Most American adults could readily afford a $2000 computer monitor if that were a major priority in their lives. Most would rather spend their money on other non-essential priorities, such as going to restaurants or movie theaters, having a larger, fancier than necessary house or car, or buying lottery tickets or cigarettes.
I'm not saying that those priorities are right or wrong. I'm only saying that it's a matter of priorities, not a matter of "can't afford that".
Actually, no. Most is over 50%, and most people could not afford a $2000 monitor. Doesn't mean they wouldn't spend it. They just shouldn't.
Most American adults could readily afford a $2000 computer monitor if that were a major priority in their lives. Most would rather spend their money on other non-essential priorities, such as going to restaurants or movie theaters, having a larger, fancier than necessary house or car, or buying lottery tickets or cigarettes.
I'm not saying that those priorities are right or wrong. I'm only saying that it's a matter of priorities, not a matter of "can't afford that".
Actually, no. Most is over 50%, and most people could not afford a $2000 monitor. Doesn't mean they wouldn't spend it. They just shouldn't.
Most American adults spend well over $2000 on non-essential things in a given year. That's money that, if a $2000 computer monitor were a high priority, could be cut out of the budget to make room inside of a year. I'm not saying that people should do that. I'm saying that people could if it were a high priority. Which, for most people, it isn't.
Why does this matter? Put another way, why ask this question?
For purposes of this forum, none.
For Steam's developers: if you have 4k-specific bugs it helps you understand that those bugs only affect 0.07% of your potential playerbase and you can prioritize accordingly.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Why does this matter? Put another way, why ask this question?
For purposes of this forum, none.
For Steam's developers: if you have 4k-specific bugs it helps you understand that those bugs only affect 0.07% of your potential playerbase and you can prioritize accordingly.
You can already tell that by pulling data from the player's game settings in your own title in many cases.
Steam's data is more about mass analytics, not content that defines the play or standards of individual titles. Better for observing trends and changes in the market, not so great for knowing what people are doing at an individual or per-title level.
Honestly with the way most of the games we make now having the online components it's become easier just to tag information about the game settings and activity and send that back to the sever for understanding what one's users are doing far better than trying to parse third party data that is aggregate across a variety of genres and demographics.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Most American adults spend well over $2000 on non-essential things in a given year.
I must not be part of that all-inclusive far-reaching statement of yours...
Which is probably why kick starters seem like a absolute scam to me... no game is worth that sort of investment.
I did restrict my statement to Americans as opposed to people living in impoverished parts of the world, and to adults as opposed to children who don't have much money because they don't have a job yet. And "most" is not the same as "all"; there are people in genuinely tough circumstances, though far fewer than think they are.
Furthermore, "non-essential" is hardly the same as "frivolous". For example, you don't really need any beverages other than tap water, which is essentially free. You don't need to eat out at restaurants; you do need to eat, but it's easy to get a meal for a few dollars from simple groceries. You don't need to go to entertainment events, such as movies, concerts, or sports. You don't need to spend money on the lottery or any other form of gambling. You don't need cigarettes or other recreational drugs, legal or otherwise. You don't need to give money to charity. You don't need jewelry or expensive designer clothing.
I'm not saying that those are all bad things or that you shouldn't spend money on them. I'm not saying that buying a $2000 computer monitor definitely should be a higher priority than any of the things above. (Except for playing the lottery, which should be a lower priority than lighting money on fire.) I'm not saying that your priorities or those of many other people are wrong. I'm only saying that, for most American adults, not having a $2000+ computer monitor is a result of (often reasonable!) choices they've made, not things that were forced on them.
The point I was getting across is that all this stuff is really cheap compared to what it was in the past. That $400 14" color tv was 1 1/2 months rent back in those days. The 4k 42" tv would be about 1/2 months rent in the same place today.
And my gaming preference isn't 4k, it's a 2k 144hz 27" monitor that I like to use at my desk because I just can't get into games from my couch, been playing from a desk for too long and as they say you can't teach an old dog new tricks
That is certainly a valid point. These things do keep getting cheaper and cheaper, which is great. When 4K TV's do come down quite a bit, then I'm sure I'll pick one up.
Yeah, I'm a desk gamer myself. I'm entirely too narcoleptic to game on a couch. Joking of course. lol
I get a pretty good life experience out of my cars
that I have a hard time believing.
then again, I only had a motorcycle for about 3 years and it got me where i needed to go just the same.
life experience difference between a 25k car and a 45k car? nearly nothing at all.
I have a friend who has a $1500 dinning room table that he uses once a year
Ummmm, the difference between a base model Z34 and a Nismo edition is about 25k-45k.
One I would happily take to a race track and drive on the limit. The other I would be scared to take a corner too fast on a public road. The difference between the two is astounding and I know because I've owned and tracked both.
There is no life experience more thrilling than than the corkscrew at Laguna Seca or the blind curve at the top of COTA. I've driven them both in cars ranging from 20k to 120k and I can assure you that you're absolutely 100% dead wrong. A Miata is fun, a GTR is mind blowing.
You feel the same way about VR as I feel about cars. For you, $600 on an oculus rift is the apex of gaming experience. To me, I'm perfectly happy with triple monitors and TrackIR and I wouldn't pay more than $200 bucks for the "joy" of strapping a giant clunky sweat box to my forehead.
It all comes down to personal preference really.
I also have a $1500 dining room table that I only use about 5 times a year. But you try telling the wife that a plastic fold out table from Lowes will be fine when guests are coming over.
Most American adults could readily afford a $2000 computer monitor if that were a major priority in their lives. Most would rather spend their money on other non-essential priorities, such as going to restaurants or movie theaters, having a larger, fancier than necessary house or car, or buying lottery tickets or cigarettes.
I'm not saying that those priorities are right or wrong. I'm only saying that it's a matter of priorities, not a matter of "can't afford that".
Actually, no. Most is over 50%, and most people could not afford a $2000 monitor. Doesn't mean they wouldn't spend it. They just shouldn't.
Most American adults spend well over $2000 on non-essential things in a given year. That's money that, if a $2000 computer monitor were a high priority, could be cut out of the budget to make room inside of a year. I'm not saying that people should do that. I'm saying that people could if it were a high priority. Which, for most people, it isn't.
I'm just saying that most American adults don't have any disposable income, let alone $2000.
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
Cool am in the 1% 1920x1200. Isn't it funny how polls like this are always slammed down, yet with the people we have running for Prez, people take it as gospel. I never put a lot into any polls but they are fun to watch.
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
lol who buys cars with spare cash. Your credit must be "feezed" up or something. 30k is actually the low end of what the majority of families spend on a classic family sedan after tax title and the fixin's. What ridiculous is you coming on the forums and saying that a bare-bones base model Camry is "high class".
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
lol who buys cars with spare cash. Your credit must be "feezed" up or something. 30k is actually the low end of what the majority of families spend on a classic family sedan after tax title and the fixin's. What ridiculous is you coming on the forums and saying that a bare-bones base model Camry is "high class".
For those who asked, information of this nature is valuable to any field that does any form of "content creation". Web designers, independent film makers, PR firms, ad agencies, you name it. It's just not info for gamers.
Outside of this, please let's all refrain from making assumptions of peoples lifestyles and income. That's the last thing anybody needs to hear from people who may or may not be ignorant and live in their little social bubble. I don't want to see it. It's going to result in someone chiming in with a trumpism and following infractions and bannings (probably me).
"As far as the forum code of conduct, I would think it's a bit outdated and in need of a refre *CLOSED*"
Most American adults could readily afford a $2000 computer monitor if that were a major priority in their lives. Most would rather spend their money on other non-essential priorities, such as going to restaurants or movie theaters, having a larger, fancier than necessary house or car, or buying lottery tickets or cigarettes.
I'm not saying that those priorities are right or wrong. I'm only saying that it's a matter of priorities, not a matter of "can't afford that".
Actually, no. Most is over 50%, and most people could not afford a $2000 monitor. Doesn't mean they wouldn't spend it. They just shouldn't.
Most American adults spend well over $2000 on non-essential things in a given year. That's money that, if a $2000 computer monitor were a high priority, could be cut out of the budget to make room inside of a year. I'm not saying that people should do that. I'm saying that people could if it were a high priority. Which, for most people, it isn't.
I'm just saying that most American adults don't have any disposable income, let alone $2000.
Do not confuse spending disposable income as soon as you get the money with not having any disposable income at all. Spending all that you get as soon as you get it is a choice (or rather, a series of choices), not something forced on people with even somewhat below the median income.
In a number of MMORPGs that I've played, some people were constantly farming yet always broke. Others never bothered to farm at all but always had plenty of money. The difference is not one of income, but spending--though the first type tended to have more income than the second. The first type of people spends everything they get as soon as they get it, and would always be broke even if the rate at which they made money increased by a factor of ten.
That's not unique to MMORPGs. It works that way in real life, too.
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
lol who buys cars with spare cash. Your credit must be "feezed" up or something. 30k is actually the low end of what the majority of families spend on a classic family sedan after tax title and the fixin's. What ridiculous is you coming on the forums and saying that a bare-bones base model Camry is "high class".
10 seconds i'll never get back. Yeap, you mentioned finacling, w/e that is. You also phrased it as though "financling" is something odd that no one does. When someone says they dropped 30k on a car, the 100% assumption is that they "financlinedized" it, not that they are high class and paid cash. Another assumption that you could make is that people who get graduate degrees also "finaclizotination" them. There;s one more assumption I could probably make about you in particular, but I don't want to get negative brownie points on the forums.
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
Person A makes $40k per year and spends $40k per year. He's never got even $1000 to his name, and he's got a negative net worth because he can't manage money and carries a lot of credit card debt long-term.
Person B makes $40k per year and spends $30k per year. Within three years, he's saved up $30k. If he planned on getting a car, he may well have the money on hand; some people would have put it into longer term investments.
The difference is not income, but spending. People who can't manage money burn through money quickly, and no amount of income will help them. That's why winning the lottery commonly ends in disaster: people who play it are a self-selecting group of people who can't manage money and will blow anything they win on stupid stuff and promptly be broke again.
Now, most people do get a loan to buy a car. That, too, is a choice, as people could get through life without having a car until they save up enough money to buy one. I'm not saying that taking a car loan is a bad choice, but it is a choice.
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
lol who buys cars with spare cash. Your credit must be "feezed" up or something. 30k is actually the low end of what the majority of families spend on a classic family sedan after tax title and the fixin's. What ridiculous is you coming on the forums and saying that a bare-bones base model Camry is "high class".
10 seconds i'll never get back. Yeap, you mentioned finacling, w/e that is. You also phrased it as though "financling" is something odd that no one does. When someone says they dropped 30k on a car, the 100% assumption is that they "financlinedized" it, not that they are high class and paid cash. Another assumption that you could make is that people who get graduate degrees also "finaclizotination" them. There;s one more assumption I could probably make about you in particular, but I don't want to get negative brownie points on the forums.
difference is i never assume people finance things. different ways of life then.
I love the single 20 something's explaining what is too expensive for others to be spending.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
da feezy? no average joe is going to have a spare 30k cash. Thats not even middle class money. thats high class/rich money.unless you are financling the car no average joe will ever, EVER have 30k cash on hand like that.
Person A makes $40k per year and spends $40k per year. He's never got even $1000 to his name, and he's got a negative net worth because he can't manage money and carries a lot of credit card debt long-term.
Person B makes $40k per year and spends $30k per year. Within three years, he's saved up $30k. If he planned on getting a car, he may well have the money on hand; some people would have put it into longer term investments.
The difference is not income, but spending. People who can't manage money burn through money quickly, and no amount of income will help them. That's why winning the lottery commonly ends in disaster: people who play it are a self-selecting group of people who can't manage money and will blow anything they win on stupid stuff and promptly be broke again.
Now, most people do get a loan to buy a car. That, too, is a choice, as people could get through life without having a car until they save up enough money to buy one. I'm not saying that taking a car loan is a bad choice, but it is a choice.
Most American adults spend well over $2000 on non-essential things in a given year. That's money that, if a $2000 computer monitor were a high priority, could be cut out of the budget to make room inside of a year. I'm not saying that people should do that. I'm saying that people could if it were a high priority. Which, for most people, it isn't.
I'm just saying that most American adults don't have any disposable income, let alone $2000.
I am not an American but nI can certainly afford 2K for stuff for my computer. The problem is more that if I want to spend that money I rather spend it on other stuff then a screen. I think most adult Swedes at least can afford that sum and so can most north Europeans who work and don't have too many kids.
You can actually get a good new computer with a 2k screen for that money or you could get 4 really good 2K screens running together. Or a 2K screen and a bloody amazing GFX card like a Titan card.
So the question is not if I can afford it but if it is worth it compared to what else I can get for that money. And it certainly can be worth it for some people but not really for me. 4K screens are dropping in price anyways.
If you have a computer budget of $4000 then it is worth considering but even at that price I think you can make something far more awesom if you keep a 2K screen and focus on high end hardware and large SSDs and maybe 4 raided 3gig media drives.
So my advice to anyone not rich thinking about 4K is to wait 2 years, the price will probably be 25% of what it is now then.
Comments
that I have a hard time believing.
then again, I only had a motorcycle for about 3 years and it got me where i needed to go just the same.
life experience difference between a 25k car and a 45k car? nearly nothing at all.
I have a friend who has a $1500 dinning room table that he uses once a year
Please do not respond to me, even if I ask you a question, its rhetorical.
Please do not respond to me
For Steam's developers: if you have 4k-specific bugs it helps you understand that those bugs only affect 0.07% of your potential playerbase and you can prioritize accordingly.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
Steam's data is more about mass analytics, not content that defines the play or standards of individual titles. Better for observing trends and changes in the market, not so great for knowing what people are doing at an individual or per-title level.
Honestly with the way most of the games we make now having the online components it's become easier just to tag information about the game settings and activity and send that back to the sever for understanding what one's users are doing far better than trying to parse third party data that is aggregate across a variety of genres and demographics.
"The knowledge of the theory of logic has no tendency whatever to make men good reasoners." - Thomas B. Macaulay
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel J. Boorstin
Which is probably why kick starters seem like a absolute scam to me... no game is worth that sort of investment.
if you have a good career and family , 30k is nothing to spend on a good vehicle for your wife to take kids around in etc.
Furthermore, "non-essential" is hardly the same as "frivolous". For example, you don't really need any beverages other than tap water, which is essentially free. You don't need to eat out at restaurants; you do need to eat, but it's easy to get a meal for a few dollars from simple groceries. You don't need to go to entertainment events, such as movies, concerts, or sports. You don't need to spend money on the lottery or any other form of gambling. You don't need cigarettes or other recreational drugs, legal or otherwise. You don't need to give money to charity. You don't need jewelry or expensive designer clothing.
I'm not saying that those are all bad things or that you shouldn't spend money on them. I'm not saying that buying a $2000 computer monitor definitely should be a higher priority than any of the things above. (Except for playing the lottery, which should be a lower priority than lighting money on fire.) I'm not saying that your priorities or those of many other people are wrong. I'm only saying that, for most American adults, not having a $2000+ computer monitor is a result of (often reasonable!) choices they've made, not things that were forced on them.
Yeah, I'm a desk gamer myself. I'm entirely too narcoleptic to game on a couch. Joking of course. lol
Ummmm, the difference between a base model Z34 and a Nismo edition is about 25k-45k.
One I would happily take to a race track and drive on the limit. The other I would be scared to take a corner too fast on a public road. The difference between the two is astounding and I know because I've owned and tracked both.
There is no life experience more thrilling than than the corkscrew at Laguna Seca or the blind curve at the top of COTA. I've driven them both in cars ranging from 20k to 120k and I can assure you that you're absolutely 100% dead wrong. A Miata is fun, a GTR is mind blowing.
You feel the same way about VR as I feel about cars. For you, $600 on an oculus rift is the apex of gaming experience. To me, I'm perfectly happy with triple monitors and TrackIR and I wouldn't pay more than $200 bucks for the "joy" of strapping a giant clunky sweat box to my forehead.
It all comes down to personal preference really.
I also have a $1500 dining room table that I only use about 5 times a year. But you try telling the wife that a plastic fold out table from Lowes will be fine when guests are coming over.
Star Citizen – The Extinction Level Event
4/13/15 > ELE has been updated look for 16-04-13.
http://www.dereksmart.org/2016/04/star-citizen-the-ele/
Enjoy and know the truth always comes to light!
http://www.toyota.com/camry/?&srchid=sem|google|Camry|Model_Camry|Camry_General_E||
Outside of this, please let's all refrain from making assumptions of peoples lifestyles and income. That's the last thing anybody needs to hear from people who may or may not be ignorant and live in their little social bubble. I don't want to see it. It's going to result in someone chiming in with a trumpism and following infractions and bannings (probably me).
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
In a number of MMORPGs that I've played, some people were constantly farming yet always broke. Others never bothered to farm at all but always had plenty of money. The difference is not one of income, but spending--though the first type tended to have more income than the second. The first type of people spends everything they get as soon as they get it, and would always be broke even if the rate at which they made money increased by a factor of ten.
That's not unique to MMORPGs. It works that way in real life, too.
Person A makes $40k per year and spends $40k per year. He's never got even $1000 to his name, and he's got a negative net worth because he can't manage money and carries a lot of credit card debt long-term.
Person B makes $40k per year and spends $30k per year. Within three years, he's saved up $30k. If he planned on getting a car, he may well have the money on hand; some people would have put it into longer term investments.
The difference is not income, but spending. People who can't manage money burn through money quickly, and no amount of income will help them. That's why winning the lottery commonly ends in disaster: people who play it are a self-selecting group of people who can't manage money and will blow anything they win on stupid stuff and promptly be broke again.
Now, most people do get a loan to buy a car. That, too, is a choice, as people could get through life without having a car until they save up enough money to buy one. I'm not saying that taking a car loan is a bad choice, but it is a choice.
You can actually get a good new computer with a 2k screen for that money or you could get 4 really good 2K screens running together. Or a 2K screen and a bloody amazing GFX card like a Titan card.
So the question is not if I can afford it but if it is worth it compared to what else I can get for that money. And it certainly can be worth it for some people but not really for me. 4K screens are dropping in price anyways.
If you have a computer budget of $4000 then it is worth considering but even at that price I think you can make something far more awesom if you keep a 2K screen and focus on high end hardware and large SSDs and maybe 4 raided 3gig media drives.
So my advice to anyone not rich thinking about 4K is to wait 2 years, the price will probably be 25% of what it is now then.