Originally Posted by megamold
true, but if ps2 was a payed game people would have to make a harder choice
do i shell out 50 for BF ( example ) or do i shell out 50 for ps2 ? in this scenario most people would pick BF over ps2
because ps2 is free they will buy BF but still play ps2 anyway because "what the hell its free" so why wouldnt i play it.
this could cause people to see ps2 is way more awesome then BF and leave that laying by the side of the road while switching to ps2 and spending the cash on it when they have the cash to spend.
|
actually, this is not quite the case
according to basic microeconomics you have the "opportunity cost" for each good. By getting something for free AND not paying for something else, you minimiza that cost. And
normally people tend to minimize their opportunity cost (although they might not even know what opportunity cost is
).
However do not "normally", because people do not always act rationally.