Activision Shoots Back at Ex-Infinity Ward Leads *UPDATE*
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
It's easy to pain West and Zampella as the poor little artists being picked on by the big bad corporation. People are more inclined to automatically assume wrongdoing on the part of Activision; yet what people aren't seeing here is Cui Bono; who benefits? Why would activision gut the cash cow and fire the golden goose if they didn't have a good reason?
Here are the FACTS:
-West and Zampella are extremely wealthy.
-IW has never had to bear the financial risk of funding their own projects. Activision put up all the money while IW reaped considerable rewards.
-Bobby Kotick took a hands-off approach towards IW projects including allowing them to make Modern Warfare even though everyone else in the company thought it was a huge mistake.
So to sum up IW was a corporate owned developer that was allowed to do as they pleased and received as much money as they wanted to do it. Sounds pretty nice, huh?
The rest is conjecture based off the various attacks and information coming to light:
-West and Zampella did not want to make MW2, but Activision insisted that was the only project they would fund, taking a firm hand in IW development for the first time ever. Instead of sucking it up and doing what their publisher told them to do like everyone else in the business, or parting ways from Activision and forming their own independent group; West and Zampella chose to take Activision's money and deliver them a sub-par game.
-IW withheld alpha builds of the game and refused to show code to Activision while still demanding milestone payments. Activision complied where most publishers would be furious.
-IW revealed the 'No Russian' mission after it was too late for Activision to do anything about it; their intent was to create a horrific scandal and controversy over the game in order to damage Activision's reputation. In a bizarre "Producers"-style twist, the mission ends up being a huge success, and the overall "phoned-in" nature of the game (bland graphics, short campaign, nonsensical story, stripped multiplayer features, buggy and unbalanced gameplay, etc) pretty much went ignored by everyone. These guys literally couldn't fail even when they tried.
-Meanwhile West and Zampella were setting up to scupper IW and steal all the good talent for a new developer working for EA, while prepping their "big evil corporation" defense. Activision finds out about this and pre-emptively fires them, as any smart company would do.
While I admit the later points are largely second-hand, it makes an overall more rational story than the "Activision fired West and Zampella because they're DICKS!" line we typically hear. West and Zampella make it sound like Activision was scheming to steal their game and IP. Um, what? Activision already owns your game and IP! They would have nothing to gain by firing these guys and weakening IW...unless IW was planning on screwing them first.
Here are the FACTS:
-West and Zampella are extremely wealthy.
-IW has never had to bear the financial risk of funding their own projects. Activision put up all the money while IW reaped considerable rewards.
-Bobby Kotick took a hands-off approach towards IW projects including allowing them to make Modern Warfare even though everyone else in the company thought it was a huge mistake.
So to sum up IW was a corporate owned developer that was allowed to do as they pleased and received as much money as they wanted to do it. Sounds pretty nice, huh?
The rest is conjecture based off the various attacks and information coming to light:
-West and Zampella did not want to make MW2, but Activision insisted that was the only project they would fund, taking a firm hand in IW development for the first time ever. Instead of sucking it up and doing what their publisher told them to do like everyone else in the business, or parting ways from Activision and forming their own independent group; West and Zampella chose to take Activision's money and deliver them a sub-par game.
-IW withheld alpha builds of the game and refused to show code to Activision while still demanding milestone payments. Activision complied where most publishers would be furious.
-IW revealed the 'No Russian' mission after it was too late for Activision to do anything about it; their intent was to create a horrific scandal and controversy over the game in order to damage Activision's reputation. In a bizarre "Producers"-style twist, the mission ends up being a huge success, and the overall "phoned-in" nature of the game (bland graphics, short campaign, nonsensical story, stripped multiplayer features, buggy and unbalanced gameplay, etc) pretty much went ignored by everyone. These guys literally couldn't fail even when they tried.
-Meanwhile West and Zampella were setting up to scupper IW and steal all the good talent for a new developer working for EA, while prepping their "big evil corporation" defense. Activision finds out about this and pre-emptively fires them, as any smart company would do.
While I admit the later points are largely second-hand, it makes an overall more rational story than the "Activision fired West and Zampella because they're DICKS!" line we typically hear. West and Zampella make it sound like Activision was scheming to steal their game and IP. Um, what? Activision already owns your game and IP! They would have nothing to gain by firing these guys and weakening IW...unless IW was planning on screwing them first.
Thoughts? Sure. One of them is right, one of them is wrong; both of them *could* be right, I don't know which one is.BehattedWanderer said:
Activision has now provided actual examples of how it claims West/Zampella obstructed royalty payments, W/Z have not. But, it all comes down to whether you believe them or not.
I don't like EA's policy of buying companies left and right, but hot damn, that was a GREAT quote.
And what a load of shit on Activision's part, what do they mean these two "prevented Infinity Ward employees from being payed royalties"? What, did they intercept the checks before they reached the employees and lock them in a box or something? lol.
And what a load of shit on Activision's part, what do they mean these two "prevented Infinity Ward employees from being payed royalties"? What, did they intercept the checks before they reached the employees and lock them in a box or something? lol.
Wow, and here I am seeing everyone spew about how evil Activision is. I mean sure, they do some shady things, and say some things that are pretty dumb, but the things they do are typical of publishers. Does that make it right? No. Does that make them any worse than any other publisher out there? Not at all. They just get all the hate because they happen to be more successful at the moment. Really though, it's starting to look like the firings were completely justified.
If Activision's claims are true, then those two should have been fired long ago.
In any case, this is America. You are an employee-at-will. As far as I am concerned, those two are fired, end of story. If they have something in their contract that says they get those royalties, then they have a case. Otherwise, tough shit. Move on. Good luck in your next position.
In any case, this is America. You are an employee-at-will. As far as I am concerned, those two are fired, end of story. If they have something in their contract that says they get those royalties, then they have a case. Otherwise, tough shit. Move on. Good luck in your next position.
I like how you make a highly elaborate and unlikely story out of complete conjecture, lol.Grampy_bone said:
If they really wanted "No Russian" to destroy the game, they would not have made it so easily skippable, and while this ridiculous story is more rational than "BECAUSE THEY'RE DICKS!" It is certainly much LESS rational than "BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO PAY THEM ROYALTIES!" which is the story I believe.
Also, have you tried failing at something? It's not hard to do. While this game arguably fell short of the first one, there is no fucking way a game like this came as a result of two development heads intentionally trying to drive a company into the dirt.
Let me take a shot in the dark here: You a fan of conspiracy theories?
I agrees with the Funk on this one. If West and Zampella really did what they are alleged to have done, they are going to be in hot water with this trial as well as having to deal with the SEC(This may explain their involvement in IW's raid) afterwards. That email smells a little fishy but there is a lot more that's not getting revealed that will be brought into evidence in the civil trial. Activision is in quite the fight here. If they lose the suit W&Z filed against them, they could lose IW and perhaps the CoD franchise(though I imagine Treyarch would have some words about that to say). If they lose this one, it will hurt their credibility with the shareholders big time. I don't see Activision being stupid and doing this frivolously.John Funk said:
Right now, all Activision is really guilty of in my eyes is charging 10 bucks more for PC games than other publishers, and not really having an appealing lineup at this time.
When huge sums of money are at stake it's almost always the same story. This is like sport team owners and players (the NFL's labor talks are a great example right now). When something is hugely successful the talent (players/developers, etc) think they are entitled to huge parts of the pie and freedom from overreaching rules and restrictions. It's understandable that they feel this way, as it was their talents that made the insane amount of money and putting restrictions on talent that successful could keep them from reaching the full potential.
While that is true, the fact of the matter is they aren't the ones that assume the risk. It's hard to forget that when you make billions, but the company/team owners are the ones that lose when it fails. The talent is still paid, but the losses fall on the big company. So therefore, they have rules that they make the talent to adhere to. They take their cut of the pie for willing to take all the risk. If there wasn't money for the big company to be made, their wouldn't be funding to make the game in the first place. It's just how it works.
To me it seems like these two developers didn't understand that principle (and I don't know why they think it will be any different with EA). We will have to see how this plays out, but so far, I think I have to side with Activision on this one.
I do hope that the bonus money is given to the rest of the employees that worked on the game. It's smart on Activision's side as that should turn out to be a very nice bonus for each employee and make them much more willing to stay and work on MW3. Honestly, I hope that they promote some IW employees up the chain that still have a passion to make a good game to make up for the obvious apathy that went into MW2 from these two dudes.
While that is true, the fact of the matter is they aren't the ones that assume the risk. It's hard to forget that when you make billions, but the company/team owners are the ones that lose when it fails. The talent is still paid, but the losses fall on the big company. So therefore, they have rules that they make the talent to adhere to. They take their cut of the pie for willing to take all the risk. If there wasn't money for the big company to be made, their wouldn't be funding to make the game in the first place. It's just how it works.
To me it seems like these two developers didn't understand that principle (and I don't know why they think it will be any different with EA). We will have to see how this plays out, but so far, I think I have to side with Activision on this one.
I do hope that the bonus money is given to the rest of the employees that worked on the game. It's smart on Activision's side as that should turn out to be a very nice bonus for each employee and make them much more willing to stay and work on MW3. Honestly, I hope that they promote some IW employees up the chain that still have a passion to make a good game to make up for the obvious apathy that went into MW2 from these two dudes.
Okay. This is fucking ridiculous. Kill Bobby No-dick and give the IW leads their fucking jobs again.
It may be hard for some of you who play way too many games to see the world as something else than all black or white, but maybe, just maybe, West and Zampella aren't poor little victims of Activision either.
Companies don't usually do stuff because "they are evil". That's a dumb argument. If what Activision says is true and they can prove it, then W/Z aren't really clean either.
Companies don't usually do stuff because "they are evil". That's a dumb argument. If what Activision says is true and they can prove it, then W/Z aren't really clean either.
Activision has so many lawsuits filed against its employees and creative partners it doesn't even have time to comment on them?
Wow. Okay.
Remind me NEVER to take a job at Activision.
