Talk:Infinity Ward

Fair use rationale for Image:Infinity Ward Logo.jpg

Image:Infinity Ward Logo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 08:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Call Of Duty 4 MP Screenshot.jpg

The image Image:Call Of Duty 4 MP Screenshot.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

• That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
• That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --04:03, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism

Got a lot of vandalism here from some disgruntled PC gamers. Moozipan Cheese (talk) 20:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

The last section regarding the dropped dedicated servers in Modern Warfare 2 is inappropriate for a wikipedia article, for its effect on IW's sales and share price must be seen to have a long and lasting effect to warrant its place here. Can we come to some kind of conclusion to exclude such materials before Modern Warfare 2 has gone on sale for at least some time before we put anything more on that issue in this article? 222.153.247.254 (talk) 05:38, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

More vandalism from PC gamers. :/ 13 November 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.208.237.48 (talk) 13:51, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Robert Bowling

He is now the "Creative Strategist" at Infinity Ward. His title is no longer "Community Manager". This is sourced via his Twitter account @fourzerotwo. Checkmate11B (talk) 11:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

There are also a lot of criticism around him. Ever since Call of Duty:Modern Warfare 2 came out the PC community have been bashing him and demanded response from him and Infinity Ward based on the failiur of the new P2P IWNET online game hosting system and a bunch of other false promises and advertisment for the MW2 PC version. --Rexz (talk) 17:13, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

That's irrelevant since this is an article about the company, and Bowling himself isn't in charge of design decisions like that. He does interviews and press events, that's it. IWNet hasn't "failed", the PC community just doesn't like it. Infinity Ward's online forums would be a betterplace to voice your complaints.=/= Ironoclast (Talk) 17:51, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not a complaint, it's a FACT that people are complaining about him. There's nothing wrong with stating that there's big criticism about him, because we would be just starting the truth. Also, the people that runs or manage or have some kind of authority under the company should be noted, whether they should have their own page on it or not, or section. Noted that the name Robert Bowling is count as a tag leading to this article, so there's no good reason to not feature him in this page or to have a section for him and what's surrounding him in the industry and the gaming community. --Rexz (talk) 10:26, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Game engines

I saw the discussion about the COD2 engine, and one of the arguments, that the game says that it uses technology licensed from Id is also appliable to the Modern warfare 2. Also the source cited in the call of duty 2 says it uses a new engine. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.153.169.102 (talk) 03:09, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

March 1st, 2010 Incident at IW Studio

G4TV broke the news at around 7 pm pacific that "bouncers" showed up at IW studios, and that their studio heads (Vince Zampella and Jason West) haven't been seen since this morning meeting with Activision. Rumors and speculations is that the heads got fired.

Kotaku reports that Jason West's LinkedIn profile indicates that he is no longer working at Infinity Ward.

An annual investor report, published yesterday to the SEC by Activision, confirms the trouble. Section 18, page F-50, paragraph beginning "In November 2009". Passage reads:

The Company is concluding an internal human resources inquiry into breaches of contract and insubordination by two senior employees at Infinity Ward. This matter is expected to involve the departure of key personnel and litigation. At present, the Company does not expect this matter to have a material impact on the Company.

BobisOnlyBob (talk) 08:51, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Read this. If true, the fate of IW is in the balance as we speak. IW will either be crippled with incompetent Activision management, or dissolved completely. Unreal stuff. 164.107.237.95 (talk) 20:06, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

What could it be: Kotick lost his mind while IW didn't obey orders? ATVI wanted to keep iw wed royalties , cause MW2 sucked a bit in PC , so they argued over this , then IW made business with other company breaching WHAT contract ? IF atvi owns IW why they need contracts , and why are they even calling them selfs developers , ATVI bought them under contract , that they get royalties , but the contract doesn't include other stuff like being fired :) I think a lot of developers don't GET it what it means to be BOUGHT by some , it doesn't NEED to be in contract , ATVI owns IW , they can fire them FOR nothing , contract stays presumably for "in what atmosphere , sorroundings , pressure , and what conditions they need to do in the new job" they accepted the contract "we will give you that and this but youl be fired when you start bitching about what we promised you" so the contract can say anything if they agree , when ATVI owns IW , they can do what they want , and they can change the name , staff , everything , give them normal salary and that's it , problem is , the "contract" contained that IW will be treated as mostly independent , getting their owed royalties , and the heads revolted but it's still the same company so ATVI has no hard time just firing them , and the ROYALTIES MONEY GOES NOWHERE , it's just like ATVI would provide the funds for the new game for it's development or give that money to them in form of royalties from the sales of the previous release ; it's a DIRTY publisher tactic to make developer think they're well treated. The final thing is , it's just the one who accepts this kind of "contract" (a half-true offer) and get's bought he needs to obey it , cause when he's bought he's just a normal internal employee and the contract doesn't cound cause it's not an external body anymore , and that IW contacting with other studios was a "breach of contract" is BS , there is no contract , it's just written "iw must not engage negotations with others.." this is just something to look like IW's would be treated like real independent developer , so when they contacted other studios , they did that technically like an internal ATVI developer and this is same for everyone , it's one company , and if you cheat your own company you get fired of course. This is probably the truth flow - not exactly (not confirmed either) , but I am ofcourse on IW side, I would fight for my stuff , and not let those capitalist pigs to mess things up. The contract is the contract they accepted before they were bought , company can obliterate the contract the minute they step into the new job , cause they are normal employees , so only subjective terms apply to those , on the mood of the boss how long and if he would be giving them what he promised in the "contract" ... the contract is an buying offer , if you accept it , you're sold , the contract no longer applies. Search sources on web , they're scattered , i'ts 4 AM , i don't have more time for searching throught all my browser history atm. Find and update please.

---

", it doesn't NEED to be in contract , ATVI owns IW , they can fire them FOR nothing "

er, what? Just because you own a company does not mean you can do whatever to your employees. There are laws and policies in place (and rightly so) to prevent this - unfair dismissal, hounding out of a job etc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.120.73 (talk) 14:53, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Outside of breach of contract, wrongful termination is actually fairly limited. It protects you from being fired due to being a member of a protected class (race/ethnicity/nationality/etc.), in retaliation for litigation or whistle blowing, and maybe one or two other specific scenarios, depending on what state you live in. Other than those, your employer can fire you for basically whatever reason they want. -208.97.245.131 (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Lawsuit court documents

Lawsuit court documents are on kotaku.com here. Should this be added to the article since they're public now? Sera404 (talk) 18:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The court documents are on the External Links section. Thanks Ajcadoo (talk) 04:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Dismissal section too long

We need to be cautious of recentism here - while the incident is clearly a signifciant one in the history of the developer, I don't think that it should be longer than the rest of the article combined. -208.97.245.131 (talk) 22:36, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Disagreed, this is one of the most controversial events in video game history. It is understandable that this section is long. It may shrink as time progresses. Ajcadoo (talk) 04:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

You're kidding, right? This wouldn't even hit the top 10 of controversial events in video game history. Nobody outside of fans probably even know that it occurred. For that matter, even if you told them, they probably wouldn't care. -208.97.245.131 (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Name ten other events in vg history more significant. If the two creators of MW who just got fired win their lawsuit, they will be able stop their former employers from making any new Modern Warfare games or releasing any new content and will take control of what is possibly the second biggest money making franchise in the industry. To say that would rock Activision's bottom line (and have a profound effect on the industry as a whole) is an understatement.

And not for nothing, only fans are likely to read this article so your contention is without merit. This development (and how it plays out) is important and necessary as it will (at the very least) have an impact on how other billion dollar corporations handle both termination of high level employees and more to the point, the public relations issues in the age of instant news via Twitter, Facebook, enthusiast press sites, etc. The current thinking that private security were brought in to handle any potential issues arising from the Infinity Ward staff over the firing is alone worth the price of admission. 144.92.84.206 (talk) 20:56, 9 March 2010 (UTC) KOTD