bigjon said:
you do realize you can use reticules outside of this 1 that is available through microtransactions right?
I have enjoyed BO4, and I like the way they have handled microtransactions. I mean they have not tempted me to buy anything. So to me that is good. I am a sucker for them if I they will aid me in any way. So the fact I have not even felt the need to use the free COD points they gave me tells me they truly are cosmetic.
There are many many other games I have played that need their microtransaction policies questioned. BO4 is not one. For me the line is clear. If it is an item needed to compete evenly then it is a sure fire hell no. If it has no effect on your effectiveness I don't care what they do, I am sure some idiots buy it, but that is their prerogative. I feel no need to. |
exactly how I feel.
To me I hate original post like this because it is pretty much a "boy who cried wolf" scenario.
There are definitely games where the DLC policies are downright predatory. But I feel BO4 has done a good job on not being one. Ya, the DLC is overpriced, but so far none of it really helps you in any way.
So while I would never buy it, I have no issue with it "existing". Some people will buy it. Cool. They love the game and want to spend extra on it. But they extra they spend has no effect on me on the other end.
Call of Duty has crossed the line in the past. CoD4 remaster was the worst. 2 of 3 best guns in the game (IMO) were locked behind loot box mechanics. That to me is a no go.
But to me this entire OP is just a copy cat crybaby trying to get attention. A reticule (which design ones typically are harder to use) is locked behind the DLC mechanic of BO4. Booo hooo.
End of 2009 Predictions (Set, January 1st 2009)
Wii- 72 million 3rd Year Peak, better slate of releases
360- 37 million Should trend down slightly after 3rd year peak
PS3- 29 million Sales should pick up next year, 3rd year peak and price cut
