Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tarchon" data-source="post: 1588510" data-attributes="member: 5990">It's nice that you do that, but I prefer to judge your argument by its merit.Efficiency is a measurement of how much of a resource is required to produce a desired result.  It has no direct bearing on quality without some notion of resource expenditure.  You can produce a great product with low efficiency and huge expenditure, or you can produce a crappy product with high efficiency and hardly any expenditure. The higher the quality in a product, the more resources it requires to produce.  It takes more time from more highly skilled editors, more highly skilled writers, more highly skilled artists, more highly skilled designers, even more expensive components (better paper, better processes), all of which are resources - they cost more money than would devoting smaller amounts of time and lower-skill workers to the project.   In fact, competitive market forces compel higher quality to require more resources, since by nature any clear product improvement that requires no additional investment and the same or less expenditure of resources is adopted by any rational producer.  Econ 101.I agree that a more efficient company has an advantage in producing higher quality goods, since it requires less resources to produce the same quality of goods as a less efficient copmany, but we have no evidence that WotC is by nature more or less efficient than TSR or anyone else.  Given equal or at least comparable efficiences, which is probably the case with the high degree of employee migration and the general openness of the RPG industry, my argument holds.  And I might add that I've seen it echoed by many people in the RPG industry as well, along with most basic texts on economics.  Quality costs money.  Efficiency is only a measure of how much a given level of quality costs.Thank you for "correcting" a statement I never made and making another "correction" that mostly repeats what I said about WotC.  I stand quasi-corrected, if you want look at it like that.</blockquote>

Verification