ah okay. DF reports that this is using the Treyarch engine, and not the Modern Warfare one released last year.
Years ago treyarch took the original role of infinity ward. They improve the engine and add new features (like audio presets).
Dunno how it is nowadays. Is vicarious vision also involved? They have wonderful talents (made destiny 2 pc, some DLCs)
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
In the EU short-term contractors are generally cheaper because while benefits are often equilvilent to full time staff, the lack of costing for pensions is a massive saving. Where is the 18 month rule coming from, is that a North American thing or a Microsoft thing? We also try to cap the time contractors work with it, the rationale being if you need a contractor for that long you probably need a permanent employee.
yea unfortunately details are thin. I'm not sure since it's not really clear how they impacted things at 343
Quite possibly H1B restrictions. My previous employers had similar experiences with their out-sourcing efforts all the way back to 2005. We'd find one or two good ones and they'd make serious contributions to the projects but then would have to return to India and then get cycled out to a different client 3-6 months after that. That may have just been the outsourcing company restrictions, but it was a hassle at times.
I dont know why I didn't recall this earlier, but I'm positive this is the reason for their 18 months on 6 months off policy. They were sued over the status of employees versus contractors and they settled out of court in 2000. There was likely similar events going on again later so were forced to make company wide changes in 2014.
...
https://www.geekwire.com/2014/inter...al-staff-18-months-requiring-six-month-break/
An internal Microsoft memo, distributed earlier today, outlines new restrictions on the company’s use of “external staff” — including a new limit on people who work on projects for Microsoft through vendors.
All contingent workers will be prevented from accessing Microsoft’s buildings and network for a period of six months after every 18-month period in which they perform work for the company, according to the memo.
Perhaps most notably, the policy includes vendors (“v-dash” workers, in Microsoft lingo), who previously were able to work on projects indefinitely, without the break that some other types of contingent workers (“a-dash” temporary workers) are required to take.
One effect is to create a clearer distinction between the company’s direct employees and its contingent workforce. The new policy comes amid word that Microsoft is planning to make cutbacks in its use of contingent staff, beyond the 18,000 layoffs of Microsoft employees announced yesterday
https://www.cga.ct.gov/PS99/rpt\olr\htm/99-R-0775.htm
MICROSOFT CASE
In 1989 and 1990 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ruled that Microsoft misclassified certain workers as independent contractors. Following this ruling approximately 10,000 current and former contingent workers sued Microsoft for benefits, including the ability to participate in its lucrative stock-purchase plan. They also sued for the value of past benefits that Microsoft did not provide.
The class action suit consists of the independent contractors identified in the IRS ruling and workers placed in Microsoft by temporary employment agencies. The plaintiffs worked for at least 20 hours per week for at least five months during a year, any time after 1986. Microsoft objected to the fact that the temporary employees, who were not identified in the IRS ruling, were plaintiffs in the suit. A lower court agreed with the company and the plaintiffs appealed the court's decision.
In May 1999 a special, three-judge panel for the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the temporary workers could participate in the lawsuit. The opinion also stated that Microsoft must provide full benefits to the plaintiffs.
Microsoft appealed this decision to the full Ninth Circuit and that court upheld the portion of the special panel's ruling that concerned participation in the class action suit. It overturned the portion of the decision concerning benefits and said that workers were entitled only to participate in the company's stock purchase plan. If the workers win their lawsuit, Microsoft could owe them up to $20 million in stock.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-dec-13-fi-64817-story.html
Microsoft Corp. will pay $97 million to settle a federal lawsuit from employees who claimed the software giant classified them as “temporary” workers for years to deny them standard benefits such as health insurance and the lucrative employee stock purchase plan, thereby saving the company millions.
Under the agreement announced Tuesday, between 8,000 and 12,000 people are eligible for a share of the settlement. The amount each worker will receive depends on when he or she worked, how long he or she worked and the total number of people who file claims under the settlement.
Microsoft has more than 40,000 employees; about 5,000 of them are so-called contingency workers. The settlement is unlikely to adversely affect the bottom line for Microsoft, which reported a $9.4-billion profit last year.
The issue has wide-ranging implications for the nation. The Labor Department estimates that more than 10 million Americans are temporary or contract workers.
...
https://www.geekwire.com/2014/inter...al-staff-18-months-requiring-six-month-break/
An internal Microsoft memo, distributed earlier today, outlines new restrictions on the company’s use of “external staff” — including a new limit on people who work on projects for Microsoft through vendors.
All contingent workers will be prevented from accessing Microsoft’s buildings and network for a period of six months after every 18-month period in which they perform work for the company, according to the memo.
Perhaps most notably, the policy includes vendors (“v-dash” workers, in Microsoft lingo), who previously were able to work on projects indefinitely, without the break that some other types of contingent workers (“a-dash” temporary workers) are required to take.
One effect is to create a clearer distinction between the company’s direct employees and its contingent workforce. The new policy comes amid word that Microsoft is planning to make cutbacks in its use of contingent staff, beyond the 18,000 layoffs of Microsoft employees announced yesterday
https://www.cga.ct.gov/PS99/rpt\olr\htm/99-R-0775.htm
MICROSOFT CASE
In 1989 and 1990 the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) ruled that Microsoft misclassified certain workers as independent contractors. Following this ruling approximately 10,000 current and former contingent workers sued Microsoft for benefits, including the ability to participate in its lucrative stock-purchase plan. They also sued for the value of past benefits that Microsoft did not provide.
The class action suit consists of the independent contractors identified in the IRS ruling and workers placed in Microsoft by temporary employment agencies. The plaintiffs worked for at least 20 hours per week for at least five months during a year, any time after 1986. Microsoft objected to the fact that the temporary employees, who were not identified in the IRS ruling, were plaintiffs in the suit. A lower court agreed with the company and the plaintiffs appealed the court's decision.
In May 1999 a special, three-judge panel for the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the temporary workers could participate in the lawsuit. The opinion also stated that Microsoft must provide full benefits to the plaintiffs.
Microsoft appealed this decision to the full Ninth Circuit and that court upheld the portion of the special panel's ruling that concerned participation in the class action suit. It overturned the portion of the decision concerning benefits and said that workers were entitled only to participate in the company's stock purchase plan. If the workers win their lawsuit, Microsoft could owe them up to $20 million in stock.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-dec-13-fi-64817-story.html
Microsoft Corp. will pay $97 million to settle a federal lawsuit from employees who claimed the software giant classified them as “temporary” workers for years to deny them standard benefits such as health insurance and the lucrative employee stock purchase plan, thereby saving the company millions.
Under the agreement announced Tuesday, between 8,000 and 12,000 people are eligible for a share of the settlement. The amount each worker will receive depends on when he or she worked, how long he or she worked and the total number of people who file claims under the settlement.
Microsoft has more than 40,000 employees; about 5,000 of them are so-called contingency workers. The settlement is unlikely to adversely affect the bottom line for Microsoft, which reported a $9.4-billion profit last year.
The issue has wide-ranging implications for the nation. The Labor Department estimates that more than 10 million Americans are temporary or contract workers.
There were Reddit posts linked in this very thread that are now deleted with testimonials of 4 or 5 different 343 employees complaining about the utter mess that studio's internal organization was, and multiple of those did mention over-relaiance on contractors as one of the issues. Of course it'a common to have contractors, that is not the issue. The devil is is the details. It seems 343 has more than average, often filling key roles, and they are to rigid on their 2 year limit + close to zero prospect of getting hired independent of performance (also sited on the employee testimonials)
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Even though as many know one of the chief reasons MS games are not as good as sony's is Sony tends to be more hands off and leave it up to the companies to make the games they want, where as MS dictate more which no doubt creates a more negative atmosphere leading to worse results.
But In saying that, In this case cause of how 434 has handled it, I feel MS should just say to 343 don't release halo infinite for the next gen xbox, make it only current gen, and ship it ASAP, warts and all, apologize and say theres a true next gen halo game coming. So at the same time say to a completely different studio (activism or EA or epic whoever ) make us a halo game for next gen ready in 2 years.
Otherwise Halo Infinite will come out by 434 in 2022/23 and still look like crap compared to the competition, the recent halo games apparently were not that great, so another misfire & I ssume the franchise is truly down the tubes (like madden, final fantasy etc, fashions don't last forever)
But In saying that, In this case cause of how 434 has handled it, I feel MS should just say to 343 don't release halo infinite for the next gen xbox, make it only current gen, and ship it ASAP, warts and all, apologize and say theres a true next gen halo game coming. So at the same time say to a completely different studio (activism or EA or epic whoever ) make us a halo game for next gen ready in 2 years.
Otherwise Halo Infinite will come out by 434 in 2022/23 and still look like crap compared to the competition, the recent halo games apparently were not that great, so another misfire & I ssume the franchise is truly down the tubes (like madden, final fantasy etc, fashions don't last forever)
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
That's fighting talk and I don't agree. Firstly "games are not as good" is subjective as hell but even if you change that down to "on average more technically polished", it's very arguable. For every God of War, The of Last of Us and Ghost of Tsushima you have an Until Dawn and Days Gone. Great games, but a bit janky here and there whereas Gears and Forza are polished to hell.
I also think the reputation of Sony allowing their teams creative freedom is being exaggerated into Sony having little oversight of projects, which isn't the case at all. These are double-digital million dollar investments and you need to keep an eye on things. Here is Cory Barlog talking about Shuhei Yoshida, then Head of Worldwide Studios, being horrified at an early version of God of War. This suggests Sony coming in, kicking some arse, and people making games better. Plenty of PlayStation games have been delayed in the final stretch, pretty much every Naughty Dog game in the last ten years for starters!
This is likely what's happened with Halo Infinite. I know the comms made it sound like this was 343's decision but this was definitely Microsoft kicking some arse. Sometimes you just need kick some arse, whether you're Sony or Microsoft.
Last edited by a moderator:
The real reason in my opinion is that Sony let the teams build up naturally. Most Sony first party games didn't set the world on fire at first with many only shipping 2-4 million but Sony stuck with them where they saw potential and each following game saw improvements and slowly built the brand strength which now is something like five studios with ten million sellers.
That's fighting talk and I don't agree. Firstly "games are not as good" is subjective as hell but even if you change that down to "on average more technically polished", it's very arguable. For every God of War, The of Last of Us and Ghost of Tsushima you have an Until Dawn and Days Gone. Great games, but a bit janky here and there whereas Gears and Forza are polished to hell.
I also think the reputation of Sony allowing their teams creative freedom is being exaggerated into Sony having little oversight of projects, which isn't the case at all. These are double-digital million dollar investments and you need to keep an eye on things. Here is Cory Barlog talking about Shuhei Yoshida, then Head of Worldwide Studios, being horrified at an early version of God of War. This suggests Sony coming in, kicking some arse, and people making games better. Plenty of PlayStation games have been delayed in the final stretch, pretty much every Naughty Dog game in the last ten years for starters!
This is likely what's happened with Halo Infinite. I know the comms made it sound like this was 343's decision but this was definitely Microsoft kicking some arse. Sometimes you just need kick some arse, whether you're Sony or Microsoft.
Hey hey hey Until Dawn was AWEOME!!
I think the biggest issue is when management during the 360 days downplayed first party titles for second and third party exclusivity investment. 360 gave us Gears, GTA 4 DLC, Project Gotham Racing, Mass Effect and Alan Wake. A big part of the 360’s exclusivity were simple investment into paying for titles. Most of Sony’s investment went to buying the actual developers. Most of the biggest first party franchises for Sony are from devs that Sony has owned for 10-20 years.
Sony has benefitted from having a long term vision when it came to development and creating an environment where these devs could flourish into AAA content providers.
All the while MS has had to pivot and take the same path that Sony took 20 years ago. Where would devs like Undead be today if MS had bought them years ago and given them resources to grow into a top flight dev?
Sony has benefitted from having a long term vision when it came to development and creating an environment where these devs could flourish into AAA content providers.
All the while MS has had to pivot and take the same path that Sony took 20 years ago. Where would devs like Undead be today if MS had bought them years ago and given them resources to grow into a top flight dev?
Good analysis. I think a lot of it may stem from the traditional differences of the companies. I mean with Windows, Microsoft is mostly selling a platform and empowering 3rd party vendors for that platform.
The problem with this mentality applied to consoles is that Microsoft doesn't have a virtual monopoly so most 3rd party content is also on the competitors platform and then the main differentiator in terms of content then becomes first party offerings.
Microsoft kinda have "halo" for XSX XSS launch. Destiny 2 The New Expansion (forgot the title) gonna comes to game pass, exclusive for xbox.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
I play it every Halloween, much like I watch Die Hard every Christmas.Hey hey hey Until Dawn was AWEOME!!
you could say that you're Qilin
Similar threads
