• Tarogar@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    100
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    The crazy part isn’t that people want to be able to disable that. The crazy part is that they want to pay to disable them…

    No you guys, that should just be an option, no questions asked. Included in the options menu for… Well, whatever the asking price of the base game is. Also known as included in the base game.

    • RightHandOfIkaros@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 day ago

      People are offering to pay as a hyperbole to try to tell Activision how much they want to disable the skins. Nobody actually is willing to pay extra for that. Its like dangling a carrot in front of a corporations face.

      “We want to do X so badly, we are willing to pay for it,” which translates to " We want to do X so badly, we are willing to do the last possible option that we want in order to be able to do X."

      • 1984@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        The word consumer is so demeaning… But yes.

        Humans are actually the only real producers in the world if you think about it. Everything around you is built by other humans.

        We rarely think about that.

    • UnbrokenTaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      People are offering to pay for it because they understand that providing that feature would potentially cause lost revenue for Call of Duty, since (theoretically) players are buying skins so other players can see them.

      I imagine there are a lot of potential solutions (I can think of a few at least) but Activision probably think the lowest risk is to do nothing.