But it's still not the workers who caused the issues in the first place, it's was Activision Blizzard who pushed them to make unrealistic release dates, it was Activision Blizzard who pushed them to put out unfinished games, it was Activision Blizzard who created unrealistic expectations for the sales of their games, it is completely Activision Blizzard's fault and to be correct, the higher-ups fault for what's happening. Taking it out on the workers when it's higher-ups who created this problem isn't going to fix the problems with the company (and honestly other shit companies like EA and Ubisoft.) The people who created the problems are still there and will still continue to create the same problems in the future. No amount of worker isn't going to fix the problems when they aren't even addressing the problem in the first place.
Regardless of who created the problem, the existence of workers who now aren't necessary doesn't make sense. You can absolutely blame the higher ups for the problem, and I would concur in this case. Most of those higher ups have left the company. There was a mass executive exodus at Activison, the CEO was ousted, and the company's CFO was fired. So, the higher ups that made this mess are gone. You mentioned EA, and a similar executive exodus happened there.
Looking back at Activison, the company is undergoing a restructuring. That means some jobs will no longer be necessary. If we get into supply and demand, and if we take supply to mean the company's level of output, they lost a big series in Destiny, and have scaled back other series in light of demand (for series like Skylanders) dropping. With a cut in their ability to supply content, and with a drop in demand for some of their other content, the equilibrium of supply drops, and you now have a surplus of labor within the company. The more employees you have, the less efficient each employee is on average, as you hire the best talent first and then every consecutive hire is, on average, a decrease in talent. If your company is scaling back, the output falls under the bottom line efficiency when you have too many resources (in this case, workers) applied to too little production for the new equilibrium supply. And thus, inefficient resources need to be jettissoned. A round of layoffs is necessary to offset the decrease and buoy the company. It's basic economics that apply to all companies, regardless of size. You're hired for your labor and are let go if your labor is no longer needed.
On a more personal note, since it's easy to get too impersonal when examining economics, a CEO or executive team can lift a company into the sky or drive them into the dirt. It's unfortunate when the latter occurs, and unfortunate for the layoffs that typically follow. The ebb and flow of hiring and layoffs is an immutable fact of economics in a capitalist society, not just because of executive failures, but also because of market forces beyond the control of any one company. I believe companies that have cash should provide severance to ease the transition of laid-off workers into a new job. Activision, from what I hear, is offering 6 months of payment as severence. Hopefully that is enough for those laid off workers to find new work. We have labor laws to account for this, and I believe it's in the interest of game industry workers to unionize, given the volatility of the industry and its resultant conditions for worker exploitation.