You can now buy a single dot in COD: Black Ops 4 for $1

midian182

Posts: 6,075   +50
Staff member

First reported by MP1ST's Alex Co, Activision has just introduced a new set of in-game items for COD: BO 4’s Black Market. One of these is an ‘Open Dot’ — a single red dot that’s used as a reticle for the Reflex sights.

The Open Dot normally costs 100 COD points, which is the equivalent of one dollar. But, in an act of unparalleled generosity, Activision is offering it for 50 COD ($0.50) right now as part of the ‘Season’s Savings’ sale that’s running until January 1.

Last year’s Star Wars: Battlefront II controversy led to a consumer backlash and several countries investigating loot boxes to see if they violate their gambling laws. Nations including Belgium and the Netherlands have banned the systems, while the FTC has promised to look into them.

Standard microtransactions, on the other hand, remain a part of many full-price titles. One prime example of this is Assassin’s Creed Odyssey, which, while a fantastic game, was marred by the inclusion of microtransactions that let players level up faster (“for those who value their time”) or gave them more gold and resources.

Most companies will argue that paying for additional extras in a game is entirely optional, and as long as people continue to spend money on them, there’s no reason to stop charging for things like little red dots.

Image credit: @excaliburps

Permalink to story.

 
Last edited:

noel24

Posts: 636   +658
"Most companies will argue that paying for additional extras in a game is entirely optional, and as long as people continue to spend money on them, there’s no reason to stop charging for things like little red dots."
Those microtransactions and lootboxes, in the mouths of those execs, start to sound like exploitation of retarded people. Where is the end? When people will learn that by paying, They destroy this branch of entertainment? Destroying for like all of Us?
 

Satish Mallya

Posts: 191   +175
TechSpot Elite
If it has microtransactions, cosmetic or otherwise, do not buy it.
I don't mean don't participate in the microtransactions - I mean don't buy the game at all.
Do not pre-order.
In fact, do not buy non-indie games at all, at least for a while.
These companies count on a steady flow of cash to survive.
Starve them of it for a little while, and watch them fold like a house of cards.
They need you a whole lot more than you need them, and it's time to drive that reality home to them.

I, for one, have had enough of being treated like crap, and intend to speak - or rather keep silent - with my wallet.
 

R00sT3R

Posts: 298   +705
Well, given the foul mouthed, obnoxious greasy little 17yr old red-neck player demographic that this game targets, the more they get ripped off by stuff like this, the better.

They and Activsion deserve each other as far as I'm concerned.
 
I've already decided never to buy Activision or Blizzard games again.
You can't even use Talismans or earned Elixirs in zombies because every time someone quits or you just get disconnected from the servers, you will lose them. There should be a class action suit filed against them for releasing a product that doesn't work. Money grab is not even the correct terminology, they are straight up robbing their consumers and fines are just a slap on the wrist. They are a criminal enterprise taking advantage of people who pay to play this game as well as some who pay to buy these in game purchases.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JaredTheDragon

brucek

Posts: 528   +612
TechSpot Elite
I don't play this game so I don't know what reticle you get if you don't pay the extra $1. Is this a matter of changing from say a blue dot to a red dot? That would feel like a cosmetic thing to me. But if it's a matter of not having a reticle at all unless you pay extra, it'd be something even worse where the cost to have a fair chance in the game is different from what is initially advertised.
 
This article is ridiculous. It's not a game changer item and it's not something you have to buy. It's an item that is pretty much only for the players who want it. In almost every game with micro transactions, there are things that you can buy, but don't have to. If you dont think it is worth spending money on, dont buy it. And this is only a .50$ purchase. If there is an item that cheap, it really isnt such a big deal to make an article for it. If you have to meet a quota for writing on this forum, at least write about something that matters. It's a HUGE waste of time to whine about an item that is so cheap and doesn't even offer s tactical advantage for players. Its straight up just a cosmetic item for 0.50 dollars... that you dont need. Some players missed the reticle from a previous game and it was added to here as an option if players wanted it. Dirt cheap. Whether you like it or not microtransactions are in every multiplayer game that can continue to update content for itself for longer than a few months. Microtransactions made treyarchs last game BO3 last for 3 years instead of the usual cod life cycle of 1 year. If a game can get constant updates and new content for itself, then I think microtransactions are more than worth it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reehahs
If it has microtransactions, cosmetic or otherwise, do not buy it.
I don't mean don't participate in the microtransactions - I mean don't buy the game at all.
Do not pre-order.
In fact, do not buy non-indie games at all, at least for a while.
These companies count on a steady flow of cash to survive.
Starve them of it for a little while, and watch them fold like a house of cards.
They need you a whole lot more than you need them, and it's time to drive that reality home to them.

I, for one, have had enough of being treated like crap, and intend to speak - or rather keep silent - with my wallet.
These games dont need to continue to add content throughout its life cycle. The creators of the game can either up the price of the game or add microtransactions to keep the game alive for a lot longer. If you want people to continue to work in a game and add new things, they cant do it for free. The gaming industry does want to make a good game, but after they create an awesome game, they are gonna want to keep updating it with new content. But they dont make enough money to pay employees and creators just from game sales. That's why games without DLC get dry to fast and die to fast
 
I've already decided never to buy Activision or Blizzard games again.
You can't even use Talismans or earned Elixirs in zombies because every time someone quits or you just get disconnected from the servers, you will lose them. There should be a class action suit filed against them for releasing a product that doesn't work. Money grab is not even the correct terminology, they are straight up robbing their consumers and fines are just a slap on the wrist. They are a criminal enterprise taking advantage of people who pay to play this game as well as some who pay to buy these in game purchases.
I do wish they found a way to fix that, It causes to many people to never use talismans or elixirs I agree. This NEEDS to be fixed!
 

BSim500

Posts: 698   +1,465
It's not a game changer item and it's not something you have to buy. It's an item that is pretty much only for the players who want it. In almost every game with micro transactions, there are things that you can buy, but don't have to. If you dont think it is worth spending money on, dont buy it. And this is only a .50$ purchase. If there is an item that cheap, it really isnt such a big deal to make an article for it. Some players missed the reticle from a previous game and it was added to here as an option if players wanted it. Dirt cheap.
^ I think we've found their "target audience" here. LOL. You know PC gaming is in serious trouble when some "gamers" rush forward to try and defend selling the equivalent of Quake 3's cg_drawCrosshair "1" console command... Don't. Seriously, just stop.

Microtransactions made treyarchs last game BO3 last for 3 years instead of the usual cod life cycle of 1 year.
And decentralized private servers, expansion packs and including for free the same full blown level editors / toolsets the devs used themselves to make the game to spawn off huge modding communities have been (and still are) extending the life of 90's games like Doom, Quake 3, Thief, etc, continuously for +20 years without any MT's at all, almost like modern MT's are now the weak-sauce excuse for what isn't there...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Theinsanegamer

herpaderp

Posts: 177   +29

Theinsanegamer

Posts: 1,993   +2,455
If it has microtransactions, cosmetic or otherwise, do not buy it.
I don't mean don't participate in the microtransactions - I mean don't buy the game at all.
Do not pre-order.
In fact, do not buy non-indie games at all, at least for a while.
These companies count on a steady flow of cash to survive.
Starve them of it for a little while, and watch them fold like a house of cards.
They need you a whole lot more than you need them, and it's time to drive that reality home to them.

I, for one, have had enough of being treated like crap, and intend to speak - or rather keep silent - with my wallet.
These games dont need to continue to add content throughout its life cycle. The creators of the game can either up the price of the game or add microtransactions to keep the game alive for a lot longer. If you want people to continue to work in a game and add new things, they cant do it for free. The gaming industry does want to make a good game, but after they create an awesome game, they are gonna want to keep updating it with new content. But they dont make enough money to pay employees and creators just from game sales. That's why games without DLC get dry to fast and die to fast
We already do that, its called map packs.

But see, in the old days, there was this thing called after sale support, where new content was FREE, because the game devs were not over-greedy capable of making something without spending $30 million on voice acting in the process. If the new content pack was substantial, it was sold as an expansion pack, and people BOUGHT them.

Game publishers are making record profits, yet older games had better support. At what point do the game companies make enough profit for you to think they are taking advantage of you?