Technology exec Mark DeLoura parts ways with struggling publisher

Sweeping THQ layoffs ‘could hit 170 staff’

Beleaguered publisher THQ is at the outset of a extensive layoff operation, according to unverified reports.

Analyst Kevin Dent claimed on his Twitter page that a "culling" at THQ would affect "170+ souls”.

THQ declined to comment when contacted by Develop.

Dent’s validity as a source is a matter of debate. He previously claimed that THQ’s entire 2014 release schedule had been axed, though the publisher moved quickly to deny this.

Today the outspoken analyst claimed that THQ vice president of technology, Mark DeLoura, had left the company. Develop has verified DeLoura’s departure.

Troubled times

Despite having released successful titles last year, THQ has recently found itself engulfed by rumours of layoffs as a result of poor performance.

Yesterday the company announced it had been threatened with delisting from the Nasdaq stock exchange.

THQ’s fortunes downturned sharply following the release of its casual product, U Draw.

“U Draw performed OK in the US when it first arrived in 2010, and performed solidly in Europe in early 2011. But when THQ relaunched the platform over Christmas last year, which included versions for PS3 and Xbox 360, revenues were well below expectations," says MCV deputy editor Chris Dring.

"That led THQ to lay off staff from the development team, including kids, family and casual boss Martin Good."

In the past twelve months THQ has closed several games studios across the globe as part of a cost-cutting operation.

Kaos in New York, as well as studios in the UK and Australia, have all been emptied.

THQ appears to be betting the bank on its subsidised Montreal mega-studio, which is planned to house several hundred developers to make a range of triple-A games in tandem.

About MCV Staff

Check Also

Technology and the market will set the cost of triple-A productions – it’s not an inevitable and negative escalation

The idea that the industry will stagnate because of rising costs is a historically flawed argument based on historical data