EA Added As Defendant To Activision's Infinity Ward Countersuit

[cerebus23]

I hope they bankrupt each other in court that would be good for the gaming industry. Its like stalin vs hitler in court both companies are run by assholes, with no reguard for gamers or games anymore.

 

[0p3rati0n]

While they're at it, why not sue every other developer/publisher that released a during that time-frame.

They might as well sue a small child for being born in the time-frame as well. Why not add to the fucked up bullshit!!!

 

[Johnnyallstar]

This is what happens when you have a sense of humor around lawyers and big businesses. Eventually some little comment is going to bite you in the ass.

 

[Jonny49]

*Grabs popcorn* I dunno about you guys but I think this is pretty entertaining.

HIT HIM IN THE BALLS!!

 

[gigastar]

Hmm, which side to root for...

Id like to go with EA on this, I would love to see CoD die in my lifetime.
But EA... well its fucking EA, we all know whats wrong in there.

Oh, wait, Activision is owned by Vivendi Universal? Fuck im actually behind EA on this. Anyone who likes Half-Life should hate Vivendi for a very good reason.

 

[Natdaprat]

In my eyes, this is the equivalent of a kid threatening to tell his mommy on another kid. It's so childish and pathetic.

 

[Saucycarpdog]

Let's see. If infinity ward wins, they get a shit ton of money and the rights to modern warfare. If Activision wins, EA loses a shit ton of money and so do Zampella/West.

Why can't the court date in May come already? I want to see this turn into Gaming War 3.

 

[Armyguy0]

http://cdn.themis-media.com/media/global/images/articles/article/8021/moonrocks_24-08-10.jpg

 

[KILGAZOR]

I agree with that guy who said this is like Stalin vs Hitler. Activision is like Hitler and EA is like Stalin, both are extremely evil, but most people agree that Activision/Hitler is a little more evil. However, I'm going to also hope that both companies suffer from this, because EA needs to be punished for modeling Bad Company 2 after CoD. Seriously, Battlefield 2 was a great and successl game, and for descructible environments I would have paid $50, so why'd they have to change up the formula?

 

[Albino Boo]

Joke or not, I don't see where the problem is. Its not like they would of made a substantial loss if this was the case, people who would buy the stimulus would have bought it at some point regardless.

It's a shame that it seems that Kotick wants to take the camaraderie out of the studios.

I think the problem here is that you have the heads of a studio under an exclusive contract who (if true) are making a deal with a studio making a similar game for your publisher's biggest rival. That's probably in violation of all sorts of parts of West and Zampella's contracts, and it's not hard to see where this rubbed ATVI the wrong way. "It's just a joke" is one of the weakest potential defenses you can have in something like this - if you're part of a large corporation, you need to take that sort of thing seriously.

I'm really interested in how EA will respond.

They have added EA as a party under tortious interference and on the face of it EA are in trouble. The only thing in EA defence is that anyone would have to pretty dim to conspire by email when Activision effectively owns the mail server. This kind of case is not uncommon is large multinational companies, however normally its about poaching of staff.

I would like to remind people that senior management are under a legal duty to protect the shareholder interest, so that in the real world Actvision hasn't got much choice about taking legal action in this case. If they didn't and that facts came out they almost certainly face legal action from disgruntled shareholders themselves. Before you say thats just a bunch rich guys, most the shares are indirectly owned the general public. The biggest investors are pension funds and life assurance companies. So that $100 million could mean 10000s of people have slightly large pensions than they otherwise would have and thats a bad thing?

 

[Loonerinoes]

The biggest investors are pension funds and life assurance companies. So that $100 million could mean 10000s of people have slightly large pensions than they otherwise would have and thats a bad thing?

That's if you trust the system and quite frankly given Activision's reputation and willingness to line their pockets with any kind of money they can get, I'd be shocked if a fraction of the money they win for the types of investors that get in bed with them (wether they have a superficially 'good' label attached to them or not) will *ever* reach the ones you're talking about.

Though not to say EA is any prettier - they just happen to have better PR and a slightly better track record from what I can tell. But that's all. Hence why this will be so entertaining to watch - because I'm not a fan of either company, even though I may be a fan of some of the developers they support.

 

[Mr.Numbers]

Well that and Activision's games are consistently better than EA's. Unless you like hunting or 5000 copies of Madden. Battlefield 1942 (which I still play to this day) and Sims 2 are the last good things they've made and look at how they stuffed up the sequels.

Yeah, I'm going for Infinite ward but I also believe that the case has merit in it's own right, and that E-mail doesn't seem like a "joke" to me. They have a case regardless of it too, remember, so there's obviously more substance than appears at first glance.

*REST OF POST REMOVED DUE TO AUTHORS STUPIDITY*

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

Joke or not, I don't see where the problem is. Its not like they would of made a substantial loss if this was the case, people who would buy the stimulus would have bought it at some point regardless.

It's a shame that it seems that Kotick wants to take the camaraderie out of the studios.

I think the problem here is that you have the heads of a studio under an exclusive contract who (if true) are making a deal with a studio making a similar game for your publisher's biggest rival. That's probably in violation of all sorts of parts of West and Zampella's contracts, and it's not hard to see where this rubbed ATVI the wrong way. "It's just a joke" is one of the weakest potential defenses you can have in something like this - if you're part of a large corporation, you need to take that sort of thing seriously.

I'm really interested in how EA will respond.

To be honest, nothing I have seen seems damning in the slightest. Activision's case is just as weak as EA's defense here. It is based on hearsay and conjecture and most points of contention have no better arbiter than a jury's gut (which itself is largely dependent upon the quality of the argument the lawyers give). Activision has yet to present anything resembling "proof" and I suspect this entire trial will eventually boil down to an incredibly expensive "he said/she said" sort of affair.

Besides, if EA actually is guilty of the things they are accused of, this trial will almost certainly never reach a court anyhow given the damages requested exceed the current liquid capital of the company my quite a bit and any reasonable human being would opt to settle the whole sordid affair for some fraction of the cost and red tape.

 

[Jumplion]

Well that and Activision's games are consistently better than EA's. Unless you like hunting or 5000 copies of Madden. Battlefield 1942 (which I still play to this day) and Sims 2 are the last good things they've made and look at how they stuffed up the sequels.

Activision's infinite ward are responsible for Bioshock 1 being good and Bioshock infinite, as I have stated before, and anything that's done to keep infinite ward from gaining revenue by EA games is low and disgusting. Why sell great when good sells better, EA? *Sigh*

Yeah, I'm going for Infinite ward but I also believe that the case has merit in it's own right, and that E-mail doesn't seem like a "joke" to me. They have a case regardless of it too, remember, so there's obviously more substance than appears at first glance.

Uhhhhh....Bioshock (and the future Infinite) was made by Irrational Games [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irrational_Games]. Which is owned by Take-Two Interactive [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Take-Two_Interactive]. Activision and Infinity Ward have absolutely nothing to do with that game, and thank god for that.

[sup]please tell me you were sarcastic...[/sup]

OT: This is gonna get ugly. In my humble opinion, EA have long since made up for their past sins of releasing the same rehashed crap games over and over again (Madden Notwithstanding because, well, it just does that) since the release of Dead Space/Mirror's Edge. I remember when Activision was the one who was pushing the innovative titles, and then everything just went reverse and EA and Activision switched places.

Seriously, the universe is fucked up. [http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2008/11/5/]

 

[Loonerinoes]

Joke or not, I don't see where the problem is. Its not like they would of made a substantial loss if this was the case, people who would buy the stimulus would have bought it at some point regardless.

It's a shame that it seems that Kotick wants to take the camaraderie out of the studios.

I think the problem here is that you have the heads of a studio under an exclusive contract who (if true) are making a deal with a studio making a similar game for your publisher's biggest rival. That's probably in violation of all sorts of parts of West and Zampella's contracts, and it's not hard to see where this rubbed ATVI the wrong way. "It's just a joke" is one of the weakest potential defenses you can have in something like this - if you're part of a large corporation, you need to take that sort of thing seriously.

I'm really interested in how EA will respond.

To be honest, nothing I have seen seems damning in the slightest. Activision's case is just as weak as EA's defense here. It is based on hearsay and conjecture and most points of contention have no better arbiter than a jury's gut (which itself is largely dependent upon the quality of the argument the lawyers give). Activision has yet to present anything resembling "proof" and I suspect this entire trial will eventually boil down to an incredibly expensive "he said/she said" sort of affair.

Besides, if EA actually is guilty of the things they are accused of, this trial will almost certainly never reach a court anyhow given the damages requested exceed the current liquid capital of the company my quite a bit and any reasonable human being would opt to settle the whole sordid affair for some fraction of the cost and red tape.

Yeah, that is definitely sounding like the most likely result. They'll settle one way or another, and god knows for how much to which side - and it'll just fizzle out like a fart. Though even so I am still secretly hoping for one titanic bash-up. For the lulz, if you will.

 

[Exort]

Why does the release date of a map pack matters?
How do EA release the mappack earlier hurt Activision?
Then how did Activision got hold of EA's Email? It was sended between EA's staff

 

[brumley53]

Well that and Activision's games are consistently better than EA's. Unless you like hunting or 5000 copies of Madden. Battlefield 1942 (which I still play to this day) and Sims 2 are the last good things they've made and look at how they stuffed up the sequels.

Activision's infinite ward are responsible for Bioshock 1 being good and Bioshock infinite, as I have stated before, and anything that's done to keep infinite ward from gaining revenue by EA games is low and disgusting. Why sell great when good sells better, EA? *Sigh*

Yeah, I'm going for Infinite ward but I also believe that the case has merit in it's own right, and that E-mail doesn't seem like a "joke" to me. They have a case regardless of it too, remember, so there's obviously more substance than appears at first glance.

Infinity Ward didn't make bioshock, Irrational Games did and they have nothing to do with either EA or activision. The only thing Infinity ward has ever done is Call of Duty which is just pumping out the same thing over and over again. EA have released the battle field games, mirrors edge, burnout, Mass effect, Dragon age origins. Whereas Activision has released COD and some very mediocre james bond games no new IP's or interesting sequels.