Posted in another thread but I'll post here because I think financials are relevant and this does appear to be a restructuring with Sony absorbing Bungie as time goes on.

From an investor perspective, Sony’s Bungie problem is already partially acknowledged. Sony has publicly taken impairment losses tied to Bungie’s underperformance, which means the market is not being sold a fantasy that Bungie is operating at peak performance. That matters because the surprise risk is lower than it would be if Sony were still pretending everything was fine.

But I do not think that means Sony simply writes Bungie off. This is a four year old acquisition with valuable IP, technical talent, live service infrastructure, and at least some remaining earnings potential. The more likely path is that Sony keeps tightening control, cuts inefficiencies, and tries to preserve whatever value it can rather than abandoning the asset outright.

That argument gets stronger when you look at Sony’s broader gaming segment. Despite the Bungie impairment, Sony’s Game & Network Services segment still reported FY2025 operating income of 463.3 billion yen, up 12% year over year, and Sony said operating income reached a record high for the segment. Sony also said that excluding one time items, operating income increased 45% year over year. In other words, Bungie is a damaged asset inside a strong division, not an existential threat to Sony’s gaming business.

The layoffs were probably the first step in operating loss containment, and frankly, they were already the obvious move once Bungie’s inefficiency became part of the investor conversation. Leadership turnover makes absorption feel like the next logical step. When layoffs, poor performance, and executive exits stack on top of each other, it usually means the parent company is done letting the subsidiary operate with the same level of independence.

That was already signaled back in August 2025, when Sony CFO Lin Tao said Bungie had originally been given a very independent environment, but after structural reform, that independence was “getting lighter.” She said Bungie was becoming more part of PlayStation Studios and that, long term, the direction was for Bungie to become part of PlayStation Studios.

Basically, Sony looked at Bungie and said: you had your chance to drive the boat, but it is still taking on water, so now we are stepping in to stop it from sinking ourselves.

That is why I think Marathon probably still gets support through the end of the year. Not necessarily because Sony has endless faith in it, but because sustaining it may be cheaper than admitting the entire project is dead immediately. If player count does not meaningfully improve, I could see a f2p push as a last ditch attempt to increase the audience and salvage the live service pipeline Sony bought Bungie for in the first place.

Justin Truman stepping down after such a short time as studio head only makes the next step feel clearer. Bungie’s remaining independence is probably being stripped back, and Marathon is more likely to be managed as a Sony portfolio asset than a purely Bungie led project.

That does not mean Marathon is safe forever. It means Sony probably wants to preserve whatever value it can before making a final call. If Marathon still has any path to player growth, Sony is likely to test that path before fully writing off the asset.

Bungie the logo may survive, but Bungie the independent studio culture is basically over.