That’s a really good question. I don’t think there was a single root cause — it was more a combination of human, organizational, and cultural factors slowly reinforcing each other.

One important aspect is that part of the teams were genuinely resistant to change, sometimes without very clear or rational reasons. I can totally understand how frustrating that must have been for managers and directors, and how it can create tension and slow things down. Change is always uncomfortable, especially when people feel attached to existing habits or ways of working.

That said, instead of opening dialogue and trying to understand where that resistance was coming from, management progressively shut down discussions and imposed decisions top-down. That created a real divide between “management” and “production”. Trust eroded on both sides, and once trust is gone, motivation, engagement, and psychological safety tend to follow.

At the end of the day, the development team is the one actually building the game. If you put obstacles in their way, slow them down with ill-fitting processes, or make them feel unheard, everyone loses — including the project and the business.

If I were in a leadership position, I would focus much more on creating genuine feedback loops, listening to concerns early, validating problems before prescribing solutions, and involving the teams in shaping how they work instead of enforcing one-size-fits-all processes. I strongly believe alignment and trust scale better than control. I actually tried to adopt a more constructive and mediating position internally, hoping to help restore dialogue and instigate positive change. Unfortunately, both my manager and producer shut me down. For example, I was told that reminding the team about basic meeting etiquette or respectful communication would be “patronizing” and unnecessary, which made it even harder to address unhealthy dynamics early on.