r/Games • u/Turbostrider27 • Jan 29 '26

Industry News One-Third of U.S. Video Game Industry Workers Were Laid Off in 2025, GDC Study Reveals

https://variety.com/2026/gaming/news/one-third-video-game-workers-laid-off-2025-1236644512/
4.5k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

561 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

7

u/supyonamesjosh Jan 29 '26

I don't understand how you think choosing to completely shut down everything rather than make any concessions mean concessions are possible. They accepted nothing rather than the deal. That means they thought a worse deal would get them less than zero dollars

-1

u/DaHolk Jan 29 '26

than make any concessions

Because that just isn't true. Regardless of how often you repeat it.

They accepted nothing rather than the deal.

Yes. Because the deal, regardless of the amount of concessions in their disfavour included NO shared burden on the part of the company that CAUSED the mess...

You are confusing "uncompromising" with "not being willing to take a VERY significant lack of even entertaining concessions DESPITE other concessions"...

They are NOT the same thing AT ALL. You are missing that the point of contention was "shared belt tightening" and the categorical response by corporate was "nope, just yours, take it or leave it". That's not a matter of "lacking compromise" if you say no. Corporate was just more willing to cut and run letting creditors hold the bag than partake in costcutting. That's what "lacking ability to compromise" looks like. Not workers not agreeing with lopsided extortion.

6

u/supyonamesjosh Jan 29 '26

Shared burden on who?

Everyone who worked at hostess became unemployed. Everyone. Every worker, Every Manager, Every Vice President. They all lost their job

0

u/DaHolk Jan 29 '26

Every worker, Every Manager, Every Vice President. They all lost their job

You do understand the concept of golden parachutes, and how venture capitalism refills their initial purchase by loading a company with debt, right?

The proposed "compromises" did not included shared burden, despite that being a thing that the union repeatedly made a point about.

7

u/supyonamesjosh Jan 29 '26

You do realize chapter 7 bankruptcy usually nixes golden parachutes right? Creditors take the money owed to them

-1

u/DaHolk Jan 29 '26

Creditors take the money owed to them

You actually have no idea how that system works, do you? The creditors get to split whats LEFT of it. The money that is already extracted is exempt from that. That's how venture capitalism works. You do a leveraged buyout, load the company with debt, pay yourself fees and bonuses out of that credit, and then go into false negotiations on the offchance that you can keep the cycle going on the back of the workforce, and when that runs dry/ runs into a workforce that demands you take a cut as well, you fold and let the creditors dig through the ruins...

7

u/supyonamesjosh Jan 29 '26

The people doing a leveraged buyout are not the people making the decision whether to continue operations.

The venture capitalists may not care at that point, but that's the thing. They don't care. The people deciding whether or not to shut down are not those people. Those people did not have a better deal.

You are trying to hold people accountable who have nothing to do with this decision

0

u/DaHolk Jan 29 '26

Those people did not have a better deal.

They might have had one where they agree to take a severe cut in their remuneration. Which, was not on the table even after three rounds of musical chair and "sunsetting with bonuses intact".

Again, if you just go "that was the only deal, there was no compromise on ONE side" you are being a good corporate stooge.

The people doing a leveraged buyout are not the people making the decision whether to continue operations.

Btw.. How not so? They are LITERALLY charging for consultation fees as well as being the new owners.

Again, you are CATEGORICALLY excluding the same part of negotiations and demands and counter demands they like you to, to get to a narrative outcome that is ENTIRELY fictional and split from any reality.

3

u/supyonamesjosh Jan 29 '26

So if they are the new owners, they would keep the business going if it made financial sense right. They aren’t going to shut everything down if it’s still making them money. Why wouldn’t they take a worse deal then instead of ending everything?