Support NeoGAF

[Ravidrath]

Source? The fact they're putting out an expansion for the iPhone CnC game suggests theyre not giving up on the franchise, but something strange definitely is going on at EALA.

It's true - entire team was told that they would be laid off when C&C4 was finished. My source is my friend on the team. Kotaku reported it, too.

C&C4 is not expected to make money. Every game has sold worse than the one before it, and RA3 just barely broke even, so... if the pattern holds, C&C4 will be a loss.

 

[KHarvey16]

It's true - entire team was told that they would be laid off when C&C4 was finished. My source is my friend on the team. Kotaku reported it, too.

C&C4 is not expected to make money. Every game has sold worse than the one before it, and RA3 just barely broke even, so... if the pattern holds, C&C4 will be a loss.

Wow, I imagine telling the team before the game is finished that they'll be let go when it is is a perfect way to ensure delays, shoddy work and terrible morale.

 

[Sean]

Always sad news when people lose their jobs, but I can't say I'm surprised. Pandemic has been really struggling this gen - all of their projects seem to have either been delayed or cancelled, and the two games actually released were mediocre.

I always had the feeling that EA never really cared about Pandemic anyway, they just wanted BioWare and Pandemic was part of that.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Wow, I imagine telling the team before the game is finished that they'll be let go when it is is a perfect way to ensure delays, shoddy work and terrible morale.

There really is no good solution to this situation. If you fire them after the fact, then you will hear stories about bitter and resentful employees who were tricked and deceived and led to believe everything was fine. Being canned is never an easy situation.

 

[Ravidrath]

Wow, I imagine telling the team before the game is finished that they'll be let go when it is is a perfect way to ensure delays, shoddy work and terrible morale.

Eh, in theory, but EALA had done that already.

EA does have really excellent severance. At 2 months of pay and benefits + 1 week for every year you've been with the company, it is worth staying for, even when jobs are more available than they are now.

 

[fizzelopeguss]

It's true - entire team was told that they would be laid off when C&C4 was finished. My source is my friend on the team. Kotaku reported it, too.

C&C4 is not expected to make money. Every game has sold worse than the one before it, and RA3 just barely broke even, so... if the pattern holds, C&C4 will be a loss.

Gutted.

CnC 3 was quite a glorious comeback for me, even in RA3 was a bit of a letdown.

Good show on EA for atleast letting them conclude the franchise.

 

[Anerythristic]

This is just horrible news. I don't think gaming can survive another console generation.

 

[Ravidrath]

Gutted.

CnC 3 was quite a glorious comeback for me, even in RA3 was a bit of a letdown.

Good show on EA for atleast letting them conclude the franchise.

What is really sad is that the C&C team was the only team at EALA that consistently delivered solid, profitable games on time and on budget.

While I'm not sure what EA should do instead of letting them go, given the way their RTS' sales have been trending, it's hard not to feel that they're being punished for the mistakes of the Tiberium and LMNO teams.

If anything, I think they probably just deserved a chance to make a non-RTS product, since they generally had their act together.

This is just horrible news. I don't think gaming can survive another console generation.

It can and will, but companies need to serious about intelligent process and decision-making. These things, by and large, are not part of the current industry culture, though, so it will take new companies and cultures to fix things, I think.

 

[Combine]

I feel really bad for those who lost jobs. There really isn't much out there now in this market. I just can't believe that there are enough openings out there, to especially fill even close to 1500 positions.

It's going to be very rough for some people.

 

[Y2Kev]

So essentially $900 million plus for Bioware. smh Lucky if they ever make a return on that investment.

After this latest round of cuts being announced I seriously wondered how these guys would fare.

Good job, JR, you know how to spot a deal.

 

[Johann]

I can't say I'm surprised after their recent track record. They don't have much too offer in the way of successful games (now that the licensed games are gone) and strong technology that could help the other studios.

I'm kinda surprised EA didn't can Saboteur in February when they shut down Pandemic Brisbane and axe the rest of Pandemic then.

The Saboteur was in development for several years. The game was probably too far along in development to kill off. EA's releases for this year were already down from last year (and that's with Godfather 2 and the Sims 3 delay). It wouldn't look too good for them and their new IP angle if they added the Saboteur (a significantly publicized game) alongside Tiberium (and The Dark Knight) in the scrapheap.

It doesn't seem like its going to happen, but hey anything is possible come December...right? Santa could place the impressive sales figures under Riccitiello's tree this year. It would be a Christmas miracle. Hasn't John been a good boy this year?

Yeah, it's not like he insulted his investors and other members of the EA Partners Program by showing favoritism towards underperforming Rock Band 2... during a year-end conference, caused his company to lose a thousand jobs and a billion dollars due to the failure of his push towards new IP/alternative revenue streams, and blamed his Wii flops on Nintendo for not releasing more first party games.

Even if the game was successful, you still have a developer that hasn't shown consistency and reliability.

 

[Y2Kev]

I believe Saboteur IS being sent out to die. On purpose. It gives Riccitiello the ammunition he needs to shut them down for good.

There needs to be serious bloodletting at EA. It's sad to say it, but it's true. The number of teams they have that do not produce output is stunning. If they don't start seriously trimming the fat, EA could be done. They are in the exact same position they were in last year-- losing massive amounts of money despite releasing hugely profitable franchises time and time again.

I love EA...I think they are a vitally important producer of important video game content. I want them to survive. They're not the Japanese government in the 90s--no need propping up these zombie teams.

 

[Jocchan]

:/

 

[jorma]

Eh, in theory, but EALA had done that already.

EA does have really excellent severance. At 2 months of pay and benefits + 1 week for every year you've been with the company, it is worth staying for, even when jobs are more available than they are now.

If that is considered "really excellent"...wow.

 

[Kintaro]

Saw this coming a mile away. How soon does EA turn its attention to John Riccitiello? Since he has come back, it has been nothing but disaster for EA. Starting with $860+ million dollars they sunk into Bioware and Pandemic that put a nice sum of money back into John's pockets.

The dude is bad news.

 

[Dipswitch]

Always a shame to see folks lose their jobs. Terrible time of year for it too

 

[fizzelopeguss]

What is really sad is that the C&C team was the only team at EALA that consistently delivered solid, profitable games on time and on budget.

Yeah i been looking through their list at wiki and i've owned and really enjoyed most of their titles. EALA made most of the solid PC titles that EA had when they went through their asshole/shit game period.

 

[Ravidrath]

If that is considered "really excellent"...wow.

It is legitimately excellent, at least by U.S. standards. "Standard" severance is 2 weeks, with no benefits.

A lot of people at EA and Pandemic have been there have been several years, so they're likely to make out pretty well.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Saw this coming a mile away. How soon does EA turn its attention to John Riccitiello? Since he has come back, it has been nothing but disaster for EA. Starting with $860+ million dollars they sunk into Bioware and Pandemic that put a nice sum of money back into John's pockets.

The dude is bad news.

They have a massive bloated structure and always have. And they were stuck in the mindset of a Playstation led industry being the formula for success. Its more than one guy. Its a structural problem.

 

[Revolutionary]

Damn, that really sucks to hear... hopefully it's false. Just a few weeks ago, I played some Tekken with one of the Pandemic devs (who I met through gaf). He seemed really enthusiastic about Saboteur, as I am - I was planning a day one purchase.

Damn shame... I'll still pick it up, though.

 

[mentalfloss]

Shame. I was one of the few who actually really enjoyed LOTR Conquest. Not that it would ever happen again anyway..

 

[Epic Tier 3 Engineer]

Yeah, it's sad that they're losing their jobs. It's also sad when Grin went down, but GAF got a kick out of that. Why? Their games sucked.

Pandemic is going down because they release glitchy pieces of crap that overpromise and underdeliver.

 

[Returners]

I like Mercs.

 

[MarshallVaako]

As long as Bioware is okay...As long as Bioware is okay..



Leave Bioware Alone!

 

[cuyahoga]

LMNO teams.

Is this still around?

 

[Iksenpets]

I always got the impression that Pandemic was merely along for the ride when EA bought Bioware.

Agreed, in fact I'd say Pandemic is the reason Microsoft never made the first move to get BioWare.

And releasing Saboteur in December was about the biggest vote of no confidence Pandemic could get. Even if the game's great, it's sent to die in a post-Black Friday release window. They don't seem to have enough faith in that game to continue bothering with Pandemic, and after Battlefront bombed and Mercs did only average, they've probably been a net loss for the company, especially compared to their big brothers over at BioWare who are probably raking in cash with Mass Effect and Dragon Age.

 

[ymmv]

You can still look forward to it, and still buy it - it's out in two weeks.

I hope the game won't have any serious bugs because it won't get patched if there are any.

 

[RobertM]

I'll miss those two games even though the first one wasn't done by Pandemic

 

[RSLAEV]

Wow that sucks. I work in Westwood and you always see Pandemic guys walking around at lunchtime (They always wear their black Pandemic shirts) It was kind of cool having a game studio in the neighborhood.

 

[Opiate]

I believe Saboteur IS being sent out to die. On purpose. It gives Riccitiello the ammunition he needs to shut them down for good.

There needs to be serious bloodletting at EA. It's sad to say it, but it's true. The number of teams they have that do not produce output is stunning. If they don't start seriously trimming the fat, EA could be done. They are in the exact same position they were in last year-- losing massive amounts of money despite releasing hugely profitable franchises time and time again.

I love EA...I think they are a vitally important producer of important video game content. I want them to survive. They're not the Japanese government in the 90s--no need propping up these zombie teams.

Y2Kev, I never replied to a query you'd made in an earlier thread about this topic, because I didn't notice until well past the thread's expiration date.

Others have circled around the issue already, but it's worth restating: the problem is not, by and large, that the games making it to market are underperforming. They are underperforming, to an extent, but that would just cause losses, not massive-hemmorhage-everyone-is-losing-their-jobs losses. Those types of losses come from the teams that take twice as long as needed to make a game, or don't make a game at all.

However -- and I don't mean to have a bleak outlook here -- I'm not sure this is a solvable problem. Canceled projects are a major part of every industry: movies don't make it to production, musical artists get signed and canned before they ever make an album, authors are signed to contracts and then never publish a book. Even within this industry, Nintendo, the supposed masters of video game efficiency, cancel stuff all the time. We know of games like Project HAMMER and games that go unreleased in the west like Disaster, but even of entire systems which are designed and then canceled, like their recently discussed DS successor that never was. Given how secretive Nintendo can be, I'm sure a large number of other projects have been canceled without the public even knowing they ever existed.

In short, I think canceled projects are part of making creative goods. While I expect these moves to lessen the major, immediate money losses, I think their long term problems are more systemic. Asking your teams to never create an ultimately canceled project is like saying, "Okay guys, we'll make money as long as everyone always produces a hit." It's not realistic: in a huge corporation at any given time, some groups will suceeed, and some will fail. If you're only making money when every team is suceeding, then you've built your company wrong.

 

[Ravidrath]

Is this still around?

LMNO is gone. It briefly came back as, like... a rail shooter or something, and then promptly died again forever.

 

[ethelred]

LMNO is gone. It briefly came back as, like... a rail shooter or something, and then promptly died again forever.

That's unfortunate. The game seemed so conceptually cool. :/

 

[Stoney Mason]

If you're only making money when every team is suceeding, then you've built your company wrong.

Very true. At least at the publisher level.

 

[Vinci]

So essentially $900 million plus for Bioware. smh Lucky if they ever make a return on that investment.

A really strong, popular MMO would help. Enter: Old Republic.

Admittedly, I'm assuming it will be popular.

 

[ChiTownBuffalo]

Man, I still play Mercenaries 2.

Just the hilariousness of the Sarah Palin/Barack Obama skins.....

 

[Flying_Phoenix]

Guys this is just the natural state of the industry. The strongest survive while the weak die. If they made hit million sellers they'd still be here. This is just the luck of the draw of the gaming industry. Let the big AAA publishers handle all of our gaming needs and pick what games we play. Fewer games while them being more similar while making less profit. The industry is just fine.

Asking your teams to never create an ultimately canceled project is like saying, "Okay guys, we'll make money as long as everyone always produces a hit." It's not realistic: in a huge corporation at any given time, some groups will suceeed, and some will fail. If you're only making money when every team is suceeding, then you've built your company wrong.

Seriously this is also why the people who say "It doesn't matter development costs are getting so high and profit margins so low. As long as they just produce hits they'll be fine", don't have a clue of what they're talking about. Every company in any industry needs both money makers and losers.

 

[lupinko]

Saw this coming a mile away. How soon does EA turn its attention to John Riccitiello? Since he has come back, it has been nothing but disaster for EA. Starting with $860+ million dollars they sunk into Bioware and Pandemic that put a nice sum of money back into John's pockets.

The dude is bad news.

Save us Larry Probst!!!

 

[Icarus]

If that's true, that was a pretty significant waste of the portion of the Bio/Pandemic purchase cost... has to be a few hundred million attributed to Pandemic in that deal.

 

[Stumpokapow]

If you're only making money when every team is suceeding, then you've built your company wrong.

I agree, but remember that EA has 15 studios or so who have 2-3 teams each. The bulk of EA's released products do quite well, and there are very few utter bombs. Their have an enormous roster of bankable IP in pretty much every genre.

The problem with the company is fat. EA repeatedly tells everyone this and despite a number of restructurings that have helped streamline stuff, there's still a ton of fat. I identified a number of full studios that I feel like either will or probably ought to be axed if EA wants to be profitable. Riccitiello has identified those studios too, judging from the rumours and the fact that it's pretty likely the OP is actually true.

Put it this way; Let's say a studio has two 150 person teams who can each be expected to create a game every two years (and presumably you alternate years, so the studio releases one title per year). To be profitable, a game needs to cover negative costs, marketing, and provide ROI. Negative costs are expenses for 300 people for one year; not 150.

Year 1: Team A releases game.
Year 2: Team B game cancelled, starts new game. (No income this year, functionally)
Year 3: Team A releases game, underperforms.
Year 4: Team B releases game
Year 5: Team A game cancelled, starts new game.

Now multiply this kind of pattern across every studio in the company.

Like I said, there are elements of the company who release products regularly and seem to always provide ROI (EA Sports as a division, actually) and there are elements of the company that are lean and have relatively fixed, reliable costs (EA Partners, for example), but there's also a ton of fat.

Pandemic has a lot of talent, but the output this gen just hasn't been there. Three profitable licences lost (including one where the game was pushed out half-baked and bombed and one where the game was near-finished and cancelled at that stage), Destroy All Humans declining as an IP and being owned by another publisher anyway... that leaves Mercs 2 which underperformed and The Saboteur which is about to and probably would even if EA did put their muscle behind it.

I feel like EA's departmental structure is pretty good at this point. My only problem is that pretty much every studio has teams who aren't being utilized effectively (whether a management issue or a development issues, I have no idea) and some studios have basically nothing to offer at all right now.

 

[RJT]

Definitely safe:
DICE: Tech wizards, profitable franchiseable games, games release on time and on a regular basis.
Redwood Shores
EA Sports

Can't DICE be hit by their relatively unsuccessful new project (Mirror's Edge)? I love the game, but it wasn't a success with the public or the critics. They're basically milking the Battlefield franchise...

BioWare, on the other hand, doesn't miss. I'm sure they'll allow to be just the way it is.

 

[Stoney Mason]

Can't DICE be hit by their relatively unsuccessful new project (Mirror's Edge)? I love the game, but it wasn't a success with the public or the critics. They're basically milking the Battlefield franchise...

BioWare, on the other hand, doesn't miss. I'm sure they'll allow to be just the way it is.

The Battlefield franchise is very succesful and profitable. Dice is more than safe. I doubt you'll be seeing another Mirror's Edge though unless it has a crazy smallish budget which seems kind of unlikely.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

Any other GAFers play this old Pandemic PC game?

That game was high quality. I really wish someone would bring that franchise back...

And I just noticed that game was published by Activision. Pandemic really has had a rough go of it, haven't they?

 

[Y2Kev]

Y2Kev, I never replied to a query you'd made in an earlier thread about this topic, because I didn't notice until well past the thread's expiration date.

Others have circled around the issue already, but it's worth restating: the problem is not, by and large, that the games making it to market are underperforming. They are underperforming, to an extent, but that would just cause losses, not massive-hemmorhage-everyone-is-losing-their-jobs losses. Those types of losses come from the teams that take twice as long as needed to make a game, or don't make a game at all.

However -- and I don't mean to have a bleak outlook here -- I'm not sure this is a solvable problem. Canceled projects are a major part of every industry: movies don't make it to production, musical artists get signed and canned before they ever make an album, authors are signed to contracts and then never publish a book. Even within this industry, Nintendo, the supposed masters of video game efficiency, cancel stuff all the time. We know of games like Project HAMMER and games that go unreleased in the west like Disaster, but even of entire systems which are designed and then canceled, like their recently discussed DS successor that never was. Given how secretive Nintendo can be, I'm sure a large number of other projects have been canceled without the public even knowing they ever existed.

In short, I think canceled projects are part of making creative goods. While I expect these moves to lessen the major, immediate money losses, I think their long term problems are more systemic. Asking your teams to never create an ultimately canceled project is like saying, "Okay guys, we'll make money as long as everyone always produces a hit." It's not realistic: in a huge corporation at any given time, some groups will suceeed, and some will fail. If you're only making money when every team is suceeding, then you've built your company wrong.

Stump basically captures what I would have replied, but I'll just restate: the number of EA teams that are unproductive far exceeds what should be considered reasonable. Most products at EA are succeeding. I can only think of a few bombs, and then you have those performing in line with expectations on a year to year basis. The company is just entirely too large.

I'd wager no other studio has a "cancelled" output like EA does. Certainly not Activision, which has many fewer employees.

 

[Kentpaul]

it's been going downhill since the first merc game

 

[Ravidrath]

Removed.

 

[Opiate]

I agree, but remember that EA has 15 studios or so who have 2-3 teams each. The bulk of EA's released products do quite well, and there are very few utter bombs. Their have an enormous roster of bankable IP in pretty much every genre.

The problem with the company is fat. EA repeatedly tells everyone this and despite a number of restructurings that have helped streamline stuff, there's still a ton of fat. I identified a number of full studios that I feel like either will or probably ought to be axed if EA wants to be profitable. Riccitiello has identified those studios too, judging from the rumours and the fact that it's pretty likely the OP is actually true.

The obvious problem with this is that today's success is tomorrow's fat. Example? Maxis is on the chopping block. Certainly not being killed entirely, but from what we hear, they'll be taking a bulk of cuts. Maxis. The creators of The Sims, EA's biggest hit in their history. Or you have Westwood studios, who used to produce big money makers with the early C&C games, which have gradually lessened over time. Pandemic was a moneymaker at one point, too.

So unless your company is a revolving door, constantly firing the old (once succesful, now fatty) and hiring the new, there's no way for this to be done in predictable fashion. I don't think the video game industry is set up in a manner that makes this feasible.

I feel like EA's departmental structure is pretty good at this point. My only problem is that pretty much every studio has teams who aren't being utilized effectively (whether a management issue or a development issues, I have no idea) and some studios have basically nothing to offer at all right now.

I agree, but my point is that this is a chronic problem for all major conglomerated business. Therefore, while it is prudent to work tirelessly to reduce inefficiencies, it also prudent to to assume that some inefficiencies will still exist no matter how hard you try, because the reality is they will. From the earnings reports we're seeing, it seems abundantly clear that EA would only be seeing favorable profit and growth if literally no inefficiencies existed.

 

[Stumpokapow]

Can't DICE be hit by their relatively unsuccessful new project (Mirror's Edge)? I love the game, but it wasn't a success with the public or the critics. They're basically milking the Battlefield franchise...

Mirror's Edge was probably slight loss / breakeven / inadequate ROI, but it was produced a) Quickly, b) Relatively cheaply by all accounts. No developer inside a major publisher would be docked because of the failure of a product, they'd be docked because of a failure of process. DICE has good process.

They're also tech wizards. They've got Frostbyte.

I feel like they're pretty safe.

BioWare, on the other hand, doesn't miss. I'm sure they'll allow to be just the way it is.

With BioWare, it's not that they miss, it's that they're set up in such a way that IF they miss, they'd be in trouble. They develop projects with HUGE teams that take a long time to make--the total opposite of something like EA Sports.

I'd say definitely Pandemic, Montreal, and EALA would be cut back or shut down before anything would befall BioWare though.

 

[RJT]

The Battlefield franchise is very succesful and profitable. Dice is more than safe. I doubt you'll be seeing another Mirror's Edge though unless it has a crazy smallish budget which seems kind of unlikely.

I wasn't talking about being shut down. But I don't know if they will be allowed to take another huge risk in the near future. And I sure hope Mirror's Edge has a sequel. It would be crazy not to make a bigger game, now that they got the hardest part figured out (the perfect control and animations).

 

[Kifimbo]

I'd say definitely Pandemic, Montreal, and EALA would be cut back or shut down before anything would befall BioWare though.

Montreal looks safe. EA will take advantage of the subsidies.

 

[divisionbyzorro]

I wasn't talking about being shut down. But I don't know if they will be allowed to take another huge risk in the near future. And I sure hope Mirror's Edge has a sequel. It would be crazy not to make a bigger game, now that they got the hardest part figured out (the perfect control and animations).

Mirror's Edge is the only time I've ever seen achievements ruin a game. They bragged on and on about how you could beat the game without ever killing anybody, and then made a high value achievement for it. They basically said that you were doing it wrong if you used a gun at all. If you played the game like a real person would have (using everything available to survive, including guns), it was a much better game.