Support NeoGAF

[The Infectious Paradox]

Day after day I'm seeing more threads about Gaming companies laying off employees. Is this more based on our economy or is it an indication of reaching the peak of the pendulum swing?

More specifically, based on what I've seen in the past few years, a lot have gamers have grown distaste for "big gaming". And I get it. There have been so many Ubisoft bloat games, and even Bethesda has gone down hill. Many instances to be seen of AAA games falling flat.

Is it possible these layoffs are a good thing? Games take millions to produce these days, and they're also a long process. Surely these companies can't risk a failing game. Will we see indies become more emphasized in the future? And will big gaming companies have to look to the drawing board more and see what gamers really want?

How do you realistically see the future of gaming?

 

[Dacvak]

You could consider it a “good thing” because the industry will be forced to recalibrate itself in a way that supports long term sustainability, but that’s kind of like saying global warming is a “good thing” because it’ll teach everyone to be more environmentally conscious. In reality, it’s a problem that should have never happened. And by and large it’s executives, stakeholders, and publishers responsible for the industry’s failings.

I’m optimistic that we’ll see the industry adjust in a more intelligent way. It’s not just forum warriors complaining about the status quo, publishers are now seeing the financial repercussions of their actions and direction. I’m hoping this reformation leads to smaller, leaner, more creative teams with more agency. That may be a naive thought, but all it takes is to look at the methodology of companies like Nintendo and From to see that when you allow your workers to embrace creativity and experimentation, instead of chasing trends, you have a better shot at success.

 

[The Infectious Paradox]

You could consider it a “good thing” because the industry will be forced to recalibrate itself in a way that supports long term sustainability, but that’s kind of like saying global warming is a “good thing” because it’ll teach everyone to be more environmentally conscious. In reality, it’s a problem that should have never happened. And by and large it’s executives, stakeholders, and publishers responsible for the industry’s failings.

That is a damn good analogy

 

[feynoob]

The problem is that the cat ate too many mice and cant walk due to the fat. And because the cat ate too much mice, there is little mouses around the area, whch causes the cat to have less mice to eat and risk of dying due to hunger, if there are no more mice.

That is what is happening to gaming. Too much budget on gaming development, less money on returns, shutting down games mid cycle, running out of budget due to high graphic performance, chasing live service games without understanding what the audience want, and covid massive boost that blinded the industry.

All these issue are getting bigger and bigger, so smaller studios who cant tank the hit are closing down, while big companies are cutting down losses to keep themselves functional.

 

[Sushi_Combo]

The layoffs that have been going on are a good thing. Many publishers thought that 2020 numbers were going to extend for a longer period so they over hired and overspent.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

As long as it's bad games that bomb, the industry will be in good shape. There's more money than ever in the market and very good games. What there isn't is tolerance for trash like most Western studios are producing.

The day From Software bombs I will start worrying.

 

[The Infectious Paradox]

As long as it's bad games that bomb, the industry will be in good shape. There's more money than ever in the market and very good games. What there isn't is tolerance for trash like most Western studios are producing.

The day From Software bombs I will start worrying.

Idk man. I mean I agree. From is my favorite studio. I guess what I meant by this thread is that.. will we finally see a shift in these BS narratives? Like, I've always cheered for the underdog and minorities. But lately I do see stories being tarnished by this "woke" agenda. That word used to annoy me, but it does have some merit lately. And I'm seeing it more and more in games. It just makes for soulless games in my opinion.

 

[KimDongHwan]

You could consider it a “good thing” because the industry will be forced to recalibrate itself in a way that supports long term sustainability, but that’s kind of like saying global warming is a “good thing” because it’ll teach everyone to be more environmentally conscious. In reality, it’s a problem that should have never happened. And by and large it’s executives, stakeholders, and publishers responsible for the industry’s failings.

I agree with your comment, but I feel is easy to target the above group you mention when, being blunt about it, we are all part of the problem. This big companies are always testing water with what works and what doesn't, whenever we complain "why are they doing a CGI trailer, where is the gameplay?" they do that because it keeps "working" for them, they probably tested gameplay trailers, CGI trailers, Story trailers, etc and then they saw a bigger return by doing CGI. Long term effect of all of those smaller decisions are hard to predict, less so for bigger companies, where one decision made on 2016 is affecting them just now on 2023. The good thing is I am also optimistic that this big market falls can result in better outcome and even maybe new players.

 

[Saber]

As already stated, chasing off trends (like that Simpson episode where every executive keep watching in their mini-tvs what is hot so they copy) is not a good idea and neither this stupid concept that GaaS is easy money, when in reality is a high risk high reward, hence why there are a very few sucessfull on the market and lot of failed ones. Theres also the problem where people who don't do games for love or are more like social warriors inserts themselves in the game industry with the clear intention of disruption and discord.

Layoffs, like selling numbers, needs context. Is these layoff from people who complain, lazy of and go over social media all day work? If this is the case, nothing of value was lost. But if those layoff are veterans or really good and passionate people that got kick out because either refuse to follow cheesy trends like Concord or is what they call the old stuff that is not up to "modern" standarts, them yeah that would suck.

I know that this has being said repeatdly but as long the gaming industry has From Software, Nintendo and similars, everything will be fine and dandy.

 

[simpatico]

I think the layoffs are from mismanagement. Hell we just found out Dead by Daylight had 1,300 people working on it. Larrin, From, CD Projekt, Rockstar are all still killing it. Every 60 days a new indie dev stumbles into generational wealth. The big publishing institutions royally fucked up their hiring and consulting in the last decade and there is still a lot of pain ahead for them. It will look bad, but watch the competent ones. There's no timeline where those decisions make them a ton of money. They were just bad bad moves.

 

[coffinbirth]

I agree with your comment, but I feel is easy to target the above group you mention when, being blunt about it, we are all part of the problem. This big companies are always testing water with what works and what doesn't, whenever we complain "why are they doing a CGI trailer, where is the gameplay?" they do that because it keeps "working" for them, they probably tested gameplay trailers, CGI trailers, Story trailers, etc and then they saw a bigger return by doing CGI. Long term effect of all of those smaller decisions are hard to predict, less so for bigger companies, where one decision made on 2016 is affecting them just now on 2023. The good thing is I am also optimistic that this big market falls can result in better outcome and even maybe new players.

They do it bc a CG trailer can be quickly outsourced to an external studio and gives the product they're shilling a tangible thing to look at beyond a title card. Usually when this occurs the game is in no state to be shown publicly, let alone as a form of marketing...which is what a trailer is.

 

[majorgamer10]

It can't be based on our economy because it's a global market. It's all economies; it's all over the world!

It's like expecting the $70 price tag to go back to $60 just because the USA is cooling the economy. The rest of the world will make it continue to be $70 and up. $60 is not coming back, globally!

What is happening is that money is getting more expensive, and that is changing strategies.

What I'm worried about is the price of games going up WHILE money is getting more expensive. It's wild!

It's like things are being rushed to get away with it.

 

[Ozzie666]

When you look back at the pandemic and look at how bonkers Animal Crossing did, that really puts things into perspective. Covid was an unusual bump in the road that publishers reacted too. Perfect time for a small gaming boom, which was unrealistic. Every company selling their souls for the next Fortnite Gaas income generator. It's like companies have forgotten 2019 and before covid. Western AAA management seems to think throwing money at a title fixes problems. It doesn't and they have lost their way. Layoffs are never good, but people need to stop buyingand pre-ording utter crap to create change.

Execs and publishers are taking so much of the profits or eating into losses, share holders demanding return on investments from poorly run companies. Never mind the agendas or a downgrade in hiring directives and lowe tier skilled employees. It's a shit show.

 

[IAmRei]

As gamedev myself, i cannot be certain. I heard publishers are hard to find this year, because industry is kind of mess, in the west (still affect whole world, i think) but the sales are still fine. Maybe next year we will see better way for the good news.

Industry turns to fast in c19 era. And the thing is, bubble of investment is happening since last year. It might not be good in the long run. Yeah, we see those "long run" now.

It might be better, or worse, depend on the next fiscal year. Or there is magic happening which can turn the industry, for the worst or better...

 

[Clear]

Mostly its the after-effects of Covid.

Market growth for gaming accelerated due to the pandemic, while labour and productivity declined due to adjustments made for remote working. The upshot is that studios got ambitious and expanded headcount and ambition, a process facilitated by the relative ease of acquiring funding for projects.

Pandemic ended and this mini bubble burst. Growth slowed, spending dropped, and as a result investment got harder to come by/justify at its former level. Hence across the industry we can see a roughly 9% downscaling across the board, and less profit-worthy studio closures to reduce monthly burn rate.

 

[TGO]

I have a negative view of the industry, they wasting money chasing things nobody wants and artificially inflating budgets to pay for stuff that's not needed.
I think it has a cancer and needs to be cut off at the knee .

 

[Wildebeest]

Indies will see more of the same problems after time. Those problems are that the amount of time and money you need to spend making a game (that will be noticed and not mocked by consumers) grow at a barely manageable rate. By the time you finish a game to cash in a trend, the trend is long dead. Games are huge projects that only seems to come together in a way where you get a feel for the finished product near the end of development, so if there was some big mistake in your plan you are royally fudged, meaning that everyone plays it super safe and middle of the road.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

You could consider it a “good thing” because the industry will be forced to recalibrate itself in a way that supports long term sustainability, but that’s kind of like saying global warming is a “good thing” because it’ll teach everyone to be more environmentally conscious. In reality, it’s a problem that should have never happened. And by and large it’s executives, stakeholders, and publishers responsible for the industry’s failings.

I’m optimistic that we’ll see the industry adjust in a more intelligent way. It’s not just forum warriors complaining about the status quo, publishers are now seeing the financial repercussions of their actions and direction. I’m hoping this reformation leads to smaller, leaner, more creative teams with more agency. That may be a naive thought, but all it takes is to look at the methodology of companies like Nintendo and From to see that when you allow your workers to embrace creativity and experimentation, instead of chasing trends, you have a better shot at success.

Excellent post.

In terms of platform holders managing to see great stability and growth without rocking the boat chasing trends themselves, I'd also add Valve to that list (there with Nintendo), though I guess they have more in common with Apple than the Big 3. As in, they don't make that many games of their own (though every now and then, they still do, like that leaked new shooter of theirs).

Indies will see more of the same problems after time. Those problems are that the amount of time and money you need to spend making a game (that will be noticed and not mocked by consumers) grow at a barely manageable rate. By the time you finish a game to cash in a trend, the trend is long dead. Games are huge projects that only seems to come together in a way where you get a feel for the finished product near the end of development, so if there was some big mistake in your plan you are royally fudged, meaning that everyone plays it super safe and middle of the road.

That can be avoided though. Just...don't chase trends. The best games (IMO), and the ones that have the most stability for themselves, devs & pubs, are those that stay to a core identity regardless of trends.

Those types of games are also more likely to start a trend, if anything, than the ones that just chase after existing ones. And indies/smaller devs (like low/mid-budgeted AA devs) will be better positioned for that because the amount of money they invest in development & marketing isn't so absurd that they have to completely rid of experimentation risks.

Most AAA studios don't have that luxury, though a lot of that is due to market conditions their publishers & shareholders/investors have created. Some, like Nintendo, can mostly avoid those problems because they don't target insanely huge budgets. And some AAA devs, like Rockstar, have IP massive enough where they can probably take some of those risks knowing that massive tons of people are going to buy the game regardless as long as the core elements are there.

In that way something like GTA6 can almost maybe be seen as a platform, kind of like Fortnite.

 

[coffinbirth]

Excellent post.

In terms of platform holders managing to see great stability and growth without rocking the boat chasing trends themselves, I'd also add Valve to that list (there with Nintendo), though I guess they have more in common with Apple than the Big 3. As in, they don't make that many games of their own (though every now and then, they still do, like that leaked new shooter of theirs).

I see this sentiment A LOT, and it simply isn't true. Valve have always been making games...this whole time, it's just that they are beholden to no-one but themselves, and they are perfectly fine with shelving years-long projects if it doesn't cut the mustard. Reminds me of Prince shelving entire albums because that wasn't his mood anymore, hahaha. Anyone else would've made Half-life 3 and cashed in 20 damn years ago. We would be on Half-Life 9 by now if this were Microsoft or something, ya know? You can call this lazy, or resting on their (Steam) laurels, but I'll take them at their word that they see their projects through to completion when they themselves are satisfied with what they created, and for no other reasons. As a Half-Life fan, I find this INCREDIBLY frustrating, but I respect them for it...and it's pretty damn hard to argue with the pedigree of their output.

 

[Wildebeest]

That can be avoided though. Just...don't chase trends. The best games (IMO), and the ones that have the most stability for themselves, devs & pubs, are those that stay to a core identity regardless of trends.

If some people were sick of Ubisoft's open world games five years ago, it is not really a core identity that everyone loves. But still the titanic can't be turned around, and nothing too new or experimental can really be risked. This is why I talk about them settling for middle of the road design which might not excite anyone but don't really upset people either. Sure, some people might be fatigued with their open world games, but a lot of people are just used to it and keep on playing their games. This to me isn't the same as making the best games with a core identity. More like widely accepted games with a familiar structure.

 

[The Infectious Paradox]

I agree with your comment, but I feel is easy to target the above group you mention when, being blunt about it, we are all part of the problem. This big companies are always testing water with what works and what doesn't, whenever we complain "why are they doing a CGI trailer, where is the gameplay?" they do that because it keeps "working" for them, they probably tested gameplay trailers, CGI trailers, Story trailers, etc and then they saw a bigger return by doing CGI. Long term effect of all of those smaller decisions are hard to predict, less so for bigger companies, where one decision made on 2016 is affecting them just now on 2023. The good thing is I am also optimistic that this big market falls can result in better outcome and even maybe new players.

This is one of the most realistic and frustrating comments I've seen. CGI trailers are not realistic. But for the masses, I do believe they spark unrealistic hype, and they also increase profit for people that may not even end up playing the games.

It reminds me of my thoughts on streaming services or gym memberships of people that only stay for a week. They thrive on people that throw out money without actually engaging in profits. Companies thrive on people that take in the shiny toy without actually getting their money's worth.

It's a crazy idea, but drones do keep companies going a lot of times. I want that to change

 

[EverydayBeast]

Gamers are seeking asylum in classic games because modern gaming has too many obligations.

 

[Robb]

I’m certainly no industry expert but my guess would be Covid aftershock and bad economy being the main drivers.

Companies always hire a ton when times are good, then fire a ton when times are tough. Especially in tech.

 

[thicc_girls_are_teh_best]

I see this sentiment A LOT, and it simply isn't true. Valve have always been making games...this whole time, it's just that they are beholden to no-one but themselves, and they are perfectly fine with shelving years-long projects if it doesn't cut the mustard. Reminds me of Prince shelving entire albums because that wasn't his mood anymore, hahaha. Anyone else would've made Half-life 3 and cashed in 20 damn years ago. We would be on Half-Life 9 by now if this were Microsoft or something, ya know? You can call this lazy, or resting on their (Steam) laurels, but I'll take them at their word that they see their projects through to completion when they themselves are satisfied with what they created, and for no other reasons. As a Half-Life fan, I find this INCREDIBLY frustrating, but I respect them for it...and it's pretty damn hard to argue with the pedigree of their output.

I respect it too, for the most part. Like you said, for diehard fans it can be frustrating that you don't get a sequel for over a decade, if not longer, let alone regular iterations.

On the other hand, it almost always means once a sequel DOES come, it's out of pure desire and creative passion, not simply to please greedy shareholders. In terms of other platform holders who do have shareholders, I think Nintendo generally strikes the best balance. That might sound weird given they have so many damn spinoffs of core IP, but that's just the point: rather than milking 3 3D Mario platformers a gen, you get one every gen. And in place of those sequels, you get spinoffs with those characters and settings.

Like a lot of Nintendo's stuff of course has a set pattern and does certain things that are "safe", but since most of their games don't rely on super-fancy graphics, epic stories or hype production values, they're forced to innovate with game mechanics & systems more than most others, on average. SIE aren't that far behind, but their current iteration is too focused on GAAS to my tastes, and that GAAS focus is driven a lot by market trends.

For example with Concord; I know some people are ripping it for a bunch of reasons that have nothing to do with gameplay, and I'm wiling to give it a chance. However the actual gameplay they showed didn't make it stand out from the many other hero shooters already out in the market. It just seems to blend in; if there is a unique gameplay hook, they should've shown it off with the gameplay reveal.

This is one of the most realistic and frustrating comments I've seen. CGI trailers are not realistic. But for the masses, I do believe they spark unrealistic hype, and they also increase profit for people that may not even end up playing the games.

It reminds me of my thoughts on streaming services or gym memberships of people that only stay for a week. They thrive on people that throw out money without actually engaging in profits. Companies thrive on people that take in the shiny toy without actually getting their money's worth.

It's a crazy idea, but drones do keep companies going a lot of times. I want that to change

It'll probably never change. Too many simpletons who don't realize they're simpletons, in gaming.

Sadly :/

 

[Hypereides]

You could consider it a “good thing” because the industry will be forced to recalibrate itself in a way that supports long term sustainability, but that’s kind of like saying global warming is a “good thing” because it’ll teach everyone to be more environmentally conscious. In reality, it’s a problem that should have never happened. And by and large it’s executives, stakeholders, and publishers responsible for the industry’s failings.

I’m optimistic that we’ll see the industry adjust in a more intelligent way. It’s not just forum warriors complaining about the status quo, publishers are now seeing the financial repercussions of their actions and direction. I’m hoping this reformation leads to smaller, leaner, more creative teams with more agency. That may be a naive thought, but all it takes is to look at the methodology of companies like Nintendo and From to see that when you allow your workers to embrace creativity and experimentation, instead of chasing trends, you have a better shot at success.

I hope you're right, but I doubt people like Strauss Zelnick and the like will take this into consideration. They're probably under the conviction already that what they're doing is intelligent and the right thing/direction. Don't count on these people being inclined to change.

 

[BbMajor7th]

A failure of imagination, courage and leadership from major platform holders and publishers has caused much of this. The corporate dogma still assumes infinite growth in a finite system. Gaming ballooned during the last generation and found huge mainstream appeal - now it plateaued. Shareholders refuse to hear this, so CEOs start half-heartedly pushing get-rich-quick schemes whilst aggressively cost cutting.

Publishers are finally beginning to reset expectations, but the damage will last this generation.

 

[SHA]

There are businesses based on what the consumers need and other businesses based on what the consumers want, the latter one obviously takes a lot more to sustain itself, part of it in modern days is being part of your audience, like being a gamer in order to get your content closer to perfection, that's completely different pov than working with faang companies.

 

[Filben]

I recommend watching this video

 

[NeverYouMind]

I recommend watching this video

While I understand the overall narrative with the demise of creative studios like Tango Gameworks, retention of content studios with poorly received releases, and lack of entertaining novel projects in development to sell to the mainstream audience in the future I cannot foresee anything but the shrinking of sales and investment in videogames.