Sony to lay off 8% of workforce, close London studio

Kyleran

The beatings continue. 

Sony is to lay off 900 people, equating to eight percent of its workforce. This reduction will see PlayStation Studio' London Studio close in its entirety, plus reductions made within Sony's Firesprite studio. There will also be reductions in various functions across SIE in the UK

In a post earlier today, Sony's Jim Ryan said the company's PlayStation community meant "everything to us", and therefore it felt compelled to share an update on the current situation.

"We have made the extremely hard decision to announce our plan to commence a reduction of our overall headcount globally by about eight percent or about 900 people, subject to local law and consultation processes. Employees across the globe, including our studios, are impacted," Ryan wrote."

https://www.eurogamer.net/sony-laying-off-900-playstation-employees-london-studio-to-close-in-its-entirety

Scot

The thing is we know too many games is part of this, but how do studios make a comeback? From a players point of view I would hope the common sense of "well they make fewer better quality games that sell more!" would win through.

But we know that is not likely going to be what happens, an industry not exactly known for innovation will cut back on anything new and tie themselves even more closely to the likes of live service even though they may be getting data in saying the likes of live service may not be the winner it was. The temptation to go down the NFT and crypto route will be very strong, the only innovation they will be looking at it revenue innovation.

MaxBacon

Scot said:

The thing is we know too many games is part of this, but how do studios make a comeback? From a players point of view I would hope the common sense of "well they make fewer better quality games that sell more!" would win through.

But we know that is not likely going to be what happens, an industry not exactly known for innovation will cut back on anything new and tie themselves even more closely to the likes of live service even though they may be getting data in saying the likes of live service may not be the winner it was. The temptation to go down the NFT and crypto route will be very strong, the only innovation they will be looking at it revenue innovation.

Cancelling ongoing projects in development and wait until the industry readjusts to 2019 levels for example.


As far I read there's already been a trend around the big studios and publishers of canning projects internally, the current reality of too may games coming out has apparently resulted on underwhelming earnings across the board.


And these companies do not like to see less millions on their profit numbers, it's the employees paying that bill on cost cutting measures now.

ValdemarJ

Sounds like it could be pay back for the CMA not crushing the Microsoft ABK deal. The UK threw a few hundred million pounds at Star Citizen to keep them going (probably demanding they move all their offices to the UK before they can collect the cash). Now Sony is pissed off.

Scot

MaxBacon said:

Scot said:

The thing is we know too many games is part of this, but how do studios make a comeback? From a players point of view I would hope the common sense of "well they make fewer better quality games that sell more!" would win through.

But we know that is not likely going to be what happens, an industry not exactly known for innovation will cut back on anything new and tie themselves even more closely to the likes of live service even though they may be getting data in saying the likes of live service may not be the winner it was. The temptation to go down the NFT and crypto route will be very strong, the only innovation they will be looking at it revenue innovation.

Cancelling ongoing projects in development and wait until the industry readjusts to 2019 levels for example.


As far I read there's already been a trend around the big studios and publishers of canning projects internally, the current reality of too may games coming out has apparently resulted on underwhelming earnings across the board.


And these companies do not like to see less millions on their profit numbers, it's the employees paying that bill on cost cutting measures now.

Solid take, but that's a temporary cure, reduce the output to sustainable levels, are they all going to except their studio is now going to make a lot less money from here on out? I can't see that, they won't all go crypto but they will be seeking a solution to regain that lost ground and it is wishful thinking on my part to hope they realise quality is the key.

MaxBacon

Scot said:

Solid take, but that's a temporary cure, reduce the output to sustainable levels, are they all going to except their studio is now going to make a lot less money from here on out? I can't see that, they won't all go crypto but they will be seeking a solution to regain that lost ground and it is wishful thinking on my part to hope they realise quality is the key.

I usually do not see this as temporary because on any industry this situation ends up happening and companies have to readjust and be profitable.


I don't even think this has much to do with the product quality, I think there's been quite the major releases recently, when these games cost so much to produce and with their price tags, it seems they are getting less sales upfront, despite this that major hit success.


The idea of good quality is not exactly holding hands with popularity, the recent Palworld shown that it's technically a mediocre game at best but it hit a nail, meanwhile others with high budget high producing quality standards couldn't sell a fraction of it. So I think popularity is still a gamble, because if that was ever a certain formula every game would be a massive hit haha

Scot

MaxBacon said:

Scot said:

Solid take, but that's a temporary cure, reduce the output to sustainable levels, are they all going to except their studio is now going to make a lot less money from here on out? I can't see that, they won't all go crypto but they will be seeking a solution to regain that lost ground and it is wishful thinking on my part to hope they realise quality is the key.

I usually do not see this as temporary because on any industry this situation ends up happening and companies have to readjust and be profitable.


I don't even think this has much to do with the product quality, I think there's been quite the major releases recently, when these games cost so much to produce and with their price tags, it seems they are getting less sales upfront, despite this that major hit success.


The idea of good quality is not exactly holding hands with popularity, the recent Palworld shown that it's technically a mediocre game at best but it hit a nail, meanwhile others with high budget high producing quality standards couldn't sell a fraction of it. So I think popularity is still a gamble, because if that was ever a certain formula every game would be a massive hit haha

Well I agree that even quality won't give you a sure fire success, but it puts you on a much better footing. I don't play early access, but from what I have heard about Palworld it is innovative (or just brought a lot of gameplay under the same bonnet which is still innovative in my eyes) and relatively solid for an EA, that's what brought the huge numbers in.

I agree with you about the readjust to be profitable, that happens in all business. But after that happens are studios going to be content with putting out fewer titles and making less money than they used to? Thats where I think they are bound to start looking at something like crypto to replace live service which is starting to get a bad reputation.

The prices have certainly been getting steep. One thing I noticed when I questioned gamers about playing early access in games like Palworld is that many had this reply "I paid xx and I got my moneys  worth". Regardless of it being an unfinished game they did not feel they were put out of pocket.

Price has to be a big factor in the success of early access as a monetarization method, unless AI brings down graphics costs I see no way AAA titles are going to keep the price down. Outsourcing to other countries seems to have been stretched to its limit.

Theocritus

Keeping prices down and paying employees high wages are two contrary things...One of the other has to give...If companies want to make profits, then they either have to riase prices or reduce the costs...Letting employees go is one way of lowering costs.

Kyleran

Theocritus said:

Keeping prices down and paying employees high wages are two contrary things...One of the other has to give...If companies want to make profits, then they either have to riase prices or reduce the costs...Letting employees go is one way of lowering costs.

Yes, but like all things, it's not quite that simple.

Fewer employees also means less staff to produce or provide goods or services which generate the revenue / profits.

Hence with the recent layoffs in the game industry delays in delivery and often outright cancellation of games are announced.

Blizzard canceled their survival game project, perhaps a smart move but we'll never know if it might have been a breakout best seller now.

Scot

"Blizzard canceled their survival game project"

Sad face.

Gorwe

Theocritus said:

Keeping prices down and paying employees high wages are two contrary things...One of the other has to give...If companies want to make profits, then they either have to riase prices or reduce the costs...Letting employees go is one way of lowering costs.

It's not that simple. Who says that all of that money is going back into quality of games and employee QoL? And not into supermodels, yachts and cocaine? That would say select few's pockets.

I am fully willing to pay more if games become better and more fun. Neither part of that equation has been achieved. Imo.

Kyleran

Gorwe said:

Theocritus said:

Keeping prices down and paying employees high wages are two contrary things...One of the other has to give...If companies want to make profits, then they either have to riase prices or reduce the costs...Letting employees go is one way of lowering costs.

It's not that simple. Who says that all of that money is going back into quality of games and employee QoL? And not into supermodels, yachts and cocaine? That would say select few's pockets.

I am fully willing to pay more if games become better and more fun. Neither part of that equation has been achieved. Imo.

You are spot on apparently.  Despite increasing worker productivity for almost 40 years now most of the money has been intentionally diverted to the top 10 / 1%.

From the article linked below.

"Key takeaways:

• Productivity and pay once climbed together. But in recent decades, productivity and pay have diverged: Net productivity grew 59.7% from 1979-2019 while a typical worker’s compensation grew by 15.8%, according to EPI data released ahead of Labor Day.
• If median hourly compensation had grown at the same rate as productivity over the 1979-2019 period, the median worker would be making $9.00 more per hour.
• This divergence has been primarily driven by intentional policy choices creating rising inequality: both the top 10% and especially the top 1% and top 0.1% gained a much larger share of all compensation and labor’s share of income eroded."

https://www.epi.org/blog/growing-inequalities-reflecting-growing-employer-power-have-generated-a-productivity-pay-gap-since-1979-productivity-has-grown-3-5-times-as-much-as-pay-for-the-typical-worker/

Gorwe

Kyleran said:

Gorwe said:

Theocritus said:

Keeping prices down and paying employees high wages are two contrary things...One of the other has to give...If companies want to make profits, then they either have to riase prices or reduce the costs...Letting employees go is one way of lowering costs.

It's not that simple. Who says that all of that money is going back into quality of games and employee QoL? And not into supermodels, yachts and cocaine? That would say select few's pockets.

I am fully willing to pay more if games become better and more fun. Neither part of that equation has been achieved. Imo.

You are spot on apparently.  Despite increasing worker productivity for almost 40 years now most of the money has been intentionally diverted to the top 10 / 1%.

From the article linked below.

"Key takeaways:

• Productivity and pay once climbed together. But in recent decades, productivity and pay have diverged: Net productivity grew 59.7% from 1979-2019 while a typical worker’s compensation grew by 15.8%, according to EPI data released ahead of Labor Day.
• If median hourly compensation had grown at the same rate as productivity over the 1979-2019 period, the median worker would be making $9.00 more per hour.
• This divergence has been primarily driven by intentional policy choices creating rising inequality: both the top 10% and especially the top 1% and top 0.1% gained a much larger share of all compensation and labor’s share of income eroded."

https://www.epi.org/blog/growing-inequalities-reflecting-growing-employer-power-have-generated-a-productivity-pay-gap-since-1979-productivity-has-grown-3-5-times-as-much-as-pay-for-the-typical-worker/

Glad(or...maybe not...I wish I was wrong, very much so) I was right. And as I said, I would pay a 100$ if the product was worth it. And not just a single playthrough. Or a copy of previous years' titles or rushed etc. And if employees actually benefitted from it(because if they do, then I do ; it's an utilitarian imperative, basically).

What do I, or anyone else, get from Bobby(and his lousy ilk) getting that sweet bonus? What?