Infinity Ward founders canned by Activision

[BicycleOfDeath]

Excellent link, Enoch. Thanks.

[Walsingham]

Excellent link, Enoch. Thanks.

 

Ditto. And this, ladies and gentleman is why a 'culture of fear' leads to totally unnecessary aggravation and fallout eventually. I ****ing hate suited wankers who think that bullying and jackboot tactics are both efficient and somehow proof of their rare genius. I've never met Activision's CEO, but I remember saying the same thing when we discussed his moving in. Graarrrgh.

 

I look after my staff and nurture them. They do great work. It's not rocket science, people!

[Calax]

Excellent link, Enoch. Thanks.

 

Ditto. And this, ladies and gentleman is why a 'culture of fear' leads to totally unnecessary aggravation and fallout eventually. I ****ing hate suited wankers who think that bullying and jackboot tactics are both efficient and somehow proof of their rare genius. I've never met Activision's CEO, but I remember saying the same thing when we discussed his moving in. Graarrrgh.

 

I look after my staff and nurture them. They do great work. It's not rocket science, people!

I think that the article has a point that most of what they claimed in their complaint was aimed primarily for shock value. Personally, I doubt that everything West and Zamp are saying it's true. If it did turn out that Acti is doing everything they can to completely cut the devs out of profits, then they'd probably have a full scale revolt from their other developers (and a few class action suits like the ones leveled against EA over unpaid overtime... only worse).

 

They claim they're owed BILLIONS in revenue from acti (after "Lining their pockets"), which strikes me as odd given that Activision would be the ones pouring millions into the ad campaign, and probably into the voice work.

 

Overall, I find that the language that West and Zamp used was designed to tick people off or inflame public opinion. And it almost feels like they're trying less to get firm legal standing, and more to draw attention to themselves and to garner public support.

[Orogun01]

I think that the article has a point that most of what they claimed in their complaint was aimed primarily for shock value. Personally, I doubt that everything West and Zamp are saying it's true. If it did turn out that Acti is doing everything they can to completely cut the devs out of profits, then they'd probably have a full scale revolt from their other developers (and a few class action suits like the ones leveled against EA over unpaid overtime... only worse).

Or it may be that this case is unique because West and Zampanella negotiating with other publishers, which is why they could be withholding profits. Or so they could say.

 

They claim they're owed BILLIONS in revenue from acti (after "Lining their pockets"), which strikes me as odd given that Activision would be the ones pouring millions into the ad campaign, and probably into the voice work.

MW2 is one of the best selling games ever; 4.7 millions sold a day after release. I say that billions is not a stretch of reality; and Activision is also owe them a promised bonus.

Overall, I find that the language that West and Zamp used was designed to tick people off or inflame public opinion. And it almost feels like they're trying less to get firm legal standing, and more to draw attention to themselves and to garner public support.

Even so, they have a strong case and if they lose they have the public's pity. For all that's worth

[Calax]

I think that the article has a point that most of what they claimed in their complaint was aimed primarily for shock value. Personally, I doubt that everything West and Zamp are saying it's true. If it did turn out that Acti is doing everything they can to completely cut the devs out of profits, then they'd probably have a full scale revolt from their other developers (and a few class action suits like the ones leveled against EA over unpaid overtime... only worse).

Or it may be that this case is unique because West and Zampanella negotiating with other publishers, which is why they could be withholding profits. Or so they could say.

wouldn't negotiating with another group be a breach of contract in and of itself thus nullifying the contract?

They claim they're owed BILLIONS in revenue from acti (after "Lining their pockets"), which strikes me as odd given that Activision would be the ones pouring millions into the ad campaign, and probably into the voice work.

MW2 is one of the best selling games ever; 4.7 millions sold a day after release. I say that billions is not a stretch of reality; and Activision is also owe them a promised bonus.

How much of a promised bonus? I mean, they're game developers, and I have yet to see an actual developer running around with ho's in his car that flash cash like movie stars. Also, I'd think a portion of the profits would go to acti, a portion would go to development (which probably is coming out of Acti due to the fact ACTI OWNS IW). Also, exactly how much does it make? I mean, we hear about Blizzard earning billions due to 11 million people paying them 15 bucks a month, but I don't think that one dev team shooting out one game will produce enough revenue that it deserves a billion or two in bonuses.

 

... I guess that's whats niggling at me. West and Zampella are asking for Billions when they're basically doing this as just themselves. It's not a class action, or anything. I'm feeling like they're saying "Well... we got canned, lets make it as sensational as we can and try to set ourselves up for the rest of our lives!". Now I haven't read the entire complaint, but I see no mention of money the fact that the money is going to the team, just THEM.

Overall, I find that the language that West and Zamp used was designed to tick people off or inflame public opinion. And it almost feels like they're trying less to get firm legal standing, and more to draw attention to themselves and to garner public support.

Even so, they have a strong case and if they lose they have the public's pity. For all that's worth

I wouldn't say they have a strong case just yet, I've seen no evidence that what they're saying is true, or that Acti is running around like the Gestapo on it's developers. Saying they have a strong case simply because you dislike some of what Acti's boss has said is ridiculous. What we've seen are complaints and a small court case that feels more like a leveraging tool than anything else. I mean seriously, that lawsuit thing was written by a highschooler, with the flair for over exaggeration. They said that Call of Duty, and Modern Warfare, are the most successful product lines in the industry, and the company. You can argue the company, but industry? What, did they pay 0 attention to the OTHER HALF OF THEIR OWNER'S NAME!? Blizzard has the biggest money maker in the industry. Then there's franchises like GTA, Battlefield (which has officially taken the title of "best recent online multiplayer" from MW2, given MW2's online bugs and inability to stop cheaters), Starcraft, Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Madden... They're over emphasizing their importance in the industry, and asking for stupidly large amounts of money because of it.

[Enoch]

I don't disagree with what Calax is saying. The case depends almost entirely on the contents of their employment agreements, as well as the alleged Memorandum of Understanding that modified it. In an initial complaint, you're not required to present all of the evidence with specificity (with a few exceptions)-- you just have to establish that, if every fact you allege is true, the defendant would be liable to pay some damages. And in the place of hard evidence (like quoted language from their agreements) West and Zampella's attorneys (a well regarded firm, by the way) went for inflammatory language and PR spin. (Which can be useful if you're trying to negotiate a settlement)

 

For example, it wouldn't surprise me if this alleged MOU fell short of a fully formalized contract modification. (Oral agreement? Emails back and forth promising to take care of them if they stuck around?) And jurisdictions are divided on the details of when and how a subsequent written or oral agreement can alter a pre-existing written contract, and whether standard-form 'integration clauses' have any effect in these situations. All this kind of stuff won't start to come out until the parties start getting to the discovery phase-- holding depositions, sending document requests to each other, etc.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Enoch

[Orogun01]

wouldn't negotiating with another group be a breach of contract in and of itself thus nullifying the contract?

I don't remember the specifics but I think that it was during or before the development of MW2. Even so the reached a MoU in which the bonuses and the IP are the bargain.

 

How much of a promised bonus? I mean, they're game developers, and I have yet to see an actual developer running around with ho's in his car that flash cash like movie stars. Also, I'd think a portion of the profits would go to acti, a portion would go to development (which probably is coming out of Acti due to the fact ACTI OWNS IW). Also, exactly how much does it make? I mean, we hear about Blizzard earning billions due to 11 million people paying them 15 bucks a month, but I don't think that one dev team shooting out one game will produce enough revenue that it deserves a billion or two in bonuses.

Probably the whole amount may go to the high numbers, between the bonus, damages, unpaid royalties and the IP. But remember that the payment is to IW in general; I think

... I guess that's whats niggling at me. West and Zampella are asking for Billions when they're basically doing this as just themselves. It's not a class action, or anything. I'm feeling like they're saying "Well... we got canned, lets make it as sensational as we can and try to set ourselves up for the rest of our lives!". Now I haven't read the entire complaint, but I see no mention of money the fact that the money is going to the team, just THEM.

It's being tried as a civil lawsuit but somehow I feel that the demands are on behalf of the whole studio since they were all aggravated on the proceedings that lead them here. It was Actvision who intimidated every employee and scrounge every possible cause to fire West and Zamp.

I wouldn't say they have a strong case just yet, I've seen no evidence that what they're saying is true, or that Acti is running around like the Gestapo on it's developers. Saying they have a strong case simply because you dislike some of what Acti's boss has said is ridiculous. What we've seen are complaints and a small court case that feels more like a leveraging tool than anything else. I mean seriously, that lawsuit thing was written by a highschooler, with the flair for over exaggeration. They said that Call of Duty, and Modern Warfare, are the most successful product lines in the industry, and the company. You can argue the company, but industry? What, did they pay 0 attention to the OTHER HALF OF THEIR OWNER'S NAME!? Blizzard has the biggest money maker in the industry. Then there's franchises like GTA, Battlefield (which has officially taken the title of "best recent online multiplayer" from MW2, given MW2's online bugs and inability to stop cheaters), Starcraft, Mario, Metroid, Zelda, Madden... They're over emphasizing their importance in the industry, and asking for stupidly large amounts of money because of it.

Activision had them escorted out of the building, questioned members of IW to tears and they have refused to pay them what's owed and what was promised on the MoU. The language is exaggerated probably because these cases are much like haggling you go up not down. Oh, and Blizzard and Activision operate as separate entities, they did not had a hand in any of those games.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Orogun01

[Calax]

wouldn't negotiating with another group be a breach of contract in and of itself thus nullifying the contract?

I don't remember the specifics but I think that it was during or before the development of MW2. Even so the reached a MoU in which the bonuses and the IP are the bargain.

which I'd think would have still been nullified by the fact that they did this, while under exclusive contract to another entity. Meaning that Acti would have grounds to dissolve the contract because the contract had been breached. This wouldn't matter if IW wasn't under another studio, as they could just be hunting for their next project, but *shrugs*.

 

... I guess that's whats niggling at me. West and Zampella are asking for Billions when they're basically doing this as just themselves. It's not a class action, or anything. I'm feeling like they're saying "Well... we got canned, lets make it as sensational as we can and try to set ourselves up for the rest of our lives!". Now I haven't read the entire complaint, but I see no mention of money the fact that the money is going to the team, just THEM.

It's being tried as a civil lawsuit but somehow I feel that the demands are on behalf of the whole studio since they were all aggravated on the proceedings that lead them here. It was Actvision who intimidated every employee and scrounge every possible cause to fire West and Zamp.

I admit, this is VERY possible, but nothing i've seen mentions how the money would be used. But even so, the production of a game rarely goes into the figures mentioned, and with the way other items have been stated, I'd suggest that Acti probably didn't act how it's been written by West and Zamps lawyers. Also, the complaint specifically mentions ONLY the royalties that West and Zamp were to recieve, not IW as a whole.

 

Also, on the flip side, it was West and Zamp who were trying to intimidate/leverage Acti into basically making them a supported indie studio. Having the ability to set their own schedules and tasks, while working off acti's paybook.

 

Activision had them escorted out of the building, questioned members of IW to tears and they have refused to pay them what's owed and what was promised on the MoU. The language is exaggerated probably because these cases are much like haggling you go up not down. Oh, and Blizzard and Activision operate as separate entities, they did not had a hand in any of those games.

They may be seperate industries, but the complaint (in section one) SPECIFICALLY said that they created the most successful franchise in the history of the company AND the industry. Blizzard is still part of the industry.

 

As to the "tears" thing, I don't know how true that is, and I've seen people cite it but never actually link to an article saying that. And the MOU you just don't know a thing about thus far.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Calax

[Orogun01]

which I'd think would have still been nullified by the fact that they did this, while under exclusive contract to another entity. Meaning that Acti would have grounds to dissolve the contract because the contract had been breached. This wouldn't matter if IW wasn't under another studio, as they could just be hunting for their next project, but *shrugs*.

It's my understanding that the MoU was reached after the incident. Besides they chose to bring this out after the release of MW2 when West and Zampanella stood between them and control of MW for which they had multiple plans for spin offs (which are in development).

I admit, this is VERY possible, but nothing i've seen mentions how the money would be used. But even so, the production of a game rarely goes into the figures mentioned, and with the way other items have been stated, I'd suggest that Acti probably didn't act how it's been written by West and Zamps lawyers. Also, the complaint specifically mentions ONLY the royalties that West and Zamp were to recieve, not IW as a whole.

Will need to review the document but rule #1 of lawsuits: Always go for the deep pocket. You go high hoping that they will meet you down at the middle.

Also, on the flip side, it was West and Zamp who were trying to intimidate/leverage Acti into basically making them a supported indie studio. Having the ability to set their own schedules and tasks, while working off acti's paybook.

All this because they asked to work on one IP? They were asked to deliver MW2 and they did so before the time limit, they fulfilled their obligations. Part of the MoU included time to work on a new IP which is probably why this thing started anyway. Activision trying to cash in on MW and IW trying to do something different.

 

They may be seperate industries, but the complaint (in section one) SPECIFICALLY said that they created the most successful franchise in the history of the company AND the industry. Blizzard is still part of the industry.

 

As to the "tears" thing, I don't know how true that is, and I've seen people cite it but never actually link to an article saying that. And the MOU you just don't know a thing about thus far.

Don't remember they saying "the industry" (again, have to review) but is definitely the biggest product on Activision's history.

 

The articles you are looking for are on Gamesutra. Perhaps is true, perhaps is not.

But is not about what's true is about you can prove.

[Calax]

 

Lines four and five.

 

Honestly, they sound like they're trying to shoot a wrestling promo.

 

"We made the greatest game in the company, nay, the industry, nay, THE WORLD!"

 

As to the largest launch? EVERYONE remotely connected to the industry KNOWS that that particular point is gonna get blown out of the water by star craft. And it's probably happening now with FFXIII. And they don't even acknowledge that the product they gave out was actually pretty damn mediocre in terms of gameplay and glitches and bugs etc. The story was hairbrained and all over the place, and multiplayer MURDERS anyone trying to play normally, the leaderboards are filled with cheaters etc etc.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Calax

[Mamoulian War]

Sorry to burst your bubble, but the people in court do not give a **** about mediocrity of gameplay, bugs and glitches... They do care only about big $ numbers... And MW2 is atm still the most succesful thing in all entertainment combined... It still doesn't change the fact, that's it **** game though

 

as much as i am FF fan FFXIII will not beat MW2... and SC2... hard to say... it's easier to shoot **** than to do micro but you know... if every WoW player buys a copy, it will conquer all charts...

[Volourn]

"wouldn't negotiating with another group be a breach of contract in and of itself thus nullifying the contract?"

 

Don't matter. You can't arbitrary stop paying money owed for soemthing already done.

 

This is why if you hire a contractor and he does a lousy job you still have to pay him for his work before you hire a new one. They did their job on the game, and they are owed what they are owed period.

 

If they breeched the contract by 'negoiating' with other companies you can fire them. That's it. You can't withhold money owed them for their work when you made money off that work.

 

Of course, a contract dependent on how it's written can call for all sorts of things. Who knows. That said, it all deopends how legal the contract is. Contracts can't be enforced if the contract itself is illegal.

Edited March 10, 2010 by Volourn

[cronicler]

I don't get it. Why is everyone so sure that the duo were actively seeking new publisher? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Also since Activision is digging through everything they can reach and haven't found anything that proves this (that they used to defend themselves), the duo are in the position of being victims at this time.

 

More importantly, what exactly was going to end this year? I recall something about some contract ending around 10.2010 but can't remember.

 

If their contracts were going to end at the end of this year, can you blame or say it was unlawful people for looking at other job opportunities, especially with a boss like Activision?

Edited March 10, 2010 by cronicler

[Calax]

I don't get it. Why is everyone so sure that the duo were actively seeking new publisher? What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Also since Activision is digging through everything they can reach and haven't found anything that proves this (that they used to defend themselves), the duo are in the position of being victims at this time.

 

More importantly, what exactly was going to end this year? I recall something about some contract ending around 10.2010 but can't remember.

 

If their contracts were going to end at the end of this year, can you blame or say it was unlawful people for looking at other job opportunities, especially with a boss like Activision?

Maybe activision isn't trying to make this a titanic deal and will actually hold off their findings till the trial?

 

I'm assuming based on one or two articles I've seen that technically the money was supposed to come in at the start of May this year, so saying "They didn't pay me" doesn't seem right given that they didn't pay anyone, and won't for at least 2 months.

 

I'm just getting frustrated because people are assuming that Activision is the evil guys in all this because they're the big bad corporation (who've had PR problems before), and act like west and Zamp are little angels who should have the support from everyone. I admit, right now I'm anti-west and zamp, partially because I feel that they weren't loyal, partially because I think they're despicable for the way that they're trying to drum up support through the pr stunt called a complaint, and in doing so are telling outright falsehoods. But I'm not saying Activision was totally right either, just that I feel that they're probably not guilty of have the garbage leveled at them.

 

As to the MoU which West and Zamp are touting, I have yet to see any evidence that this was anywhere BUT verbal. Which means that there is no record of what exactly anyone said and thus you can't really enforce it. If you see any firm evidence that what West and Zampanella are saying happened, the Mou being written and that it said that once they got MW2 done they could do what they wanted for a bit, and that ONLY they had access to MW's line, then Activision is probably in the wrong. But until then I'm not gonna treat that very well (particularly after seeing their lofty claims about how awesome their product is).

 

I don't know the exact numbers, but I seriously doubt modern warfare is the most successful thing in all entertainment combined. How much did Avatar take in? How much money is WoW earning for blizzard right now? How much has the starcraft and Diablo lines earned blizzard? How much has Final Fantasy earned Square? Or Kingdom Hearts earned square and Disney? Launch? Possibly, but Launches mean little overall, and I'm fairly sure that people know it right off the bat.

[Orogun01]

I don't know the exact numbers, but I seriously doubt modern warfare is the most successful thing in all entertainment combined. How much did Avatar take in? How much money is WoW earning for blizzard right now? How much has the starcraft and Diablo lines earned blizzard? How much has Final Fantasy earned Square? Or Kingdom Hearts earned square and Disney? Launch? Possibly, but Launches mean little overall, and I'm fairly sure that people know it right off the bat.

$310 millions the first day on US and U.K sales alone. Five days later $510 millions worldwide. As of January 18th over 1 billion revenue in sales. Oh; and those are just the numbers for MW2.

# 1 entertainment industry in the world: Gaming!! Not movies with blue treehuggers.

[RPGmasterBoo]

That's actually depressing.

 

The best selling game, of all things, is a retarded military shooter.

[Calax]

I don't know the exact numbers, but I seriously doubt modern warfare is the most successful thing in all entertainment combined. How much did Avatar take in? How much money is WoW earning for blizzard right now? How much has the starcraft and Diablo lines earned blizzard? How much has Final Fantasy earned Square? Or Kingdom Hearts earned square and Disney? Launch? Possibly, but Launches mean little overall, and I'm fairly sure that people know it right off the bat.

$310 millions the first day on US and U.K sales alone. Five days later $510 millions worldwide. As of January 18th over 1 billion revenue in sales. Oh; and those are just the numbers for MW2.

# 1 entertainment industry in the world: Gaming!! Not movies with blue treehuggers.

Even those numbers don't beat WoW... Which earns (every month) 100 million (more, I used 11 million as the subscriber number instead of 11.5) for acti-blizz. Which over the course of a single year beats MW2 without actually releasing anything.

 

Assuming that every person picks up a copy of Cataclysm on one day, that's 460 million.

[Hurlshort]

That's actually depressing.

 

The best selling game, of all things, is a retarded military shooter.

 

That's a bit harsh. It is a very strong multiplayer shooter that has introduced a leveling system to keep people interested longer than a few rounds. It might not be the best shooter out there, but it was the first to really capture the treadmill design of an MMO in a FPS game, and they reaped the rewards from that.

[RPGmasterBoo]

That's actually depressing.

 

The best selling game, of all things, is a retarded military shooter.

 

That's a bit harsh. It is a very strong multiplayer shooter that has introduced a leveling system to keep people interested longer than a few rounds. It might not be the best shooter out there, but it was the first to really capture the treadmill design of an MMO in a FPS game, and they reaped the rewards from that.

 

It wasn't a particular criticism of CoD, I meant it on an overall level, as in the theme that seems to sell well. Military shooters are a dime a dozen and even though games are in many way limited limited they still offer a diverse range of experiences.

 

Military bang bang affairs are so... mundane... in the grand scheme of things.

 

Then again the adolescent male is the target audience so I really shouldn't be all that surprised.

[Calax]

That's actually depressing.

 

The best selling game, of all things, is a retarded military shooter.

 

That's a bit harsh. It is a very strong multiplayer shooter that has introduced a leveling system to keep people interested longer than a few rounds. It might not be the best shooter out there, but it was the first to really capture the treadmill design of an MMO in a FPS game, and they reaped the rewards from that.

Actually, Most competative groups decried MW2 becuase it didn't allow dedicated servers, and was RIDDLED with bugs to the point where I think that they were saying that MW3 would probably have a paid subscription to play it's MP so that they could keep patching the game.

[Hurlshort]

Yes, but MW2 sold a huge amount based on the merits of the original MW.

[Orogun01]

I don't know the exact numbers, but I seriously doubt modern warfare is the most successful thing in all entertainment combined. How much did Avatar take in? How much money is WoW earning for blizzard right now? How much has the starcraft and Diablo lines earned blizzard? How much has Final Fantasy earned Square? Or Kingdom Hearts earned square and Disney? Launch? Possibly, but Launches mean little overall, and I'm fairly sure that people know it right off the bat.

$310 millions the first day on US and U.K sales alone. Five days later $510 millions worldwide. As of January 18th over 1 billion revenue in sales. Oh; and those are just the numbers for MW2.

# 1 entertainment industry in the world: Gaming!! Not movies with blue treehuggers.

Even those numbers don't beat WoW... Which earns (every month) 100 million (more, I used 11 million as the subscriber number instead of 11.5) for acti-blizz. Which over the course of a single year beats MW2 without actually releasing anything.

 

Assuming that every person picks up a copy of Cataclysm on one day, that's 460 million.

I think that they only count sales not payed subscriptions.

[Calax]

Yes, but MW2 sold a huge amount based on the merits of the original MW.

And we saw what happened with Halo between 2 and 3 and odst...

 

I don't know the exact numbers, but I seriously doubt modern warfare is the most successful thing in all entertainment combined. How much did Avatar take in? How much money is WoW earning for blizzard right now? How much has the starcraft and Diablo lines earned blizzard? How much has Final Fantasy earned Square? Or Kingdom Hearts earned square and Disney? Launch? Possibly, but Launches mean little overall, and I'm fairly sure that people know it right off the bat.

$310 millions the first day on US and U.K sales alone. Five days later $510 millions worldwide. As of January 18th over 1 billion revenue in sales. Oh; and those are just the numbers for MW2.

# 1 entertainment industry in the world: Gaming!! Not movies with blue treehuggers.

Even those numbers don't beat WoW... Which earns (every month) 100 million (more, I used 11 million as the subscriber number instead of 11.5) for acti-blizz. Which over the course of a single year beats MW2 without actually releasing anything.

 

Assuming that every person picks up a copy of Cataclysm on one day, that's 460 million.

I think that they only count sales not payed subscriptions.

Note:"Most successful" is exactly what they said, in the industry. They aren't in the top 5.

[Volourn]

And, what's with the so call withoding royaltys? Aren't royalties apart of a contratc so isn't illegal to withhold them since its basically theft of someone else's money? Logic. does. not. make. sense.

[alanschu]

Just thought I'd chime in briefly. Most of these points are towards Calax.

 

Wasn't there a point where Bio wasn't owned by EA? To be indie and then get bought out tends to be a SLIGHTLY different situation than being formed under a publisher.

 

There was a point where Infinity Ward wasn't owned by Activision either. They were purchased by Activision after the release of the original Call of Duty.

 

 

How much of a promised bonus? I mean, they're game developers, and I have yet to see an actual developer running around with ho's in his car that flash cash like movie stars.

 

John Carmack was famous for owning multiple Ferrari's, and even giving one of them away to a winner of one of the Quake Tournament winners. I think he even decided if he bought less Ferrari's, he could pursue is other dreams of experimenting in rocketry. There are a LOT of people in the games industry that make a LOT of money. Most people don't, but I assure you I will not be losing sleep over wondering if the heads of big studios (id Software, BioWare, Blizzard, etc. and I would definitely presume, Infinity Ward) are making enough money to be able to flash their cash around.

 

 

They claim they're owed BILLIONS in revenue from acti (after "Lining their pockets"), which strikes me as odd given that Activision would be the ones pouring millions into the ad campaign, and probably into the voice work.

 

Looking at Kotaku's legal documents posted, I see clearly on the 48th point that they feel they are owed in excess of $36 million (and this is probably related to the other part of the document where they mentioned they were seeking appropriate remuneration for not only themselves, but the staff that worked at Infinity Ward).

 

 

I mean, we hear about Blizzard earning billions due to 11 million people paying them 15 bucks a month, but I don't think that one dev team shooting out one game will produce enough revenue that it deserves a billion or two in bonuses.

 

You do realize that not everyone pays $15 a month for the game. Assuming the 11 million is still accurate (I heard it was slashed in half when they lost access to China... Did they get China back?), the thing is that Chinese subscribers do not pay $15/month for the game. They paid significantly less (I don't know the actual numbers, but GamaSutra mentioned that Activision-Blizzard would make about $140 million annually from China, and that was with an anticipated improved royalty, up from the $55 million per year they were making).

 

I mean seriously, that lawsuit thing was written by a highschooler, with the flair for over exaggeration

 

IIRC, the lawsuit was written up by a respectable law firm.

 

They said that Call of Duty, and Modern Warfare, are the most successful product lines in the industry, and the company. You can argue the company, but industry? What, did they pay 0 attention to the OTHER HALF OF THEIR OWNER'S NAME!? Blizzard has the biggest money maker in the industry

 

I did another quick skim of the article, and most of the praise they mention for the Call of Duty and Modern Warfare franchise came from either third party praise, or Bobby Kotick himself. Could you point me to the which article in the lawsuit mentions that they, Jason and Vince, state that Call of Duty and Modern Warfare are the most successful product lines in the industry?

 

NOTE: I see your later post as I go through. The first article does mention it. However, we're not sure what their metric is for "successful." I'd argue that, given its duration and the amount of sales that have occurred early in the release (which is the most important time for sales, there could be a metric that allows them to legitimately post this claim. You talk about games like Diablo 2 and StarCraft, none of which had remotely near the sales that MW2 alone had just months after its release. Selling a lot of games over a long period of time is less successful than selling a lot of games over a short period of time. This is even in the words of Obsidian CEO, Feargus Urqhart. StarCraft 2 is not out yet, and is literally you doing the exact same thing that you accuse West and Zampella of doing.

 

 

Also, on the flip side, it was West and Zamp who were trying to intimidate/leverage Acti into basically making them a supported indie studio. Having the ability to set their own schedules and tasks, while working off acti's paybook.

 

I don't think you understand how this works. Full creative control does not mean that Infinity Ward can do whatever they want. It means they have control over the content. It doesn't guarantee that Activision will fund whatever they want. If Infinity Ward comes to them with your absurd "Modern Warfare: Carebear Edition," and Activision doesn't like it, Activision can still state that they will not fund this project. Infinity Ward is free to come up with other ideas Activision will consider. It does mean that Activision does not have the right to alter game content upon its own volition without consent from the developer itself (something that does happen in video games, and probably other industries). It does not mean that Infinity Ward gets free willy nilly to do whatever they want with Activision's money.

 

As to the "tears" thing, I don't know how true that is, and I've seen people cite it but never actually link to an article saying that. And the MOU you just don't know a thing about thus far.

 

The lawsuit itself explicitly states that employees were brought to tears in article 32.

 

 

Note:"Most successful" is exactly what they said, in the industry. They aren't in the top 5.

 

You don't know what the metric they are using for successful is. The only real argument you made is World of Warcraft. You have also spat out games that don't even exist yet, as well as other games that are over a decade old that wouldn't have nearly the revenue per unit that a game like Modern Warfare 2 has had. I'll state straight up that, financially speaking, I consider MW2 to be significantly more financially successful than games like Diablo 2 and StarCraft. But when Activision themselves mention that MW2 is one of three primary reasons why Activision was able increase its net revenues from 2008 to 2009. Not bad for a game released at the end of 2009. Activision also boasted that it was the best selling console game in the US and Europe for 2009, despite its November release date.