Rumors swirled about the fate of Compulsion Games, Ninja Theory, Double Fine Productions, Undead Labs and even Arkane Studios, despite three of them having major projects in development. Would Senua and State of Decay 3 face cancellation, especially after occupying such prime spots during the latest Xbox showcase? Thankfully, no. Instead, Compulsion and Double Fine will return to independent status while receiving some runway to tide them over during the transition. No funny business about Xbox owning their IP or anything – at least, the former has confirmed that it retains ownership over We Happy Few, South of Midnight, and Contrast.

Ninja Theory and Undead Labs, meanwhile, will have new ownership. Funding is in place to ensure their projects can “grow,” and while we don’t know who has acquired them, their future is seemingly secure for now.

Arkane Studios is a more complicated situation. It’s currently in “required consultation” with the Works Council to “review potential strategic options.” Could that mean the studio is sold? Is it going to be restructured around MachineGames, especially with the latter’s co-founder, Jerk Gustafsson, becoming president? We probably won’t find out for several months.

By the way, Mojang and King are now directly under Sharma, who touted their monthly active players as the “largest” of Xbox, alongside other benefits. So anyway, they’re facing layoffs. Cheers, everyone.

In fact, every single unit is being hit. Activision, Bethesda, ZeniMax, Blizzard, Xbox Game Studios – you name it. The extent of layoffs is different across the board. Aside from Bloomberg’s Jason Schreier reporting that ZeniMax faces significant restructuring (but won’t be stuck working only on Fallout and The Elder Scrolls), we don’t know who’s hit the hardest. But hey, as Sharma proclaimed, “None of our first party publicly announced games or projects are being cancelled as part of these reductions.” So for the time being, Marvel’s Blade, despite rumors galore about its status, is safe. Key emphasis on “for the time being.”

In terms of worst-case scenarios, you’re probably hearing all this and thinking that it’s not so bad. Hardly ideal, nowhere near good, but Xbox could have easily shuttered the above five studios without so much as any empathy. Instead, it’s taking the high road. As for the other studios, at least Microsoft’s chief people officer, Amy Coleman, said that the eliminated roles aren’t being replaced by AI…before saying it’s true that “AI is changing how work gets done.” What a fantastic thing to say on a day where thousands have lost their jobs, but I digress.

It’s also worth noting that management is becoming more streamlined, going from 14 layers to three or five, which likely means layoffs across those roles as well. Helen Chiang is taking over as Chief Operating Officer to “bring our businesses together under one operating model, making sure we make clear investment decisions, learn from our successes and failures, and hold ourselves accountable for results,” Sharma says.

When you look at the bigger picture, however, it’s hard not to see the past several years of Xbox – ever since Phil Spencer announced those acquisitions in 2018 – as one big failure after another. A three percent accountability margin is bad enough, but hearing that it’s three to ten times lower than the competition?

Game Pass, which has become a huge tent-pole and arguably the lifeblood of Xbox (besides Call of Duty, Minecraft and Candy Crush Saga, as depressing as that sounds), hasn’t seen the required growth. Besides inking deals for tens of millions of dollars with other developers and publishers to have their games on the service, first-party titles have seen their own sales affected. Which anyone and everyone predicted from the start, because who in their right mind would spend $70 on The Outer Worlds 2 when they can play it for cheaper on Game Pass?

That’s not even getting into the hardware revenues for Xbox, which have been declining quarter after quarter after quarter for a while now, even as it grew larger, increased investment, and became even more muddled.

While attempting to tackle Xbox’s problems head on is admirable, I’m not sure that Sharma’s goal for the brand to be “one of the few companies that entertains more than a billion people each day” – claiming it has “many of the most beloved franchises in entertainment history, talented studios around the world” – is the right choice of words. Especially after outlining how the brand has burnt billions of dollars over the year. That too on top of losing several IPs due to the studios departing.

It’s always nice to be positive, especially when proclaiming a “return to growth in 2027.” But that just tells us that 2026 is absolutely cooked, and really, who can sugarcoat that? Saying that Xbox will invest as much as it ever has but with “greater focus, greater discipline, and greater clarity” is only useful through a proven track record. And no, changing Xbox to all-caps XBOX after a Twitter poll doesn’t qualify.

After a terrible generation with the Xbox One, doomed from the start due to one horrendous reveal conference and Don Mattrick, the deck was stacked against Xbox Series X/S from day one. Even Sharma admits that the install base was smaller when Gen 9 began, while the overall cost structure was higher. The main means of growth, Game Pass, ended up an albatross that effectively torpedoed the company’s first-party efforts. We’ve gone from Xbox serving as a juggernaut owning some of the most significant studios out there to proclaiming that it’s “neither possible nor desirable” to do this, and that it lost 64 cents for every dollar invested in a “typical year.” Man alive, what did a terrible year look like in that case?

Even after all this refocusing and boasting about the return of console exclusives, we’re currently in a situation where no one can buy an Xbox Series X/S if they wanted to. Recent price hikes aside, there aren’t enough in supply, to the point where Microsoft is encouraging those with used consoles to sell them to those in need. All of this is due to recent memory and storage price hikes. The latter is estimated to be more than five times higher in Holiday 2027 than what the company paid in 2025, with memory following a similar pattern.

What a time to proclaim, “Physical discs to the rescue,” right? Well, because of PlayStation’s tomfoolery, that may look like a distant pipe dream for Project Helix as well, based on rumors. At least Xbox is reportedly working on a way to digitize your Xbox One and Series X/S libraries (sorry, OG and Xbox 360 lovers), but that does nothing to assuage fears that it’s also pursuing a digital-only business model for its games. And as we’ve emphasized several times with PlayStation, that means it can dictate everything from discounts to licenses. You won’t really own everything so much as “rent” it, subject to the terms and conditions of using the very same service. Don’t like it? Well, go to the competition who employ the same tactics.

Maybe this comes across as doom-saying for Xbox, but if you’ve been paying attention, that’s what PlayStation has been doing. Removing over 500 Studio Canal films and episodes that customers purchased because of expiring license agreements. No option to download them afterwards either – your ownership isn’t even null and void because it didn’t exist in the first place. The PlayStation 3 and PS Vita storefronts are shutting down, which paints a grim future for the PS4’s store (at least their content remains downloadable for now). The less said about dynamic pricing for its discounts or PlayStation still trying the live service model despite all evidence proclaiming it shouldn’t, the better.

The same goes for any prospect of reselling games, which have only increased in pricing over the past several years. You could argue that not every major title can carry an $80 price tag like Grand Theft Auto 6, but that won’t stop publishers from trying, and ditching physical copies in the process.

I don’t want to make a blanket statement proclaiming that every single aspect of gaming is awful, or that there aren’t successes out there that offer some respite. It hasn’t even been a year since we celebrated how games like Clair Obscur could exist in an industry where triple-A budgets could rival the GDPs of the smallest countries. There have been so many wonderful releases thus far this year, including from Xbox and PlayStation, such as Forza Horizon 6 and Saros.

There’s still more to look forward to from them with Halo: Campaign Evolved, Gears of War: E-Day, and Marvel’s Wolverine, and with releases like Clockwork Revolution, State of Decay 3, Resident Evil Veronica, Fable, The Witcher 3 – Songs of the Past, and Final Fantasy 7 Revelation in 2027, the hobby as a whole isn’t dying by a long shot.

But it’s extremely disheartening to see two of the Big Three console manufacturers so horrendously cooked for different reasons. On the lowest end, it’s crazy to see Xbox taking all these steps and getting rid of so many people, not for the sake of profitability but to escape the ditch it dug for itself. Meanwhile, at the tippy top, it’s sad that PlayStation, the market leader, could care less about preservation, much less giving you any sense of ownership or a console that doesn’t demand an instalment plan (and I’m not even talking about next-gen).

The takeaways from this are too numerous to count, even without delving into the bubble that is triple-A development. At the end of the day, gaming is more expensive and will only skyrocket further with the PS6 and Project Helix. Whether this is a storm to weather, or an unending downpour without respite, it’s a sad day for gaming regardless.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

PlayStation Plus cancellations. Pictures of physical game collections. Expletives. A modified version of PlayStation’s slogan to now say, “Play by our limits.” My favorite is probably the image from Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty, except the “Colonel’s” dialogue to Raiden reads, “Corporations will abandon physical media, and the individual will own nothing at all.”

And on and on it goes for about 3,000 comments on one tweet.

If it wasn’t clear enough already, the decision to kill physical games has gone down poorly. Polls from different publications show that most readers are fine with the PS5 being their last console. A presidential candidate in France, Jean-Luc Mélenchon, lambasted Sony’s decision, stating that “video games are not mere merchandise, they are cultural assets, and the law in force must apply to them.”

Brazilian lawmaker Erika Hilton seeks to investigate Sony if it plans to announce digital-only titles and use them to push digital-only consoles. She also brought up a rather interesting issue in hindsight: how consumers paid more for consoles with disc drives, only to now be faced with a digital-only future. Remember when Sony was pushing for its optional Blu-ray disc drive? How it faced supply shortages and extensive scalping when the PS5 Pro was announced without one? Not even two years later, those who went to pains for the same have essentially been left high and dry.

But regardless, the result is clear: Most people utterly despise PlayStation’s decision. On the one hand, the direction is confusing – and we’ll get into that. On the other, it comes across as tone-deaf, especially with storage costs ever-increasing.

Of course, everyone knows why PlayStation is doing this, and it’s not just because the consumer base has trended more towards digital. This is also apparently far from a snap decision to help bring down the price of its next-gen console (especially because the real costs are tied elsewhere). But it all goes back to greed and the need to control its players’ purchasing power.

Remember that talking point from its last fiscal report about how 85 percent of its software sales for the quarter were full-game digital downloads? And how it was up by five percent year-over-year? When measuring the full-year ratio of downloads to physical sales, it actually turned out to be 78 percent. Furthermore, physical software revenue was actually up from 121.159 billion yen in fiscal year 2024 to 125.106 billion yen in fiscal year 2025 (though that also includes bundles and disc royalties from third parties).

There’s also that recent report by Alinea Analytics about physical sales splits for some of the top-selling PS5 games this year. Resident Evil Requiem reportedly sold 3.5 million copies on the platform, and about 27.8 percent is apparently physical. 007 First Light’s physical sales allegedly make up 21 percent of the two million sold on the platform. Ghost of Yōtei is perhaps the most egregious – a whopping 35.4 percent of the reported 1.2 million sold this year alone is physical.

Again, these are all estimates and not official data, but even if they’re off by five percent (give or take), there are still those out there buying discs in sizable enough quantities to justify their production. But in PlayStation’s eyes, all those physical copies simply represent a market ripe for resale, where they’re effectively cut out from any profits. This has long been a concern for the games industry for decades – who remembers the always-online DRM that Assassin’s Creed 2 had to combat piracy? So why is it taking such drastic steps? Games have become far more expensive and need to generate more sales to guarantee a return.

If Sony can dismantle the current ecosystem to funnel customers towards a digital-only future where it receives all the revenue, ownership be damned, it will go for it. It will even go a step further, as indicated by dynamic pricing on the PlayStation Store, to carefully control how much you save. Because everyone knows that those sales are meant to save the company money, not you. It’s even looking at potentially increasing the price of PlayStation Plus again in the future, presumably to spite all of you who played EA Sports FC 26 through your subscription.

To that end, Sony has also reportedly repurposed its disc manufacturing plant in Thalgau, which now plans to build microlenses instead. By 2028, it’s seemingly going from 300,000 discs daily to 30,000. It wouldn’t be surprising to see that volume drop even further, but if it wasn’t clear already, this has been a years-long plan. The fact that it’s finally set a deadline probably has less to do with the current memory and storage shortages, and more with trying to prop up the PS6 as its main digital tentpole.

How will this affect retailers? PlayStation said it would offer future titles in “digital formats only”…years after it announced it would no longer provide full games via digital codes for PS4. Obviously, this shouldn’t inspire much confidence in said retailers. But they’re effectively fighting to stay relevant, especially with the industry shifting more towards digital delivery, both in games and marketing.

How will it handle its partners and other publishers? Why, by allowing them to re-order discs for existing PlayStation titles after January 2028, according to a new report by Game File. That explains why it hasn’t completely shifted away from disc manufacturing. What about games launched after that date? What if you planned to release a game in Fall 2027 but another major release – say, The Witcher 4 – forces you to delay it to early 2028? Well, we don’t know, and at this point, it wouldn’t be surprising if PlayStation is similarly clueless.

All of this, every single bit, is the consequence of Sony being the market leader. It may dress up these decisions as adapting to “consumer trends” and aligning “more closely with how most of our community prefers to access and play games today.” But these decisions, from start to finish, are all for PlayStation’s sake, and nothing more. And its shareholders, lest we forget. After all, the stock price rose by a whopping 3.2 percent after this announcement. Mission accomplished, clearly.

For everyone else who wants to feel a sense of ownership, or just to be assured that their platform holder can’t just take away things on short notice – like PlayStation’s recent announcement to remove more than 500 Studio Canal movies, with no avenue for current owners to access them – well, you can’t. Unlike the forced PSN account linking, this isn’t just something that it can back down from at the slightest hint of backlash. Even if it ultimately delivers a compromise – like special $100 discs for collectors – PlayStation will just keep on keeping on, slowly shifting towards a market that it fully controls. Like an amusement park where you’re welcome to buy a ticket and stay for as long as Sony dictates rather than a product that you own.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

I would say “If you haven’t been following PlayStation lately,” but that would be untrue because this truly came out of nowhere. New games coming to PlayStation consoles will no longer have physical discs from January 2028 onwards; instead, they’ll only be available on the PlayStation Store or retailers digitally. Games that were released before this won’t be affected, so it at least sounds like Sony isn’t completely abandoning the format, but the intention is clearly stated:

“This is a natural direction for Sony Interactive Entertainment to adapt to consumer trends as the general preference for digital media significantly outpaces physical discs.” It also says that it will “enable us to align more closely with how most of our community prefers to access and play games today.”

That latter part won’t be too surprising because, as so many publishers have claimed, much of their revenue comes from digital sources. Sales are increasingly digital. PlayStation itself reported that 85 percent of its software sales were full digital games. From a business standpoint, this probably feels like the best step forward for the company, right?

And yet it’s inciting widespread, justifiable outrage across the board. Go look at the comments on the “Official PlayStation Used Game Instructional Video” from 2013 with Shuhei Yoshida and Adam Boyes, who are both no longer at the company. It almost feels like a time capsule, or as one of the more popular comments notes, “like watching the wedding video after the divorce.”

The physical games market has since declined massively; used games are a dying breed; and even if you want to be “completely physical” with any title, you still have to deal with day-one patches and internet access to even access a title.

It’s one thing when a company announces it’s not releasing its latest game physically, whether because of leaks or something else. When a platform manufacturer that owns one of the biggest digital storefronts in gaming outlines plans to completely move away from physical media? You could have told players five years prior, and it still wouldn’t have gone over well, for several reasons.

When discussing all this for Grand Theft Auto 6, I said this is the new normal, and far from being a new phenomenon, it’s something that gamers, unwittingly or otherwise, have been a part of for years and years. This isn’t to say it’s fair or in favor of the customer – just that it’s the reality.

However, at the very least, with physical games existing in some form, consumers have had some sense of ownership, and even some freedom of purchasing. That physical edition of Astro Bot that I recently picked up for 25 percent off because I didn’t want to wait for another PlayStation Store sale is one example. It’s not about the price of the discount – just the fact that I’m not interested in constantly checking the PlayStation Store to see if it’s on sale.

There’s also not wanting to constantly reinstall a massive game like Ghost of Yōtei, which is over 85 GB. Would I still have to download patches and additional modes like Legends? Sure, but I wouldn’t have to concern myself with downloading the entire game besides. The fact that I have that disc and can access it whenever while maintaining space for other titles, digital or otherwise, is a great comfort.

Mind you, that’s just my preference, and it doesn’t even get into all the other problems with PlayStation’s decision. With no more physical games, Sony can effectively monopolize all your purchasing on the PlayStation Store. I’m not saying that it could jack up the prices for everything, but its whole dynamic pricing experiment, which has resulted in different discounts depending on your region, is the first sign of trouble. Even if you’re searching for the best deal, it’s going to be what PlayStation dictates is suitable, and don’t even think about trying to game the system by accessing other regions’ storefronts.

Then there’s the decision to shut down the PS3 and PlayStation Vita storefronts from July 2027, though these changes will begin rolling out this year for certain countries. Yes, I know it originally meant to do this in 2021 and ultimately backtracked, but that doesn’t make it any less insulting. Besides, it now sets a very real precedent of the company just stopping access to its digital titles, whether you like it or not (or decide to subscribe to PlayStation Plus, which oh-so-conveniently raised its prices recently). Best of all, full sarcasm intended, is that “players will still be able to download previously purchased content after the closing date for the foreseeable future,” per the company. What happens if it doesn’t even allow that? And once again, what if that becomes the precedent for the future?

If all that wasn’t enough, PlayStation has done an awful job translating what any of this could mean for the PS6. Will it have a disc drive? Can you attach a disc drive? If not, then what about all those PS5 titles that you own on disc (because several rumors claim that it’s backwards compatible)? Can you somehow convert your library to a full digital format? How will that work if you don’t own a PS5 or, at worst, your console is broken? Will all those discs, many costing $70 because you bought them on day one like a good little soldier, suddenly become unplayable? If it continues selling cross-gen titles and you’re still on a PS5 with a perfectly good disc drive, are you forced to buy them digitally? Well, the answer to that last one is increasingly looking like a “yes”, but it’s still absurd.

However, perhaps the biggest question of them all: How long has this been planned? Did it consciously design the PS6 to not have a disc drive? Is it really going to get away with selling a next-gen console without it and potentially charging $1000 (which, going by its rumored bill of materials, it very well might)?

Maybe Sony will reveal more in the coming months, especially when it’s ready to actually reveal and talk about the PS6. Maybe offering digital versions of its games is a means to satiate retailers, though if physical pre-order reports for GTA 6 are anything to go by, it’s not exactly working out well. Maybe it will work out some kind of system to enable lending digital copies. Heck, it may even backtrack or delay the decision, just to satiate fans before slowly and surely going ahead. No half-measures, after all, no matter how long it takes.

Whatever the case may be, this decision isn’t depressing just because of the state of the industry, and its complete disregard for preservation and digital ownership. It’s the overwhelming majority simply going along with it, ensuring the PS6 is a sell-out on day one. Not because they don’t know better, but because it’s “normal” in every sense of the word that PlayStation and other major companies have always wanted.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

However, its price tag puts it at a premium over even the PS5 Pro, and that’s a cause for concern. At $1049 for a 512GB variant that functions on par with the base PS5 and Xbox Series X, it’s made our thoughts wander to what the next generation of gaming hardware could bring to the table and has us wondering what such offerings could cost. As always, there’s more to the issue than meets the eye, and we’re going to come at this from multiple angles. Let’s get started.

Leaving Traditions Behind

The old console model is the first thing that comes to mind, as it’s what the Steam Machine aimed to tackle before component shortages and the subsequent increase in prices forced Valve to pass on additional costs to its players. When you put that against how consoles have often absorbed losses they take on expensive hardware only to earn that back via game sales, subscriptions, peripherals, and platform fees, the Steam Machine’s disruptive potential becomes a little clearer.

However, that isn’t the only variable to consider. The PlayStation and Xbox have traditionally been closed-off ecosystems, with both Sony and Microsoft using all the factors we’ve mentioned above to try to surge ahead of their rivals. Throw in other gaming systems like the Switch into the mix, and the pattern becomes clearer. Big brands have used exclusivity and their unique USPs to ensure consumer loyalty and recoup the losses from discounted entry points over the duration of a console generation.

That means it can be hard for gamers to switch over to a rival, considering that they’ve had around seven years to build a library of games that would then become redundant if they were to give another system a try. Valve’s arguing against that route with the Steam Machine, bringing a PC/console hybrid that’s about as open-ended as they come thanks to a Linux-based operating system with a SteamOS overlay.

Yes, you’re paying a premium, but you also get the flexibility of a PC in a machine that gels pretty well with your living room setup thanks to its compact size and an approach to heat management that we must tip our hat to. That’s a more open-ended alternative to the PS5 or Xbox that could also run as a reasonably powerful PC if the need arises, since you could even run Windows on it and plug in a keyboard and mouse to get some work done from the comfort of your couch.

There’s value in both approaches, no arguments there, but there is the pressing concern that both Sony and Microsoft must now think long and hard about what they’re going to do about pricing their next-gen offerings. Absorbing hardware costs heavily in the interest of subsidization, both companies risk losing out on profit margins. Not doing so could raise prices, which isn’t going to make a lot of console gamers happy. It’s a frying pan and fire kind of situation that needs careful navigation if the next generation of consoles is to sustain the value that they offer to gamers.

The Rising Tide Of Prices

It’s probably a good idea to think about the price hikes on Sony’s PS5 lineup at this point. As of March 2026, the PS5 Disc Edition now sits at $649.99, while the PS5 Digital is at $599.99, and the PS5 Pro is pushing dangerously close to the thousand-dollar mark, with its retail price at $899.99. While it’s all well and good to support Sony, a manufacturer known for its quality gaming hardware over many years, and say that there was no choice but to hike up prices, that still doesn’t address worries about what the PS6’s price could be when it comes out.

Things are equally troubling with the Xbox Series. The Xbox Series S is now $100 dearer if you’re looking at a 512GB model, while the 1TB versions of both the S and X are now $150 more expensive. What’s worse, the 2TB models are now discontinued. Heck, even Lenovo has stated that memory prices may never return to normalcy.

Microsoft might be facing a tricky situation, all things considered, as Project Helix seems to be shaping up quite well, although it’s deep in development. However, as it’s being built to play both Xbox and PC games, that could put its value proposition quite close to what the Steam Machine is currently offering, and that’s without considering the promise of “leading performance” from the brand’s upcoming next-gen powerhouse.

With plans to ship out alpha hardware to developers in early 2027, it’s clearly getting closer to its final launch, as is the PS6. In the case of Project Helix, the PC/console hybrid angle could likely be a very justifiable reason for a higher price, especially for enthusiasts, but we’re concerned that such a situation could affect the mass-market relevance that it so clearly needs if it’s to take on the PS6. Exclusive games are a great way to get that going, but are they going to be enough to justify paying a high price for them? That’s something that remains to be seen. Either way, it’s a possibility that Project Helix’s goals may come into conflict with each other and be an obstacle to its success.

We’re aware that all of this is a tad speculative at this stage, but the Steam Machine has given us valid reasons for our concerns thanks to its price. But what could be done about them?

A Smart Way Forward

Well, you might not like what’s on our mind, but allow us to explain. We think delaying both the PS6 and Project Helix could be a smart choice for Sony and Microsoft. It isn’t because we think none of us are ready for a generational leap that could make modern gaming even better than it is today, not in the slightest. But at this point, with hardware prices and supply being what they are, it’s going to be a tall order to match retail prices with the value that’s on offer.

Both the PS6 and Project Helix need to come in at a time when a higher price tag is justified by an undeniable value proposition. Without it, we don’t see too many people looking to buy new consoles since their PS5s and Series X consoles, along with handhelds, the Switch 2, cloud gaming and other libraries, let them enjoy the best of whatever gaming is offering, albeit at a slightly lower performance that still works just fine since it’s what they’re already used to.

It’s going to be very easy to just wait out an upgrade, forcing Sony and Microsoft to either lower prices or weather low demand for new consoles. For the past few generations of consoles, upgrading to whatever next-gen offerings were available was a matter of better graphics, improved loading times, better frame rates, ray tracing in the case of the PS5 and Xbox Series, and bigger, more ambitious worlds that pushed the boundaries of what a modern gaming experience could achieve.

That’s the way it should be if you ask us, with each iteration of the PlayStation and Xbox working to give gamers a solid reason for an upgrade that goes past being an enthusiast, for whom a new console is a must-have, day-one purchase. Nothing wrong with that per se, but there’s a risk of alienating gamers who would like nothing more than a shiny new console but are priced out of joining in on the fun when the PS6 and Project Helix come along.

The Steam Machine has shed light on a facet of gaming hardware that console owners aren’t fully aware of yet, but the current situation has shown us all what those hidden bills look like. It brought the question of price and affordability to next-gen consoles, and we worry that launching either or both models too soon runs the risk of turning console gaming into a luxury purchase instead of a convenient, mass-market solution. It isn’t going to be entirely on the manufacturers, given the current cost-component environment, but it’s sure as hell going to be a factor if the prices are too high for the average gamer to make the leap to next-gen consoles.

We’re hoping to tell you that we were wrong to worry at some point, but all the evidence now points to a late 2027 to early 2028 launch for the PS6 and Project Helix. And while it’s certainly going to be interesting to see how Sony and Microsoft try to offset price increases, it’s going to be pretty saddening to know that so many of us won’t be playing the best games of the next few years in the best possible ways that they’re meant to be enjoyed.

And that would definitely be a disappointment all around.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organizati

Lest we forget, the year has been full of other live-service failures, big and small. Highguard is the most prominent, but Destruction AllStars recently saw its servers shut down as well. After a whopping five years of development and $880 million spent, Sega cancelled its Super Game project. And lest we forget, Sony shut down Bluepoint Games after having it on a live-service project for years. Even among lesser-known companies, it’s looking grim. Wildgate, which launched last year to some fanfare, won’t receive any more content after its next update.

But don’t worry, everyone. Amid all these high-profile failures and money sinks, Hideaki Nishino, fearless president of Sony Interactive Entertainment, told Famitsu about his plans to “revitalize the market” via first- and third-party content. The answer? Live service games.

The company is focusing on new releases but also “considering what we can do with older titles in the medium to long term.” He even considers Marvel Tōkon: Fighting Souls to be a live-service game for…reasons.

When asked if PlayStation truly wants to pursue the model – because who could believe it after so many project cancellations and studio closures – Nishino said, “With live service games, it’s important to continuously provide something. The genre itself is relatively new, and I think many people are trying various things, so we also want to continue to take on challenges within that context.”

Yes, that’s right. The genre which grew to prominence with Destiny, Fortnite and whatnot, which has seen more failures than hits in the past decade, is still “relatively new.” And PlayStation can do nothing to actually overcome those challenges. So if you thought Jim Ryan’s departure would mean that the company suddenly pivots its business strategy, well, maybe think again.

Let’s leave aside the irony of wanting to continue pursuing live-service after laying off hundreds of developers who worked on one of the pioneers of the model. What truly baffles me about all this is how, even with all these setbacks, the disaster that was Concord, and considering one of the main appeals of Sony’s consoles is its prestige single-player titles, it still wants to keep trying with live service. Where at first you don’t succeed, you apparently fail, fail, fail again, fail some more and keep trying because why not?

We’ve already gone over the Marathon situation. On Steam, at least, it’s now at its second straight day under 10K peak concurrent players. So not quite at Highguard’s level just yet, but lest we forget, even after its upcoming layoffs, Bungie is still a pretty big team. Destiny 2 was considered to be in big trouble when it hit these same numbers, and I would be shocked if Marathon somehow got a pass.

Then there’s Fairgame$ or Break In, or whatever PlayStation thinks it should be called, which we’ve seen neither hide nor hair of in over three years. There hasn’t even been any gameplay. Rumors claim it has an extraction shooter mode, but we don’t even know what the standard gameplay formula is. And no, playtests following the former were not positive, not that anyone could expect them to be at this point.

The only thing that’s left is Horizon Hunters Gathering. I like the series and the gameplay doesn’t look too shabby. But after reports about how this is what most of Guerrilla Games is on for the time being and that the third Horizon game is years away, it just feels like a repeat of The Last of Us Online. And Anthem. And Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League. And Redfall, even if those aspirations were allegedly scaled back before its disastrous launch. That is, putting developers who specialize in single-player titles on these live-service ships which ultimately go nowhere.

The hilariously tragic part of it all is that the model itself doesn’t always lend itself to failure. Look at Grinding Gear Games’ Path of Exile 1 and 2. It’s able to provide consistent content updates for both games – after an awkward transitory period, but still – and now cycles back and forth between leagues. You could argue that it’s an action RPG that doesn’t have the same budget and scale as these other triple-A endeavors, and might be right. But the goal is retention and providing consistent quality content. Sometimes, the developer doesn’t always get it right and is forced to eat crow over some really bad decisions. And yet, it continues to push forward thanks to cultivating a hardcore community, for better or worse.

It feels like bigger companies like PlayStation and, yes, even Xbox, want that same thing, but greenlight projects just to chase trends. If there’s a plan, it certainly doesn’t feel like it, especially with some of these games spending years trying to figure out what to do, wasting time and money. And allocating triple-A-level budgets to begin with is in itself a problem. If Bend Studio released Days Gone 2, you could at least be assured of some returns, and maybe an evergreen title that continues to generate sales down the line. But with a live-service title, you’re essentially rolling the dice. If it underperforms, you lose your initial investment and continue to burn money every day the servers remain online, and when new content is delivered.

Of course, there’s also the fact that the market is too crowded. The live-service model is far from new; it feels like every other live-service game is because their shelf life is so short. And yet, publishers continuously gamble for a chance at a hit and that sweet long-term revenue. Every time, no matter how often it fails, and regardless of how many other failures there have been in the past.

It isn’t realistic to expect anything else at this point because as long as someone is making money in the live-service space, there will always be others who want a piece of the pie. No one can really say how Xbox will fare with its single-player offerings, especially given its baffling exclusive strategies and lackluster console market share. But at least for Sony, the focus on single-player titles should become more prominent.

If games like Astro Bot, which has reportedly reached 4.3 million sales since launching in September 2024, prove anything, it’s that even smaller-scale, linear projects have a place. PlayStation doesn’t always have to invest in these massive titles that require budgets in the hundreds of millions – besides its own IP, there is room for more variety. Even if they underwhelm in the short term, like Saros apparently has, you don’t need to worry about continuing to pay for their upkeep and eventually shutting them down.

Maybe it’s trying something different with games like Marvel Tōkon and Horizon Hunters Gathering. As long as it expects big returns, then even efforts like these won’t be the right fit (and I’m extremely doubtful that there’s any room for the latter). I can respect smaller developers who try to reach for that next viral hit by going into live-service, even if they miss the mark. But for a company like PlayStation to keep throwing millions after millions at the model and have little to show for it is a definition of insanity that defies description.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

It’s how we stumbled upon Amazon Brazil’s listing for the game, and a detail that has us quite optimistic about Leonida becoming one of Rockstar’s most immersive and authentic open worlds. Yes, the graphics are going to be an important factor in making it believable, but we think it’s the city’s denizens that are really going to sell the experience. We’re beginning to suspect that Leonida’s real strength is going to come from its people, making it a real, reactive place that makes us a part of its identity.

Why is that? As always, we’re happy to tell you all about it. Strap in for this one, and let’s go!

The Promise Of A Better World

Let’s begin with what the retail listing claims is going to be a part of the experience on offer in GTA 6. Yes, there are factors like a dynamic weather system with potential effects on physics and gameplay alongside advanced ray tracing and reflections, and PS5 Pro-focused enhancements that could mean better resolutions and more stable frame rates. They’re all reasons to be excited, but are we really expecting anything less from one of modern gaming’s biggest and most ambitious titles?

We’re interested in all the other details that the listing promises. There are NPCs with advanced, AI-based routines for starters, and organically unfolding events peppered all around the map. The listing reports that the game’s version of Vice City and Leonida is going to be denser and more immersive, while an entire social media system that’s baked in could keep pushing viral videos to your character’s phone as you go about your day-to-day life in the city.

Vice City might also have influencers, who could lead you to secret side missions, giving you a good enough reason to engage with them in non-violent ways, even if they get too annoying. Establishments within the world could be interactive in ways you haven’t seen before. There’s a lot of promise in what the retailer suggests, and although we’d advise waiting until Rockstar confirms that all of this is indeed a part of the game, it’s still hard not to get excited at the thought of what it all means for an open-world that follows in the footsteps of games like GTA 5 and Red Dead Redemption 2, which are already quite high on our list of favorites in the genre.

A Living, Breathing World

The reason we’re so invested in the details about Leonida’s NPCs is that they’re always a part of Rockstar’s success, since its games live or die by what you’re doing in between missions in the main campaign. GTA 6 will already have us visiting a lot of the city’s points of interest, spreading it all out over police chases, heists, set-pieces, story chapters, and more. But those are kind of standard for the franchise at this point, and while we’re sure they’re going to be great, they’re not what players will hold with them long after they’ve rolled the credits on the grand adventure they experience.

It’s what they’re going to do in Leonida when they’ve got nothing on their plate that’s a potential fountain of fond memories, a personal collection of highlights that’s going to fuel the community built around the experience, and reasons to look back fondly on the game. Hell, it could all prompt a truly enthusiastic player to dive right back into a new playthrough to build an entirely different set of memories and fun moments. It’s going to places where the game doesn’t tell you to go; that’s a huge part of what makes Rockstar’s games memorable. The visuals could make the world look real, but it’s authentic NPC behavior that makes it feel real.

Think about RDR2, and what we’re trying to say here becomes clearer. The NPCs in Rockstar’s take on the Wild West didn’t feel like mere props, a facet that many other open worlds have neglected in comparison. Your camp members had lives of their own and were often found running errands or doing chores, their moods varying enough to make them feel like living beings, thanks to the conversations you could have with them.

Random encounters as you made your way across the world gave the impression of a world that was crafted to be unpredictable yet authored in a way that blurred the lines between a truly historical recreation and a digital sandbox that was built to suck you in. Witnesses to your crimes, bounty hunters, lawmen, and the like knew your face when your actions were not a part of the accepted social standards set down on their lands, while the honor system gave all of it a unique flavor that influenced the outcome of your time with Arthur. Meet the same folks a little down the line, and your actions were a part of how they responded to seeing you again.

Animals, settlements, and the strangers you got to meet were part of the illusion that the world you were exploring was one that existed independently of you and would continue to do so long after you were gone. It was a lovely undercurrent to the experience that made the narrative’s melancholic ending all the more poignant as a result.

But for all those merits, RDR2’s frontier-style experience allowed for a slower, more controlled approach to its open world. But GTA 6 has to factor in a significantly larger number of variables. There are things like traffic, highways, stores, the police, influencers, fellow criminals who may or may not be aligned with your own interests, tourists, the social media system, and the general hustle and bustle of the city to account for. That’s a challenge that we believe could push even Rockstar to its limits.

Getting Things Right

Of course, Rockstar’s track record could very well mean that it manages to pull a rabbit out of a hat with GTA 6, but the sheer scale of it all has us thinking of all the possible things it would need to do to manage such a feat. It wouldn’t be enough to merely have NPCs have AI-generated conversations, and we don’t think that Rockstar would even bother with such an approach (more on that a little later). But we think that the game’s AI is going to be invisible, working behind the scenes to make its systems come to life in ways that sell the experience on offer.

Let’s speculate a little on what that could mean. NPCs in Leonida could go to work, visit stores on the way home, maybe get a workout in before they take a shower, and go out exploring. Perhaps they could start a livestream while they’re at it, which you could then check out before heading on over yourself. That’s a day-and-night cycle with a multitude of possibilities already. We can already imagine the more patient ones among you following an NPC just to see if their routines are as elaborate as they are if that’s the case.

This tackles a normal day in the life of an NPC in GTA 6. But what if you were to upset that routine by perhaps committing a crime? You could draw the attention of those very same folks who could crown the scene and record a video (which then goes viral), or call the cops on you. They could run away in fright, or even try to confront you if they’re feeling particularly brave that day, which could very well be the case if their moods dynamically change from one day to the next.

Of course, that could mean that dynamic events wouldn’t have to be scripted but would be naturally unfolding responses to our own actions in Leonida. They wouldn’t need to be fixed markers that trigger when we get close, instead stemming from overlapping systems like the weather, law enforcement’s presence and influence in a region, traffic and NPC schedules, and social media trends, all of which act together to respond to what we’re doing in a specific place at a specific time. The possibilities then become endless.

It could also mean that the police could have more agency over the severity of their response to any crimes you commit, with factors like access to the area, available witnesses and footage of an incident, crowd density that may influence what weaponry they’re carrying, and, of course, the severity of the crime itself. It would mean a departure from GTA 5, where they simply spawn around your location to set off a chase.

There’s also the weather to think about. Storms might change how NPCs behave, with lower traffic and pedestrian movement, a change in driving and traversal physics, beach crowds, visibility, police patrolling, boat activity, and perhaps even mission conditions. We’ve already talked about the potential for influencers to change the way you discover side activities. Think about watching a viral clip and following the influencer in question to a location, or perhaps finding the place from their feeds.

All of these factors could eliminate question marks on a map entirely while also ensuring that no two players find a specific mission or event in the same way, creating a net of variables that ensures a unique experience for each of us, while still managing to pull from the same pool of scripted and unscripted content. It challenges traditional open-world design in interesting ways, where map icons, the above-mentioned question marks, scripted “random” encounters, fixed side mission locations, and NPCs just waiting for us to find them have become the norm.

GTA 6 could create exceptions that directly challenge these practices, bringing events that you discover for yourself instead of stumbling upon, with multiple ways to get to them hiding in plain sight but never fully revealing themselves. NPC routines could make triggers for attached quests or secrets become dynamically moving markers that you find so organically that you never think that they’re a part of a script. Side missions would need you to be in the right place at the right time, just as something like that would unfold in the real world. Shops and other establishments would become more than just decorative presences, going beyond their functionality to present you with even more variables. Crowds could be a facet that generates stories instead of just filling empty spaces in Leonida’s real estate.

Honestly, it’s made our brains hurt thinking about all the ways Rockstar could manage to make Leonida the best open-world it’s made, and possibly the best one we could be a part of in the last decade or so. But can it fit within the GTA franchise’s framework? Absolutely!

Risks and Rewards

You’re probably already with us on this, but GTA is the perfect franchise for the kind of chaos we’re thinking of. It isn’t hard to imagine pulling up our in-game phones to view a social media feed that points us to a specific location where something interesting has gone down, only to arrive there and find that the area has been cordoned off by the police. Talking to witnesses could provide new leads to follow, which could then allow an entire chain of side quests to unfold more organically than ever seen in any other open world.

All of this is a natural fit for the franchise, which has already demonstrated its ability to simulate life in a busy city in GTA 6’s predecessor, where your phone and the internet were already a way for the game to bring its satire and mission-related tools into the gameplay loop. GTA 6 could make your phone become a more natural part of the gameplay loop and a crucial tool that your adventure hinges on, making it a living, breathing mission board, rumor system, discovery tool, and a layer of world reactivity all on its own. And with it on your person at all times, it becomes the catalyst for a whole lot of chaos.

That would be really cool if it’s all done well, but we’re wondering if it could also be something that breaks the immersion if things don’t go according to plan. NPC behavior could fall into repetitive loops, or even worse, cause them to say the same old boring lines over and over again. Those are aspects we’ve seen a lot of over the years, and it’s been a while since they’ve gotten old. Random events could be so random they stop feeling believable, which is something we haven’t seen but could definitely break the spell Leonida casts on us.

AI-generated content could clash with authored writing, a conflict that would be all too evident in an adventure that comes with such an ambitious undertaking. Of course, there’s also the ever-present threat of bugs causing a lot of the magic to collapse right in front of us, a scenario that threatens the very fabric of Leonida’s unpredictability in ways that would need a lot of work to set right. Too many systems working together could mean that they eventually work against each other, making mission designs feel unpredictable in a bad way. It’s going to need a balance that’s as thin as a tightrope, but we’ve already said that Rockstar is a studio that could pull it off. It’s time to look at why.

Think of its legacy. GTA 4 was already more reactive and physical than most of the open worlds available to us at the time of its release. GTA 5 continues to be a gift that keeps on giving, with its modern sandbox offering an online experience that continues to keep its players coming back for more to this day. We’ve already spoken at length about RDR2, and it remains unmatched. That gives us a lot of confidence, as it’s not just the intelligent use of AI in creating a game world that makes GTA 6 a potential game-changer, but the fact that it’s Rockstar working to refine design philosophies that it has worked with for decades, making great use of available technology and hardware to bring pioneering experiences to the table.

If Amazon Brazil indeed has things right, GTA 6’s biggest innovation is going to be in how Leonida reacts to what we do when we engage with it without a goal in mind. With a world made stunning by better reflections and weather, it could also be one that feels genuinely alive thanks to how NPC AI could simulate the real world. RDR2 has already paved the way for such a groundbreaking approach. All GTA 6 needs to do is take that same philosophy and implement it across the board to make a world that’s louder, more chaotic, and modern.

Leonida could be a place where everyone has somewhere to be, and every crowd could tell stories better than a single NPC at a fixed location ever could. It could make every crime you commit become content, and make your every action the source of a new thread of activities to follow, the main campaign be damned.

We’re hoping that’s the case. It would definitely help us feel that the long wait for this one was worth it, and perhaps even a necessary part of the experience. Well, our fingers are definitely crossed, and we’re glad we’re not going to have to wait too long to find out if we’re right.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

It’s only natural, then, to expect remakes of Resident Evil 5 and 6, which had a lot of Chris Redfield and other important cast members from the overarching narrative squished into their respective stories. Leon, Claire, and Jill have had their time to shine in remakes, but the leader of the BSAA’s Wolf Squad has been conspicuous by his absence. That reference to him in Requiem could even be seen as a sort of a secret that points to him getting a couple of remakes as well.

But recent reports suggest that this might not be the case, and we think that assuming that remakes of RE5 and RE6 are definitely on the way ignores some obvious roadblocks, the biggest one being that they are quite different from all the other games that have been modernized. They’re bigger, louder, more action-heavy, and co-op driven than their counterparts. That doesn’t make them unpopular, not in the slightest, but it does bring unique challenges to the table that would make them a tad more complicated to modernize in a way that makes sense for both the developer and players.

The developer would have to think long and hard about what it wants them to be in the years to come, and make hard choices that could backfire, making them risky candidates for remakes despite their narrative significance. It doesn’t make sense to assume that the studio is going to remake these two titles at some point. Allow us to explain why we think that’s the case.

Looking To The Future

The report that the developer isn’t committed to remaking the two titles in question is a good place to start. Notice that we said “not committed” instead of ” cancelled”, an important distinction. Of course, we have to consider the fact that although the news came from Insider Gaming which is quite reliable, it was still coming from an insider who’s been known to focus on Resident Evil, an understandable sentiment considering the franchise’s popularity.

But if we were to take the rumors up on face value, the suggestion that RE5 and 6 are not on the developer’s roadmap for the franchise is an indicator that it isn’t going to try remaking them at some point, but could be biding its time in a bid to ensure that it gets things right. The way we see it, the absence of a plan is a good thing, and a far better alternative to rushing into something simply because of the wishful thinking of fans, who might not understand a few key intricacies despite the completely acceptable enthusiasm to see their favorite games coming back to the spotlight.

Fear not, because we’ve come prepared to convince you that the developer is right in holding off on remaking these two games. It’s time to get to the meat of this one.

A Case of Misplaced Co-Op Identity

If your mind has already jumped to Resident Evil 5, you’re probably thinking along the same lines as we are. RE5’s gameplay loop is quite deeply tied to co-op play, with Chris and Sheva working as a team for a major part of it. On its own, it presents the developer with a dilemma.

Is it a good idea to retain the co-op experience, which was arguably a very enjoyable part of Chris’s time in Kijuju? Could it be made into a single-player experience with improvements to the AI that make Sheva work well enough to feel like a legit combatant? Does combat need to be redesigned to account for either one of these options, and will the story have to be reworked to take on a more horror-oriented tone instead of the action-oriented, cooperative structure that made the original experience as enjoyable as it was?

All of these are complex areas that will need a lot of thought and nuance if a remake is on the cards, and what the developer decides is a good direction for a modernized version of the game. It isn’t going to be enough to overhaul the visuals on this one, and Sheva would probably be an area that poses a real challenge.

She would need to feel like a real character and a competent partner to Chris on the adventure they go through. Her entire skill set might need a serious revamp, rebuilt from the ground up to give her more agency in fights, allowing her to go past a simple AI-controlled companion if the remake takes the single-player route. She’s probably a factor that could make or break the remake, and is probably as important as the change in tone that any alterations would have to bring.

We say that since RE5 was a horror title with a lot of action, military thriller, and co-op shooter elements thrown into a story that had a lot of significant character development for Chris and Jill with Wesker acting as a catalyst for their growth over its story. All of those elements worked together to make the game as good as it was, and we wouldn’t want to be in the position of having to pick a few over the others.

Too much focus on one would come at the cost of neglecting everything else, which would defeat the purpose of a remake in the first place. Make it too serious, and the game loses that chaotic energy that underlined the entirety of its campaign, while emphasizing the action risks exacerbating the few complaints that made this one a divisive title for the franchise. It’s a game that needs cautious tonal correction over rampant tonal erasure, and that’s a tricky balance even for a studio with the developer’s obvious talent.

And then there’s Resident Evil 6, which brings its own set of problems to the table.

The Devil In The Details

If RE5’s main problem is co-op and having a remake working around that design pillar, RE6 brings the challenge of balancing multiple protagonists, narrative storylines, and gameplay identities. That automatically makes remaking it a nightmare more daunting than even the most formidable BOWs, since it would not only be a massive, expensive undertaking, but one that would require a complete restructuring of it all.

Make it too small, and it carries the risk of major cuts that would dilute the story’s impact. Reimagining it entirely would certainly put off more than a few purists whose interest would be in replaying the original experience with fresh new perspectives added in, the original’s scale and chaos being non-negotiable aspects of any effort to modernize the title.

RE6’s identity is easily the biggest roadblock to a remake that makes sense, given that each of its protagonists brings a unique perspective to the table. A part of the story is about the franchise’s signature style of horror, while another takes that to its extreme with superhuman spectacle. Those fights with Simmons continue to be among our most memorable ones in the franchise, after all.

But it also brings in military action and spy-thriller energy, pitting Chris as false Ada against each other in a narrative thread that was quite intriguing when we didn’t know what was going on. That many disparate threads leaves the developer with little choice but to go for a mere visual overhaul, which defeats the purpose of a remake considering the ones that have preceded it, or to create a more focused experience that risks foregoing the intensity of the original experience.

That’s not a trivial creative choice, but a massive undertaking that would mean devoting time, energy, and crucial resources to those who could otherwise be a part of other projects in development. That’s not an easy call to make, and if it were to cut content, the developer would have to face the ire of fans who love RE6 specifically because of its scale and ambition, facets that even we’d miss if they weren’t a part of a remake. Its absurd action and chaotic ambition were very enjoyable undercurrents that helped sell the story it was trying to tell, after all.

It’s a trap that we’d definitely think twice about taking on, since RE6’s perceived flaws are a part of its identity. Speaking of identity, there’s something common between both the titles we’ve been talking about.

A Pragmatic Approach

Both RE5 and RE6 represent the franchise’s action-oriented era, taking them beyond numbered mainline entries and giving them a sort of historical significance to the franchise. But that very part of it could also be a hindrance that makes it difficult to usher them into the future.

It’s definitely tricky, since the developer can’t ignore them forever, but must ensure that any effort to recreate them takes what made them rather divisive into account, and find a middle ground that works within the context of current-gen titles. Keeping that in mind, we’re pretty confident that holding off on remaking them is not just a smart choice, but is one that could pay dividends if the studio takes the time it needs to get things right. Irrespective of whether they’re faithful remakes, heavy reimaginings, or a suitable middle ground, staying put is a way to ensure that it avoids franchise fatigue while also handling each title’s unique problems on its own terms.

Remaking both games simply because we can’t wait to see them isn’t a good choice. RE5 would need improvements to its AI for solo players while building on important aspects like Sheva’s characterization, combat pacing and repetitiveness, and a better balance between horror and action. RE6 would need a campaign that’s structured better, less tonal clashes, a trimming of its mechanical excess, and more focused character arcs, which all point to it needing to be reimagined rather than remade.

They’re probably going to come to the surface at some point, but they’re not going to be easy wins in the way that other titles that received remakes were. Even those took a lot of effort, and these two are going to be expensive, challenging undertakings with the possibility that a section of players are going to dislike them no matter how well they turn out.

The developer is sure to confront the franchise’s most divisive period. We’re saying that letting it do that on its own terms is the right way to go about things.

In short, let them cook, folks!

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

The $80 price point is a stickler – I mean, many of us expected that. Some even suspected a $100 price, though Rockstar took the roundabout approach of locking five stores behind the same for the full-fledged experience. Triple-A gaming strikes again: unimaginable levels of greed, so on and so forth. But what’s truly been curious is the backlash against the lack of a disc with the physical version.

Is it priced any differently from the digital version? No. Is it simply a box with a code in it? Yes. Is Rockstar doing this to avoid leaks from retailers who break street date? At that point, we’re several steps removed from conspiracy theories about the PC version being ready and waiting to go, but facing a delay to ensure it doesn’t suffer a Steam leak like so many other high-profile games over the past year.

Yet it’s the lack of a physical disc that has people worked up. There’s a rumor that a proper physical release could happen in December. Then a response from Rockstar customer support claimed it was months away. And before any hope could materialize, The Hollywood Reporter, of all publications, cited a source claiming there won’t be a physical disc at launch or in the months after, and that the support message is valid but interpreted the wrong way. All in the span of a few days, mind you.

Of course, it’s not unreasonable to ask questions like, “Why are Rockstar and Take-Two demanding such a high price and not committing to providing a disc?” Whether you’re a collector, someone who believes in preservation or someone who doesn’t want to download the entire game for another playthrough somewhere down the line (even if you still have to deal with tens of gigs of updates), it’s not the loftiest expectation in the world.

But such is the hoopla around all this that other developers, like Insomniac Games with Marvel’s Wolverine, are getting caught in the crossfire. Neither releasing on the same date, let alone in the same month, but still wanting to reassure players – yes, it has a disc in the box. And as absurd as it seems, I wouldn’t be surprised if more developers issue the same statements, either to reassure retailers who won’t stock Grand Theft Auto 6 due to the lack of a disc or their players to avoid any kind of negative press. Or really any backlash, even if their sales skew massively towards digital, because the coming release period is so crucial and only a few will rise to the top.

The funny thing in all this isn’t people debating whether this is the new normal or whether publishers should be allowed to get away scot-free, especially in an age where digital ownership is a big deal, and a large chunk of gaming relies on an internet connection. It’s actually the shock at how much of the “new normal” this has really become.

You could go, “What’s next? Collector’s Editions with Steelbooks and no discs?” Yeah, PlayStation and Santa Monica Studio already beat you to that particular point of anger in 2022 with Ragnarok. The Collector’s edition didn’t have a physical disc.

Think times have changed? Feast your eyes on the Death Stranding 2: On the Beach Collector’s Edition with its 15-inch Magellan Man statue, art cards, a specially crafted box and even a Dollman figurine. Yet, no physical disc. That will be $230, but look on the bright side – at least it has a letter from Hideo Kojima himself.

You could argue that the lack of a physical disc is to keep costs down and that these are simply items for the more ardent collectors, but we come back once again to the crux of the matter. At these prices, a disc seems a given with how much money you’re putting down. Then again, it could just be a means for publishers – in this case, Sony – to have you spend extra for the actual game. Either way, the result is the same.

And while both of these editions received, at best, a moderate reaction given their price, Grand Theft Auto 6 has blown the entire discussion wide open. Now, that may not seem very fair. Then again, neither of those games is GTA 6. Just as that name entails a certain level of quality and seemingly allows for justifying $80 when other triple-A publishers simply wouldn’t dare, so too does it result in massive expectations in every single way. That includes something as seemingly innocuous as locking off a few stores out of dozens or providing a disc instead of a download code.

Yet suddenly, we’re in an age where the resale market is dead, physical retailers get the short end of the stick, and gamers face persecution…when these have all been ongoing issues for a while. Those who have purchased physical editions for years have had to go beyond simply asking whether there’s a disc. They’ve also had to look at a game’s playability without relying on downloadable updates. I still remember the controversy around Monster Hunter Rise in 2021, which shipped without a proper ending and final boss. Those got added a month later in an update, but that decision alone meant that some players never bothered with the physical edition, insane as it sounds.

Again, such is the hype and attention around Grand Theft Auto 6 that it could bring much wider attention to such issues. That it could prompt questions about whether gamers are actually getting a raw deal with a physical edition or simply a pretty box to stare at. Some companies, like PlayStation, may be looked at as “consumer-friendly” for doing the bare minimum, even though they’re very much part of the problem.

All the attention is ultimately a good thing, though, because it raises these issues higher than before, even if it’s sometimes through the same repetitive memes. The problem is all this will be drowned out over time.

That’s not just because this is the first step in the marketing cycle and that trailer 3 hype will effectively override any lingering concerns. Or that the proper gameplay showcase will have millions, including us, dissecting every bit for new details. It all goes back to the same reason why digital sales have become so dominant – most players don’t care about physical copies. So while there’s some justification for demanding a disc, even for old time’s sake, Rockstar and Take-Two will see the pre-order numbers and the tens of millions lining up on launch day, and they will simply continue as is, the entire “ordeal” will become an unrecognizable bump in the road towards billions in revenue.

Welcome to the new normal. You’ve been here for years.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

Oh wait.

This year, it feels like every project from the house of Assassin’s Creed, Far Cry, and Splinter Cell is having problems or cutting back to meet deadlines – including new entries in those very same properties. Assassin’s Creed Codename Hexe has apparently pulled back and laid off 50 members from its team. Far Cry 7 is reportedly in a stage of development referred to as “Hell,” where things reportedly change every single month. And the less said about that fabled Splinter Cell Remake, which may as well be the stuff of legend at this point, the better.

So what about Ghost Recon, reportedly codenamed Project Ovr? A first-person shooter that seemingly takes after Ready or Not, reportedly promising a darker experience against the backdrop of a fictional war, where squad-based tactics are more prominent than ever? You know, everything that hardcore fans of the series have wanted? Well, sources previously told Insider Gaming that an internal alpha was scheduled for last Fall and if everything went well, it could launch this year.

Fast forward to this month, post-reshuffle and things have taken a rather drastic turn. Insider Gaming first reported that the alpha didn’t meet expectations. “Unrealistic deadlines,” “poor planning and management,” and “directors not listening to feedback” were apparently some of the things thrown around. Unfortunately, the head office has seemingly rejected any other arrangements, aside from reportedly bringing in VP of global creative Julien Sansalone and VP of production Jean-Baptiste Duval. Not to really change how the development team actually works, mind you. Just to oversee things. Presumably, they’re to be the eyes and ears for upper management, providing information on actual progress rather than going simply by whatever the studio says.

Then there’s the most recent report. What’s been done to bring the project back on track? A “cut and greatly reduced” scope, for starters, with “many features stripped.” The sources in question didn’t go into much detail on what exactly was removed, but they apparently vary in overall scale (and potential significance).

Furthermore, details on an internal alpha held last Spring have emerged. Ovr is apparently not “stable at all,” and the game is in a “terrible” state. What about last year’s internal alpha, and plans to shift to the final game within 12 months? I’m theorizing here, but it’s possible that after its organizational overhaul, upper management took one look at the game’s state and decided it was far from satisfactory.

It likely gave the developer time to shape up for another alpha test, and well, these are seemingly the results. Based on that, it’s made changes to ensure no roadblocks in deliverables.

Going back to Insider Gaming’s latest report, a beta is now apparently targeting November. Unfortunately, there’s another problem. Recent layoffs have hit multiple studios under the publisher’s umbrella, including this one, which means those remaining will purportedly have more work on hand. Which apparently means “long days of crunching” for the beta. So if it wasn’t bad enough that the team is working to get the game rolling, that too after abandoning several features, it has even less resources to do it and is under more pressure. Keep in mind that before these changes, some developers apparently expected the project to be outright cancelled.

Why? Because the studio’s management seemingly has no idea what it was doing. This was a concern that emerged with how much freedom these individual Creative Houses would have. But you should think of this as more of the old way of doing things meeting a new approach by management that’s more concerned with cutting costs and actually taking steps to ship the product rather than dilly-dallying.

And while it’s easy to blame the executives in charge at the top, you have to remember that Assassin’s Creed Black Flag Resynced was reportedly meant for March before facing a delay. How that extra time would have helped the remake is anyone’s guess, but based on relatively positive impressions from both fans and media outlets, we’ll default to it being the correct choice.

But this is this, and that is that. One Creative House won’t necessarily operate like the others, and that goes double for its studios. It is the same as handling Splinter Cell and The Division, however – the former waffling about with its remake while the latter has yet to provide updates on The Division 3 for almost three years. Aside from executive producer Julian Gerighty, who had a key role in both titles, leaving the company, of course.

As for Ghost Recon, really, what can you say at this point? As much as this new studio structure ensures that projects actually get going rather than end up mired, it feels like the company as a whole has no clue what it wants to do with the franchise. When Wildlands embraced the open-world approach, there was significant blowback from long-time fans, and its launch state didn’t help matters either. Nevertheless, after strong sales, the company stuck with it, improving and introducing significant new features while showcasing how much fun it could be. It may not have been the true blue Ghost Recon that the hardcore fan wanted, but it was certainly getting there.

Then Breakpoint stripped most of that away, including AI squadmates and introduced a poorly implemented survival theme. The real goal? Taking Wildlands formula and trying to create a looter shooter, complete with a social hub. As noted earlier, this went down horribly and even with massive overhauls, it’s far from the ideal experience.

So what was the plan after that? Of all things, Ghost Recon Frontline, a first-person shooter battle royale that looked to embrace the Fortnite style of building walls. Except you were actually air-dropping them in with a laser pointer. The reception to this was so bad that the publisher ultimately just scrapped it months later. Good riddance.

By comparison, Ovr looked like it was going back to what made the series great while leaning into more grounded, realistic tactical play. Yet again, however, we don’t know where it fell short as to warrant so many changes. Was the squad management terrible? Did the gunplay disappoint? If there’s an open world, did it not have enough checklists of activities? We don’t know, but whatever its problems, the publisher isn’t keen to sit on the sidelines and wait for the development team to suddenly strike gold. And it’s not going to be lenient on them either, even with reduced manpower.

While it’s nice to hope that everything will work out, the past decade or so hasn’t been kind to Ghost Recon. And at this point, wistfully hoping that those in charge just “get it” and deliver an experience that will satisfy both the hardcore and the more contemporary fans feels like a pipe dream.

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.

But the fantasy of managing a college football team, which is arguably the crux of a simulator aimed at recreating the real-life experience in a digestible, digital format has always been Dynasty Mode. It’s the home of college football, and we’re quite eager to get started with it in College Football 27. That’s because EA seems to have gone beyond merely recruiting players to play games and then have you simulating seasons.

Things are different this time around, and the latest iteration of Dynasty Mode after two years of tweaks and modifications looks like it’s the real deal, with the entire experience coming close to managing an entire program. That includes managing expectations, dealing with spreading limited resources across the board, staffing challenges, negotiating NIL deals, facing the pressures that a coach would face, trying to retain players who would rather take their talents elsewhere, and establishing a team’s long-term identity one step at a time.

That’s a long list of things to do, but that’s precisely why we think this year’s iteration of Dynasty Mode might be the real main event in this year’s take on College Football. Join us as we take you through what’s made us so optimistic about it.

The Third Time’s The Charm

If CF 25 was the comeback after a very long hiatus for the franchise, CF 26 was a title that brought in a lot of refinements that proved quite popular. Based off of that trajectory and everything we’ve seen of CF 27 so far, it’s certainly looking like a big swing from EA, going past incremental improvements to present a bold, confident take on the sports sim that could easily find fame and glory thanks to what it’s bringing to the table.

EA is positioning College Football 27 as the third step in its rebuilt Dynasty roadmap, following the comeback foundation of 25 and the refinements of 26. And from what we’re seeing, it isn’t just about adding in new features and calling it a day. That would be too easy, and a potentially lazy solution to the vision it has presented. Its latest deep dive into Dynasty Mode showcases how it’s clearly being pitched as a deeper program-management experience rather than just another recruiting-and-season sim loop.

Instead, we’re looking at a program management mode that feels akin to what it would be like to manage an evolving landscape of players with many variables for us to control. Or at least, try as life attempts to wrest that very control out of our hands in a take on franchise management that’s bringing all of the chaos from the real world to our screens.

Where Road to Glory is about a single player and Ultimate Team puts you on a hamster wheel where you’re collecting players and grinding out levels, and Road to CFP is about simulating the competition, Dynasty brings all of that into one place, putting you right at the center of the broader fantasy of a college football simulator. It isn’t about a single season, but about building a lasting legacy within the framework of the game.

Athletic Director Expectations are the clearest example of that shift. Instead of treating every job like the same climb with different uniforms, CF 27 gives each program its own pressure points, patience level, and definition of success. A powerhouse could expect you to put them front and center of playoff runs, and perhaps not take too kindly to a decision to hold them back. A school that’s still trying to make a name for itself might give you a bit of breathing room as you try to help it get on the map. One job might hinge on rivalry wins, another on owning a recruiting pipeline, another on building an offensive or defensive identity, and another on keeping facilities or rankings at a required standard.

All of these parameters become part of an ever-changing landscape that you’re then expected to manage, just as a talented coach would have to do in the real world. A solid record may buy patience at one school and still feel like underachievement at another, depending on what the program believes it should be competing for. The new Dynasty isn’t just about winning, but doing so in a way that serves your school’s interests and expectations.

Of course, that can get chaotic without the game’s systems giving you a bit of control over the chaos. That’s where Dynasty Blueprint comes in, turning those expectations into an annual resource puzzle rather than just a list of objectives. You could choose to allocate a significant amount of funds to secure NIL rights for a recruit, or perhaps use that money to create facilities that secure your team’s long-term growth. You could also invest in staff to better support your team, or perhaps spend it all on ensuring a win-now season if that’s what your school really wants. Because Dynasty Points operate as a yearly, use-it-or-lose-it budget, the mode pushes you to make short-term calls instead of hoarding resources forever.

It’s about handling pressure, and handling it well enough to cement your own position within growing teams. And that’s just scratching the surface on systems that go a lot deeper.

A More Hands-On Approach

There’s a reason we mentioned NIL when talking about using your Dynasty Points as effectively as you can. In the real world, it’s a factor that gives players a fair bit of control over the trajectories of their football careers, and CF 27 is making that a factor of the experience by ensuring that the onus of retaining them or letting them move on to greener pastures is on you. Recruiting was already a major part of the experience in previous titles, and making retention become a factor makes things all the more authentic.

Given that you only have a limited number of Dynasty Points to reflect your budgets, you’re going to be smarter with resources in smaller ones while having to manage high expectations on powerhouse programs. It makes retaining your best players as important as recruiting new ones, and it’s a great way to link factors like prestige, deal breakers and school strength in a way that’s both comprehensive and cohesive all at once. The new approach to NIL makes Dynasty less predictable, which is something the mode has needed.

Factor in facilities and staff, and the NIL system’s unpredictability gets amplified, its scope extending beyond your team’s potential on the field. Once again, it’s a showcase of how the entire management experience is more all-encompassing this time around as your facilities and staff become long-term investments that can shape your program’s identity while making coordinators matter a whole lot more. Program grades then become a part of the long-term loop, making rebuilds feel different from merely stepping in to take over a well-established program for a national contender.

Those differences are a welcome addition, and a fine way to ensure that the coaching carousel actually has an impact on how things go for you and your team. You’re not just grinding out levels, which was something we couldn’t help but notice in previous iterations, but building a resume that gives you as much negotiating power as your powerhouses. It’s an effective way of making successes or failures work both ways between players and a coach, tying job openings to school expectations in a way that gives you a lot of choices, but with enough tradeoffs to make those decisions feel as agonizing as they might be in the real world.

Of course, all of that feeds very well into the new Dynasty storytelling engine, that brings in dynamic weekly recaps, Heisman Watch updates alongside a fully animated ceremony, and so much more. They’re all great ways to give a season context and flavor while making you feel like your decisions and hard work actually matter, being as impactful to your team’s journey as they can be. If everything else we’ve talked about lets you manage numbers to achieve the best possible advantage, or perhaps even a compromise between your school’s expectations and your team’s potential, this is where the drama comes in, presenting it all in a way that gets you immersed in the spectacle and realism of it all.

It’s all shaping up to look like this could be the most personal take on College Football’s Dynasty Mode, and the Team Builder now bringing in customisable elements like unique backgrounds and signature accents is a great touch. It lets you imagine yourself in the thick of the action at a stadium, your personal attachment to a program you’ve built represented well in the atmosphere around the games you’re a part of.

Building Balance

You’re probably wondering if everything we’ve said so far makes things look like they’re too good to be true. Believe us when we tell you that the thought has crossed our mind. Ambitious changes like the ones we’ve been talking about so far come with a lot of risk. The new NIL systems could become an unending maelstrom that sucks in your limited budget leaving you at the mercy of a treacherous sea of unpredictability.

The Athletic Director systems could be seen as too random, running the risk of generating expectations that seem unfair thanks to how unrealistic they are perceived to be. The logic between the Coaching Carousel and recruitment and retention must land as perfectly as it can in order for it to be believable, holding up across multiple seasons in a way that makes sense to us all. There needs to be a balance, and it has to be one that holds up under the duress of multiple concurrent seasons for the entire simulation to work.

All of these are reasons to be wary of getting too invested in what’s coming before we get to try it out. But they’re also a great showcase of how EA hasn’t just added new things to Dynasty and called it a day. It’s evolving what the mode is supposed to be in the modern era of college football. If it manages to get things right, it could make Dynasty go from being just another mode to indulge yourself in, and become the one that defines the entire game.

We’re rooting for that to be the case, if only for the selfish reason that it would mean hours upon hours of entertainment. But hey, that’s what we’re all tuning in for, right?

Thankfully, we don’t have to wait too long to find out!

Note: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, GamingBolt as an organization.