Call Of Duty: Battle Of The Activision Logo [Update]

Illustration for article titled Call Of Duty: Battle Of The Activision Logo [Update]

The courtroom drama unfolding over the Call of Duty franchise is in many ways big, and important, and heavy, but it's not entirely without petty crap. Take Modern Warfare 2's use (or, not) of the Activision logo, for example.


Seems that while a wrangle was going on behind the scenes prior to Modern Warfare 2's release, Infinity Ward decided to go and release the game without an Activision logo present. It's on the box, yeah, but not the actual game. Go on, fire up a copy, see if you can spot an Activision logo either while its booting up, or during the intro sequence.


Even when Activision specifically requested for it to be included, as is the case with just about every other game ever released, Infinity Ward refused, instead only mentioning the company responsible for manufacturing and promoting the game in some small print.

So take sides in this battle all you want, just remember: when things get this petty, nobody comes out looking good.

UPDATE - Reader shaberaven points out something even sadder: if you watch the game's closing credits, below, you'll notice that Infinity Ward's shout-outs last for 5:12. Activision's, while admittedly a shorter list, are sped past the screen at a furious 45 seconds, so quick that if you wanted to read them properly you'd have to mash on the pause button.


Which is a little sad. Hating Activision head command is one thing, but the QA testers and marketing folks deserve better treatment than that.

Share This Story

Get our newsletter


I dislike how publishers get much more credit for the development of games rather than the team that developed it in many cases.

For example, the legend of zelda games for the gameboy were in fact developed by a capcom based studio but published by Nintendo, yet many people don't even realize this as the capcom logo is not obviously present anywhere on the box or in game.

This is especially noticed titles developed by smaller companies and then published by larger conglomerates.

Level-5 is a great example, look at their games and how many of them have their logo displayed on the box? Very few. Sometimes companies put the logo on the back sometimes not, IMO publishers (who are the ones who pay for the game but also the ones who profit the most.) SHOULD be on the front, as should the main development studio.

White Knight Chronicles, Dragon Quest 8, Jeanne d'Arc, none of this have Level 5s logo on the front of the box.

Sometimes I prefer to support a specific development studio rather than just the publisher or game series. I own everything created by Clover Studios and if my 360 hadn't croaked a long time ago I'd also own everything by Platinum Games. I own many Grasshopper Games. But what if I wanted to just support say Treyarch (I don't I'm just using them as an example.) if the publisher didn't put the Treyarch logo on the box then without additional research I wouldn't know that CoD4 wasn't developed by them but instead by Infinity Ward. Looking at the WaW boxart now there is no real way at first glance to know that IW didn't make that game.

I also feel that doing that would go a long way towards helping kill off the tumorous like shovel-ware that permeates EAs image. EA could still publish games but if the company that developed shared equal billing on the box you'd know it isn't EA making this garbage instead EA is paying for it. This would make in-house EA games seem better rather than having that stigma of poor quality.