EA faces layoffs of 350 workers from marketing and publishing branches

ea-logo-16-9.jpg

Electronics Arts will be laying some of its workers later today, as stated by EA's CEO Andrew Wilson. In what's being claimed as "addressing our challenges and preparing for the opportunities ahead", 350 employees in EA's 9,000-person workforce will be laid off. Those affected are staff pertaining to the marketing and publishing divisions of EA, which Wilson says will help "streamline decision-making".

This follows some fairly significant losses related to the gaming industry in the recent months, such as Square Enix shuttering their Luminous Productions studio and losing 33 million, or Activision-Blizzard laying off a massive 800 workers earlier this year.


Today we took some important steps as a company to address our challenges and prepare for the opportunities ahead. As we look across a changing world around us, it’s clear that we must change with it. We’re making deliberate moves to better deliver on our commitments, refine our organization and meet the needs of our players. As part of this, we have made changes to our marketing and publishing organization, our operations teams, and we are ramping down our current presence in Japan and Russia as we focus on different ways to serve our players in those markets. In addition to organizational changes, we are deeply focused on increasing quality in our games and services. Great games will continue to be at the core of everything we do, and we are thinking differently about how to amaze and inspire our players.

This is a difficult day. The changes we’re making today will impact about 350 roles in our 9,000-person company. These are important but very hard decisions, and we do not take them lightly. We are friends and colleagues at EA, we appreciate and value everyone’s contributions, and we are doing everything we can to ensure we are looking after our people to help them through this period to find their next opportunity. This is our top priority.


All employees impacted by the layoffs will be given a severance package.

:arrow: Source
 

Tigran

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2002
Messages
1,628
Trophies
2
XP
3,648
Country
United States
EA has a trail of toilet paper - still covered in turd - that goes back miles of their history.

Releasing the same game multiple times with minor cosmetic tweaks (Nascar 95 and 98 being personally familiar to me).

Releasing lootboxes in predatory manners.

Releasing DLC with no content and high cost.

No real gameplay improvements to their sequal games.

Ending studios who didn't want to go down a live model.

Claiming games who aren't profitting as much as they desire a 'failure', even if it's the top selling game for that and the next few months.

Sacking employees because they didn't meet their expectations.

The CEO gets absurd benefits in Stock and other non-Cash rewards and the sort, while still retaining a fairly large pay, while simultaneously firing employees or docking pay because "We're not doing so well Mr Stark".

I could go on. EA is basically the definition of greed in the gaming market.

Don't forget self sabotage so they have an excuse not to do something. Such as release ME3 on Wii U at the same time as the Trilogy (With trilogy being cheaper) then going. "SEE! NO ONE BUYS OUR GAMES ON NINTENDO SYSTEMS! NOPE NOPE NOPE!" Or another case with Titan fall 2 being released between to bigger games so they can go "See! People don't want to play single player games with no Microtransactions! THEY WANT MULTIPLAYER GAMES ONLY!!!!!"

They are a company willing to shoot themselves in the foot to get rid of what they think of as a wart.
 

Sakitoshi

GBAtemp Official Lolimaster
Member
Joined
May 8, 2012
Messages
2,256
Trophies
2
Age
33
Location
behind a keyboard or a gamepad
Website
sakiheru.blogspot.com
XP
2,911
Country
Chile
Not so much anymore.
wrong.
ea sports keeps them afloat, so they can do whatever they want as long as that is true and sports fans are completely disconnected from all the gaming world, all they do is keep buying the latest anual edition without a care in anything.
 

Kraken_X

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2018
Messages
158
Trophies
0
Age
54
XP
2,548
Country
United States
I never understood EA's business model. They buy out great studios like Pandemic, Westwood and Popcap and then force them to make games that aren't good and that aren't at all similar to their previous games. As expected, the games underperform, the IP becomes worthless, and the developer dissolves.

Compare that to the Disney model where they buy a company like Pixar or Marvel and then basically let them do what they do best but with extra muscle.

At some point you would think that EA would learn, but it's almost like they enjoy destroying good IP more than making money.
 
Last edited by Kraken_X,

blahblah

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 16, 2018
Messages
1,132
Trophies
0
Age
35
XP
1,472
Country
United States
I never understood EA's business model. They buy out great studios like Pandemic, Westwood and Popcap. Force them to make games that aren't good and that aren't at all similar to their previous games. As expected, the games underperform and then the IP becomes worthless and the developer dissolves.

Compare that to the Disney model where they buy a company like Pixar or Marvel and then basically let them do what they do best but with extra muscle.

At some point you would think that EA would learn, but it's almost like they hate destroying good IP more than making money.

Pandemic wasn't a great studio. They produced games for as long as it was financially viable to do so. The type of game Pandemic made quickly fell out of favor.

Westwood happened well over a decade ago. Time to let that go. No one at EA today in a leadership role was involved in the Westwood affair.

Popcap is still a thing. Mobile gaming (without abusive IAP stuff) isn't, though, so Popcap is in a complicated spot.

The rest of your post is also wrong, and unsupported by any kind of evidence. No, the publisher isn't 'forcing' studios to 'make games that aren't as good as what they used to make'.

Game development is complicated and expensive. It's also a hit driven business, and EA hasn't had many big hits lately. They'll get out of this rut in a few years.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Don't forget self sabotage so they have an excuse not to do something. Such as release ME3 on Wii U at the same time as the Trilogy (With trilogy being cheaper) then going. "SEE! NO ONE BUYS OUR GAMES ON NINTENDO SYSTEMS! NOPE NOPE NOPE!" Or another case with Titan fall 2 being released between to bigger games so they can go "See! People don't want to play single player games with no Microtransactions! THEY WANT MULTIPLAYER GAMES ONLY!!!!!"

They are a company willing to shoot themselves in the foot to get rid of what they think of as a wart.

This is deranged conspiratorial nonsense. EA would love to sell units on Nintendo consoles. Money from Nintendo users is as good as money from anyone else.

Respawn picked their release date. This has been well reported, see Jason Schreier's reporting on the subject.
 
Last edited by blahblah,

Souliousery

Well-Known Member
Newcomer
Joined
Dec 5, 2017
Messages
63
Trophies
0
Age
32
XP
361
Country
Canada
Pandemic wasn't a great studio. They produced games for as long as it was financially viable to do so. The type of game Pandemic made quickly fell out of favor.

Westwood happened well over a decade ago. Time to let that go. No one at EA today in a leadership role was involved in the Westwood affair.

Popcap is still a thing. Mobile gaming (without abusive IAP stuff) isn't, though, so Popcap is in a complicated spot.

The rest of your post is also wrong, and unsupported by any kind of evidence. No, the publisher isn't 'forcing' studios to 'make games that aren't as good as what they used to make'.

Game development is complicated and expensive. It's also a hit driven business, and EA hasn't had many big hits lately. They'll get out of this rut in a few years.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



This is deranged conspiratorial nonsense. EA would love to sell units on Nintendo consoles. Money from Nintendo users is as good as money from anyone else.

Respawn picked their release date. This has been well reported, see Jason Schreier's reporting on the subject.
I feel like this guy is a EA propagandist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deleted_413010

Burlsol

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2015
Messages
113
Trophies
0
XP
752
Country
EA has a trail of toilet paper - still covered in turd - that goes back miles of their history.

Releasing the same game multiple times with minor cosmetic tweaks (Nascar 95 and 98 being personally familiar to me).

Releasing lootboxes in predatory manners.

Releasing DLC with no content and high cost.

No real gameplay improvements to their sequal games.

Ending studios who didn't want to go down a live model.

Claiming games who aren't profitting as much as they desire a 'failure', even if it's the top selling game for that and the next few months.

Sacking employees because they didn't meet their expectations.

The CEO gets absurd benefits in Stock and other non-Cash rewards and the sort, while still retaining a fairly large pay, while simultaneously firing employees or docking pay because "We're not doing so well Mr Stark".

I could go on. EA is basically the definition of greed in the gaming market.
You forgot to mention the part where EA has intentionally sabotaged some of their titles from studios they are trying to 'clear house' with. Anthem being spoiled by an Apex launch is the the most recent example. EA has been dicking over Bioware for the better part of the decade, they needed a good launch even if Anthem is somewhat lackluster... What happened? Apex launches as a f2p game with minimal microtransaction bullshittery so that people decide to play it instead. It's the same launcher so anyone who might have been looking at Anthem could simply download Apex and play immediately. Both appeal to the sort of looter shooter crowd. Now that press about Anthem is out and sales were less than 'expected', they've gone back and tweaked Apex to be more grindy, added more microtransaction bullshittery, and start firing people.
 

regnad

Button Masher
Member
Joined
May 19, 2008
Messages
2,512
Trophies
1
Age
53
XP
3,657
Country
Japan
Reading their press release, this sounds like great news! They’re “streamlining decision making” and “preparing for challenges ahead”! They’re going to “inspire and amaze” their players!

It’s all rainbows and sunshine and buttercups!
 

Taleweaver

Storywriter
Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2009
Messages
8,685
Trophies
2
Age
43
Location
Belgium
XP
8,066
Country
Belgium
While obviously rather sad for these people, I can't say I mind much. Them remaining firmly origin only (and - on PC - windows only) means that I won't buy their games, no matter how awesome they might be. And with their reputation, it was only a matter of time before a large portion of gamers would say things like "nice graphics...but I don't believe it'll be as great as this trailer makes it out to be".

I wonder how they'll go forward on this. "Streamline decision making" doesn't really say much, perhaps other than that there were initially too many people involved in the process. Perhaps E3 will give more clarity? :unsure:

Pandemic wasn't a great studio. They produced games for as long as it was financially viable to do so. The type of game Pandemic made quickly fell out of favor.

Westwood happened well over a decade ago. Time to let that go. No one at EA today in a leadership role was involved in the Westwood affair.

Popcap is still a thing. Mobile gaming (without abusive IAP stuff) isn't, though, so Popcap is in a complicated spot.

The rest of your post is also wrong, and unsupported by any kind of evidence. No, the publisher isn't 'forcing' studios to 'make games that aren't as good as what they used to make'.

Game development is complicated and expensive. It's also a hit driven business, and EA hasn't had many big hits lately. They'll get out of this rut in a few years.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------



This is deranged conspiratorial nonsense. EA would love to sell units on Nintendo consoles. Money from Nintendo users is as good as money from anyone else.

Respawn picked their release date. This has been well reported, see Jason Schreier's reporting on the subject.
Sorry, but both these replies seem pretty strange to me.

* the acquirement of westwood was indeed a long time ago, but it's not like they stopped milking the franchise since then. C&C rivals is about haf a year old now, so no...it is not "time to let that go".

* mobile gaming not being a thing? You need to inform yourself better...the money in mobile games recently became bigger than all other forms of video games combined.

* if you disagree with someone, it'd be better to ask for sources, rather than jump to conclusions and say that he's wrong 'and unsupported by any kind of evidence'. How about asking for it first?
yeah, I'll concede that EA obviously isn't telling them to factually reduce the quality of games. But there are more subtle ways to do that. Like locking important parts of the game behind a firewall. This puts players on their toes, and thus reduces the feeling of these latter games.


As for your reply to @Tigran : it might be true or not, but you can't deny that EA at best had a poor idea of marketing when they put wiiu's mass effect 3 in the market directly next to mass effect trilogy for the same price on all other consoles/PC. They could have waited. They didn't.
Besides...the story of EA and nintendo (at least during the wiiu days) was all but "deranged conspiratorial nonsense". EA wanted to build a platform for their games on the wiiu. Nintendo wanted to keep control of their own store. So EA...they didn't really broke their promise, but certainly didn't add anything to push for the wiiu either. Couple that with the aforementioned bad timing of ME trilogy, and it's not like you can just dismiss the theory.
 

blahblah

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
May 16, 2018
Messages
1,132
Trophies
0
Age
35
XP
1,472
Country
United States
While obviously rather sad for these people, I can't say I mind much. Them remaining firmly origin only (and - on PC - windows only) means that I won't buy their games, no matter how awesome they might be. And with their reputation, it was only a matter of time before a large portion of gamers would say things like "nice graphics...but I don't believe it'll be as great as this trailer makes it out to be".

I wonder how they'll go forward on this. "Streamline decision making" doesn't really say much, perhaps other than that there were initially too many people involved in the process. Perhaps E3 will give more clarity? :unsure:


Sorry, but both these replies seem pretty strange to me.

* the acquirement of westwood was indeed a long time ago, but it's not like they stopped milking the franchise since then. C&C rivals is about haf a year old now, so no...it is not "time to let that go".

* mobile gaming not being a thing? You need to inform yourself better...the money in mobile games recently became bigger than all other forms of video games combined.

* if you disagree with someone, it'd be better to ask for sources, rather than jump to conclusions and say that he's wrong 'and unsupported by any kind of evidence'. How about asking for it first?
yeah, I'll concede that EA obviously isn't telling them to factually reduce the quality of games. But there are more subtle ways to do that. Like locking important parts of the game behind a firewall. This puts players on their toes, and thus reduces the feeling of these latter games.


As for your reply to @Tigran : it might be true or not, but you can't deny that EA at best had a poor idea of marketing when they put wiiu's mass effect 3 in the market directly next to mass effect trilogy for the same price on all other consoles/PC. They could have waited. They didn't.
Besides...the story of EA and nintendo (at least during the wiiu days) was all but "deranged conspiratorial nonsense". EA wanted to build a platform for their games on the wiiu. Nintendo wanted to keep control of their own store. So EA...they didn't really broke their promise, but certainly didn't add anything to push for the wiiu either. Couple that with the aforementioned bad timing of ME trilogy, and it's not like you can just dismiss the theory.

1. That's not a relevant thing.

2. You are ignoring what I actually said. I said 'outside of abusive IAP stuff'. Popcap's games do not translate well into abusive IAP crap.

3. No.

4. No. No reason to wait. Having a title out for a new console is nice. People buying games for the new console they just bought aren't cross shopping for bundles for their old console.

More stuff that is untrue. It's not the role of a publisher to push a console. Nintendo sells units, EA makes games. Really as simple as that.
 
D

Deleted_413010

Guest
I could go on. EA is basically the definition of greed in the gaming market.

I'm sorry to tell you this but your gonna find greed atleast once in the business world. No matter what sector. Rather it be gaming, music, etc. Gaming you could say isn't one of the more greedy sectors. I would say myself EA has pushed the upper limits of greed. The only games i play from EA are the Need for Speed series. You think FIFA or any of that shit interests me? Well...FIFA is a shit pile in my eyes and Star Wars Battlefront i actually play. All the other games i don't play.
 

VartioArtel

Well-Known Member
Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Messages
442
Trophies
1
XP
2,733
Country
United States
I'm sorry to tell you this but your gonna find greed atleast once in the business world.
Hey, I stopped here.

There's a fundamental difference between a company "being greedy", which is what you're implying. And "Being the definition of greed", wherein to put it in living creature terms, they want to charge money for every breath every human on the world takes.

Making this sort of argument? Doesn't say anything. If anything it looks like the classic "fanboy" shill defense of "Oh well EVERYONE'S greedy so that makes their actions fine!"

No, it just makes them one of, if not the, absolute worst greedy companies, which is exactly what my statement implied.
 
Last edited by VartioArtel,
D

Deleted_413010

Guest
EA hasn't made a single good game in years.

Star Wars Battlefront?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Hey, I stopped here.

There's a fundamental difference between a company "being greedy", which is what you're implying. And "Being the definition of greed", wherein to put it in living creature terms, they want to charge money for every breath every human on the world takes.

Making this sort of argument? Doesn't say anything. If anything it looks like the classic "fanboy" shill defense of "Oh well EVERYONE'S greedy so that makes their actions fine!"

No, it just makes them one of, if not the, absolute worst greedy companies, which is exactly what my statement implied.

I completely agree lol. And not trying to argue my apologies. I hate greed myself.
 

Site & Scene News

Popular threads in this forum

General chit-chat
Help Users
    K3Nv2 @ K3Nv2: Ah see that's were you're wrong it's the shitbox everything has to be very serious