Zelda producer Eiji Aonuma says Nintendo avoids layoffs to keep long-term staff

Legend of Zelda producer Eiji Aonuma told GameSpot in interviews published November 5 and 6, 2026 that Nintendo avoids layoffs to build institutional knowledge that pays off over the long term.

The comments arrived as The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time Remake reached players on Nintendo Switch 2, and they landed against a sector where Western game development teams have undergone several layoffs while Japanese studios have largely remained steady. Game industry layoffs reached 10,977 in 2026, already passing the total for 2025, according to the ASGC tracker cited by Tech Insider. Microsoft separately planned to cut 3,200 employees at Xbox.

Game Developer analysts argued the pace of announced layoffs may be slowing, but the damage to teams and institutional knowledge has already been done. The assessment appears in Tech Insider’s comparison of sector job cuts against Nintendo’s continuity model.

Tech Insider cautioned that several outlets stretched Aonuma’s remarks about one franchise team into a company-wide no-layoffs pledge, but the quoted comments do not establish a formal Nintendo policy or headcount figures. Aonuma spoke about the Zelda team and the benefits of tenure, not about every Nintendo studio, contractor, or future downturn.

Eiji Aonuma is a Nintendo veteran of 38 years who most recently worked on The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time Remake. His GameSpot explanation framed retention as a long-running Nintendo habit rather than a recent policy shift, tracing the practice back to projects Shigeru Miyamoto originally worked on. Aonuma said developers at Nintendo tend to be quite experienced with the company’s processes, making it easier to discuss how to proceed at the next step of a project.

The Zelda team changes over time but retains a continuity of core staff from one project to the next, creating a base to build from while bringing up new staff. Aonuma said that continuity contributes to the sense of continuity that players feel in Zelda games, and he linked it to the long-standing practice of keeping experienced staff across projects. Players feel that continuity from one entry to the next.

Very long-term-tenured staff who shared experiences over time make it easier to discuss how to proceed or try something new whenever a project reaches the next step. Aonuma put it this way: “every time you get to the next step, it’s easier to discuss how to proceed, or if you’re going to do something new.” Experienced developers can discuss how to proceed at the next step of a project more smoothly because they know the company’s processes.

When new staff arrive, extensive discussion is required to explain how and why things are done, including the language used, and the team must balance that onboarding so newcomers do not work by rote without understanding. Aonuma said: “When you have new staff coming in, of course you want to make sure that you’re bringing everyone up with a lot of discussion.” That investment in reasoning takes additional time, but it preserves a shared vocabulary and internal shorthand that lets a team skip explaining and move straight to decisions.

Shorthand only works when enough people already speak it. Institutional knowledge includes concrete details such as a designer remembering why a dungeon puzzle failed in playtesting three games ago and an artist knowing which silhouette rules keep Link readable at a distance. Core staff persistence guards against two failure modes: a studio that never refreshes and a studio that refreshes so fast nobody remembers anything.

In the GameSpot interview, the question referenced the artist who originally drew the map and having him draw a map as part of preserving legacy like Ocarina of Time. Staff who have shipped multiple games together build a shared understanding, which makes it easier to collaborate and experiment.

The original Ocarina of Time arrived in 1998, and the 2026 remake spans 28 years of that single game’s life. Aonuma apologized for the Water Temple in the original game and said fixing it was overdue homework for the remake, noting he originally designed the temple 28 years ago to make being underwater fun. He said the team adjusted the temple because it was well known for its difficulty.

The Ocarina of Time Remake serves as a stress test for institutional memory because the team must know why the original worked and which rules to preserve or rework for a new console. Smaller touches such as Richard the dog’s Castle Town night piece of heart show the remake team remembers quirks fans love.

The remake includes new sidequests and dungeon tweaks, plus the option to turn off the user interface from Breath of the Wild and the jump button, while maintaining what made the original great. Not all Ocarina of Time Remake developers have played the Nintendo 64 original, and Aonuma said thanks to these young people the remake was made the way it was.

The remake holds a Metacritic score of 96, and Digital Foundry measured the Switch 2 version at 60 FPS compared with 20 FPS on the Nintendo 64. It features updated visuals, modernized controls, additional gameplay elements, and adjustments to familiar locations while preserving the original adventure’s identity.

During Nintendo’s Ask the Developer interview on November 2, 2026, Aonuma said looking back at Ocarina of Time helps newer staff grasp its significance while giving them freedom to make their own creative decisions. He said the remake lets the current team study the original game’s structure and discover ideas for future Zelda projects, and that the project could provide valuable insights for future entries in the franchise.

Aonuma gave younger developers room to make creative decisions of their own instead of requiring them to follow his version of the original. He said the remake lets the current team study the original game’s structure and discover ideas for future Zelda projects, and that the project could provide valuable insights for future entries in the franchise.

Nintendo’s retention model builds a franchise on long-serving core teams, while many large publishers use acquisition, consolidation, and periodic restructuring. Tech Insider says each model trades something different: retention buys continuity and a recognizable franchise voice, while acquire-and-close buys flexibility and speed of capital reallocation. The retention model buys continuity, faster internal debate, and a recognizable franchise voice, but it costs more time during onboarding and demands patience when a project slips.

Tech Insider cited examples of that cost: one in three acquired studios closed, Arkane Lyon is at risk, and BioWare’s shutdown involved 400 cuts. The acquire-and-close model’s price shows when accumulated design memory leaves with staff after a studio closes. Nintendo prices the loss of institutional memory into its decisions and chooses to keep people rather than risk losing context that never transfers.

The trade-off shows in weak quarters: keeping staff means fixed labor costs continue even when hardware sales slow, which can squeeze margins. Tech Insider noted that retaining employees adds fixed labor costs. Nintendo’s second-quarter net profit fell 29 percent to 73.5 billion yen as Switch 2 momentum slowed.

Long-tenured teams can turn inward, protect long-standing practices, and reject outside ideas, and retirees leave concentration risk behind. Aonuma’s emphasis on explaining reasons to new staff partly answers this risk by spreading understanding beyond the veterans, though a retention philosophy cannot be copied by decree because a studio that lays off staff one year and announces retention the next lacks the shared history that makes the approach work.

No dataset compares Nintendo’s headcount history to its rivals, so the contrast between Nintendo’s retention and industry layoffs stays qualitative. Publishers rushing to cut costs may find that restoring lost design knowledge costs more than the savings first appeared to offer. No source in this story says long tenures guarantee better games.

Zelda only earns repeat revenue when each entry feels consistent with the previous one, and Aonuma connects franchise consistency to staff continuity. For players, the interview gives a straightforward reason Zelda games feel connected as hardware changes. Nintendo executives also raised the theme that remakes count as new games, and Aonuma’s explanation gives a plausible mechanism for why Nintendo’s remakes feel intentional.

The practical lesson for developers is to write down the reasons behind decisions, not only the decisions themselves. Teams that know earlier projects move faster through decisions, keep the studio’s creative principles in mind, and tackle new challenges without rebuilding how they work together. Nintendo needs experienced developers who can pass on knowledge while giving younger employees room to develop their own ideas. Staff who have shipped multiple games together build a shared understanding, which makes it easier to collaborate and experiment.