this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
81 points (97.6% liked)

PlayStation

676 readers
14 users here now

A community for discussing all things PlayStation.

The instance rules apply here alongside two community specific rules.

Rule 1. Please keep all discussion relevant to PlayStation consoles, games and services.

Rule 2. Lemmy.zip allows NSFW content but I’d rather keep this a safe community for gamers of all ages so please don’t post adult content here.

That’s it for the rules.

Check out the Xbox community.

If you have any suggestions, comments or concerns please send me a direct message.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Cross posted from !xbox@lemmy.zip

Electronic Arts are laying off roughly 670 employees, or 5% of its workforce and has reportedly cancelled a number of upcoming projects including Respawns Star Wars first person shooter.

EA CEO Andrew Wilson blames the job cuts on ”accelerating industry transformation where player needs and motivations and changed significantly”

He also confirmed that going forward EA will be moving away from licensed IP and concentrating on owned IP, sports titles and games with ”massive online communities”.

EA becomes the third company to lay off a large number of staff this week alone after Until Dawn developers Supermasive Games announced plans to let 90 of its staff go and Sony who are cutting 8% of its staff.

For those keeping score the total layoffs in the first 59 days of 2024 currently stand at a worrying 7,800 people.

For comparison the estimated job loses in the gaming industry for all of 2023 was 10,500.

Are we possibly heading for a second video game crash? Perhaps not on the scale of the video game crash of 1983 in the US but it’s clear that the industry is going to have to change, and change dramatically if it intends to survive.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Yewb@kbin.social 3 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Who is the dumbass that made the decisions to over hire by 670 workers?

The board should look into that it would have been more profitable to have never hired them at all, lets fire the ceo and we will bring in a new guy for less pay while we milk this baby for all its worth!

[–] CluelessLemmyng@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I guarantee you that the first staff to be let go is the hiring staff. If they're laying off folks, they don't need them.

[–] Yewb@kbin.social 2 points 8 months ago

But someone above them allocated reqs for people hold those guys accountable if it was a short term hire for a specific program no big deal but many of these hires probably left stable jobs for these ones they are losing.