Further Job Losses at Activision

[fitbabits]

Thanks to gamesindustry.biz (http://www.gamesindustry.biz) for the news (http://www.gamesindustry.biz/content_page.php?aid=14954).

Following the recent reduction in the workforce at its Santa Monica headquarters, software publisher Activision has confirmed reports that the company's restructuring plans will lead to further job losses in the UK.

The publisher has been forced to axe around 150 jobs in the US in an effort to maintain its position in the current market as the latest hardware transition completes and publishers begin to implement strategies for continued growth with the next-generation consoles.

..........

In an official statement, an Activision spokesperson said: "Due to market conditions and the ongoing console transition period, a number of jobs were at risk in the UK, mainly affecting Finance and PR functions, as well all temporary staff."

Little more is known at this stage in terms of the exact number of job losses affecting the UK division, or whether the global restructuring is likely to extend further into Activision's other EU operations.

"Activision is working with each employee affected to ensure the needs of each individual is the priority and so until the consultation process is complete, it's inappropriate to quantify job losses, but we'd like to thank everyone for their patience and dedication at this difficult time," the statement concluded.
Eek! My commiserations to anyone out there affected by these layoffs.

[Grimmjow]

yea it kinda sucks..nobody i know hasnt lost there job so it just may be the corp side of things

[Serapth]

Wonder how long until the first "You insensitive bastard, real people lost there jobs!" comments enter this thread. They always do...

What I dont get is why the game industry cant staff itself like other industries... why is it always feast or famine? Christ, cant these companies maintain a lower but stable number of employees so they dont have to start swinging the ax once hard times set in? Sad part is, in a year from now we will probrably hear about Activision hiring 500 people or some such thing. Then... 2 years later, letting them all go.

[Grimmjow]

who knows maybe there trying to do that now, game market changes so only time will tell

[chazio]

who knows maybe there trying to do that now, game market changes so only time will tell

*they're

...and they didn't let you go! ;)

[Zanzibar]

Wonder how long until the first "You insensitive bastard, real people lost there jobs!" comments enter this thread. They always do...

What I dont get is why the game industry cant staff itself like other industries... why is it always feast or famine? Christ, cant these companies maintain a lower but stable number of employees so they dont have to start swinging the ax once hard times set in? Sad part is, in a year from now we will probrably hear about Activision hiring 500 people or some such thing. Then... 2 years later, letting them all go.

Hmm. Well, one thing about this industry is that you invariably need less people at the beginning of the project than you do at the end. At the start, you have fewer tools available to the designers and artists, while the programmers are working on building toolsets, creating new opcodes and so forth. At this early stage, it's better to have fewer people on a tight-knit team to find the pitfalls in the art/design paths and get those addressed. The smaller the team, the better the communication. Most often, games go through a 'greenlight' process where you build a proof-of-concept version that has the full 'experience' of the game without actually having to have the whole thing laid out. Once the project gets greenlit, then you increase your staff to handle the rest of the game.

Activision found itself in a tough spot right now. The market as a whole is in limbo, as the X360 is still trying to take over, while the consumers are waiting on word about the PS3. The Activision titles not named Call of Duty 2 are just doing okay, not great - only Madagascar has outsold expectations; Quake 4 is doing well but not spectacularly, but apart from that, a lot of Activision games had a lot of development time but not a lot of return. They've decided to cut several projects for their 'speculative' IPs and instead focus on licensed movie tie-ins and continue working with their existing stable of successful IPs.

On that note, it's a near-miracle that the actual developers have largely been untouched by these layoffs. For the most part, it's a belt-tightening at the corporate HQ as opposed to cutting loose salaried artists, designers and programmers.

[Draft]

They've decided to cut several projects for their 'speculative' IPs and instead focus on licensed movie tie-ins and continue working with their existing stable of successful IPs.That's worked so well for EA thus far.

[Serapth]

Hmm. Well, one thing about this industry is that you invariably need less people at the beginning of the project than you do at the end. At the start, you have fewer tools available to the designers and artists, while the programmers are working on building toolsets, creating new opcodes and so forth. At this early stage, it's better to have fewer people on a tight-knit team to find the pitfalls in the art/design paths and get those addressed. The smaller the team, the better the communication. Most often, games go through a 'greenlight' process where you build a proof-of-concept version that has the full 'experience' of the game without actually having to have the whole thing laid out. Once the project gets greenlit, then you increase your staff to handle the rest of the game.

Oh I agree completely the industry works that way... First off, im glad to hear that creative talent arent that ones being culled this time, what a rare exception that is :) Very rarely does the fat actually get trimmed.

That said, as I agreed with you above, the project schedule in a game is basically predicatable. Upfront, then again at crunch there are going to be bursts of resource requirements. Sad part to tell anyone that hasnt just live their live in the gaming world, THIS IS TRUE OF MOST BUSINESS!

See, in most other job fields its also works around 90 percent of normality surrounded with 10 % of insanity. Thats just how things go. Difference is, most other businesses look at the long view. Just because someone isnt busy today, doesnt mean we dont have a job for them tomorrow.

This is where the game industry is rather sad. It seems to live on a title by tittle basis. Can you imagine if Adobe worked this way... if once Photoshop version X shipped, they laid of X people because there is about to be a down swing in sales. Well, no shit there is about to be a downswing in sales... you just released a new product and its going to take your team Y amount of time to come up with a new product.

Frankly, point blank the gaming industry needs to stop thinking themselves as rockstars and act like a business, because frankly your a bit of both. Sad thing I keep seeing is business moves based on a window of say 1 year both forward and back. If a billion dollar a year company is only looking forward and back a year at a time like they seem to be doing, a whole lot of investors ares basically a bunch of tools for going along with it.

Game development isnt some magical candyland. It isnt excempt from simple econmomic rules... no matter how much it wants to pretend it is.

[Draft]

True. I work in the insurance industry, and it gets incredibly busy each year around October, and stays super fucking busy till the end of January. We could easily have used twice as many people around the office as we normally employ.

[CaptSqueeze]

Just to make people aware....

Activision says "about 5%" to make the investors happy, and some clever person in the media says "hey let's see... 5% of their force = 150 people. So 150 people were laid off."

Speaking as one of the people laid off, there were only about 65-70 people actually laid off. A few recruiters, a few production people, some QA people, and a few people that couldn't find a spot in other Activision studios. MOST of us were aware ahead of time and have already found spots or are in the process of doing so.

The corporate people were the hardest hit in my opinion. Activision, for all of their faults, truly tried to hook most of the studio people into new positions. And while I lost my job there, I have a great deal of respect for how they handled these massive changes in the company.

[fitbabits]

Just to make people aware....

Activision says "about 5%" to make the investors happy, and some clever person in the media says "hey let's see... 5% of their force = 150 people. So 150 people were laid off."

Speaking as one of the people laid off, there were only about 65-70 people actually laid off. A few recruiters, a few production people, some QA people, and a few people that couldn't find a spot in other Activision studios. MOST of us were aware ahead of time and have already found spots or are in the process of doing so.

The corporate people were the hardest hit in my opinion. Activision, for all of their faults, truly tried to hook most of the studio people into new positions. And while I lost my job there, I have a great deal of respect for how they handled these massive changes in the company.
Firstly, I'm sorry you lost your job and I wish you the best of luck in securing new employment.

Lastly, thank you for taking the time to post your 'insider' viewpoint of what's been going on at Activision of late. I think people in general are far too quick to jump all over a corporate company when they decide to 'restructure' their workforce (with good reason it must be said, especially when some companies send their executives off to Hawaii to decide who's getting laid off), but it's pleasing to know that Activision tried their best to minimize the losses and secure people employment in other areas.

Again, good luck to you.