Kotick Paints Black and White Picture of Infinity Ward Firings

[MikeWehner]

Kotick Paints Black and White Picture of Infinity Ward Firings

Activision's CEO says he has no plans to allow for a Call of Duty feature film.

It's been a while since Jason West and Vince Zambella were terminated from their positions with Activision-owned Infinity Ward, and for the most part the dust has settled. But in a recent interview with The New York Times [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/business/bobby-kotick-of-activision-drawing-praise-and-wrath.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0], Activision CEO Bobby Kotick spoke frankly about the earth-shaking decision to let two of the company's biggest names walk the plank.

"You find out two executives are planning to break their contracts, keep the money you gave them and steal 40 employees," Kotick explains. "What do you do? You fire them."

And that's just what he did, leading to a war of words between the former Infinity Ward employees and the company that sent them packing. West and Zampella alleged that Activision was withholding bonuses and other compensation that should already have been paid out.

His actions have been painted as the moves of a ruthless businessman, but for his part, Kotick appears careful of the moves he makes with Activision's IPs. According to the Times piece, he has repeatedly turned down offers from various Hollywood studios to create a feature film based on the Call of Duty universe because they could "taint the brand."

Source: The New York Times [http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/business/bobby-kotick-of-activision-drawing-praise-and-wrath.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0]

Permalink

 

[Lawyer105]

Personally, I'm not really sure how any Hollywood action movie could possibly "taint the brand" of Call of Duty anyways. It's basically just an interactive action movie itself, these days! Another Kotick-line of the highest quality.

 

[SNCommand]

Yeah, well he's never going to persuade people into not perceiving big publishers as evil, apparently within the gaming community you release a product they dislike and you're Satan

Now for the whole Infinity Ward debacle I don't think it's completely black and white, Infinity Ward broke their contract which is a big no no when doing business for evident reasons, but then again Activision didn't really deal with the incident with grace

What is clear though is that a lot of people really thought Activision was screwing with Infinity Ward for the evulz

 

[fix-the-spade]

Come on Bobby, that's not what happened now is it?

Looking at the facts, you had your suit against (supposed co-conspirators) EA thrown out of court, then a number of allegations of highly illegal behaviour on your part came to light, then the day before the West Zampella suit hit it's due date, you settled behind closed doors.

What does that tell us Mr Kotick? I'd say it tells us that not only was every allegation made against you true, but that there were other things so bad you were prepared to drop hundreds of millions just to make sure that a court of law, the public and your investors didn't get to hear them.

On a slightly different note, does this justify a breach of whatever non-disclosure agreement(s) he will have signed when the whole thing came to a crashing halt? It's pretty blatant slander regardless.

If it is I would love to hear West, Zampella's and the legally mandated versions of events. Between the three we may actually get some kind of truth.

 

[Nazulu]

Didn't Kotick once say he wanted to sell cut scenes like movies?

Oh yeah, here it is - http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.232663-Kotick-Itching-to-Sell-Cutscenes-As-Films

Guess they don't want any one else making money of the name.

 

[gigastar]

Oh boy, someone let the muzzle off of Kotick.

I wonder if Activision's PR team is warned of theese things beforehand...

Personally, I'm not really sure how any Hollywood action movie could possibly "taint the brand" of Call of Duty anyways. It's basically just an interactive action movie itself, these days! Another Kotick-line of the highest quality.

Yes, because what we need is more dumb, generic action movies in our cinemas.

Also, considering that Call of Duty rakes in more every year than all but the biggest movies put together, why would he need to bother?

 

[Sylveria]

Come on Bobby, that's not what happened now is it?

Looking at the facts, you had your suit against (supposed co-conspirators) EA thrown out of court, then a number of allegations of highly illegal behaviour on your part came to light, then the day before the West Zampella suit hit it's due date, you settled behind closed doors.

What does that tell us Mr Kotick? I'd say it tells us that not only was every allegation made against you true, but that there were other things so bad you were prepared to drop hundreds of millions just to make sure that a court of law, the public and your investors didn't get to hear them.

On a slightly different note, does this justify a breach of whatever non-disclosure agreement(s) he will have signed when the whole thing came to a crashing halt? It's pretty blatant slander regardless.

If it is I would love to hear West, Zampella's and the legally mandated versions of events. Between the three we may actually get some kind of truth.

Not surprising if it's true. Isn't Kotick the one that allegedly sexually harassed a flight attendant then sued her when she complained about it cause he she wouldn't be able to afford to defend herself a few years back?

Anyway, I'm just glad that Activision hasn't published anything I've even remotely cared about since I quit WoW. I'd hate to think even a penny of mine is going to him.

Oh.. and how could a movie "taint the brand"? What, might something have Call of Duty in the title and not be instantly associated with a bunch of 12 year olds screaming racial and sexual slurs at each other? Yeah how horrible that would be. Give the series to Michael Bay, even he would class it up compared to the games and the vocal portion of the player-base.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Infinity Ward broke their contract which is a big no no when doing business for evident reasons,

There is no good evidence to say that they even did that, when pressed by EA, the evidence Activision came up with was that IW had discussed release dates with some members of EA/Dice (common practice, you don't want to release two similar games the same week) and part of a text message that allegedly went between West and 'someone working for Infinity Ward,' who has never been identified.

Which is why the suit was thrown out of court not long later.

The rest of the evidence Activision submitted comprised some extremely personal attacks on West, Zampella and a number of other ex-IW employee's motivations, honesty and competence.

 

[Lawyer105]

Personally, I'm not really sure how any Hollywood action movie could possibly "taint the brand" of Call of Duty anyways. It's basically just an interactive action movie itself, these days! Another Kotick-line of the highest quality.

Yes, because what we need is more dumb, generic action movies in our cinemas.

They're going to make them anyways, all that would change is that some of them would now carry the COD logo.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Not surprising if it's true. Isn't Kotick the one that allegedly sexually harassed a flight attendant then sued her when she complained about it cause he she wouldn't be able to afford to defend herself a few years back?

I can't remember that one. However, these are my two favourite bits of Activision's work from the last five years.

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.117249-Activision-Suing-To-Stop-Brutal-Legend-Release?page=1

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/7.223798-Activision-Tried-to-Steal-Paintballers-Identity?page=1

Neither paints a particularly grand picture of Activision's modus operandi.

 

[gardian06]

Come on Bobby, that's not what happened now is it?

Looking at the facts, you had your suit against (supposed co-conspirators) EA thrown out of court, then a number of allegations of highly illegal behaviour on your part came to light, then the day before the West Zampella suit hit it's due date, you settled behind closed doors.

What does that tell us Mr Kotick? I'd say it tells us that not only was every allegation made against you true, but that there were other things so bad you were prepared to drop hundreds of millions just to make sure that a court of law, the public and your investors didn't get to hear them.

On a slightly different note, does this justify a breach of whatever non-disclosure agreement(s) he will have signed when the whole thing came to a crashing halt? It's pretty blatant slander regardless.

If it is I would love to hear West, Zampella's and the legally mandated versions of events. Between the three we may actually get some kind of truth.

Not surprising if it's true. Isn't Kotick the one that allegedly sexually harassed a flight attendant then sued her when she complained about it cause he she wouldn't be able to afford to defend herself a few years back?

Anyway, I'm just glad that Activision hasn't published anything I've even remotely cared about since I quit WoW. I'd hate to think even a penny of mine is going to him.

Oh.. and how could a movie "taint the brand"? What, might something have Call of Duty in the title and not be instantly associated with a bunch of 12 year olds screaming racial and sexual slurs at each other? Yeah how horrible that would be. Give the series to Michael Bay, even he would class it up compared to the games and the vocal portion of the player-base.

I know how it could taint the Call of Duty brand: they couldn't release sequels fast enough.

 

[Diablo1099_v1legacy]

While he is a corporate Satan, he has a point, I mean, Mario Bros anyone? or Resident Evil? Any fighting game movie? He has the right idea blocking attempts to make a film, last thing we need is another bad Game Movie for the pile.

 

[Rainforce]

.................................................what an idiot : D
*ahem* *switches off offensive-text-generator*
Well...I'm not sure how you want to "taint the brand", I mean it feels more like this brand is tainting otherwise perfectly fine games.
And Kotick, you could actually make quite the sum with that feature film. I understand that you really REALLY dislike making money, but the rest of the company needs to stay afloat SOMEHOW. So please don't manage your company like a suicidal maniac on corporate-scale, but start to make some decisions that will net you something uh......positive.

 

[GenGenners]

Nurse! Mister Kotick is out of his room again!

 

[Traun]

And yet every single person in this thread, had he been in Kotick shoes, would have done the same.

 

[Spygon]

Kotick doesn't want to make a film about Call of Duty so he must be telling the truth about the firing of Jason West and Vince Zambella. Sorry how does that make any sense

 

[LordMonty]

Hey the game's story is an average action film, i guess that comparison would hurt there feelings right

 

[Ympulse]

And yet every single person in this thread, had he been in Kotick shoes, would have done the same.

No, no I wouldn't.

I would have actually paid my employees for the work they did, so that they didn't see the grass on the other side of the fence as greener. It's basic business, if your employees aren't paid what they're worth, they'll go somewhere where they are.

 

[BrotherRool]

A CoD film would be terrible. It'd either be a generic war film with nothing to do with CoD, or it would be an accurate representation of CoD and the bloodiness when not being there for gameplay would make CoD seem absurd and overwraught. It probably would make tons of money though. I imagine a lot of CoD fans haven't ever seen a game-movie of a game they've played.

And yet every single person in this thread, had he been in Kotick shoes, would have done the same.

But didn't Activision have to pay up when Infinity Ward tried to sue them? So Kotick argument that this was true and that he had paid them the bonuses owned can't be black and white iron tight