Titanfall. A game name, or a codename?

Titanfall is developed by Vince Zampella from Respawn Entertainment. A studio moniker arising from the gameplay trope of rebirth. Vince was the Infinity Ward CEO, who developed the mega-blockbuster franchise 'modern warfare' under the call of duty brand. Vince and his cohorts were fired from IW by Activision citing contract breaches. These breaches that eventually came to light were that they were talking to other publishers, trying to sell call of duty secrets and ideas...Sure, they helped create the biggest franchise of 7th gen. They should be making way more money. Activision are just greedy fucks. All agreed? Ok then.

Anyway, Respawn turned around with fists waving in the air, likely muttering something like "You'll rue the day you fired us Activision!" and decided to make a game using all the ideas they'd taken from an in development CoD game, and make it better.

I mean, you can instantly tell that there's some shady shit going down... just looking at the new Call of Duty game shown at e3, the similarities in theme are wild. Mechs, double jumping, futuristic battlescape, wall running...it's all there. It takes time to develop a huge game like CoD, what with its irrelevant single-player campaigns and all that. CoD was likely already in production, and then Titanfall is released without a single player campaign, but wink wink promising a later single player campaign.... It's so obvious that Titanfall was rushed through to meet a release schedule.

So, my theory is that vince and cohorts tried to sell their ideas to EA but were caught by Acti and fired. EA then hired them to make said game, which Vince probably completely underestimated in cost, overestimating his own ability. EA, now being in a major position in power over them, tried to get them to sell this stolen CoD to them for a much smaller cost by using a contractual obligation that says the ip must be turned over if it costs too much. Respawn, having only this one original ip to their name, and Zampella, having a lot of experience sneaking and selling around their ideas, went behind EA's back to MS and made deal with them to continue their funding for the game in exchange for making the game exclusive. Titanfall is then marketed as a CoD killer.

Titanfall is a stolen property, funded by EA and MS, which Respawn thought they could release before CoD was ready, to premptively cut it's throat. I wouldn't be surprised if Titanfall 2 comes out around the same time as CoD:future war or whatever it's called.

What say you?

Hmm......they are very similar.

Though imagine the fall of Activision if EA did have COD.

At least, 1 of 4 hated companies by me would be down....

That's a real stretch. The only part that is hands down is no way COD:AW could copy Titanfall in such a short time, so information crossed streams (giggle) at some point before in development of them both.

How is it a stretch? I agree that it's...imaginative, perhaps conspiratorial, but a stretch? Stretch implies unlikliness.

Vince was the CEO of the company that makes CoD. They were fired for trying to sell information and property to other companies (which would likely be EA, seeing that the biggest rival to CoD is Battlefield, by none other than EA).

Now this game comes out which was made quickly, has all the same features as a CoD game that had to be in development for at least a few years (while Vince was still CEO)...it's funded by EA (CoD maker's biggest rival, and MS (who has paid for timed CoD:MW DLC exclusivity since forever)

Sure I know crossing streams happens. It happens a lot in the movie industry too. But this stream starts at the very top of Infinity Ward, and ends with the very same man at a rival house. This isn't crossed stream. This is one man taking a piss at two different places!

Stretch? Hardly. Conspiracy. Yes

You have too much time to kill.

But, with that time you have crafted a good narrative. I still disagree though. I think EA realized that if it came out 6-12 months later, it would be a clone of the latest COD and would get lost in the shuffle. So, they called M$ and conned them into buying it knowing the PR problems M$ had with the XB1.

EA had no reason to call MS. The contract for independant funding with EA states that if they required more than the alotted money, then rights to the Titanfall franchise would have to go to EA. If anything, EA would impede progress as much as possible. When once Vince was probably trying to sell the ideas to EA for *cue dr evil* 100 million dollars, they would now have the IP for less than 5m.

This is business, remember.

No, I feel stretch is used well there. I was going to aplogize but after some research, I'll stick with stretch. You do raise some good points, but the "vince and cohorts tried to sell..."...is a bit of a stretch :P

But that's the part we know 100% is true! Lol
its detailed in the lawsuit...its why Vince was fired. Thus is common knowledge that vince and crew were unhappy about their wages. They even tried to sue Activision for not paying them enough.

True,

But paying $5 million for a DEAD ip instead of $100 million is still bad.  The only way this game is still being talked about or even getting released is if M$ pays EA big $ to go exclusive.  And even then, M$ had to spend ass loads of money to advertise it.  EA called M$ when they knew the game was going to cost them a chunk of cash if they didn't.  This is business, cut or eliminate risk from the investment when you can.

Read The Final Hours of Titanfall.