Who are you for? EA, Jason West and Vince Zampella or activision?

[Alby_da_Wolf]

Kasz216 said:

Alby_da_Wolf said:

[...]

Thanks for the infos. If what Activision claims is true, it's obvious that it's right, but West and Zampella claim quite different things. Also, EA trying to meet W and Z, and not the opposite, doesn't imply a guilt of the latter by itself, unless they accepted EA's offers and actually damaged Activision or at least broke contract obligations. Moreover, even proving a meeting was not only requested, but actually happened, doesn't automatically demontrate that at that supposed meeting they conspired to act against Activision while still under contract with it. The trials will decide who's right about what and up to what degree. There is also a thing to be established: if they just talked with EA about a possible contract AFTER their contract with Activision expired, could this be considered a guilt or a breach of contract?

They have proof of them intentionally damaging WaW on purpose... before MW2 came out.  They've already released this to the public.

Thanks to you too, now I understood without any doubt which amongst Activision claims was the strong evidence you were talking about. And this could indeed be really serious matter against W and Z, their only defence could be proving that exaggerated competition amongst dev teams was encouraged by Activision from the start, or that the very fast releases of the series alternated between IW and Treyarch left them no other choice than harsh internal competition, but yes, this second possible defence is quite pulled by the hair, unless Activision actively (sorry for the pun) pushed this competition to harsh levels, it wouldn't be a strong defence. A third possible defence would be that in this internal competition it wasn't either Activision or IW, but Treyarch to start the feud. IIRC before WaW release, IW complained to Noah Heller for talking shit about MW in interviews about the soon to be released WaW and asked websites and mags to interview actual Treyarch developers instead of that guy that constantly tried making their game shine by throwing shit at MW instead of using their own game's merits to promote it http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=201353&site=cvg . Noah Heller's statements can be proven too, they were made in interviews publicly available, so, if Activision let him do, it would be a proof that it at least tolerated, if not encouraged, a war between the teams with blows below the belt. Before googling, I didn't remember this episode anymore, now I remember that back then most people sided with IW in that feud. After, Treyarch more than proved its worth and that that shit wasn't really necessary, but by then a douche Treyarch exec not able to do PR in a fair way already started bad blood between the teams and between IW and Activision.