• 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.

Layoffs at Suckerpunch confirmed, includes staff from Sly Cooper era (maybe 20-40%)

msdstc

Incredibly Naive
They already own them.

Sony already own Sucker Punch.

i don't think it's good business sense to purchase something twice...

I don't know how I missed this, can I get a link to the article for this? I could've sworn they were just contracted, but this is great news to hear! lol, way out of the loop.

David Cage games actually make money. The games still sell around 2 million.

I was responding to the claim that sony expects 9s and 10s out of their developers or they get the axe. I was sarcastically replying that the other studios would be long gone if that was the case.
 

BuzzJive

Member
Sad that so many think this is "normal".

It's unfortunate that the company that essentially made the best selling PS4 game this year can't get enough followup work to keep their staff in place. This falls on poor planning and poor management.

You suck Sony.
 

Duxxy3

Member
tumblr_mi1n1cm5a51rqfhi2o1_500.gif


In all seriousness they are most likely regrouping for a new ip that is currently prototyping, you really don't needs to be paying a full team to do that.

If you want your quality to stay at a high level, you need to retain people. If you're constantly hiring and firing, your quality will be up and down. Nintendo's quality has remained top notch for decades because they don't dump half the staff of a developer when a game is finished.

The new Mario Kart was good, the Mario Kart before that was good, and the one before that. Rag on Nintendo all you want for their business practices, but the quality of their games has not suffered.

Uncharted 2 was an AMAZING game. Then a lot of the staff moved to another project and we got Uncharted 3. A good game by most standards, but not near the level of Uncharted 2. Dark Souls 1 and 2 is yet another example.
 
Second Son sold well. Again this has nothing to do with the state of Sucker Punch. It's how the games business works. Extra people are brought in to help with a major project, once that project wraps up they are let go.

If that were the case those would have been contracted employees and this wouldn't be considered as company layoffs. No one hires people as full time, permanent employees to wrap up a game and then fire them lol. Only poorly ran studios have that happen.... It's really not the norm just because you hear of EA and Activision dumping people left and right.
 

DigiMish

Member
If that were the case those would have been contracted employees and this wouldn't be considered as company layoffs. No one hires people as full time, permanent employees to wrap up a game and then fire them lol. Only poorly ran studios have that happen.... It's really not the norm just because you hear of EA and Activision dumping people left and right.

This happens more than you think.
 
If you want your quality to stay at a high level, you need to retain people. If you're constantly hiring and firing, your quality will be up and down. Nintendo's quality has remained top notch for decades because they don't dump half the staff of a developer when a game is finished.

The new Mario Kart was good, the Mario Kart before that was good, and the one before that. Rag on Nintendo all you want for their business practices, but the quality of their games has not suffered.

Uncharted 2 was an AMAZING game. Then a lot of the staff moved to another project and we got Uncharted 3. A good game by most standards, but not near the level of Uncharted 2. Dark Souls 1 and 2 is yet another example.

Strange examples to use. Uncharted 3 is a lot better than Mario Kart Wii relative to their respective series'. Nintendo operates in a completely different culture. Do Capcom, Konami, Square, ect... have massive layoffs in their japanese development studios? Doesn't seem to stop them from being very up and down quality wise.
 
Well, you do have to consider the ever increasing production cost ramp. If (as a simple example) Infamous 2 sold 500k units and cost 15M to make, while Infamous:SS sold 700k units and cost 25M to make, that higher sales total may not be high enough to justify the increase in production costs. They wouldn't be the first studio to suffer from this phenomenon, where sales are fine by historical standards, but insufficient because of the relentless cost ramp.

That's a possibility, but I think it's more likely we're just looking at redundancies. Ultimately I agree with you, I just wanted to point out that there is a pretty common way (At least in the AAA industry) for a company to have their best selling game ever also make far less money than their previous titles.

That's true. Going by the first two months of NPD, it looks like I:SS sold ~2X what the previous series sold in a similar time frame, so I suspect that performance wise the game at least matched expectations. I doubt the game had double the development cost of I2, but this is just a hunch.

Although the rumors of staff reductions reaching 30+% is a bit worrying, and seems far more than just getting rid of redundancies after a project.
 
If that were the case those would have been contracted employees and this wouldn't be considered as company layoffs. No one hires people as full time, permanent employees to wrap up a game and then fire them lol. Only poorly ran studios have that happen.... It's really not the norm just because you hear of EA and Activision dumping people left and right.

When you want to recruit world class talent that has little difficulties finding jobs elsewhere, I don't know if you could sell them on a contractor position.
 
Uncharted 2 was an AMAZING game. Then a lot of the staff moved to another project and we got Uncharted 3. A good game by most standards, but not near the level of Uncharted 2. Dark Souls 1 and 2 is yet another example.

Except that, interestingly enough, both of those examples aren't actually about retaining staff. Both of those companies didn't actually lose the talent that made those games, they just moved them to a different project. I get what you're trying to say, but those were both interesting examples to use.

I personally might have used the revolving door of God Of War directors (especially Ascension) as my example.
 
Poor planning or not, Sucker Punch likely wants to head in a new direction after Infamous Second Son, which the series will have had 3 retail games and 2 stand alone digital games. In doing so that is likely going to take time and planning and they likely don't need to pay an entire staff to do that. At least that's what I think is happening, it will be bizzare if they make another Infamous since they theoretically could have dove head first into that right away.

Still I wish they could have spun off a smaller team Media Molecule style and maybe game jammed an idea for a downloadable title, something I think Sony's in house studios are sorely lacking.
 

njean777

Member
I hope they do a new IP, I liked Infamous but SS felt like more of the same to me and I didn't even finish it. I would like to see something new from them.
 
Well, some folks have already updated their LinkedIn.

Yesterday: 110
Today: 104

Let's see how far the rabbit hole goes.
So wait, 6 are let go, and its a pandemic? If that's the final count, its just another day in the real world. That's far from the 40% touted in the thread title.

GAF does maf gudz.
 
It would've been better to spend that resource into developing a new title a-la ND style. That way, you have twice the amount of people "prototyping", reserving ideas and concepts for full production after the main alpha of the primary title is completed.
 

beril

Member
So wait, 6 are let go, and its a pandemic? If that's the final count, its just another day in the real world. That's far from the 40% touted in the thread title.

GAF does maf gudz.

6 People updating their linked in profile within 24 hours is not the same thing as 6 people in total being laid off

(Do people even use linkedin anymore?)
 

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
So wait, 6 are let go, and its a pandemic? If that's the final count, its just another day in the real world. That's far from the 40% touted in the thread title.

GAF does maf gudz.

Just because only 6 people updated their linkedin account doesn't mean only 6 people are let go.
 
So wait, 6 are let go, and its a pandemic? If that's the final count, its just another day in the real world. That's far from the 40% touted in the thread title.

GAF does maf gudz.

Not everyone updates their LinkedIn immediately, especially if they haven't landed on new jobs.

Give it another week.
 

Freeman

Banned
Sony sucks if they can't manage to keep the internal studios going with the PS4 selling as well as it is. They shouldn't gimp the Playstaion division because other parts of Sony can't turn a profit.
 
Sony sucks if they can't manage to keep the internal studios going with the PS4 selling as well as it is. They shouldn't gimp the Playstaion division because other parts of Sony can't turn a profit.

This isn't a Sony thing, it's a videogame industry thing. It sucks and it's horrible but it is the norm. It shouldn't be but it is. Some places are ahead of others in this like Nintendo where almost all staff stays on. Other than the few good managed companies the entire industry sucks, not just Sony.
 

scoobs

Member
Layoffs happen, unfortunate but that's just how it goes in the real world. Hope everyone lands on their feet.
 
If you want your quality to stay at a high level, you need to retain people. If you're constantly hiring and firing, your quality will be up and down. Nintendo's quality has remained top notch for decades because they don't dump half the staff of a developer when a game is finished.

The new Mario Kart was good, the Mario Kart before that was good, and the one before that. Rag on Nintendo all you want for their business practices, but the quality of their games has not suffered.

Uncharted 2 was an AMAZING game. Then a lot of the staff moved to another project and we got Uncharted 3. A good game by most standards, but not near the level of Uncharted 2. Dark Souls 1 and 2 is yet another example.

You are right, but don`t forget that in this industry outsourcing is used extensively (mostly to studios in china), so theres always the risk of uneven quality. Really, the most of the work is being done by some chinese people, and not by your favorite studio.
 

Bundy

Banned
That really doesn't mean anything. Just because it sold more than the previous games does not mean it was an economic success.
With the PS4 userbase (around 5 - 6 mio back then) and the infamous: SS sales numbers.... yes, it was a success.
 
As others have said, they are probably scaling down before scaling up again.

inFAMOUS Second Son sold 1 million copies in 9 days (at full price). I don't think they are laying people off due to extreme financial pressure. Seems like natural transitioning redundancies.
 
This isn't even just a video game thing, it's a corporation thing.

The theory is you constantly hire, and then every so often layoff the bottom or niche role workers, thus theoretically making the business stronger.

I'm not convinced it works, but it's not at all uncommon.
 

gogoud

Member
Im still shocked the industry doesn't have a union. Do employees them self not want a union?
Unions are bad. Bad worthless employees will be stuck getting paid for overlooking bugs and other things. It's good for benefits, but a lot of times bad apples get rewarded. I guess job security is awesome, but motivation and morale goes down hill when lazy slobs are also rewarded.
 

mclem

Member
Im still shocked the industry doesn't have a union. Do employees them self not want a union?

I've had this discussion from time to time. Usually when I was annoyed, so my arguments at the time might not have been the most coherent... but they would at least have been loud.

My impression from my time in the AAA industry is that there's an underlying feeling that the whole edifice only really *works* through being able to overwork people; that is, a feeling that giving people reasonable benefits would have a disastrous effect on the already-bloated budgets.

I'm sceptical how true this is, but there's a problem here that everyone's too scared to find out. Make the change and turn out to be wrong, and everyone's out of a job. The status quo works - for some value of works - and is the safer option.

And, of course, the industry as a whole benefits from the idea that game development is in some way desirable. There's always fresh-faced kids out of university who are anxious to get involved with the hobby they love. In a sense being driven by passion is a good thing, but it's absolutely finite as we age and other life priorities take over, and when the passion goes, problems arise, developers burn out, and become less useful. But hey, there's always a new fresh-faced youth you can replace them with!

I think we'd have a better industry as a whole, if we worked on nurturing and encouraging that passion, rather than treating it as fuel to meet unrealistic demands. I get a strong impression that some companies do (Valve. Maybe Blizzard). But one thing we *wouldn't* have as much of is bleeding-edge product; budgets would not stretch as far as they're used more towards treating people better.

Ultimately, devs want to make a good game. And in the absence of a budget that respects the work needed to do that properly, the passionate ones will put more of themselves into it instead.

So, in short: There is a perception, I believe, that unionisation would get in the way of being able to make games. For people passionate about their art - even to their own detriment - that can inspire opposition.
 
With the PS4 userbase (around 5 - 6 mio back then) and the infamous: SS sales numbers.... yes, it was a success.
Yeah, but we still don't know anything about the budget. Relative it was a success for sure, financially we have no idea.


Paging @NeoGafShitPosts.
He is only right when it comes to asset production. Some studios outsource most of that these days.


Not everyone updates their LinkedIn immediately, especially if they haven't landed on new jobs.

Give it another week.
I have witnessed periods between 3-6 months before some people updated their profile. Not very indicative I'm afraid except for a general picture.
 

HoodWinked

Member
my guess is that they were overstaffed purposely to hit the deadline for second sons and now that they are going back to regular developmental pace they're cutting staff.
 
Top Bottom