Saw this over at Trekbbs. Intresting thing is that half way through it says that Activision was told that there was no current plans for films
Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The suits at Activision can kiss our fandom's @ss. "You must make more movies and series even if they'll be crappy so we can keep making equally crappy games!"??? God, what capitalistic idiots.
-------------------- "God's in his heaven. All's right with the world."
Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Activision's not saying "you have to keep making crappy movies", they're saying that Paramount is not meeting the terms and conditions of their contract, and thus they have terminated it and are seeking restitution.
I work in video game development, and I know what the contracts are like; there are usually perfomance gurantees. Activision probably paid a certain amount fore the rights to publish X games based upon Y amount of Star Trek product (say two movies in 5 years and a series or two) Paramount planned to make. Paramount was probably required to spend Z amount of advertising dollars on same. Ergo, if Paramount is not making more Trek films, and isn't putting sufficicent advertising muscle behind the properties it is making, then they're probablty in violation of it.
I worked on a Deep Space Nine video game some years ago, and I know how difficult it canm be to get needed materials at Paramount (I had to do an end run aroudn their legal and licensing department and call Rick Sternbach directly to get what we needed).
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
The interesting, or mildly interesting, thing, is that quantity is what's at stake, not quality. Enterprise isn't burning up the charts, but it does about as well as most of its peers. (Especially those on UPN and the WB.) Viacom allowed two Star Trek shows to go off the air? Well, I'm all for forcing more DS9 out of everyone involved, but I can't imagine that would be very healthy, creatively.
But! The real reason I wanted to post was to make the following snarky comment/prediction: Viacom buys Vivendi's holdings in the computer game industry. Hooray for vertical integration!
I suppose in retrospect that isn't so snarky. "OK Blizzard, you're working for us now. Is there some way we can get Klingons in StarCraft II?"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Thanks Mr. Neutron for giving us your analysis of the situation between Activision and Paramount and also thanks for the link to your web site regarding your experiences with the development of "Deep Space Nine: Crossroads of Time." It's very interesting reading.
Pity about the falling out between Activision and Paramount, does that mean that we won't see a "Bridge Commander 2" or an "Elite Force 3"?
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Armada 2 rocks! It's great to send dozens of starships to their doom without getting a court martial!
Fun to wipe out freinfs online too.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Anduril
Ex-Member
posted
That's almost too funny.
Activision pulling a lawsuit on someone for not maintaining the value of the name it bought the rights too.
Like they have been keeping the value up...
IP: Logged
posted
This is a very interesting issue, though. And will only increase in complexity and confusion as video games rise in prevailance and the line between media forms blurs. Like, in a situation like this, where now it's kind of a one-sided dependance by Activision on Viacom, in the future, it will be a synergystic relationship between the two, and each part will help the other.
But, crazy fantasy? Blizzard working for Vivendi working for Viacom? Though Blizzard is too classy for liscensing.
BUT: A CRAIG KILBORNE TURN BASED GAME?!?!!?!!?!?!!
Registered: Oct 1999
| IP: Logged
-------------------- "Well, I mean, it's generally understood that, of all of the people in the world, Mike Nelson is the best." -- ULTRA MAGNUS, steadfast in curmudgeon
Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
posted
Imagined scenerio, re: UM speculation: McG, fresh from his Oscar win for directing Charlie's Angels 3: Fast Fast Bright Good, signs on to direct Doom: The Motion Picture. (Starring Colin Farrel as The Doom Guy and Anthony Hopkins as the Cyberdemon.) But during the intensive nine month shoot, ID puts out Doom IV and no one buys it because gamers are fickle and maybe John Carmack has been replaced by Romero in some sort of freak accident. Does the movie studio have a case against them? It is interesting to ponder.
Extra-snarky sidenote: If anyone has a case for an abandonment of quality and/or quantity claim, it is DC Comics. "The '70s Show star is Warner Brothers' first choice, but not that of director Christopher Nolan, the site reported." Suspected understatement award.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Keep in mind while reading this that companies are more likely to file complaints/lawsits like this during times of recession because profits are so thin.
Until the facts are heard in court, we really don't know which party is being truthful here or if Activision's claims have merit. Perhaps Activision is really trying to renegotiate its contract with Paramount as Paramount claims.
Also keep in mind that it might be an attempt by members of Activision's legal department to keep their jobs during a time of position eliminations and layoffs.
Just take everything you hear at this point with a grain of salt and try not tp be too judgemental until all the facts are revealed.
Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
posted
Wow whats with all the hate? Activision has published some of the best Trek games to date.
Armada Armada 2 Bridge Commander Starfleet Command 3 Elite Force Elite Force 2 Invasion
Hell, Hidden Evil wasnt TERRIBLE. Had a great story.
That only leaves Away Team as the Activision Trek-game "dud". The rest sold pretty well.
The real problem here is that most of you sound like you are Trek fans before gamers, so you let some of the little pointless things (omg the soverign turns to fast, omg the imod isnt canon) get in the way of the game.
Im definitely see myself as a gamer before a trek fan.
If activisions suit forces Paramount to make a good trek movie, then so be it. I wont complain
Registered: Aug 1999
| IP: Logged
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
