Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 Microtransactions Revenue Earned Are Higher Than COD: WWII

black ops 4 microtransactions revenue

It’s no secret that Activision earns a lot of money via microtransctions in its Call of Duty games. Now, while gamers might be annoyed at how these are implemented, it seems there are always gamers who are willing to pony up the dough to either have their character stand out from the pack, or just to easily earn a new weapon.

As part of Activision’s Q2 earnings call, the publisher announced that not only did Call of Duty: Black Ops 4 has more MAUs (monthly active users) than Call of Duty: WWII, but even the hours played increased by more than 50 percent! Not only that, but the publisher mentioned that the Black Ops 4 microtransactions revenue are higher than that of COD: WWII as well.

For Call of Duty: Black Ops 4, net bookingsB from in-game items grew year-over-year versus Call of Duty:WWII and are ahead of WWII on a comparable life-to-date basis.

Given how Treyarch has annoyingly made new guns easier to earn by buying Reserves (read: loot boxes) in Black Ops 4, (which is what it also did in Black Ops 3), it shouldn’t be that surprising that the Black Ops 4 microtransactions revenue is higher than WWII, since, y’know, Sledgehammer Games didn’t pull off anything like that.

Let’s hope that Infinity Ward has enough control regarding over their game that we won’t see this pay-to-win scenario in Modern Warfare.

Are you surprised that Black Ops 4 earned higher than WWII in terms of MTX revenue or not at all?

Source: Seeking Alpha (login required)

6 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Hates bad writers.
Hates bad writers.
4 years ago

If only everyone could wait until Microtransactions got removed from MW. The game itself looks to have changed things up a bit. It would bring me back for sure if they ditched Microtransactions.

Alex
Reply to  Hates bad writers.
4 years ago

They won’t. Acti earns way too much for it to be even considered. If MTX is only for cosmetics, I’m honestly OK with it as a compromise. But if it’s like BO4 where guns are tucked away, then nah. As you can see in our COD reviews, we factor those in as well since you just know Acti will sneak it in post-launch.

ProAssassin84
ProAssassin84
Reply to  Alex
4 years ago

Does this site get lots of traffic. I’m curious. There isn’t lots of comments on articles on here. It is weird as I love this site and it always has the latest news for the games I play.

jameslara
Reply to  ProAssassin84
4 years ago

We do but I’m not sure how long you have been around here. The site had a major dip over the last few years due to management scheduling with life. It happens and unfortunately the site took the hit. You can go back in 2017 or even 2016 to see comments were much more frequently. We are working on some stuff and hoping we can get more engagement from the community.

Like I said we do get a good amount of traffic, but where I personally want it (like it was before) we aren’t there yet.

ProAssassin84
ProAssassin84
Reply to  jameslara
4 years ago

Awesome. Love this site.

Hates bad writers.
Hates bad writers.
Reply to  Alex
4 years ago

Compromise is weakness. Don’t support the game if it has them. If everyone sat out for a month, they’d remove them. Gamers have all the power, should they choose to use it is up to them. I certainly will.

Top Games and Upcoming Releases