Top
160°

Activision Is Selling a Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 Duck Gun Charm for $5

In today's Black Ops 4 patch, Activision has now introduced a duck gun charm that it's selling for $5 real world money.

The story is too old to be commented.
Jin_Sakai414d ago

Leave it to EA and Activision to nickel and dime the consumer. Worst publishers on earth!

Fist4achin414d ago

Sadly enough there are people who are going to buy into it...

I've got some ocean front property in Arizona for anyone interested!!!

TheGamez100414d ago (Edited 414d ago )

Got to the final tier last event just for fun and didnt have any other games to play.....not worth it....
Crap ton of grinding and shi**y rewards, only 2 or so items out of the 40-100 that are actually good. Then theres all the dlc wpns that are locked behind the lootboxes lol wtf. Most BS microtransactions ive seen in a premium full priced video game to date and sadly its not as exposed and being talked about as much as other publishers out there (EA and Bethesda).
What I fear MW will also go through....

Tankbusta40414d ago

MW will launch without all this...the review websites will gush about it...a month later it will be just like this crap,,,with pink guns and stupid crap

Nitrowolf2414d ago

Yeah I mean MW will no doubt launch with some MT but they’ll eventually role out a bunch of it a few months after launch

Pretty gross of activision to do

excaliburps414d ago

Yes, exactly. :( Scared that MW will go through the same crap as BO4 and we'll be left with empty promises, and MTX out of the wazoo.

yomfweeee414d ago

Stop blaming publishers for this. Find the assholes who actually pay for these things and have a conversation with them. Stop hating businesses for being businesses.

Applejack414d ago

Yeah, don’t blame EA, Activision or any other publishers for implementing these scummy practices in the first place. /s

harmny414d ago (Edited 414d ago )

Well you won't be able to change anything by killing a few whales.

But I agree that business is business. Would you rather earn 25k or 100k a year. That's what microtransactions are. They make money whether you like them or not. Shareholders don't care about the hate of forum gamers.

LucasRuinedChildhood414d ago

"Stop blaming drug cartels. Find the assholes who actually pay for these drugs and have a conversation with them. Stop hating drug cartels for being drug cartels." - yomfweeee, genius

yomfweeee413d ago (Edited 413d ago )

Let's compare something completely illegal to something not illegal. Who is the genius?

Rachel_Alucard414d ago

Except Treyarch are the ones implementing this. Activision sets revenue goals they must meet each quarter and it's up to the dev how they do it. You can blame Acti for setting high revenue goals but keep in mind only Treyarch have been putting weapons inside lootboxes, refusing to do a currency trade in system for dupes, and adding more and more junk despite all the outcry.

yomfweeee413d ago

They implement it because their consumers consume it. That is their job. Because some don't like it, they shouldn't do it? They are profiting from it. They will continue to do it until they do not profit from it. Nothing will change that ever.

I'm sorry it is so hard for you all to understand that.

Rachel_Alucard413d ago

They implement it because their studio is garbage. The retention rate for BO4 is something nobody talks about but it's the worst in the series. That's a huge amount of losses and all they do is shovel all the trash on their whale playerbase who have a need to own everything. Their "consumers" are a select percent of people who buy everything. There's no point in catering to them when your overall losses are worse. Treyarch being the only one out of the 3 studios doing this despite the fact the other 2 refusing to do it tells me all I need to know.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 413d ago
akaFullMetal414d ago

This is just screwed up pricing wise but then again people seem to be buying them. If people didnt buy them then they wouldn't offer these or hopefully as much. Just like DLC and now microtransactions it just takes a few whales and this becomes the norm. When people bring up these fears they get lambasted for fear mongering but look where we are.

Blu3_Berry413d ago

I noticed that in the last 2 years, almost every major AAA publishers have now implemented microtransactions as their top priority. Those who are guilty of this are Activision, EA, 2K/Take-Two and Bethesda.

Despite alot of gamers including myself who dislike microtransaction, they're not going away anytime soon. It is a money-making machine so in the publisher's view, why on earth would they want to remove microtransactions? Would is the benefit of publishers removing microtransactions other than good-will?

Game costs for production has gone up over the years, and will continue to do so. Of course it's also important to manage budget correctly. They need to make their money somehow, so in my opinion it can go 3 ways.

1) Increase the standard retail price for AAA games. The standard price is $60 USD, so one option is that they increase it to $70 or even $80 USD to recover their spent resources quickly.

2) Implement a crap-ton of microtransactions. This is where we are at right now, with microtransactions being implemented in several games now, even single-player games.

3) Make more games as a live-service. There are plenty of live-service games right now that has sprouted for AAA publishers such as The Division, Anthem, Fallout 76, Warframe, Fortnite, Apex Legends to name a few. Imagine if all AAA games came out at launch with bare minimal content and slowly sprinkle content over the course of 3 years, alot of people will not like it. Personally, I would hate it if majority of games became a form of live service or episodic which some single-player games have done in the past. This is the least desirable action for me personally.

There's another factor that is also hurting publishers and developers from maximizing their profits. Those are used game sales and piracy. Both of these do not give any money to the publishers or the developers. Pretty self-explanatory. If they were to go back and restrict used sales and combat against piracy, they would see their profits possibly go up. That's another story altogether so I won't talk about that right now.

The point being, they want to make money quickly with rising cost for production and marketing. They gotta make their money somehow. Me personally, if I had to pick which option I would want publishers to do if forced to do so, then I would pick option 2 (implement microtranscations). I don't like this practice, but for me personally it has less of an impact to me overall then the other two options, especially since I don't buy microtrasnsactions to begin with.

The sad thing about all of this though, is that they ARE making money off of microtranactions. We have only ourselves to blame when we are the ones who keep buying it.

Show all comments (18)