BREAKING NEWS: Infinity ward studio situation

More fuel on the fire.

Activision announces new "strategic plans" for Call of Duty franchise

[QUOTE="PR"]

Publisher Activision announced today new "strategic plans" for the Call of Duty franchise, announcing a new developer for the shooter franchise and confirming the departure of key Infinity Ward staffers.

The plans include the formation of a dedicated business unit that will bring together its various new brand initiatives with focused, dedicated resources around the world. The company intends to expand the Call of Duty brand with the same focus seen in its Blizzard® Entertainment business unit. This will include a focus on high-margin digital online content and further the brand as the leading action entertainment franchise in new geographies, new genres and with new digital business models.

"2010 will be another important year for the Call of Duty franchise," stated Mike Griffith, President and CEO of Activision Publishing. "In addition to continued catalog sales, new downloadable content from Infinity Ward and a new Call of Duty release, we are excited about the opportunity to bring the franchise to new geographies, genres and players."

The company expects to release a new Call of Duty game from Treyarch this fall. In addition, Infinity Ward is in development on the first two downloadable map packs for Modern Warfare® 2 for release in 2010.

The company is also for the first time announcing that a new game in the Call of Duty series is expected to be released in 2011 and that Sledgehammer Games, a newly formed, wholly owned studio, is in development on a Call of Duty game that will extend the franchise into the action-adventure genre.Sledgehammer is helmed by industry veterans Glen A. Schofield and Michael Condrey. Prior to joining Activision Publishing, Schofield was the Executive Producer of the award-winning game, Dead Space and Michael Condrey was the Sr. Development Director on the game. The Dead Space franchise has won more than 80 industry awards worldwide including the prestigious A.I.A.S. Action Game of the Year and two B.A.F.T.A.S.

The Call of Duty business unit will be led by Philip Earl, who currently runs Activision Publishing's Asia Pacific region and previously served in senior executive positions with Procter & Gamble and Nestle. Activision Publishing veterans Steve Pearce, chief technology officer and Steve Ackrich, head of production, will lead Infinity Ward on an interim basis. Jason West and Vince Zampella are no longer with Infinity Ward.

Lastly, Activision Publishing announced that the company is in discussions with a select number of partners to bring the franchise to Asia, one of the fastest growing regions for online multiplayer games in the world.

rragnaar

It sounds like COD has been taken away from IW and given to Treyarch and Sledgehammer.

There are no words.

*Shrugs* I'm not a CoD fan, but Infinity Ward is clearly talented. I'm sure they won't have trouble finding funding and I'll keep an eye on their next release.

I won't be surprised if MS picks up the Infinity Ward refugees.

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

[QUOTE="rragnaar"]

It sounds like COD has been taken away from IW and given to Treyarch and Sledgehammer.

dvader654

There are no words.

*Shrugs* I'm not a CoD fan, but Infinity Ward is clearly talented. I'm sure they won't have trouble finding funding and I'll keep an eye on their next release.

I won't be surprised if MS picks up the Infinity Ward refugees.

I said IW refugees, not IW itself. I'm sure once the founders have set up/joined with a studio, a sizable portion of IW's people will join them.

I still can't get over how all this happened when Battlefield Bad Company 2 came out. It's just so ironic and almost like the writing on the wall, if you know what I mean.ASK_Story

The timing is ... unfortunate, to say the least.

Call of Duty: Racerdvader654

I don't know about you, but I would so play a CoD kart racer. You could have Allies vs. Axis, racing around tanks of your country, shooting people with shells. Tie a Nazi V2 to it for boost, get powerups like laying anti-tank mines or getting those forward-mounted rollers that nullifies mines for a short time. You could have random NPC spectators randomly shooting bazookas onto the course, cratering it. I mean, something like this would be a day one purchase for me.

[QUOTE="dvader654"][QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

There are no words.

*Shrugs* I'm not a CoD fan, but Infinity Ward is clearly talented. I'm sure they won't have trouble finding funding and I'll keep an eye on their next release.

I won't be surprised if MS picks up the Infinity Ward refugees.

CarnageHeart

I said IW refugees, not IW itself. I'm sure once the founders have set up/joined with a studio, a sizable portion of IW's people will join them.

Yeah, like mentioned before, Infinity Ward itself was created by a mass exodus from EA by the team. There is a good chance it will happen again.

Basically, this will become a disaster for Activision if it goes that far. I am not a Call of Duty fan, I am an Infinity Ward fan. Sure, it will be fine for a while, but Treyarch was only able to keep the quality so high by doing what was essentially a total conversion mod of IW games.

[QUOTE="dvader654"]Call of Duty: Racerargianas

I don't know about you, but I would so play a CoD kart racer. You could have Allies vs. Axis, racing around tanks of your country, shooting people with shells. Tie a Nazi V2 to it for boost, get powerups like laying anti-tank mines or getting those forward-mounted rollers that nullifies mines for a short time. You could have random NPC spectators randomly shooting bazookas onto the course, cratering it. I mean, something like this would be a day one purchase for me.

[QUOTE="argianas"]

[QUOTE="dvader654"]Call of Duty: RacerASK_Story

I don't know about you, but I would so play a CoD kart racer. You could have Allies vs. Axis, racing around tanks of your country, shooting people with shells. Tie a Nazi V2 to it for boost, get powerups like laying anti-tank mines or getting those forward-mounted rollers that nullifies mines for a short time. You could have random NPC spectators randomly shooting bazookas onto the course, cratering it. I mean, something like this would be a day one purchase for me.

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"] If true, I praise Activision for the firings. S0lidSnake

ummm....really?

In all likelyhood, IW is being forced to make a MW sequel which they dont want to. All Activision is doing here is flexing its muscles.

Let me be about the 200th person to say this: God of Warfare.

I don't doubt that a dlc pack will unlock the third player perspective, then they will judge from those downloads to see what they need to do to monetize a full price product.

Joy.

Let me be about the 200th person to say this: God of Warfare.

I don't doubt that a dlc pack will unlock the third player perspective, then they will judge from those downloads to see what they need to do to monetize a full price product.

Joy.

SirSpudly

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"] If true, I praise Activision for the firings. LongZhiZi

ummm....really?

In all likelyhood, IW is being forced to make a MW sequel which they dont want to. All Activision is doing here is flexing its muscles.

Activision was within its rights to fire the head honchos of IW, but its an insanely stupid move given how insanely successful IW has been. The CoD franchise isn't going to collapse overnight, but one can only run on fumes for so long.

The treatment of developers as interchangeable parts inconsequential to game design is an idiotic notion that drove Atari's most talented designers away, pushing them to create the first 3rd party, a little company by the name of Activision.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"] If true, I praise Activision for the firings. LongZhiZi

ummm....really?

In all likelyhood, IW is being forced to make a MW sequel which they dont want to. All Activision is doing here is flexing its muscles.

I dont even know how to answer this. If you want to blame IW for this, fine.

[QUOTE="LongZhiZi"][QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]

ummm....really?

In all likelyhood, IW is being forced to make a MW sequel which they dont want to. All Activision is doing here is flexing its muscles.

CarnageHeart

Activision was within its rights to fire the head honchos of IW, but its an insanely stupid move given how insanely successful IW has been. The CoD franchise isn't going to collapse overnight, but one can only run on fumes for so long.

The treatment of developers as interchangeable parts inconsequential to game design is an idiotic notion that drove Atari's most talented designers away, pushing them to create the first 3rd party, a little company by the name of Activision.

History's repeating itself...interesting. :lol:

Activision was within its rights to fire the head honchos of IW, but its an insanely stupid move given how insanely successful IW has been. The CoD franchise isn't going to collapse overnight, but one can only run on fumes for so long.

The treatment of developers as interchangeable parts inconsequential to game design is an idiotic notion that drove Atari's most talented designers away, pushing them to create the first 3rd party, a little company by the name of Activision.

CarnageHeart

[QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

Activision was within its rights to fire the head honchos of IW, but its an insanely stupid move given how insanely successful IW has been. The CoD franchise isn't going to collapse overnight, but one can only run on fumes for so long.

The treatment of developers as interchangeable parts inconsequential to game design is an idiotic notion that drove Atari's most talented designers away, pushing them to create the first 3rd party, a little company by the name of Activision.

KittyKat

It really is sad. MW2 is quite possibly the biggest selling of all time and this is how Activision treats the creators, by firing them and escourted them out of their offices.

This wont happen in the movie industry. Steven Spielberg didnt get treated like **** after Jaws or E.T, instead he got a license to do whatever the hell he wanted.

To add more fuel to the fire, Tomonobu Itagaki recently settled out of court. If you forgot what happened, he was never given the bonuses he was promised for the success of the Dead or Alive games (which turned out to be $1.4 million...wow).

I don't know about you, but I would so play a CoD kart racer. You could have Allies vs. Axis, racing around tanks of your country, shooting people with shells. Tie a Nazi V2 to it for boost, get powerups like laying anti-tank mines or getting those forward-mounted rollers that nullifies mines for a short time. You could have random NPC spectators randomly shooting bazookas onto the course, cratering it. I mean, something like this would be a day one purchase for me.argianas

Modern Warfare Racing. Homeland Security vs. Al-Qaeda.

Yeah, like mentioned before, Infinity Ward itself was created by a mass exodus from EA by the team. There is a good chance it will happen again.AtomicTangerine

Again, Infinity Ward was formed by former 2015 (an indie developer) employees which only did one Medal of Honor game, Allied Assault.

[QUOTE="KittyKat"][QUOTE="CarnageHeart"]

Activision was within its rights to fire the head honchos of IW, but its an insanely stupid move given how insanely successful IW has been. The CoD franchise isn't going to collapse overnight, but one can only run on fumes for so long.

The treatment of developers as interchangeable parts inconsequential to game design is an idiotic notion that drove Atari's most talented designers away, pushing them to create the first 3rd party, a little company by the name of Activision.

S0lidSnake

It really is sad. MW2 is quite possibly the biggest selling of all time and this is how Activision treats the creators, by firing them and escourted them out of their offices.

This wont happen in the movie industry. Steven Spielberg didnt get treated like **** after Jaws or E.T, instead he got a license to do whatever the hell he wanted.

True, but the gaming industry has "star" producers and directors who get away with **** that others wouldn't. Look at Kojima. There's no way that anyone could convince me that some of the execs at Konami saw the ending and didn't absolutely freak out about it, but in the end decided to let Kojima ship it the way it was because of WHO he was, and as a result, gamers were treated to a crap ending to one of the best series of all time.

Who knows what was going on behind the scenes here? Maybe IW was getting stupid like Kojima got stupid and just didn't have the same situation or as much clout to pull it off. Frankly, I'd feel more comfortable if I knew the team was getting messed with PRIOR to MW2 being finished, because that would explain quite a bit to me about how that game turned out.

Bottom line? We probably won't ever know exactly what happened. But I will say that before any of this, I was already questioning whether I'd re-enlist for another IW-made COD game, because this one felt like a blatant cash grab, and had some issues that I never expected to see in an IW game. And maybe Kotick saw some of the same things. And think back to when Nintendo let Rare go and everyone thought they were being startlingly stupid, but in retrospect, Nintendo was being pretty shrewd about things. We don't know enough to say anything here with any authority.

Frankly, I'd feel more comfortable if I knew the team was getting messed with PRIOR to MW2 being finished, because that would explain quite a bit to me about how that game turned out.Shame-usBlackley

Activision has been keeping an iron grip on Infinity Ward since the very beginning. Infinity Ward wanted to make Modern Warfare right after the first Call of Duty, but Activision forced them to keep Call of Duty in WWII. This is what happens at all Activision-owned developers. I really doubt that Neversoft wanted to keep making annual Tony Hawk/Guitar Hero drivel. To once again quote Tim Shafer, it's how the beast communicates.

Bottom line? We probably won't ever know exactly what happened. But I will say that before any of this, I was already questioning whether I'd re-enlist for another IW-made COD game, because this one felt like a blatant cash grab, and had some issues that I never expected to see in an IW game. And maybe Kotick saw some of the same things. And think back to when Nintendo let Rare go and everyone thought they were being startlingly stupid, but in retrospect, Nintendo was being pretty shrewd about things. We don't know enough to say anything here with any authority.Shame-usBlackley

In my eyes, Infinity Ward is a one trick pony developer that has been rehashing the same formula since 2002 (Medal of Honor: Allied Assault) and it got old really fast (with Call of Duty 2). But in their defense, they probably never got the chance to prove otherwise.

True, but the gaming industry has "star" producers and directors who get away with **** that others wouldn't. Look at Kojima. There's no way that anyone could convince me that some of the execs at Konami saw the ending and didn't absolutely freak out about it, but in the end decided to let Kojima ship it the way it was because of WHO he was, and as a result, gamers were treated to a crap ending to one of the best series of all time.

Who knows what was going on behind the scenes here? Maybe IW was getting stupid like Kojima got stupid and just didn't have the same situation or as much clout to pull it off. Frankly, I'd feel more comfortable if I knew the team was getting messed with PRIOR to MW2 being finished, because that would explain quite a bit to me about how that game turned out.

Bottom line? We probably won't ever know exactly what happened. But I will say that before any of this, I was already questioning whether I'd re-enlist for another IW-made COD game, because this one felt like a blatant cash grab, and had some issues that I never expected to see in an IW game. And maybe Kotick saw some of the same things. And think back to when Nintendo let Rare go and everyone thought they were being startlingly stupid, but in retrospect, Nintendo was being pretty shrewd about things. We don't know enough to say anything here with any authority.

Shame-usBlackley

Other than that, i agree with you on everything else.

In my eyes, Infinity Ward is a one trick pony developer that has been rehashing the same formula since 2002 (Medal of Honor: Allied Assault) and it got old really fast (with Call of Duty 2). But in their defense, they probably never got the chance to prove otherwise.

UpInFlames

So you dont give them credit for MW1's multiplayer?

Yes, single player is an afterthought with MW games, but they brought some pretty cool stuff with the multiplayer, no?

So you dont give them credit for MW1's multiplayer?

Yes, single player is an afterthought with MW games, but they brought some pretty cool stuff with the multiplayer, no?S0lidSnake

Like what?

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]So you dont give them credit for MW1's multiplayer?

Yes, single player is an afterthought with MW games, but they brought some pretty cool stuff with the multiplayer, no?UpInFlames

Like what?

lol never change UIF. :P

lol never change UIF. :PS0lidSnake

Heh, I was actually being serious. I never played Call of Duty multiplayer because I'm just not interested so I don't know that much about it. If you mean the "innovative" level progression, weapon unlocks and stuff, DICE pioneered that system with Battlefield 2 back in 2004 (unless there was something prior to it that I am unaware of), not Infinity Ward.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]lol never change UIF. :PUpInFlames

Heh, I was actually being serious. I never played Call of Duty multiplayer because I'm just not interested so I don't know that much about it. If you mean the "innovative" level progression, weapon unlocks and stuff, DICE pioneered that system with Battlefield 2 back in 2004 (unless there was something prior to it that I am unaware of), not Infinity Ward.

Well, i know that perks wasn't really IW's idea, but it's how they combined everything which made COD4 the biggest multiplayer shooter ever. I never played BF2, but the IW's perks system goes way beyond what BFBC2 does. It's not just weapon unlocks and level progression, the perks system gives you these super powers of sorts. the killstreak rewards also are a unique MW idea. I dont like it personally, it destroys the balance of a game, but it's brilliant when it works. And it's a fantastic way to reward the player.

What else. ummm, i dont know about MW1, but MW2 has this really cool RPG styIe leveling up system. It rewards experimentation, and allows for some addictive gameplay. If the online wasn't buggy as hell, it would be the best online experience on the consoles. And I say experience, because it's not just a shooter anymore. It's an RPG that has a fps combat system.

I guess I don't see those 'super power' perks as a good thing... Also Borderlands and Fallout 3 are RPGs with an FPS combat system. MW2 is merely a semi-competent shooter.:Prragnaar

I dont like those perks either, but 15-20 million other people do. :P What I am trying to say is that they have created a winning formula, and then they get shafted like they are nobody.

I guess I don't see those 'super power' perks as a good thing... Also Borderlands and Fallout 3 are RPGs with an FPS combat system. MW2 is merely a semi-competent shooter.:Prragnaar

Borderlands rolls up MW2 into a big doobie and SMOKES IT.

I dont like those perks either, but 15-20 million other people do. :P What I am trying to say is that they have created a winning formula, and then they get shafted like they are nobody.S0lidSnake

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot Call of Duty is really popular. Infinity Ward is the greatest then.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]I dont like those perks either, but 15-20 million other people do. :P What I am trying to say is that they have created a winning formula, and then they get shafted like they are nobody.UpInFlames

Oh I'm sorry, I forgot Call of Duty is really popular. Infinity Ward is the greatest then.

It's popular because it's good. But yeah, write em off because it's popular.

It's popular because it's good. But yeah, write em off because it's popular.S0lidSnake

You're the one basing your opinion on their popularity (perks are crap, but since it's popular, it must be awesome), not me. I stated my reasons for "writing them off" and your counter-argument was they're popular. *shrugs*

Meh. I really don't know who did what first and quite frankly I really don't care all that matters to me is that when I play MW2 online I have a fantastic time. For me I just find it an incredibly fun and rewarding experience and a blast to play.

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]It's popular because it's good. But yeah, write em off because it's popular.UpInFlames

You're the one basing your opinion on their popularity (perks are crap, but since it's popular, it must be awesome), not me. I stated my reasons for "writing them off" and your counter-argument was they're popular. *shrugs*

My problems with perks have more to do with IW not testing them properly than me disliking them period. Some of the perks in MW2 allow for exploits which is what i dont like about it. Uncharted 2 handled these perks better IMO. The perks in MW2 weren't playtested enough due to Acitivision rushing the game out for the holiday season as evidenced by the lack of a beta for MW2. Perks themselves aren't the issue. Like I said in reply to YOUR post, they give you these extra powers that you can play around with, and find ones that work best with your play styIe. It's not just picking out which weapon loadout to use or which cIass suits you, it's much more deeper than that.

Also, I made my counter argument in response to your post. Quoting my response to rragnaar, and ignoring what I said directly to you is a bit lame. Anyway, I'm arguing that IW has brought new stuff to the online multiplayer arena. Perks, killstreaks, an insane customization of weapons is what IW has accomplished. You may not like it, but millions of people are addicted to it which is a testament to IW's talent, and precisely why they aren't a "one trick pony."

My problems with perks have more to do with IW not testing them properly than me disliking them period. Some of the perks in MW2 allow for exploits which is what i dont like about it. Uncharted 2 handled these perks better IMO. The perks in MW2 weren't playtested enough due to Acitivision rushing the game out for the holiday season as evidenced by the lack of a beta for MW2. Perks themselves aren't the issue. Like I said in reply to YOUR post, they give you these extra powers that you can play around with, and find ones that work best with your play styIe. It's not just picking out which weapon loadout to use or which cIass suits you, it's much more deeper than that.

Also, I made my counter argument in response to your post. Quoting my response to rragnaar, and ignoring what I said directly to you is a bit lame. Anyway, I'm arguing that IW has brought new stuff to the online multiplayer arena. Perks, killstreaks, an insane customization of weapons is what IW has accomplished. You may not like it, but millions of people are addicted to it which is a testament to IW's talent, and precisely why they aren't a "one trick pony."S0lidSnake

I didn't respond to your post because I felt there was nothing for me to say. You conceeded that DICE already did the leveling system, weapon unlocks system. You then talked about the perks being great when they work, but stated that they ruin balance which to me means they're not great at all.

Pioneering something that breaks balance in online multiplayer is beyond worthless.

My "one trick pony" comment was in reference to the single-player.

And I couldn't possibly respond to your "RPG with a FPS combat system" with anything but a big fat :lol:. So I decided not to. But since you insist:

[QUOTE="S0lidSnake"]My problems with perks have more to do with IW not testing them properly than me disliking them period. Some of the perks in MW2 allow for exploits which is what i dont like about it. Uncharted 2 handled these perks better IMO. The perks in MW2 weren't playtested enough due to Acitivision rushing the game out for the holiday season as evidenced by the lack of a beta for MW2. Perks themselves aren't the issue. Like I said in reply to YOUR post, they give you these extra powers that you can play around with, and find ones that work best with your play styIe. It's not just picking out which weapon loadout to use or which cIass suits you, it's much more deeper than that.

Also, I made my counter argument in response to your post. Quoting my response to rragnaar, and ignoring what I said directly to you is a bit lame. Anyway, I'm arguing that IW has brought new stuff to the online multiplayer arena. Perks, killstreaks, an insane customization of weapons is what IW has accomplished. You may not like it, but millions of people are addicted to it which is a testament to IW's talent, and precisely why they aren't a "one trick pony."UpInFlames

I didn't respond to your post because I felt there was nothing for me to say. You conceeded that DICE already did the leveling system, weapon unlocks system. You then talked about the perks being great when they work, but stated that they ruin balance which to me means they're not great at all.

Pioneering something that breaks balance in online multiplayer is beyond worthless.

My "one trick pony" comment was in reference to the single-player.

And I couldn't possibly respond to your "RPG with a FPS combat system" with anything but a big fat :lol:. So I decided not to. But since you insist:

What I appreciated most about Modern Warfare was the manner in which bullets can perforate cover in a way most other FPS simply do not allow. There have been other games that have allowed you to shoot though certain substances but what MW allowed was definitely head and shoulders above just about everything else.

That said, I think we've reached a point with so many FPS on the market that no one game or franchise will please everyone anymore than one band would please every person who enjoys rock. There are so many different tastes and expectations when it comes to this genre that arguing about quality becomes moot. Last year I played several excellent FPS, including MW2 and KZ2, and both of those games are as likely to be maligned as praised.

Hey can i just ask. How much control does activision have over these companies? Like can they tell IW and blizzard what to do with their games ( mainly care about blizzard, heard they wanna muck around with diablo 3 )

Hey can i just ask. How much control does activision have over these companies? Like can they tell IW and blizzard what to do with their games ( mainly care about blizzard, heard they wanna muck around with diablo 3 )

hotfiree

According to Gamasutra's contacts, Infinity Ward had the contractual right to make an original game, which they had been working on and wanted to finish before diving into MW3 (which Acitivision wanted them to do immediately). Activision then decided to terminate its contract with Infinity and force Infinity Ward to be the once to breach it so they demanded the 75 person Infinity Ward lay off some of its staff (fully expecting IW to say 'no'). When Infinity Ward refused, so Activision declaredIW 'insubordinate', escort the founders off the premises and of course, break contract.

http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/27482/Analysis_Infinity_Wards_DoubleEdged_Sword.php

In a tight economy, I don't expect developers to quit or turn down working for Activision if they have no other options, but guys with options might want to think hard before they agree to work for Kotick.

[QUOTE="hotfiree"]

Hey can i just ask. How much control does activision have over these companies? Like can they tell IW and blizzard what to do with their games ( mainly care about blizzard, heard they wanna muck around with diablo 3 )

ASK_Story

TBH though i dont know why you would want your company to have anything to do with activision. I know i would slam the door in kotics face.

I'm hearing that Activision and Kotick can't touch Blizzard because it's still with Vivendi. Even though they merged, V is still in charge of Blizzard. But you never know. Kotick might have some crazy plan to screw up Blizzard as well.ASK_Story

Vivendi is the majority shareholder of Activision Blizzard. It's impossible to know the details of the merger agreement, but it's entirely possible that Blizzard enjoys a full autonomy (reportedly Blizzard had a big say in Vivendi's decisions prior to the merger, for obvious reasons). All of Vivendi Universal Games/Sierra Entertainment properties and developers were placed in the direct control of Activision post-merger - except Blizzard.

Infinity Ward bosses suing Activision

"Activision terminated their employment weeks before they were to be paid substantial royalty payments as part of their existing contracts for Modern Warfare 2," the statement reads.

"Instead of thanking, lauding, or just plain paying Jason and Vince for giving Activision the most successful entertainment product ever offered to the public, last month Activision hired lawyers to conduct a pretextual 'investigation' into unstated and unsubstantiated charges of 'insubordination' and 'breach of fiduciary duty,'which then became the grounds for their termination on Monday, March 1st," said their attorney, Robert Schwartz.

"After all we have given to Activision, we shouldn't have to sue to get paid," Zampella said.

"Activision seized control of the Infinity Ward studio, to which Activision had previously granted creative control over all Modern Warfare-branded games," the statement concludes. "The suit was filed to vindicate the rights of West and Zampella to be paid the compensation they have earned, as well as the contractual rights Activision granted to West and Zampella to control Modern Warfare-branded games."

The plot thickens.

There's word on another site that Activision demanded them to lay some people off, knowing they'd refuse, and used that for the insubordination. Apparently doing so gives 100% control of the MW IP to Activision in the process.

Still, I expected the lawsuit to not be filed until Friday. They sure were fast!

There's word on another site that Activision demanded them to lay some people off, knowing they'd refuse, and used that for the insubordination. Apparently doing so gives 100% control of the MW IP to Activision in the process.

argianas

wow Bobby kotick is a shrewd mother ****er.

What a horrible **** excuse for a human being.

You mean the Gamasutra article CarnageHeart posted?

The whole thing just sounds slimy on Activision's part. I guess it's no secret that the heads of IW and Acti have been butting heads on where to go, but this is despicable if Activision was looking for any sort of reason to get rid of them. You'd think creating one of the most successful games around would allow more creative freedom or bargaining power for the devs.