surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
I don't want another "Modern" game anytime soon with the new "Modern" Metal of Honor, and the "Modern" Ghost Recon.
By Modern Ghost Recon I meant the last two Advanced Warfighters. The upcoming Future Solider looks really interesting.
'Good faith' and 'Fair dealing' aren't generally phrases I associate with Activision anyway. I associate 'Evil', 'Satan' and 'Murdered babies' with Activision instead.
Kinda sounds like those two got sick of Activision's shit. I'm not really surprised.
I bet Bobby swings by the IW office from time to time just to fire a few lower end employees and stare from the shadows at the remaining ones while that Richard James smile creeps across his face.
I bet Bobby swings by the IW office from time to time just to fire a few lower end employees and stare from the shadows at the remaining ones while that Richard James smile creeps across his face.
Bobby Kotick writhes in pain of knowing that he will have to wait for a judge's decision to scam fools into paying 70$ for yet another overhyped FPS.
I'm not a big fan of them but the first advanced warfighter came out before modern warfare so it should not be compared with the new medal of honor that is a basically a me too game. Also advanced warfigter in single player plays a lot different than modern warfare, and its mp is terrible but its a lot more realistic.
@ Corduroy Turtle you might be right.
In my opinion the publisher is just a name they aren't shit without the teams of developers working with them. The teams do all the work and the publisher do the easy work, overall the publishers should be kissing the developers asses and making sure they have everything they need. Not acting like butthurt bastards biting the hand that feeds them. Since their not doing this in a more mature manner they're also losing face when it comes to they're buyers. Most gamers were mad when they dropped X-men, Brutal Legend and Ghostbusters. Yet now that they're messing with Their main cash cow we see they real don't care about the developers only themselves.
In my opinion the publisher is just a name they aren't shit without the teams of developers working with them. The teams do all the work and the publisher do the easy work, overall the publishers should be kissing the developers asses and making sure they have everything they need. Not acting like butthurt bastards biting the hand that feeds them. Since their not doing this in a more mature manner they're also losing face when it comes to they're buyers. Most gamers were mad when they dropped X-men, Brutal Legend and Ghostbusters. Yet now that they're messing with Their main cash cow we see they real don't care about the developers only themselves.
Typical BK logic. (that's Bobby Kotick, not the burger joint.)
Step 1: Fire two senior employees for an arbitrary reason after they earn you a billion dollars.
Step 2: Realize "oh shit! now we gotta replace the two people we just fired!"
Step 3: Blame it on the two employees for getting fired. And file a lawsuit.
Brilliant.
Step 1: Fire two senior employees for an arbitrary reason after they earn you a billion dollars.
Step 2: Realize "oh shit! now we gotta replace the two people we just fired!"
Step 3: Blame it on the two employees for getting fired. And file a lawsuit.
Brilliant.
Karma, Eventually some bad stuff was gonna happen to Activision. Hopefully EA with have another good Bad Company game and take more of the FPS war market.
From what little information I actually have so far, plus a heavily biased opinion, it almost seems like the basis for Activision's suit is "C'mon! These guys were being total dicks! I mean seriously!"
I think this may be the PR nightmare that turns Activision around much like the PR nigtmare that forced EA to rethink their strategy.
It's happened time and time again.
It's happened time and time again.
"The filing goes on to say that the two are even more nefarious than originally thought since "as a direct and proximate result of this breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, Activision has been forced to commit additional resources to Modern Warfare 3." Yes, West and Zampella have made Activision lose both time and money."
Can we get them each a medal? :|
Can we get them each a medal? :|
Truth be told, I was sure this was the reason last month within a week of the firing.
If only Infinity Ward can legally make Modern Warfare, and Infinity Ward was workin on another project, and Modern Warfare 2 was actually rushed, then Modern Warfare 3 could not be released in two years. That was the only possible reason I could think would make Activision fire the heads of their most lucrative franchise.
If only Infinity Ward can legally make Modern Warfare, and Infinity Ward was workin on another project, and Modern Warfare 2 was actually rushed, then Modern Warfare 3 could not be released in two years. That was the only possible reason I could think would make Activision fire the heads of their most lucrative franchise.
I won't buy another modern warfare game after that last clusterfuck.
I'm literally shaking with excitement for red dead redemption though!
Squuuueeeeeeeeee.
I'm literally shaking with excitement for red dead redemption though!
Squuuueeeeeeeeee.
@chuchoyei
I don't care what came first, what is "technically original", and what is multiplayer/single player friendly. I'm just sick of the "gritty, modern" setting - it's the new WW2.
I don't care what came first, what is "technically original", and what is multiplayer/single player friendly. I'm just sick of the "gritty, modern" setting - it's the new WW2.
@Xzyliac: Activision? AKA Kotick C.(orporate) A.(sshole)? maybe do their shady moves more discretely, but make a 180 turn? i honestly doubt it.
Before you get to angry at Activision, remember, these guys were most likely fired for preventing Modern Warfare 3 from releasing in time for Christmas of 2011. As in, there would be no Modern Warfare 3 to boycott in the first place had Activision not gotten rid of them.
You can buy things that you boycott. You can't buy things that aren't sold. If Activision didn't step in, there would be no product to boycott at all.
You can buy things that you boycott. You can't buy things that aren't sold. If Activision didn't step in, there would be no product to boycott at all.
Frank West is the guy from Dead Rising. The West in this story is Jason West, I believe.
I only noticed this because in the many times I've read news of this suit over the last few days, I always get confused and make exactly the same relation.
I only noticed this because in the many times I've read news of this suit over the last few days, I always get confused and make exactly the same relation.
What on earth is going on with Acitvision's share prices?
They have been consistently been going up for the past month. They are a full dollar higher than they were a month ago today.
What the heck are Activisions investors thinking? How could they possibly see all these suits as positive developements? Anyone here know enough about finance to explain this outright bizarre trend?
They have been consistently been going up for the past month. They are a full dollar higher than they were a month ago today.
What the heck are Activisions investors thinking? How could they possibly see all these suits as positive developements? Anyone here know enough about finance to explain this outright bizarre trend?
Frank West? LMAO
Will this madness ever end? It's too bad that other guys have to sit back and watch.
Will this madness ever end? It's too bad that other guys have to sit back and watch.
So people are sick of WWII games and modern warfare games? What's next for people get sick of, westerns, future warfare, civil war, and etc.
Ya c?
All Destructoid is talking about the Call of Lulty 6 and the Steam sales rise! Activision should thank you guys for this ;>
*tried to be funny not a fanboy*
All Destructoid is talking about the Call of Lulty 6 and the Steam sales rise! Activision should thank you guys for this ;>
*tried to be funny not a fanboy*
This was utterly misread, Matthew, because it goes on to say this was similarly the same issue with Modern Warfare 2. Not only that but your title is misleading, it's not held up by any legal issue at all. It's saying the two intentionally held up MW3 because they wanted to spite Activision out of immoral values, if you think about it though it just sounds like lunacy. In reality though Frank West and Vince Zampella are not signing what Activision is laying on the table, hence holding up production of the next game. What if the contract said, "You must sell your soul and bend over once a week for Bobby Kotick?"
Activision is twisting meaning and wording around, and the fact is this is a common tactic, when laid out in front of laymen if this goes for jury, they might fall for it.
Utterly it breaks down to, the two looking for another job (opening a new studio), talking with employees about possibly joining them, and Frank West and Vince Zampella not getting their 36 million in royalties immediately.
None of which is illegal or against their contract I'm sure. The only ones breaching contract here is Activisions lack of giving up royalties in fact they have used it as slave incentive to get other team members to stay on board (aka they don't get it if they leave).
I think Activision will lose unless as I said before morons eat what they shit out in verbal diarrhea.
Activision is twisting meaning and wording around, and the fact is this is a common tactic, when laid out in front of laymen if this goes for jury, they might fall for it.
Utterly it breaks down to, the two looking for another job (opening a new studio), talking with employees about possibly joining them, and Frank West and Vince Zampella not getting their 36 million in royalties immediately.
None of which is illegal or against their contract I'm sure. The only ones breaching contract here is Activisions lack of giving up royalties in fact they have used it as slave incentive to get other team members to stay on board (aka they don't get it if they leave).
I think Activision will lose unless as I said before morons eat what they shit out in verbal diarrhea.
I think I agree with EdgyDude. This is the part where Kotick starts to shut up and not be so public about his asshole-ish-ness.
But he's still going to be an asshole.
But he's still going to be an asshole.
"None of which is illegal or against their contract I'm sure. The only ones breaching contract here is Activisions lack of giving up royalties in fact they have used it as slave incentive to get other team members to stay on board (aka they don't get it if they leave)."
Actually, that's not entirely true. Many employment contracts feature what are called "non-competition clauses," which essentially prevent employees from doing exactly what Activision accused the two IW execs of: breaking away to form a competing business and poaching employees from Activision. In this instance, the IW execs had signed an agreement not to solicit employees from Activision for a period of 2 years (later amended to 3) following the termination of their employment. Activision seems to think they have evidence of exactly that.
It appears that both parties may not have lived up to the terms of their contracts. It may well boil down to who breached first, and whether those actions actually constituted a legal breach. Insubordination, which is what they were allegedly fired for, is a very general term, and difficult to define as a matter of law.
Another key issues is who has the rights to the Modern Warfare intellectual property. Without seeing the exact terms of both the contract between IW and Activision and the employment contracts of West and Zempala, it's impossible to be certain, but to be perfectly honest I have a hunch it's Activision. Activision picked up IW when IW was in dire financial straits, which likely left them with little negotiating power. That means while IW may have had creative rights in making the Modern Warfare franchise, Activision actually owns it.
In any case, it's an interesting dispute, and one that will last a good long time, unless they somehow reach a quick settlement. However, it sounds like there's a bit too much animosity floating around for that.
Actually, that's not entirely true. Many employment contracts feature what are called "non-competition clauses," which essentially prevent employees from doing exactly what Activision accused the two IW execs of: breaking away to form a competing business and poaching employees from Activision. In this instance, the IW execs had signed an agreement not to solicit employees from Activision for a period of 2 years (later amended to 3) following the termination of their employment. Activision seems to think they have evidence of exactly that.
It appears that both parties may not have lived up to the terms of their contracts. It may well boil down to who breached first, and whether those actions actually constituted a legal breach. Insubordination, which is what they were allegedly fired for, is a very general term, and difficult to define as a matter of law.
Another key issues is who has the rights to the Modern Warfare intellectual property. Without seeing the exact terms of both the contract between IW and Activision and the employment contracts of West and Zempala, it's impossible to be certain, but to be perfectly honest I have a hunch it's Activision. Activision picked up IW when IW was in dire financial straits, which likely left them with little negotiating power. That means while IW may have had creative rights in making the Modern Warfare franchise, Activision actually owns it.
In any case, it's an interesting dispute, and one that will last a good long time, unless they somehow reach a quick settlement. However, it sounds like there's a bit too much animosity floating around for that.
@Hcapt SC2 and Cataclysm are coming out soon,those probably have more to do with the recent climb in share price than the IW fallout.
@Volomon My guess is both parties are violating parts of their contract. The interesting question is whether or not Activision tried to put in non-compete clauses into the contract and if those would be upheld.
@Volomon My guess is both parties are violating parts of their contract. The interesting question is whether or not Activision tried to put in non-compete clauses into the contract and if those would be upheld.
"attempts to secede", Violation of Loyalty, Breach of Employment contract.
These are the phrases in the complaint summary that jump out at me. Do we HAVE a copy of their employment contracts? No.
Therefore - No one knows if these charges are valid or if it is simply a mountain of bullshit counter charges.
All of which will be expensive and lead to all parties having delays.
I don't know if any of you have ever heard this phrase before regarding the Law.
The process is the punishment.
For the poor it means - you have no rights until you can pay for rights.
For the rich - it means the richest party wins.
Usually it means, even if you win - the process may wipe out your entire judgement in fees.
These are the phrases in the complaint summary that jump out at me. Do we HAVE a copy of their employment contracts? No.
Therefore - No one knows if these charges are valid or if it is simply a mountain of bullshit counter charges.
All of which will be expensive and lead to all parties having delays.
I don't know if any of you have ever heard this phrase before regarding the Law.
The process is the punishment.
For the poor it means - you have no rights until you can pay for rights.
For the rich - it means the richest party wins.
Usually it means, even if you win - the process may wipe out your entire judgement in fees.
Oh my god....... Please don't make another Call of Duty Modern Warfare game! I can't take it anymore!! Everyone at the school I go to still talks about MW2 every single friggin day and how it's the best game "EVAH."
P.S. Or anything other than "Modern Warfare." They hate anything that's not Modern Warfare or "Teh Haloz."
P.S. Or anything other than "Modern Warfare." They hate anything that's not Modern Warfare or "Teh Haloz."
@Xzyliac
Same. He's pretty much solidified his nonsensical status. I think this is the 30th "here Wii go" comment.
Same. He's pretty much solidified his nonsensical status. I think this is the 30th "here Wii go" comment.
YAY, no more milking for a bit more time! If it was "modern" warfare, it would've spent the entire time in the middle east.
I think modern war has gone far as possible in videogames. Civil Warfare, now there's your next hit.
Sounds like Kotick trying to curry favour for Activision and resentment against the West and Zampella.
"and that they are using that delay as 'leverage in their negotiations with Activision.'"
Sounds a lot like a lie. I mean, I can't see how putting in more time on Modern Warfare 2 was a bad thing. Maybe Activision made some pretty high demands that IW flat out refused.
These are the reactions I immediately had after reading this, mainly because I just hate Activision.
Sounds a lot like a lie. I mean, I can't see how putting in more time on Modern Warfare 2 was a bad thing. Maybe Activision made some pretty high demands that IW flat out refused.
These are the reactions I immediately had after reading this, mainly because I just hate Activision.
@ Adam - either way, I doubt that there will or would have been a Modern Warfare 3 in 2011, mostly because of the Infinity Ward heads. Though if there is a Modern Warfare in 2011, it would be because these two were fired, as West and Zampella have made three things clear - 1. only Infinity Ward can make Modern Warfare, by contract. 2. Modern Warfare 2 was rushed, which is why it could be completed in time. 3. Infinity Ward would be working on something that isn't Modern Warfare - they would take a break from it. Add them together, and you realize Modern Warfare 3 can only occur in 2011 if West and Zampella are no longer employed. For Activision, I would imagine that is the fundamental reason for the firing.
You may hate Activision and the tactics employed, but they are the reason you get a Modern Warfare game every two years instead of every five.
@ TestMunky - That makes sense. Thanks!
You may hate Activision and the tactics employed, but they are the reason you get a Modern Warfare game every two years instead of every five.
@ TestMunky - That makes sense. Thanks!
follow
