By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Greedy Activi$ion strikes again: Acti starts charging for RETICLES in CoD BO4

Sadly there's gonna be little kids who beg their parents to buy them these shady microtransactions. This is just going to get worse.



Around the Network

It's like people forgot that microtransactions on cosmetics are there to play on the pshycological numbness of the individuals that buys it. That and people going numb over this issue. Y'all given them a sign that they can push forward with their bullshit as long as it doesn't affect your vision of what's allowed.

It shouldn't be there in the first place, but people still wants to give them the pass ...



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909 

KManX89 said:
DakonBlackblade said:

How can you possibily think that selling a pixel is not a problem. I guess thats why these companies don't go out of business, they sell ppl a pixel for 1$ and they actualy buy it.

This.

CaptainExplosion said:

The issue is selling reticles, as in something that's free in every shooter besides this one. EVERY! SINGLE! ONE!

And this.

Jesus fucking Christ, people are actually defending Activi$ion selling them reticles in an FPS game, WTF?! I'll bet if they actually did charge for ammo like I talked about earlier (which I wouldn't put it past Activi$ion), they'd try to defend that as well. 

I see the day where they gonna start selling guns in FPS. As in, you'll have to start with just your fists and if you want more bang, shell out the bucks!

This is why modern day gaming is in the state it's in, because of people letting greedy companies like EA, Activi$ion, Konami, Ubisoft, WB, Take Two, etc. get away with it. Some people tried to defend Konami selling them $10 save slots as well, fucking SAVE SLOTS, a basic feature that's been free in every game since the NES days. What next? Charging to load the game up? Oh wait, I'll bet they'd try to defend THAT as well SMGDMFH. 

Let me spell it out in simple terms: if it's a basic feature, YOU DON'T FUCKING CHARGE FOR IT! Just like if it's on the disc, you don't fucking charge for it. That's like record companies saying "we'll charge you $5 extra for tracks 5, 10 and 11 on that CD you just bought".

This is why I mostly retrogame: No shitty monetisation and GOTY versions are complete unlike that MW2 rerelease that Activision did, both locking it behind a paywall of buying that year's CoD, but even removing features to sell them DLC down the line. There's a reason why my last Activison buy is older than their merge with Blizzard (and even several years older than the newest EA game I own, which is Dragon Age: Origins - from GOG with all the DLC included) : so greedy they don't deserve a single buck from me. I'd rather pirate one of their games than buy any, but since none of their games are anywhere close to what I'm playing, there's no risk to that either.

Last edited by Bofferbrauer2 - on 03 January 2019

Replicant said:
COKTOE said:
It's near, or maybe even already at the point where I don't have the energy to discuss the antics of Activision, EA, Konami, Ubisoft, ect anymore. At least in any depth. Same thing with Trump. I feel like I gassed out throwing haymakers in the 3rd round, and my opponent is still standing. I will say this though ( yet again ): I stopped buying Activison games with COD: World At War ( although Diablo 3 did sneak past by accident ), and EA games with Dragon Age: Inquisition. Welcome to the club. I hope you can stick with it. I'm telling you, everything in your life will improve. Even food will taste better.

Gotta try this. I haven't bought a game from EA in ages but I'm still feeling sore from the last game I bought from Activision (Destiny 1). Unfortunately, I can't join you before I've bought Spyro Trilogy and Crash Team Racing.

Well at least those games aren't teeming with microtransactions, season passes, loot boxes, and other things that make me want to fight jason1637 in a parking lot. When Destiny 2 was offered with PS+ last summer, it became the first game from that service that I ever rejected. Easy call.  I have no doubt that elements of Destiny 2 are good, and even great, but the bad stuff.....To dust off an old chestnut: When you mix a bucket of ice cream with a bucket of shit, you get 2 buckets of shit.



- "If you have the heart of a true winner, you can always get more pissed off than some other asshole."

Yes, complain about micro transactions of a single dollar when there are lootboxes that inflate and obscure prices to literal hundreds and thousands of dollars for simple skins. People freaking out over this just shows how amazing lootboxes and gambling are at obscuring prices and value. I fail to see how this is any more egregious than weapon skins in CSGO, toppers in Rocket League or voice lines in Overwatch, except that this dot costs way less and is an honest and direct purchase.

At the point we are at, direct micro transactions are the most honest and progressive monetization we have. But yeah, please continue to rile yourself up against small inconsequential things while the people who raise child gamblers are getting away with it.

Last edited by vivster - on 03 January 2019

If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

Around the Network

Op, you are correct about Activision being run by a bunch of money hungry bastards. However, its for completely different reasons than you bring up. Like shipping a broken game in THPS5, closing down Bizarre Creations after just a single game under them, lying about Destiny 2 xp rates, locking off Modern Warfare remaster behind a Infinite Warfare special edition, the list goes on. The reticle thing means absolutely nothing in front of all this as its merely a cosmetic microtransaction. Dont use a soggy match when you have a flamethrower sitting next to you OP.

Mar1217 said:
It's like people forgot that microtransactions on cosmetics are there to play on the pshycological numbness of the individuals that buys it. That and people going numb over this issue. Y'all given them a sign that they can push forward with their bullshit as long as it doesn't affect your vision of what's allowed.

It shouldn't be there in the first place, but people still wants to give them the pass ...

A fool and his money is easily parted. Its the person's fault for not having adequate self control.

Last edited by flashfire926 - on 03 January 2019

Bet with Intrinsic:

The Switch will outsell 3DS (based on VGchartz numbers), according to me, while Intrinsic thinks the opposite will hold true. One month avatar control for the loser's avatar.

Mar1217 said:
It's like people forgot that microtransactions on cosmetics are there to play on the pshycological numbness of the individuals that buys it. That and people going numb over this issue. Y'all given them a sign that they can push forward with their bullshit as long as it doesn't affect your vision of what's allowed.

It shouldn't be there in the first place, but people still wants to give them the pass ...

I'm not going to care much about the microtransaction cat gnawing on my feet when there is a full grown lootbox tiger mauling my face. That's why I give this one a pass and concentrate on the bigger problems.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.

CaptainExplosion said:
jason1637 said:
What's the issue?

The issue is selling reticles, as in something that's free in every shooter besides this one. EVERY! SINGLE! ONE!

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.



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

Pubg still a better game at lower price.



flashfire926 said:

Op, you are correct about Activision being run by a bunch of money hungry bastards. However, its for completely different reasons than you bring up. Like shipping a broken game in THPS5, closing down Bizarre Creations after just a single game under them, lying about Destiny 2 xp rates, locking off Modern Warfare remaster behind a Infinite Warfare special edition, the list goes on. The reticle thing means absolutely nothing in front of all this as its merely a cosmetic microtransaction. Dont use a soggy match when you have a flamethrower sitting next to you OP.

Mar1217 said:
It's like people forgot that microtransactions on cosmetics are there to play on the pshycological numbness of the individuals that buys it. That and people going numb over this issue. Y'all given them a sign that they can push forward with their bullshit as long as it doesn't affect your vision of what's allowed.

It shouldn't be there in the first place, but people still wants to give them the pass ...

A fool and his money is easily parted. Its the person's fault for not having adequate self control.

Yet, we shall not reject the compagny's fault in this. Indulging themselves knowingly with psychological tricks into their games just to get that extra they need just to buff up their financial results.

This is pathetic. Defending it, is probably even more though.



Switch Friend Code : 3905-6122-2909