[quote]trying to focus on the wrong aspect of the article.[/quote] Whether or not the quality of the product was the real issue is pure conjecture. Activision may have made the right choice. We do not have any view into what really happened. The only factual point of the article follows: This was a wrongful dismissal legal action. In which the employer was found to be wrong and had to pay the terminated party what was owed.

[quote]Actually the tension started when decisions were made the blatantly decreased the quality of the game. The lawsuit was the culmination of the tension that ended with an artist being denied compensation for his work that he had earned. This compensation was due him by contract. He cared for the quality of the product, so when he spoke out the company went after him unjustly. You have a pathetically hard time grasping such a simple concept. You are blatantly bias, the evidence of which being that you are trying to focus on the wrong aspect of the article. You are rendering a simple concept ambiguous because your argument is week.[/quote] No bias at all here. Bungie screwed up by not buying him out. Marty screwed up by not realizing he wasn't the boss anymore. You did get one thing right though, it is very simple. Money. If Bungie paid him out or bought his interest in the company when they fired him, none of this would have happened. Money money money.