Calax

*checks his small laundry list of diagnoses* lets see... AH! Here it is under "Bipolar"! They did indeed suggest that I was Aspergers during one of my "don't kill yourself" counseling sessions. Made for great fun when my mom knew that because all of a sudden everything changed to help that out. Kinda frustrating really. As to the kid? Eh, mom's are like that.

Then why not do what valve did and go into production for themselves? And honestly, how much of that sale was them being awesome devs, vs how much was the marketing blitz being amazing at it's job.

It's not like Aspergers makes you incompetent for trial or anything. It's really just a minor form of autism that means you have trouble relating to those around you.

They're both probably playing up the injustices of what was done to them for more monetary benefits. However, it's my opinion that none of this garbage would have happened if West and Zamp hadn't decided that they were somehow developer gods who could fart roses and excrete a game that'd make millions, and turn around and demand that whatever they wanted happened.

Basically, a bride that is sold through the mail to a man. Often from less economically successful countries.

So you're thinking she'll end up like Rudi?

So if you have somebody put in a sink in your house, and then that sink leaks because they didn't put in the caulking, it's not their fault? in the words of their attorny which you seem to be parroting

Neither Acti or IW would be deciding the bonuses at this point, it'd be what's in their contract that decides it. And no they didn't do their job because their job right, because that job requires that they put the Activision logo sign/animation in the game before the title screen, they DID NOT DO THIS. So, what's detention?

You don't get extra for screwing up stupid. You don't even know what the contract said about the bonuses, neither do I. They could have something built in so that they have to wait out the financial quarter before getting their bonus, or that they have to actually, you know, do their jobs correctly to get it. As to the imprisonment thing, I don't know if what they did was technically illegal. From what little I've read on the subject it can be pretty murky.

You realize that you have no evidence of Acti being "guilty as sin", and which company broke what first right?

I haven't seen anyone involved in the case even claim any of the things you mention here, never mind prove them. Personally, the most convincing argument I have still heard is that Acti wanted out of the deal that would have given Westpella the right to decide what games they make (ie. not be a cash cow for Acti), and spent enough resources on it to conjure enough material for them to spin as something sinister. Since, if the MoU exists, Westpella would have had no reason to split Acti, they already would've had the power they have now at EA. They wanted out, they were talking to the CEO of the competing company well before their contract was up for re-negotiation discussing the possibility of setting up IW under EA rather than under Acti. If the MoU exists, neither party has any real reason to do what they've been alleged to have done. Their legal complaint specifically mentions that they're seeking the bonus money that's not just for them, but the employees that they had (most of which have followed). Acti's counter suit says that IW basically were holding MW2 as a hostage for whatever they wanted (not doing work on it without extra money etc), and as a point of evidence that's been released to show that IW wasn't following through, the fact that Acti's logo (you know, the one at the start of all games for the publisher) was not in the game as it was required to be.

"Mail Order"

http://kotaku.com/5795472/video-games-defe...ent-video-games Video games win.

Yep, planning to breach a contract intentionally to profit from it is definitely not legal. But now we are again at another aspect of the case. It all ties back to the whole union thing. West and Zamp wanted out, and were working towards that end when they got fired, and their employee's left out of loyalty. Since the employees left, west and zamp updated their lawsuit to include the bonuses to the employees that would have been paid had they stuck around. Basically them acting almost like a union has allowed EA to head hunt half the dev team from under Activision, and allowed West and Zamp to drastically increase what they may or may not have been owed. Also http://kotaku.com/5795472/video-games-defe...ent-video-games Californias law about mature video games is now dead as a doornail.

http://beta.news.yahoo.com/michele-bachman...-204700074.html Crap

Just because the claims aren't apparently baseless without a trial, don't make it so. Also, EA sniping =/= what you said earlier. So I mis-spoke slightly, but there is still enough evidence for the entire thing to move forward, which is more than most are willing to admit. Either way, it still is a point that that's what a union could do (the IW manipulation) within a company, even if they're just trying to prevent things like Team Bondi. The difference between a company trying to hire key staff from another company, and said staff sabotaging their current/previous company, is more than slight. As in, the first is both legally and morally acceptable, the latter is not. Except that from what I remember, the guys at IW had another year or two on their contract with Acti. And both the guys at IW and the guys at EA had known this but were continuing to move foreward with the planned company jump. I'm pretty sure breaching a legally binding contract is NOT "legally and morally acceptable", nor is encouraging/facilitating said breach in a situation that benefits you.

Just because the claims aren't apparently baseless without a trial, don't make it so. Also, EA sniping =/= what you said earlier. So I mis-spoke slightly, but there is still enough evidence for the entire thing to move forward, which is more than most are willing to admit. Either way, it still is a point that that's what a union could do (the IW manipulation) within a company, even if they're just trying to prevent things like Team Bondi. Also, Eve onlines insanity (including that rioting in the main trade hub) got a bit more rediculous. One of the devs behind it came out and said "stuff is so expensive because it's brand name! We'll introduce non-brand name stuff later on at lower price points."

Woke up after a strange dream where I was taking classes in an airport, struck up a conversation with a random woman before going back out to my car with her (it was snowing out for some reason)... then finding a severed head in a windbreaker. Now my leg hurts.

They have the best credit possible, and once they sell the current house they should be able to completely pay off the mortgage on the new one right off, don't know about the two rentals but my dad seems to think that the rental payments will be enough to cover their mortgages, and give a tiny bit extra.

I don't see why I would need a union to defend my rights. aren't there courts to decide who's right and who's wrong? you don't like how you're being trated, you just have to point out what laws your employer is breaking, right? Well, it gets into what you can and can't be fired for etc. Also there's benefits, retirement, hours, and such that need to be protected against removal/predication by the companies. For example, without a union it's quite possible that you could be fired because your employer found a person who might not be as competant as you, but will work 60 hrs to your 40 hrs a week for as much or less pay, so they fire you for something simple and nebulous which gets them around the law, and hire the other guy.

They're moving to be closer to work. Originally they'd be closer to both jobs but since buying it my dad decided to retire. So within the past year they purchased this house, (it's also smaller) and two rental properties.

So, It's been decided amongst my family that we're having a semi-surprise party for my dad to commemorate his Retirement, 60th birthday, and the move to his new house. It's going to be interesting, and nice to be back home.

Unions are a neccessary evil. They've made the working world a lot better for a lot of people over the years. Unions are a balancing act really. The teachers union in Cali was so horrifically powerful that they could fight over the number of minutes required of teaching in their contracts (which led to my senior year being 4 day weeks half the time, and the other half it was 4.5 day weeks... and the teachers I talked to HATED that fact). But without proper unions, the employer is entirely free to screw over their employees (which is sort of how gamestop works. If you grump about how stupid the system is to the wrong person, you get instantly kicked because they have a stack of applications six inches thick).

... says Activision, who made, what, billions, by sacking them? Let's have some source criticism, please. http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/7093...nity-ward-case/http://www.g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/7111...ill-go-forward/ The court seems to think there's merit to the fact that EA might have been sniping. Sometimes stuff backfires on you.

But with a fear of being blacklisted by every publisher I don't see anyone within the industry standing up for an union, mostly people who get fed up and leave. Probably the closest thing the industry will get to a union is the actual company employees banding together to do stuff. Yeah, kind of like Infinity Ward. Banding together doesn't always mean that they're going to be good about "unionizing". It just means they use their power as a unit towards their own ends. IW's heads used this to do back door negotiations with a rival company while trying to sabotage their own.