out of its case, sticking it into another, bringing it to school, and then refusing to listen to a teacher who told him to put it away because it looked dangerous, and then the kid taking it to another classroom.
Take a look at pictures of it. It looks like a classic Hollywood bomb. If it had shown up like this in the street where the pope is visiting the street would be cleared and the bomb squad called in. Same thing if found in an airport. This is another example of political correctness run rampant. And, I suspect that it was a manufactured crisis. Look who his father is.
On the post: Konami Ingeniously Fuses Two Things Everybody Hates: Insurance And In-Game Microtransactions
Looks like Techdirt has re-discovered America
In each one of those games (and probably many more I don't play)one can buy a form of protection against being invaded and having one's resources taken using in-game resources. Those resources can be slowly earned (or quickly and in large volume bought for real cash). In TMW they are called "Shields" and in Clash of Clans something else. In both of these games "Players can spend hours collecting resources in-game to build up their mother base with weaponry, staff, and other defenses" and then "...other players can not only invade, but steal resources..."
What makes the version of this in this game so very different as to constitute a horrible "microtransaction?" Or did Techdirt just have a slow day?
On the post: UK Copyright Group Plans Heavy Anti-Piracy Measures For Bond Film Because Of How Successful It Will Be
We need centralized planning, yes?
1) Make a movie
2) Distribute it as permitted under the laws of the various countries, at whatever date it wishes to.
Without being forced to choose between being pirated or reducing the anticipated gross revenue its highly paid financial analysts feel will maximize the revenue.
When Techdirt starts having skin in this game, say by contributing a million or two or fifty towards the production, or owning a major portion of the common stock of a studio, then it should have a binding say in how and when the movie is distributed.
On the post: Turing Pharma Boss Martin Shkreli Defends Massive Price Increase As A Good Thing For Patients
False Logic
" Pharmaceutical companies enjoy massive profit margins, much more than would be expected if they were faced with meaningful competition. The lie is exposed when patents expire. Prices fall dramatically once the market is opened, including that of the original manufacturer's. "
Any time a market opens up prices will invariably fall, now that there are new competitors. This is not an argument that there are "massive profit margins" that are inappropriate given the large R&D that is done for both the specific drug and all the others that failed.
On the post: Company Acquires Rights To Drug Used By AIDS/Cancer Patients; Immediately Raises Per Pill Price From Under $14 To $750
A second look
On the post: DailyDirt: What (Not) To Do With Smart Kids...
What "Smart Kid?"
Take a look at pictures of it. It looks like a classic Hollywood bomb. If it had shown up like this in the street where the pope is visiting the street would be cleared and the bomb squad called in. Same thing if found in an airport. This is another example of political correctness run rampant. And, I suspect that it was a manufactured crisis. Look who his father is.
Next >>