Activision’s Call Of Duty: Warzone 2 has recently come under fire from players for releasing “pay-to-win” bundles that offer mechanical benefits that free players simply don’t receive. In particular, the new Roze and Thorn bundle is causing the most pushback among fans, as it includes a free UAV effect that many believe ruins the mode. UAVs are a highly sought-after ability in the game as they reveal an enemy’s location, giving the user a massive advantage over the other team to obtain better positioning.
Activision released a number of paid bundles for Call Of Duty: Warzone 2’s DMZ mode resulting in players expressing their dismay with the move, fearing that this heralds a change in the game’s design philosophy. They have also deemed the recent bundles “pay-to-win,” as they include mechanical benefits that free players simply don’t receive. These bundles grant access to highly sought-after abilities in the game that could give users a significant advantage over those who don’t have access to them.
One of the latest bundles, known as the Roze and Thorn bundle, caused a particularly poor response from fans. It offers a free UAV effect that many are calling mode-ruining. The move has led to fans accusing Activision of ruining the gameplay in the mode and has called for the developer to offer players alternative, less impactful paid cosmetics.
“This is genuinely game-breaking in my experience. People defending this either don’t own a pay-to-win package so they have no idea how much you can abuse this, or they do own pay-to-win packages and love abusing them. The worst part is how many people are treating it like it’s nothing and see no issue with this,” wrote one Reddit user.
While this isn’t the first bundle with game-altering effects, the bundles released in April’s Season 3 introduced “bonus effects” like armor vests, insured weapon cooldowns, and bonus operator slots for certain skins. While these mechanical advantages for paid cosmetics have currently been limited to the game’s DMZ mode, it is unclear whether that will remain the same in the long-term.
It is not the first time a significant shooter has faced significant resistance for attempting to make users pay for a mechanical advantage. Back in 2017, EA removed all microtransactions before the Star Wars Battlefront 2 launch after fans complained about such “pay-to-win” abilities and perks being hidden in lootboxes.
The addition of pay-to-win elements in Call of Duty has disappointed fans and caused significant backlash in the community, raising concerns about the long-term impact on the game’s design philosophy. In the future, Activision might consider allowing players an alternative to pay for cosmetics without altering the gameplay, as that could appease players and avoid significant backlash. It’s safe to say that developers must tread carefully when it comes to adding any pay-to-win elements in the game, as Call Of Duty players have shown that they are highly passionate and willing to express their frustrations.