IW Studio Heads fired by Activision.

[CheeseMan42]

I guarantee most of the guys will leave with them. These are the same guys that went and formed Infinity Ward after breaking away from EA.

 

I plan on seeing a new studio or something form, in addition to some sort of legal action. I don't know what they could fight though...

 

We will likely not see anything happen for sometime, but I am sure that Infinity Ward will eventually be totally different the Infinity Ward that we know today.

 

The thing is that whatever new studio they may form will start from nothing. They won't have the Call of Duty franchise to print money with anymore. Even if they all leave, there are plenty of talented developers out there who will take over the franchise and spit out another iteration for Activision.

[tkrow21]

The thing is that whatever new studio they may form will start from nothing. They won't have the Call of Duty franchise to print money with anymore. Even if they all leave, there are plenty of talented developers out there who will take over the franchise and spit out another iteration for Activision.

 

IW had wanted to move away from the Call of Duty name anyway (remember when it was just Modern Warfare 2?)

[CheeseMan42]

IW had wanted to move away from the Call of Duty name anyway (remember when it was just Modern Warfare 2?)

 

Nope. I haven't paid attention since the original. Its not that they don't have the franchise anymore, they would have nothing. None of the code they have put years into making will go with them.

[tkrow21]

Nope. I haven't paid attention since the original. Its not that they don't have the franchise anymore, they would have nothing. None of the code they have put years into making will go with them.

 

The code is theirs to keep, the game engine is even named IW lol.

[El_Capitan]

IW had wanted to move away from the Call of Duty name anyway (remember when it was just Modern Warfare 2?)

Originally, from an article: "Activision feels that Modern Warfare has taken on a life of its own, and as a result has become their main focus."

 

Call of Duty makes more sense in the WWII era, and Modern Warfare shouldn't be included with Call of Duty, they are totally different as far as gameplay. Making money off a well established brand is a great marketing strategy, though it would be crazy to call a game placed in the future, i.e. 2100's and still call it Call of Duty: Future Warfare... but calling it just "Future Warfare" marks it as an entirely different beast.

[tkrow21]

So modern soldiers don't have a call of duty?

[FUZi0N]

Call of Duty? How does that only pertain to WW2? I think it works fine for all time periods..

 

"Call of Duty is a legal term describing the necessity to carry out a job or duty, such as a police case, military assault/wartime actions, or other military or highly important jobs. Once again, a call to/of duty can be a highly important position of work, (Doctor/Fireman/Civil Service/Governing) but otherwise and more commonly used for wartime legal terminology."

[CheeseMan42]

The code is theirs to keep, the game engine is even named IW lol.

 

Didn't Activision buy IW? If not then I am mistaken.

[El_Capitan]

In WWII, as far as the United States was concerned, Franklin D. Roosevelt enacted the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, basically a peace-time draft. When the U.S. entered into a war, all men aged 18 to 45 were made liable for military service, referred to as a draft call. It was their Call of Duty.

 

There is no longer a peace-time draft, so there is no more draft calls, or calls to duty. Military service is now voluntary, so it's more a "Voluntary Act of Duty".

[tkrow21]

Don't know how credible this article is, but if this is true, I think we can see another split like with EA.

[El_Capitan]

Wow, no royalties paid out to IW? I sense a litigation coming.

[Deathmineral]

I would say call of duty works for any time period, in fact I think it's somewhat necessary to have something like that... I mean "future warfare" would be the most unoriginal name ever conceived for a game. Battlefield games are a good example of good titling of games, shows a connection not only through the battlefield name but also through stuff like the year, 1942 - 2142, I mean it's nothing fancy but it's simplistic, understandable, and somewhat original, I mean it's a bit better than "battlefild: future warfare" or "battlefield: modern warfare". I just think that the call of duty part of the titles is kind of necessary, I mean that's supposed to be something that sets it apart from all the other ww2 and modern warfare games.