EA Chicago Studio To Close 58
Geoff Keighley, who is guest-editing Kotaku this week, has the official release from EA that their Chicago studio is closing. The 150 employees that used to work at the site are trying to be placed throughout the rest of the EA structure, while the games on tap for development there are currently on hold. The release is fairly terse when describing the reason the studio is being closed: "Each team is responsible for staying on a reasonable path to profitability. Sticking to that strategy is what gives us the financial resources and flexibility to take risks on new projects. Unfortunately, EA Chicago hasn't been able to meet that standard. The location has grown dramatically in the past three years while revenue from the games developed there has not. The number of employees has grown from 49 in 2004 to 146 people currently in the new facility in downtown Chicago. As it stands, EA Chicago has no expectation of hitting our profitability targets until FY2011 or later."
Making an example (Score:3, Interesting)
I guess they weren't bluffing...
Re:What did they make? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:EA buying and selling... (Score:3, Interesting)
It seems pretty clear what they want from the press release, which spells it out in no uncertain terms. They want profitability. Nothing wrong with that; they're a business, and this is a capitalist economy. You don't like it, either go somewhere else or vote your conscious for political candidates who believe in changing it, but don't blame EA for acting the way they're supposed to act within the system in which they exist.
This studio grew by 300% with no corresponding growth in profits. What is a business supposed to do? They're not running a charity for these employees.
Yes, I'm sure the hours were long and hard - I've been through it, working for a game publisher myself for 3 1/2 years. But I still understand EA's perspective. When you hire a bunch of people, you expect those people to increase your overall productivity, not just collect a paycheck, which is what it amounts to when revenue stays flat even as you bulk up the company.
The grunts - the devs, testers and other peons who slave in countless death marches - will get fired, while the execs will get millions in severance packages.
It's most likely that neither the "grunts" *nor* the execs are to blame here. Usually in a situation like this, it's middle management that's to blame - the project managers, the producers, the creative directors, etc. These are the guys responsible for the nitty-gritty decisions. These are the guys that the execs have delegated to.
Yes, it's sad that the grunts will get laid off. But that's life, and they should expect nothing less if their company isn't doing well. If they're talented, they'll quickly get hired somewhere else. If they're not talented, then maybe they shouldn't have been there in the first place.
Real innovation allows for project failures. (Score:3, Interesting)
The idea is that something good *might* come from these apparently far-fetched projects.
This is also true for games and game-related concepts. If teams are expected to be profitable, essentially letting sales be the main determinant for their current actions, then most of the software that they will come up with will be little more than a derivative of existing stuff.
This is why we have game sequels ad Nauseum today.
I think they're shooting themselves in the foot.