Comments on: Michael Pachter weighs in on Activision/Infinity Ward dispute http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/03/05/michael-pachter-weighs-in-on-activisioninfinity-ward-dispute/ Sun, 05 Feb 2012 11:26:00 +0000 hourly 1 By: boy http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/03/05/michael-pachter-weighs-in-on-activisioninfinity-ward-dispute/comment-page-1/#comment-2324 boy Sat, 06 Mar 2010 18:32:21 +0000 http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/?p=7586#comment-2324 Haha. Pachter. Haha. Pachter.

]]> By: steven g http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/03/05/michael-pachter-weighs-in-on-activisioninfinity-ward-dispute/comment-page-1/#comment-2316 steven g Sat, 06 Mar 2010 12:13:08 +0000 http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/?p=7586#comment-2316 The story here (reading between the lines) is actually about the control and direction of the Modern Warfare Property. This started way back when Infinity and Treyarch started taking pot shots at each other. It seems that Activision wants to do what IT wants with the Modern Warfare concept and this has upset Zampella/West, who probably reacted by looking into their legal and business options. Whether any party acted outside of an agreement/contract will be subject to the courts, and for sure any money owed will come under any future court case (or settlement). Whether Zampella/West can wrestle back control over the IP is dubious, but one wonders whether they will be 'free' contractually to work on a very similar game within the next two years. What a contrast between ActivisionBlizzard's way of dealing with Infinity Ward when compared to Microsoft Studio's relationship with Bungie - as a reminder, they LET them go independent last year! This will run and run. The story here (reading between the lines) is actually about the control and direction of the Modern Warfare Property. This started way back when Infinity and Treyarch started taking pot shots at each other.

It seems that Activision wants to do what IT wants with the Modern Warfare concept and this has upset Zampella/West, who probably reacted by looking into their legal and business options. Whether any party acted outside of an agreement/contract will be subject to the courts, and for sure any money owed will come under any future court case (or settlement).

Whether Zampella/West can wrestle back control over the IP is dubious, but one wonders whether they will be ‘free’ contractually to work on a very similar game within the next two years.

What a contrast between ActivisionBlizzard’s way of dealing with Infinity Ward when compared to Microsoft Studio’s relationship with Bungie – as a reminder, they LET them go independent last year!

This will run and run.

]]> By: John Mclane http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/03/05/michael-pachter-weighs-in-on-activisioninfinity-ward-dispute/comment-page-1/#comment-2306 John Mclane Fri, 05 Mar 2010 19:59:29 +0000 http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/?p=7586#comment-2306 I believe him over you. You are a homer for retards I believe him over you. You are a homer for retards

]]> By: dan http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/2010/03/05/michael-pachter-weighs-in-on-activisioninfinity-ward-dispute/comment-page-1/#comment-2304 dan Fri, 05 Mar 2010 18:07:54 +0000 http://www.criticalgamer.co.uk/?p=7586#comment-2304 No, it's not like a sports franchise at all, you're just a homer for Activision. I hope they paid you to ignore reality and ignore that activision delayed paying people, and then fired them instead of paying them the long overdue money. THAT is the heart of the story. No, it’s not like a sports franchise at all, you’re just a homer for Activision. I hope they paid you to ignore reality and ignore that activision delayed paying people, and then fired them instead of paying them the long overdue money. THAT is the heart of the story.

]]>