Packaging?

[TGLS]

Many products in Capitalism have no kind of packaging. For example, computers and other electronics have no inputs for a material that would represent any kind of packaging. Maybe some firm should be a packaging plant that takes finished goods and packages them, making paper and plastic more valuable products, without crowding factories or causing an effect on quality.

[Esoteric Rogue]

Many products in Capitalism have no kind of packaging. For example, computers and other electronics have no inputs for a material that would represent any kind of packaging. Maybe some firm should be a packaging plant that takes finished goods and packages them, making paper and plastic more valuable products, without crowding factories or causing an effect on quality.

To the contrary, I bet almost all the products have packaging We just don't see it.

I did take marketing in school, and appreciate the subject of packaging. In the game, I assume it's part of the product rating, but I think my point is it's a small part. For instance, if we look up marketing on wikipedia, there is no reference to packaging.

One real world stadard representation is the 4P:

Product
Promotion
Price
Place

Product includes what was once called Production. In the game, that also includes technology level. If packaging were present, it would best be included as a sub-component of Production, too. Since packaging should improve over time, it could be reflected in the technology level.

Promotion in the game is reflected the brand which is subject to advertising and corporate branding spending.

Price is price.

Place is distribution, which is fundamentally implemented in the game by selling to retail stores, competitors corporations, including overseas.

All the components are inter-related to some degree.


My first conclusion is that packaging is an unstated factor of improving the technology level.

As far as game mechanics, I think packing is closely related to product lines. Because, my first example of product lines is always the generic brands. It's the exact same can of corn, except one has a Green Giant on it, and the other has a black and white no-brand label. I didn't mean to give an example that's purely labelling though, oops. Anyway, it's thus also closely related to branding.

So, my second conclusion is that brands since the in-game brands are reflective of quality which is based on tech-level, then packaging is just one more somewhat small aspect that could be added. But I suspect it wouldn't add much to the game, unless product-lines were added. (Which, I happen to be probably against, just for simplification -- since adding a new product line is effectivly adding a new market, I'd rather just see a whole new type of product rather than just a derivative.)

Per yer implementation, the labelling units should probably one in the same same as packaging units.
I'm really confused why you said "without effecting quality". Packing is either a significant factor or not, and saying quality should remain unchanged suggests that it's not significant. :/

It would change the "balance" of everything. Not that that's an argument against it, it just means it's not easy. Most of the chemical products only include plastic for the packaging, and the cereal, I believe, contains paper for the cardboard packaging. Would reduce them to one input for the factor, and then add the other input at the packaging firm? Feels weird.

Industries like automobile seem unaffected.

[TGLS]

I came up with this idea mostly because I was annoyed with how little paper and plastic are used in the game. If cardboard and plastic packaging was added atto the game in some manner (Maybe an input for sale units in factories), then the markets would grow. This was never intended to effect products that already have packaging like canned corn and shampoo, but to give things like electronics and toys a small additional expense. I don't think many can agree that a game where paper has no use except for tobacco products and two other products is realistic.