Los Angeles, CA – Call of Duty players are expressing frustration over the introduction of a new $80 cosmetic item in the game, inspired by the movie “Godzilla X Kong: New Empire.” This exorbitant cost is just one example of the rising trend of expensive in-game cosmetics that players are encountering.
The new addition, known as the “B.E.A.S.T Glove,” is a melee weapon featured in Call of Duty Warzone and Modern Warfare III. Modeled after King Kong’s mechanical arm from the film, the glove allows players to engage in hand-to-hand combat with enemies in the game. However, obtaining this weapon requires purchasing four separate $20 DLC packs, rather than earning it through gameplay achievements.
Players have criticized the high price tag attached to acquiring the B.E.A.S.T Glove, highlighting the challenges faced by individuals with limited budgets. The financial burden of spending $80 on four DLC packs for a single in-game item underscores the capitalistic nature of the gaming industry and its impact on players from various socioeconomic backgrounds.
While the DLC packs include additional cosmetic items and rewards, the primary focus remains on obtaining the exclusive glove themed after Kong. However, feedback from the Call of Duty community suggests that the glove itself may not live up to the expectations, lacking customization options and impactful gameplay mechanics.
The prevalence of expensive cosmetics within popular video games like Call of Duty reflects a larger trend in the gaming industry. Companies like Activision and Blizzard have capitalized on microtransactions and in-game purchases, enticing players to spend additional funds on virtual items. This phenomenon has become normalized, with many players willingly engaging in these transactions despite the associated costs.
As the demand for in-game cosmetics continues to grow, the debate over affordability and value in gaming remains a contentious issue. The introduction of $20 DLC packs and $80 premium items signifies a shift towards monetization strategies that target players’ willingness to invest in virtual content. Ultimately, the decision to purchase these items rests with the players, highlighting the complex relationship between gaming companies and their consumer base.