Avalanche prepares to lay off 77 staff

By Games Industry.biz Published 28 October, 2008

Just Cause sequel unaffected.

Avalanche Studios is preparing to lay off 77 of its 160 staff due to losing two publishing contracts this year, worth around USD 34 million (EUR 27.2 million), GamesIndustry.biz reports.

The studio is currently in negotiations with unions to let the staff go after informing employees of the decision last week.

"We have given notice that it's our intention to lay off 77 people," said CEO Christofer Sundberg, speaking to GamesIndustry.biz. "We have lost two publisher deals this year - those deals were worth around USD 34 million.

"We lost the first deal in February but we could survive that one because we had a shortage of staff in other projects and we decided to put together a team to work on a original IP that we had in development. But the team that were working on a project that was terminated last week - there were about 67 people on that team."

The company operates a policy of last in, first out, meaning staff working across the company will be made redundant, not just those working on the cancelled titles.

Sundberg said that now "there's a stronger focus more than ever" on the development of Just Cause 2 for Eidos, as well as the recently revealed project The Hunter, with Emote Games.

He also added that the studio "has started some discussions with different publishers about a new project and those discussions are going very well."

Sundberg said that he wasn't comfortable with the size of the studio, and he anticipates that the business will not grow too large in future, preferring to concentrate on a small handful of projects.

"I'm very positive that we'll get back on our feet again. But will we become a 160-employee studio again? I'm not sure.

"It just sort of became that way. I love working with these people but I hate growing because it becomes very industrialised and very impersonal. We started this company based on a passion to create games, not to run a huge business," detailed Sundberg. "Our focus is on original IP which we've done well with, but the industry is focused on licenses and sequels."

"We will become a two project studio on top of The Hunter, which is a different project with a smaller team. We definitely won't take on more than two projects," he added.

Picture of Games.

About Games Industry.biz

Read more articles from Games by visiting the Games Industry.biz archive page.

You may also like...

Comments (10) Latest comment 3 years ago

Comments threads automatically close after 30 days, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • Uncle_Fishboy #1 3 years ago

    Just Cause is ace. As long as the sequel gets made then the ex staff can eat cold soup, sit shivering all winter with blankets on their laps and turning tricks for bread rolls.

  • rayk2099 #2 3 years ago

    A real shame. They're a good bunch.

  • teabagger #3 3 years ago

    I've never understood the 'last in, first out' policy. In my experience some of the longest serving guys are also by far and away the most useless, though I suppose they are more expensive to get rid of. Guess it's down to whether you're concerned about short term money saving over long term studio strength.

  • iokthemonkey #4 3 years ago

    In my experience some of the longest serving guys are also by far and away the most useless

    ----

    They're also the ones most familiar with the game engine/code.

  • glaeken #5 3 years ago

    Aha I knew something was going on at Avalanche. No showing of Just Cause 2 since the beginning of the year and their web site has been under construction most of the year as well. I just hope they eventually manage to release Just Cause 2 as although the first game was not perfect it showed immense promise and the game engine was superb.

  • Doctor_What #6 3 years ago

    And that's why it sucks to work in this industry folks. I was offered a job in January that I declined because I didn't think their games were good enough. Six months later they laid off 100 staff - if I'd moved there for that job then that redundancy would have left me literally with nothing. 'Last in, first out' means that the people with the least security, the ones who may have relocated their entire family recently, who will get the worst settlements, are going to be absolutely shafted. They'll probably have to relocate to get a new job, and then at their new place they run the risk of being another 'last in, first out' victim.

    I think this is getting worse. Developers know that they can swell their number for the final year of games, hiring while there's enough work then laying people off 'unexpectedly' when the work dries up a year later, rolling those people into unemployment and requiring them to take the risk of it happening at their next place. With the lack of security in the economy this situation is not something that should be allowed to continue.

    Yes, our industry needs to be able to maintain profitability, but we can't go around casually ruining people's lives every time management makes short-sighted decisions about their focus.

    Uncle_Fishboy, that's a really nasty thing to write. People are always more important than games. Grow up.

  • Uncle_Fishboy #7 3 years ago

    I'm sorry. I hope they get other jobs.

  • Pirotic #8 3 years ago

    That's a shame, the studio's output has been pretty decent but reading between the lines the publishers don't really want to fund original concepts.

  • quantumsheep #9 3 years ago

    Good luck to those affected. Really enjoyed Just Cause...

    Oh, and agree with Dr. What there as well.
    Edited by 1 at 28/10/08 @ 14:54

  • Jocho #10 3 years ago

    About the "last in, first out", that's no "company policy" of theirs (although they state so), it's Swedish law (the Law of Employment Security), that's been heavily debated here for as long as I can remember. Those against the law consider it a way to freeze out young people and making it more difficult to run a company, while those for the law considers it a security layer for older people who would get frozen out due to their age if they got fired, which they state they would do as soon as the employer would have to fire people.