Call of Duty: Black Ops 2

[jkid101094]

I still dont know why the choice system should fail nor why you quoted that atrocious article rant.

If he doesn't explain himself then we can just assume that his opinion is bullshit.

[Tanassy]

Opinion is bullshit.

That doesn't even make any sense.

[shadowDOESrock]

sooo... no explaination?

EDIT: oh wait, i just read it. 'I wont bother explaining myself'. But why was that article in the quote as well?

[jkid101094]

That doesn't even make any sense.

Then you either have a different definition of "bullshit" or are a complete idiot. =P

[Tanassy]

It's my opinion, not anyone else's. Why should I feel the need to convince anyone else?

Like, 90% of people on the internet don't like other people's opinions anyway, even though they have their own. Logic..

[Hakudamashi]

It's my opinion, not anyone else's. Why should I feel the need to convince anyone else?

I don't think it's a matter of trying to convince anyone, as it is we just want to better understand your view point. We didn't get it the first time, could you please make it clearer?

[shadowDOESrock]

Treyarch recently announced their next venture into the "Call of Duty" franchise. "Black Ops 2" is slated for a November 2012 release, and fans are gearing up for the shooter. However, Activision could be facing some legal troubles over the new game's setting.

According to Game Informer, there is a lawsuit between Infinity Ward and Activision, that states that "Call of Duty" titles set after Vietnam would be exclusive to Infinity Ward. The video game magazine obtained court documents that include a clause printed in Infinity Ward's Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The clause reads as follows:

"Activision will retain authority and responsibility over all titles within the 'Call of Duty' franchise (specifically excluding any 'Call of Duty' title set in modern day (post Vietnam). the near future or distant future, which shall be under the authority of IW consistent with and subject to Sections 2(a) and (b)). including all creative, development and publishing decisions; provided that IW will be entitled to receive a residual IP bonus and a technology bonus from products published under the 'Call of Duty' brand as outlined in Section 3(d)."

"Call of Duty: Black Ops 2" will be set in the year 2025, which falls under the "distant future" category included in the clause. Game Informer notes that the two companies have previously had a "stressful" relationship, and that Treyarch may be feeling too confined under the restrictions set in place. There are several indications of this, such as the inclusion of guns that weren't designed or made available until the late 1980s or 1990s in the original "Black Ops," prompting Infinity Ward to complain.

Pulling Black Ops II from the shelves is likely, but Activison paying damage to IW is also a possible remedy.

The trial has yet to occur.

There is also a lawsuit that Infinity Ward owns everything 'Modern Warfare'.  Hence why 'Call of Duty' became more of a subtitle in MW2 & 3.

----
Sorry, Infinity Ward - but this is just plain retarded now. :l
I hope that that company dies, no offence.

Or you know what, Treyarch should make their own franchise, instead of trying to do something great & original for the call of duty franchise. Let IW rot together with CoD.

Also, i lol'd at the part where it said that they should pay Infinity Ward for 'technology bonuses'. Hah..
Treyarch did more new textures, designs & graphical enhancements in Black Ops than what IW did ever since CoD2.
MW3 even looked worse than Black Ops, and also ran worse than MW2 on PC's, even though they looked identical.

[Hakudamashi]

Then why wasn't IW the first to make a future CoD then? I smell fail.

[SmashFinale]

i personally could not give a fuck if Treyarch makes a CoD game. i personally prefer IW over Treyarch. But that's just me.

[shadowDOESrock]

i personally could not give a fuck if Treyarch makes a CoD game. i personally prefer IW over Treyarch. But that's just me.

Have fun with Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3.5 (or 2.75, really) with no community support.

[Hakudamashi]

i personally could not give a fuck if Treyarch makes a CoD game. i personally prefer IW over Treyarch. But that's just me.

Do tell.

[HereAndThere]

Sorry, Infinity Ward - but this is just plain retarded now. :l
I hope that that company dies, no offence.
Let IW rot together with CoD.

I blame the fact that the original founders left the company to pursue something more interesting and, well, overall better.
The new Infinity Ward needs to get torn down by angry 9-year old CoD Fanatics who possibly might not get their Black Ops II thanks to that company.

[Tanassy]

They could always just push back the release date and re-skin the game under another name..

[HereAndThere]

They could always just push back the release date and re-skin the game under another name..

Isn't that kinda what they're doing already...?
Basically releasing an unfinished product, changing the story a bit, reskinning it and releasing it a year late?

[shadowDOESrock]

Isn't that kinda what they're doing already...?
Basically releasing an unfinished product, changing the story a bit, reskinning it and releasing it a year late?

No.

They could always just push back the release date and re-skin the game under another name..

Like True Crime Hong Kong / Sleeping Dogs? Maybe.

But there is no reason to for Treyarch or Activison to do that. The IP 'Call of Duty' belongs to Activision, this is just plain retarded.
Infinity Ward isnt doing anything really good since CoD4 anyway.