• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Insomniac Leak: Another PlayStation Studio Could Be Closing In The Future

Ronin_7

Banned
Its weird how hard up they seem for cash right now. They're breaking records. I dont completely get it.
It's not about breaking records, business adjusts as needed.

My company had a record year in my Country, yet there were layoffs across every division... My team was one of the few not affected.

This while breaking records.

Google has insane profits & 12.000 were gone, same for most companies.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
As for the future profits of Activision (which is around $2B per year), well too bad. It's as much (if not a bit more) than Sony's entire gaming division. Thats a lot of profits to buy more publishers. :)
The more you spend the more you save… great when you do not count the initial $80 Billion spent… still, again, not a charity and in this race to the bottom they have a plan to make it all back with lots of interest and that is the plan that people should think about… sigh…
 

ProtoByte

Member
As you might expect, Reee has gone all proletariat because Sony dares to lay people off in a leaner economic world. Shockingly, someone there actually pointed out the business illiteracy that I see there and most other places on the internet.

The dichotomy in this thread from people who have zero clue how business operates.

"Costs are too high for games"

"We need to reduce costs"

"We need to make sure no one gets laid off"

"We need to make sure developers are paid what they are worth"

"Don't crunch, take your time"

"Why aren't the graphics better than the previous version"

"Why is the game shorter"

As if games magically appear in your hard drive.


Hate to say it, but I'm probably going to actually read the Kotaku article for the sake of convenience. Sounds like some really interesting insights into the business reality of the industry right now.
 

Sanepar

Member
Tbh at this point the best move for Sony is to sell Playstation arm. They don't have the financial structure to expand and compete targeting 10 years from now. They have only 16 studios that make games. They need someone that can invest and buy publishers for them.
 

xrnzaaas

Member
It's baffling that Media Molecule is still around while Sony didn't think twice about closing studios with bigger potential. Gotta be them.
 

ManaByte

Gold Member
The plan with Spiderman 3 is to have two parts a year apart. So not spliced out int a ton of TV or Telltale episodes. So the master plan with SM3 is really one gigantic game split into two releases.

80EK7AK.jpg

It's not 2 parts. It's 3.

Part 1: 2027 $50
MP game: 2027 $50
Part 3: 2028 $50

Then a "GOTY" combo release in 2029 for $60.

So FOMO: $150 or wait three years and pay $60 for it all.
 

ProtoByte

Member
The plan with Spiderman 3 is to have two parts a year apart. So not spliced out int a ton of TV or Telltale episodes. So the master plan with SM3 is really one gigantic game split into two releases.

80EK7AK.jpg
It was a consideration. Not "the plan". Every (more recent) schedule they've got shows Spider-Man 3 as a single release.

The worst part about leaks like these is the misinterpretation and/or purposeful false framing of the information revealed.
 

N1tr0sOx1d3

Given another chance
This is insane.
Games now cost £20 more, gaming has never been so popular with sellthrough breaking records, games now sold multiplatform and yet here we are massacring jobs every which way.

Games shouldn’t be costing £400 million to create.
 

Godot25

Banned
So it's either outdated document (because Sony already shut down PixelOpus), or we have new entrant on chopping block.
But there is no obvious candidate. Media Molecule was already restructured and Sony obviously won't touch studios like SSM, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerrilla, Sucker Punch or Polyphony. And they will also not touch new acquisitions like Firesprite, Firewalk or Haven. So only candidates are studios like London Studio.
 

Woopah

Member
Good, if the all close I don't care. When will we have Switch 2 Nintendo?
2nd half of 2024.
Might have just been about Pixel Opus, future doesn't mean our future, but whenever it was written future.
So it's either outdated document (because Sony already shut down PixelOpus), or we have new entrant on chopping block.
But there is no obvious candidate. Media Molecule was already restructured and Sony obviously won't touch studios like SSM, Naughty Dog, Insomniac, Guerrilla, Sucker Punch or Polyphony. And they will also not touch new acquisitions like Firesprite, Firewalk or Haven. So only candidates are studios like London Studio.
Its from November 2023.
Tbh at this point the best move for Sony is to sell Playstation arm. They don't have the financial structure to expand and compete targeting 10 years from now. They have only 16 studios that make games. They need someone that can invest and buy publishers for them.
They don't need to buy publishers, they can just continue growing and buying developers.
 

Three

Member
If MS cared that much about Xbox's bad financials, why didnt they cut the cord anytime up to 2022?

As for the future profits of Activision (which is around $2B per year), well too bad. It's as much (if not a bit more) than Sony's entire gaming division. Thats a lot of profits to buy more publishers. :)
Believe it or not Mattrick made xbox profitable during the time of the late 360 gen. They had a strategy shift since then. They are still not running a charity.
 
Last edited:

Snake29

RSI Employee of the Year
What is the date? Because i’ve heard this doc was a year old. They closed PixelOpus.
 
Last edited:
This is insane.
Games now cost £20 more, gaming has never been so popular with sellthrough breaking records, games now sold multiplatform and yet here we are massacring jobs every which way.

Games shouldn’t be costing £400 million to create.

How do you propose they make the types of games their fanbase enjoy much cheaper? Game length is one way. What else?
 

ungalo

Member
Media Molecule didn't work on Sackboy right ?

I guess it will be either Media Molecule or London Studio, or one of the recent studios they acquired nobody care about.
 
Last edited:

Woopah

Member
I tried searching for the year but could only find the month November mentioned, can you show where it says 2023?
In the article it says:

"Whatever final decisions Insomniac decided to make about its upcoming projects, some internal documents suggest budget cuts demanded by Sony have complicated matters. Presentations earlier in the year point to a rough projected headcount of 500 moving forward"

It then goes on to mention a September presentation and a more recent November one.
 
Last edited:

bitbydeath

Member
In the article it says:

"Whatever final decisions Insomniac decided to make about its upcoming projects, some internal documents suggest budget cuts demanded by Sony have complicated matters. Presentations earlier in the year point to a rough projected headcount of 500 moving forward"

It then goes on to mention a September presentation and a more recent November one.
Yeah, that’s all I could find as well.
Timeframe is relative to whenever it was written.

Earlier in the year doesn’t necessarily mean earlier this year.
 
Last edited:

Woopah

Member
Yeah, that’s all I could find as well.
Timeframe is relative to whenever it was written.

Earlier in the year doesn’t necessarily mean earlier this year.
Earlier in the year means relative to when the article was written I believe. Aka, earlier in 2023.

Same as when the article talks about material from "November" or "the "summer". It means this year.
 
Last edited:

bitbydeath

Member
Earlier in the year means relative to when the article was written I believe. Aka, earlier in 2023.

Same as when the article talks about material from "November" or "the "summer". It means this year.
If what they pulled from said “earlier in the year”, it could mean anytime. Depends if they’re referencing the hacked material or are paraphrasing I suppose.
 

Woopah

Member
If what they pulled from said “earlier in the year”, it could mean anytime. Depends if they’re referencing the hacked material or are paraphrasing I suppose.
Its them paraphrasing, the article uses quote marks when it's taking text directly from the files.

Edit: I've seen other slides from the leak, and they have the year written in the bottom left. So I imagine the slides the author saw had the year written in it too.
 
Last edited:

Phase

Member
This is insane.
Games now cost £20 more, gaming has never been so popular with sellthrough breaking records, games now sold multiplatform and yet here we are massacring jobs every which way.

Games shouldn’t be costing £400 million to create.
You're right, it is insane. But it's self-inflicted. This is what happens when companies are public and "need" exponential growth. At some point it becomes unsustainable, all while gutting a lot of what got them there in the first place. At least they're finally starting to realize smaller projects may be necessary.
 

simpatico

Member
Just the thought that Media Molecule has prime office space somewhere and a staff of salaried people in 2023 is really blowing my mind over here.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
You're right, it is insane. But it's self-inflicted. This is what happens when companies are public and "need" exponential growth. At some point it becomes unsustainable, all while gutting a lot of what got them there in the first place. At least they're finally starting to realize smaller projects may be necessary.
Yup.

The strive for game makers to make bigger splashier games with AAA textures and voice actors and cinematics is killing some studios. Thats on them to go balls out, or be more conservative and make a good game that doesn't have to be huge productions or open world or even licensed. Marvel takes what from Sony? About 10% cut?

Not every restaurant is a AAA Vegas pig out buffet.
 

nial

Gold Member
London Studio is not a strong candidate. Not only they're pretty successful overall, but it's also their internal development department in SIE Europe, at most they will just do a big restructure within it, or replace it with a new department that is functionally the same (like Japan Studio Internal Development Department to Team Asobi).
When it's all said and done, Bend Studio and Media Molecule are the most likely options here, IMO.
 
Either Media Molecule or Bend. MM's output since LBP2 has been what, Dreams? Bend put out great handheld titles but what's their output the last ten years? One game. Does Sony even check in with these folks or do they just hand them a credit card and say "good luck!"
 

MarkMe2525

Member
Click bait. There is always the chance of a studio closure for a variety of reasons. People like this make a broad-inevitable predictions, and then attempt to garner clout when said inevitability prediction comes true.

P.s. I read absolutely zero percent of the "article".
 

bitbydeath

Member
Either Media Molecule or Bend. MM's output since LBP2 has been what, Dreams? Bend put out great handheld titles but what's their output the last ten years? One game. Does Sony even check in with these folks or do they just hand them a credit card and say "good luck!"
Most of their studios take a long time, Sucker Punch for example released Ghosts around the same time as Days Gone and neither have had a new game since. (Outside of their DLC support)
 
Last edited:

Heisenberg007

Gold Journalism
Unless Media Molecule can right the ship, they should be closed.

That money could be used for funding better projects for PlayStation gamers.
 

ProtoByte

Member
You're right, it is insane. But it's self-inflicted. This is what happens when companies are public and "need" exponential growth. At some point it becomes unsustainable, all while gutting a lot of what got them there in the first place. At least they're finally starting to realize smaller projects may be necessary.

Yup.

The strive for game makers to make bigger splashier games with AAA textures and voice actors and cinematics is killing some studios. Thats on them to go balls out, or be more conservative and make a good game that doesn't have to be huge productions or open world or even licensed. Marvel takes what from Sony? About 10% cut?

Not every restaurant is a AAA Vegas pig out buffet.

I think that's an overly simplistic and easy explanation that doesn't hold upon inspection.

Horizon looks better than Spider-Man 2, reuses fewer assets, is way longer and cost the better part of 100 million less to make. Cinematics and VAs out the wazoo, recording for much longer periods of time. I think Insomniac was less than smart casting Lowenthal and Bailey in the foremost roles for Spider-Man, but they don't break the bank any more than Ashley Burch and Lance Reddick, featuring Carrie Fisher.

Let's also not pretend like the push for improved technology is new or something consumers have nothing to do with, or doesn't exist outside of PlayStation's studios. Frankly, back when the industry was less public and corporate, the ambition for exponential improvements in technology was greater than it is now, and the hardware was getting cheaper and more powerful to facilitate it. Now we're plateauing.

The lead up to Spider-Man 2's launch on this forum and others was full of people noting how iterative it appeared from SM1 and MM, and it turned out to be exactly that. To the point that Insomnjac themselves don't know why they're spending 3 times the money for less of a cumulative effort for the game.

So the answer is more complicated and perhaps uncomfortable. Maybe there's too much bloat. Maybe game devs have actually decreased in productivity as a result of said bloat and the resultant bureaucracy, anti-crunch/work-life balance propaganda and working from home. Maybe California is a failed state, and way too expensive to pay people in.

Maybe margins are narrow because these games are worth way more than 70 dollars at launch, and gamers are too fickle and short sighted to understand that.

Notes: The smaller games were losing Sony money; and the cut Marvel takes ranges from 20-35% depending on the format of the copy sold, going by their X-Men terms.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
I think that's an overly simplistic and easy explanation that doesn't hold upon inspection.

Horizon looks better than Spider-Man 2, reuses fewer assets, is way longer and cost the better part of 100 million less to make. Cinematics and VAs out the wazoo, recording for much longer periods of time. I think Insomniac was less than smart casting Lowenthal and Bailey in the foremost roles for Spider-Man, but they don't break the bank any more than Ashley Burch and Lance Reddick, featuring Carrie Fisher.

Let's also not pretend like the push for improved technology is new or something consumers have nothing to do with, or doesn't exist outside of PlayStation's studios. Frankly, back when the industry was less public and corporate, the ambition for exponential improvements in technology was greater than it is now, and the hardware was getting cheaper and more powerful to facilitate it. Now we're plateauing.

The lead up to Spider-Man 2's launch on this forum and others was full of people noting how iterative it appeared from SM1 and MM, and it turned out to be exactly that. To the point that Insomnjac themselves don't know why they're spending 3 times the money for less of a cumulative effort for the game.

So the answer is more complicated and perhaps uncomfortable. Maybe there's too much bloat. Maybe game devs have actually decreased in productivity as a result of said bloat and the resultant bureaucracy, anti-crunch/work-life balance propaganda and working from home. Maybe California is a failed state, and way too expensive to pay people in.

Maybe margins are narrow because these games are worth way more than 70 dollars at launch, and gamers are too fickle and short sighted to understand that.

Notes: The smaller games were losing Sony money; and the cut Marvel takes ranges from 20-35% depending on the format of the copy sold, going by their X-Men terms.
I dont know how much budget goes to all the cutscenes, VA, tons of script etc.... but IMO that is the kind of stuff that should be downscaled first if any game is tapping out the budget.

Modern day overdoing cinematics is no different than the early days of CDrom digitized actors doing clips. Only difference is that modern cinematics are better quality as those old 90s clips were mostly laughably bad as if half the time the people in them were the employees doing it themselves. One part programmer, one part drama class.

And just like CDrom clips, hardly anyone brings that up as a top priority in a good gaming. Not too often you'll see people say Game X is awesome because the story and dialogue were the best features.

Unless it's a game totally meant for story, personally I dont think a lot of gamers care in their games for overbloated unskippable cut scenes, tons of yammering, the walk and talk part at the beginning of a level where you cant do anything about it. They want good graphics, gameplay and often MP modes if it's a traditional full priced game. I'd confidently predict when it comes to budget setting, most gamers would put anything to do with cinematics low on the budget priority list.

Sony is an entertainment company at heart. TVs, movies, games, music. Ya they got other stuff like insurance and making cell phone cam lenses, but holistically their game budgets are blowing the bank because they want to make their games like Hollywood. And going by the past few years literally Hollywood with tons of video game movies and tv shows. They want their media to have similar production values where game and movie become one.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom