Call of Duty: Warzone currently has a number of problems, from bugs and glitches to balancing problems and cheaters. The latest scandal stems from the Rook skin for operator Roze. many players claim it is blatantly pay-to-win. How much merit is there to these accusations?
In contrast to weapon skins, operator skins can only be partially unlocked by playing the game and most of them have to be bought for real money. That is precisely why one of these skins is now causing unrest in the community – it's pay to win.
Operator Roze Rook Skin Pay-to-Win?
Operator Roze's legendary Rook skin has been the subject to criticism from players in the past. Unlike most other skins, which are colorful to some extent, the Rook skin is completely black. Not hard to see where the problem lies, right? The Rook skin is difficult to spot in Warzone where there are many dark corners to camp in.
This short clip shows that the skin can give you valuable seconds of doubt even against professionals:
Why is the Rook Skin a Problem Now?
Good question. The Rook skin is not new. Far from it. It came into play with Season 5 of Modern Warfare. There were of course players that complained back then as well, but now, months later, the discussion is once again at hand.
The Rook skin was brought back to the limelight after a recent Warzone tournament. Many players had chosen operator Roze's black outfit to gain competitive advantage. An example of this can be seen below.
What Makes the Rook Skin Pay-to-Win?
The issue lies in the fact that this particular skin was part of the Modern Warfare battle Pass. In short: you gain a competitive advantage from an item that can't be won through playing. The very definition of pay-to-win.
Players are demanding one of the following to happen: remove the Rook skin altogether, which is very unlikely, or modify it with some coloring so that it's at least somewhat visible.
- READ MORE: Call of Duty League 2021 Stage 1 Breakdown!
We can definitely see where the complaints are coming from and look forward to Activision solving this issue in the near future.
Original article by EarlyGame's Lukas Ballat.