Summer Game Fest 2025 reaches over 50m livestreams | News-in-brief Live show had a peak concurrent audience of more than 3 million viewers, up 89% year-on-year Image credit: Summer Game Fest News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on June 16, 2025 This is a News-in-brief article, our short format linking to an official source for more information. Read more about this story by following the link below: Summer Game Fest 2025 reaches over 50m livestreams

Switch 2 sells almost 1m units in Japan, making it country's biggest console launch Nintendo's latest hardware has sold three times more units than the original Switch in its first week Image credit: Nintendo News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on June 13, 2025 Hardware sales for the Nintendo Switch 2 have reached almost one million units in Japan, making it the country's biggest console launch to date. As reported by VGC, data from Famitsu showed 947,931 consoles have been sold within the first week of the Switch 2's release. In comparison, the original Switch sold 330,637 units according to the Game Data Archive. Looking at other console launches in Japan, PlayStation 2 previously held the record having sold over 630,000 units followed by the Game Boy Advance at 611,000 and the Nintendo DS at 468,000. Earlier this week, Nintendo announced that the Switch 2 sold 3.5 million units worldwide, its highest selling hardware within the first four days of release. The original Switch sold 2.7 million within the same timeframe. The Japanese publisher forecasts Switch 2 sales of 15 million by March 2026, while Ampere Analysis predicts that over 13 million people will buy the console in 2025.

As AI faces court challenges from Disney and Universal, legal battles are shaping the industry's future | Opinion Silicon advances and design innovations do still push us forward – but the future landscape of the industry is also being sculpted in courtrooms and parliaments Image credit: Disney / Epic Games Opinion by Rob Fahey Contributing Editor Published on June 13, 2025 In some regards, the past couple of weeks have felt rather reassuring. We've just seen a hugely successful launch for a new Nintendo console, replete with long queues for midnight sales events. Over the next few days, the various summer events and showcases that have sprouted amongst the scattered bones of E3 generated waves of interest and hype for a host of new games. It all feels like old times. It's enough to make you imagine that while change is the only constant, at least it's we're facing change that's fairly well understood, change in the form of faster, cheaper silicon, or bigger, more ambitious games. If only the winds that blow through this industry all came from such well-defined points on the compass. Nestled in amongst the week's headlines, though, was something that's likely to have profound but much harder to understand impacts on this industry and many others over the coming years – a lawsuit being brought by Disney and NBC Universal against Midjourney, operators of the eponymous generative AI image creation tool. In some regards, the lawsuit looks fairly straightforward; the arguments made and considered in reaching its outcome, though, may have a profound impact on both the ability of creatives and media companies (including game studios and publishers) to protect their IP rights from a very new kind of threat, and the ways in which a promising but highly controversial and risky new set of development and creative tools can be used commercially. A more likely tack on Midjourney's side will be the argument that they are not responsible for what their customers create with the tool I say the lawsuit looks straightforward from some angles, but honestly overall it looks fairly open and shut – the media giants accuse Midjourney of replicating their copyrighted characters and material, and of essentially building a machine for churning out limitless copyright violations. The evidence submitted includes screenshot after screenshot of Midjourney generating pages of images of famous copyrighted and trademarked characters ranging from Yoda to Homer Simpson, so "no we didn't" isn't going to be much of a defence strategy here. A more likely tack on Midjourney's side will be the argument that they are not responsible for what their customers create with the tool – you don't sue the manufacturers of oil paints or canvases when artists use them to paint something copyright-infringing, nor does Microsoft get sued when someone writes something libellous in Word, and Midjourney may try to argue that their software belongs in that tool category, with users alone being ultimately responsible for how they use them. If that argument prevails and survives appeals and challenges, it would be a major triumph for the nascent generative AI industry and a hugely damaging blow to IP holders and creatives, since it would seriously undermine their argument that AI companies shouldn't be able to include copyrighted material into training data sets without licensing or compensation. The reason Disney and NBCU are going after Midjourney specifically seems to be partially down to Midjourney being especially reticent to negotiate with them about licensing fees and prompt restrictions; other generative AI firms have started talking, at least, about paying for content licenses for training data, and have imposed various limitations on their software to prevent the most egregious and obvious forms of copyright violation (at least for famous characters belonging to rich companies; if you're an individual or a smaller company, it's entirely the Wild West out there as regards your IP rights). In the process, though, they're essentially risking a court showdown over a set of not-quite-clear legal questions at the heart of this dispute, and if Midjourney were to prevail in that argument, other AI companies would likely back off from engaging with IP holders on this topic. To be clear, though, it seems highly unlikely that Midjourney will win that argument, at least not in the medium to long term. Yet depending on how this case moves forward, losing the argument could have equally dramatic consequences – especially if the courts find themselves compelled to consider the question of how, exactly, a generative AI system reproduces a copyrighted character with such precision without storing copyright-infringing data in some manner. The 2020s are turning out to be the decade in which many key regulatory issues come to a head all at once AI advocates have been trying to handwave around this notion from the outset, but at some point a court is going to have to sit down and confront the fact that the precision with which these systems can replicate copyrighted characters, scenes, and other materials requires that they must have stored that infringing material in some form. That it's stored as a scattered mesh of probabilities across the vertices of a high-dimensional vector array, rather than a straightforward, monolithic media file, is clearly important but may ultimately be considered moot. If the data is in the system and can be replicated on request, how that differs from Napster or The Pirate Bay is arguably just a matter of technical obfuscation. Not having to defend that technical argument in court thus far has been a huge boon to the generative AI field; if it is knocked over in that venue, it will have knock-on effects on every company in the sector and on every business that uses their products. Nobody can be quite sure which of the various rocks and pebbles being kicked on this slope is going to set off the landslide, but there seems to be an increasing consensus that a legal and regulatory reckoning is coming for generative AI. Consequently, a lot of what's happening in that market right now has the feel of companies desperately trying to establish products and lock in revenue streams before that happens, because it'll be harder to regulate a technology that's genuinely integrated into the world's economic systems than it is to impose limits on one that's currently only clocking up relatively paltry sales and revenues. Keeping an eye on this is crucial for any industry that's started experimenting with AI in its workflows – none more than a creative industry like video games, where various forms of AI usage have been posited, although the enthusiasm and buzz so far massively outweighs any tangible benefits from the technology. Regardless of what happens in legal and regulatory contexts, AI is already a double-edged sword for any creative industry. Used judiciously, it might help to speed up development processes and reduce overheads. Applied in a slapdash or thoughtless manner, it can and will end up wreaking havoc on development timelines, filling up storefronts with endless waves of vaguely-copyright-infringing slop, and potentially make creative firms, from the industry's biggest companies to its smallest indie developers, into victims of impossibly large-scale copyright infringement rather than beneficiaries of a new wave of technology-fuelled productivity. The legal threat now hanging over the sector isn't new, merely amplified. We've known for a long time that AI generated artwork, code, and text has significant problems from the perspective of intellectual property rights (you can infringe someone else's copyright with it, but generally can't impose your own copyright on its creations – opening careless companies up to a risk of having key assets in their game being technically public domain and impossible to protect). Even if you're not using AI yourself, however – even if you're vehemently opposed to it on moral and ethical grounds (which is entirely valid given the highly dubious land-grab these companies have done for their training data), the Midjourney judgement and its fallout may well impact the creative work you produce yourself and how it ends up being used and abused by these products in future. This all has huge ramifications for the games business and will shape everything from how games are created to how IP can be protected for many years to come – a wind of change that's very different and vastly more unpredictable than those we're accustomed to. It's a reminder of just how much of the industry's future is currently being shaped not in development studios and semiconductor labs, but rather in courtrooms and parliamentary committees. The ways in which generative AI can be used and how copyright can persist in the face of it will be fundamentally shaped in courts and parliaments, but it's far from the only crucially important topic being hashed out in those venues. The ongoing legal turmoil over the opening up of mobile app ecosystems, too, will have huge impacts on the games industry. Meanwhile, the debates over loot boxes, gambling, and various consumer protection aspects related to free-to-play models continue to rumble on in the background. Because the industry moves fast while governments move slow, it's easy to forget that that's still an active topic for as far as governments are concerned, and hammers may come down at any time. Regulation by governments, whether through the passage of new legislation or the interpretation of existing laws in the courts, has always loomed in the background of any major industry, especially one with strong cultural relevance. The games industry is no stranger to that being part of the background heartbeat of the business. The 2020s, however, are turning out to be the decade in which many key regulatory issues come to a head all at once, whether it's AI and copyright, app stores and walled gardens, or loot boxes and IAP-based business models. Rulings on those topics in various different global markets will create a complex new landscape that will shape the winds that blow through the business, and how things look in the 2030s and beyond will be fundamentally impacted by those decisions.

Resident Evil 9, Stranger Than Heaven, and more of the key reveals from Summer Game Fest 2025 10 highlights from Geoff Keighley's annual livestream Feature by Samuel Roberts Editorial Director Published on June 7, 2025 Geoff Keighley's annual Summer Game Fest showcase had a few big moments, including a major showing from Capcom, some sharp-looking indie games from well-known developers, and a creative tie-in between Hitman and James Bond by IO Interactive. Find a selection of 10 key SGF 2025 highlights below, including all-new reveals and several worthwhile updates on already-announced games. End of Abyss Created by Section 9 Interactive, a Malmö-based studio of developers who worked on the Little Nightmares games, and published by Epic Games itself, this was the horror highlight of SGF. In End of Abyss, a combat technician explores a facility that's riddled with fleshy monsters, in what looks a little like a twin-stick survival horror shooter. New pathways will emerge in the game as players become stronger, suggesting something of a Metroidvania structure. This one doesn't have a specific release date yet beyond 2026, but it's coming to Xbox, PlayStation, and PC. Lego Voyagers This two-player Lego game from the developers of Lego Builders Journey left an impression with a simple but perfect pitch: what if you played as a single Lego brick, and the entire game was built around that notion? Anyone still craving high-value co-op experiences for couch play after finishing this year's wonderful Split Fiction should keep this beautiful-looking game on their radar. It's coming to PC and consoles, including the original Nintendo Switch, and will be playable either locally or online (with only one purchase necessary for the latter). Mina the Hollower To see this content please enable targeting cookies. Mina the Hollower, the long-awaited new game from Shovel Knight developer Yacht Club Games, got a release date of October 31, 2025 during SGF. This trailer will set off fireworks for anyone familiar with its inspirations: Link's Awakening and the other Game Boy Color Zelda games, for example, as well as the side-scrolling adventures of the Castlevania series. Marvel's Deadpool VR Rather a lot of licensed games made the cut in this Summer Games Fest (who could've predicted that this year's livestream would offer viewers a real-time strategy game tie-in to Game of Thrones, a TV show that ended on a contentious note in 2019?). Meta's big reveal at SGF was Deadpool VR, another superhero-themed exclusive coming to Quest 3, following last year's killer app Batman: Arkham Shadow. This game stars Neil Patrick Harris as Marvel's Merc with a Mouth, and comes from 'Splosion Man developer Twisted Pixel. As ever, Deadpool's delivered-via-sledgehammer meta humour is something of an acquired taste, yet the recent history of pop culture would suggest it's never been more popular. Deadpool VR's first-person combat and storytelling look authentic to the character, which is either a dream come true or a living nightmare, depending on who you ask. It launches exclusively on Quest 3 and 3S in late 2025. Ill and Mundfish's push into publishing Mundfish, the latest developer to move into publishing, had a big presence in this year's SGF livestream. That included a colourful-if-muddled trailer for Atomic Heart 2, a follow-up to its 2023 hit FPS. But perhaps more interesting was the horror-themed FPS Ill, the debut game from studio Team Clout. What could be more frightening than being chased by dozens of decaying bald men, and occasionally, some fetid-looking evil giant babies? This game will launch on PC, Xbox, PlayStation, but it doesn't have a release date yet. Scott Pilgrim EX Considering the Scott Pilgrim graphic novels ended 15 years ago, the longevity of a story about a down-on-his-luck 20-something fighting all his new partner's exes in sequence continues to amaze. This spiritual sequel to 2010's acclaimed Ubisoft tie-in Scott Pilgrim Vs The World: The Game sees Scott and six of his pals teaming up to fight three different warring gangs who have taken over Toronto. Developer Tribute Games (creators of the brilliant Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Shredder's Revenge) comprises staff who worked on that prior Ubisoft title. Pleasingly for fans, too, series creator Bryan Lee O'Malley is behind the story on this project. With four-player co-op part of the mix, Scott Pilgrim EX launches in 2026. Casino Royale's Le Chiffre comes to Hitman: World of Assassination With IO Interactive's James Bond game First Light not arriving until 2026, this reveal was a real treat for fans of 007, and a fun stopgap. Actor Mads Mikkelsen joined IO's Hakan Abrak on-stage in announcing that his Casino Royale villain Le Chiffre has been added to Hitman: World of Assassination's Paris level as a limited-time Elusive Target. Players have until July 6 to take him out. Blighted Guacamelee studio Drinkbox is behind this visually stylish action RPG, which looks like it'll scratch the itch of anyone who got deep into Hades but wants something with a fresh twist (or co-op) to play. The setting is described as a 'psychedelic western nightmare' by the developers, and a 'blighted' mechanic alters the difficulty of the game dynamically depending on how afflicted the player is. It's coming soon to Steam. Stranger Than Heaven First unveiled last year as Project Century, this deeper look at the next project by Like A Dragon developer RGG Studio showed off the game's 1943 (seemingly) period Japanese setting, as well as its combat and other gameplay elements like moral choices (of the Xbox 360 era 'spare/kill' variety). Considering the last trailer was set in 1915, it would appear to suggest the game takes place across multiple decades. It's exciting to see this studio trying something a little different, even if some of the parts are superficially similar. Resident Evil Requiem The reveal of the ninth mainline Resident Evil game closed the livestream with a bang. Requiem is slightly hard to grasp from this first trailer, perhaps by design: the protagonist is an agent called Grace Ashcroft, and we see several glimpses of the ruins of Raccoon City amid the horrors in this teaser. No doubt Capcom will gradually put the pieces together in the run-up to its February 27, 2026 release date on PC, Xbox, and PlayStation. It firmly looks like a stylistic follow-up to the first-person hits Resident Evil 7 and Village. On-stage, it was promised the game will feature "high-stakes cinematic action" as well as survival horror.

Scottish mobile developer Outplay Entertainment cuts 15% of staff to "align operations with current business realities" "This was not a decision we took lightly," CEO says Image credit: Outplay Entertainment News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on June 5, 2025 Outplay Entertainment has cut more than 20 jobs to "align [its] operations with current business realities." The Dundee, Scotland-based studio, self-described as "the largest independent mobile game developer in the UK," states on its website that it employs 135 staff, although it's unclear if this figure includes the 21 roles that have been laid off. That's around 15% of its headcount. In a statement to MobileGamer, CEO Douglas Hare said: "Earlier this week, Outplay made the difficult decision to restructure parts of the business, which has affected as many as 21 team members across several departments. "This step was taken to align our operations with current business realities and to support a strategic shift toward partnering with publishers for future game releases. "This was not a decision we took lightly," Hare concluded. "We are incredibly grateful to the talented individuals affected, many of whom have made lasting contributions to our games and culture. We are doing everything we can to support them through this transition." Outplay develops a number of licensed mobile games, including Gordon Ramsay's Chef Blast, Angry Birds Pop!, and Subway Surfers Blast. Over 2200 developers have lost their jobs in 2025 so far, with cuts and closures at Freejam, Splash Damage, Piranha Games, Jar of Sparks, Ubisoft, ProbablyMonsters, Iron Galaxy, Sumo Group, Liquid Sword, NetEase Games, Toast Interactive, Night School Studio, Striking Distance, Ballistic Moon, Eidos Montréal, PlaySide, AppLovin, Nerial, Reality Labs, and, most recently, there have been multiple cuts at EA, including Respawn, as well as People Can Fly and Jagex.

Neowiz signs global rights to Shadowlight's inaugural game, Kill the Shadow "We were grateful to find a partner who shares our philosophy on game development," says Shadowlight CEO Image credit: Shadowlight News by Vikki Blake Contributor Published on June 4, 2025 Lies of P publisher Neowiz has signed a deal with Shadowlight for the global rights of the studio's inaugural game, Kill the Shadow. As spotted by GamesBeat, the Shanghai studio said Neowiz shared its "philosophy on game development," and emphasized the publisher's openness to collaborating. "What initially drew us to Shadowlight was a collaborative development philosophy to deliver premium narrative games for PC and console audiences,” said Neowiz CEO, Kim Seung-chul. "We look forward to working closely with the team to release Kill the Shadow globally, and we hope audiences find the same charm we experienced as we reveal more about the title.” CEO of Shadowlight said of the deal: "Neowiz is a reliable global publisher, and we were grateful to find a partner who shares our philosophy on game development. As we see the games industry evolve to be inclusive of other cultures, it’s important to have a publisher that is open to collaborating and emphasizing the significance of your content." Neowiz similarly signed a $8 million deal with Warsaw-based developer Zakazane at the end of last year to publish its upcoming neo-Western RPG. In 2023, Neowiz invested $17 million in Polish developer Blank Game Studios. It also acquired a 21% stake in the developer.

As the Nintendo Switch 2 launches, these are our hopes and dreams for the console Image credit: Nintendo Feature by GamesIndustry.biz Staff Contributor Published on June 5, 2025 With the Nintendo Switch 2 launching today, it closes out a rocky pre-launch period of tariffs, fiery price discussions around software and hardware, and some retailers cancelling pre-orders. Much of that will feel like a distant memory once the hotly-anticipated console is in players' hands, and they're trying out the first new Mario Kart game in more than 11 years. There's always something special about Nintendo hardware. Even with the Wii U, the console manufacturer's biggest dud in recent memory, that was still the case. While the Switch 2 is firmly an evolution of 2017's Switch and not anything bolder in terms of input or form factor, Nintendo's unbelievable run of great software over the past eight years looks set to continue. The downside for consumers, of course, is that they will be paying much more for some of those titles than they did on the last console. Below, to celebrate its launch day, the GamesIndustry.biz team shares its realistic hopes and dreams for the years to come on Switch 2. A fresh take on exclusive IP Nintendo has already demonstrated that it's willing to switch it up in terms of new takes on its iconic franchises, with the destructible levels of Donkey Kong Bananza and the open roads of Mario Kart World. But I have an appetite to see the same approach taken with continuations of beloved franchises like The Legend of Zelda, 3D Mario, and Pokémon. While Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom are getting enhanced versions and the newest Pokémon Legends title launches this fall, Nintendo has the opportunity to revitalise some of its beloved IP with boosted hardware and fan interest. Not only that, but it could flip the script entirely and debut a brand new franchise unrelated to anything that’s come before it – something that would become intertwined with the Switch 2 and inspire a new generation of players and developers. – Sophie McEvoy The end of bad Switch ports While games like Doom and The Witcher 3 demonstrated that miracles were possible with the Nintendo Switch's limited hardware capabilities, numerous ports from more powerful platforms fell short. From the notoriously rough visual downgrade of Batman: Arkham Knight to the choppy port of WWE 2K 2018, sometimes visually intensive games have made their way to the console with a whiff of 'buyer beware' about them. In some cases, like the Kingdom Hearts games, 'cloud' versions bypassed trying to run natively on the hardware altogether, which was a compromise too far for many players. That's a trend the Switch 2, with its out-of-the-gates impressive ports of Cyberpunk 2077 and Civ 7, could really do without. Inevitably, we will reach a point with the next Xbox and PlayStation consoles where the disparity with the Switch 2 becomes too great, and we could potentially see a similar downslide in ports. But hopefully the quality level reached with this first wave of releases sets a high standard for what's to come. Users' tolerance for lower quality multiplatform releases has been tested too much during the latter years of the Switch's lifecycle. – Samuel Roberts Switch 2 is at the heart of indie games Image credit: ConcernedApe The early years of the Switch were a honeymoon period for indie games, causing a gold rush of publishers and developers getting their back catalogues on the platform. As the eShop became swamped with shovelware, while Nintendo did little to improve discoverability (until very recently), Steam quickly became the de facto home for indie games again. There's still nothing like playing an indie game on Switch. The portability remains a cut above other devices with a similar form factor, like the Steam Deck. While Nintendo shows it values smaller games with its Indie World showcases, there's still a disconnect between the intent of those presentations and how easily indie games are actually discovered on Switch. Using the eShop to celebrate good taste in games should be a goal of Nintendo's during this generation. A golden age of indies comparable to the original Switch launch seems unlikely – the moment has probably passed on that. But more consistent curation would have a massive amount of value. – Samuel Roberts Nintendo shows that the mouse has the magic The unveiling of the Switch showed that Nintendo learned a lot of lessons from the Wii U, itself a failed follow-up to the Wii: the company didn't rock the boat. It's the same form factor you know from the original Switch, with a clear '2' in the name. All its more novel secondary features – like the Joy-Con's mouse controls – are not at the centre of the marketing messaging like the Wii Remote or DS touchscreen were for those consoles. This was wise in a few practical ways. It means there are no interface-based headaches in porting a game onto the console, paving the way for (theoretically) good third-party support. Consumers, developers, and publishers know what they're getting. Still, it means the console is going to feel largely familiar as an experience. The hope, then, is that deeper into the generation, Nintendo and other developers find new and interesting things to do with the mouse. Competitive wheelchair basketball game Drag x Drive is Nintendo's first attempt at this, but the drab art style doesn't inspire much confidence. Previous breakthrough exclusives like Arms and Splatoon felt like a much bigger deal. – Samuel Roberts More than just a console As a handheld device, the Switch ended up being more than just a games console. Subscription-based services like Crunchyroll and InkyPen provide access to anime, comics, and manga, while the YouTube app lets players watch a (albeit limited) selection of movies and shows. With the improvements in screen resolution, the Switch 2 would benefit from integrating more streaming services like Netflix, Disney+, and Amazon Prime. Sure, you can use these apps on phones and laptops, but it would be convenient to have everything on one device – particularly a handheld console that's a popular traveling companion. And with social connectivity being a major selling point of the new console with GameChat, there's an opportunity to host streaming parties of shows and films on top of playing games. – Sophie McEvoy The GameCube library isn't left to fester on Nintendo Switch Online On day one, Nintendo Switch Online's Expansion Pack brings GameCube games to Switch 2 players: The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker, F-Zero GX, and Soulcalibur 2. More will be coming, but if Nintendo's previous form with its classic console libraries are anything to go by, it will be a glacial wait. I hope I'm proven wrong. Possibly complicating matters is that some key GameCube titles have already been ported to Switch, like Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, Pikmin 1 and 2, and Metroid Prime. The console's best game, Resident Evil 4, has been widely available for years on other platforms. The best case scenario here, then, is that Nintendo brings some more unusual or unexpected games to the service – the coming inclusion of Chibi-Robo, a cult GameCube game that's been hard to get hold for many years, is a strong indicator that the company is thinking outside the more obvious Mario and Zelda games. Rogue Squadron 2: Rogue Leader, Eternal Darkness: Sanity's Requiem, and Metal Gear Solid: The Twin Snakes would be on my personal wishlist. And maybe Starfox Adventures, too, just to hear everyone complain about it again. – Samuel Roberts A new take on Zelda in time for the movie This one is pretty much guaranteed. After reinventing the Zelda series with the open world games Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom, both of which celebrated player freedom and ingenuity, it will be fascinating to see what tack the team behind these games take next. "I think [TOTK] is – to use a bit of a term – an apotheosis, or the final form of that version of The Legend of Zelda," said producer Eiji Aonuma in a 2023 interview with Game Informer. "In that regard, I don't think that we'll be making a direct sequel to a world such as that that we've created." My prediction: in the same way Super Mario Wonder gave players a fresh spin on a classic Mario 2D platformer experience following 2023's (terrible, if you ask me) Super Mario Bros. movie, I could see a similar tack taken with 2027's live-action Zelda movie. A game that seems superficially familiar, but is bursting with new ideas, would bridge the gap between veteran Nintendo players and newbies. – Samuel Roberts

IO Interactive's first showcase to take place on June 6, 2025 | News-in-brief IOI Showcase will air at 6pm PDT and feature information about 007 First Light, Hitman: World of Assassination, and MindsEye Image credit: IO Interactive News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on June 3, 2025 This is a News-in-brief article, our short format linking to an official source for more information. Read more about this story by following the link below: IO Interactive's first showcase to take place on June 6, 2025

AR developer DreamPark secures $1.1m in seed funding round Investment will support expansion plans, partnerships with established IP, and growing its development team Image credit: DreamPark News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 30, 2025 Mixed reality developer DreamPark has raised $1.1 million in a seed funding round. DreamPark develops AR experiences at physical locations via markers including QR codes that change real-world spaces with digital features. Led by Long Journey Ventures with participation from Founders Inc., the investment will help the firm accelerate creating partnerships with established IP, expanding the amount of rental Quest headset units it has, and growing its development team. So far, DreamPark has installed experiences in Santa Monica and the LA County Fair, with plans to expand to Seattle, Orange County, and corporate events. "We're not just creating content, we're building a platform that revitalises communities by giving people a reason to gather, play, and connect in physical spaces in real life," said DreamPark CEO and co-founder Aidan Wolf. "DreakPark bridges the digital and physical worlds, creating a new category of play where the magic of virtual worlds enhances real-life connections. We're reimagining what's possible when the spaces around us become canvases for shared adventure and imagination." DreamPark co-founder and business director Brent Bushnell added: "We're building the world's largest theme park – one that exists everywhere and is accessible to everyone. We want to make getting out to play worthwhile again. "This investment allows us to expand our footprint of access points across the country rapidly, develop partnerships with premium IP holders, and continue enhancing our technology to deliver magical experiences that bring people back to real-world spaces."

Apple prepares to cry wolf over gaming again | Opinion Gaming on Apple platforms is set to be a WWDC focus once again – but with the company increasingly pushed to open up its app ecosystem, maybe this time the wolf is real Feature by Rob Fahey Contributing Editor Published on May 30, 2025 Apple's developer-focused annual WWDC event kicks off in a little over a week, which means that it's time once again for one of the industry's most well-established games of farce; in which Apple, the GM, tries to convince us all that this time, no this time, it's really truly serious about gaming, and we, the players, all try to keep our faces straight and our eyes unrolled. It's a ritual that often skips a year or two but always comes back with a vengeance – Apple cites some impressive numbers about hours or dollars spent on games on their platforms, wheels out a famous developer to wax lyrical about the power of the hardware and demonstrate a build of their game, and announces some new iOS features related to gaming. With love-bombing of the games industry complete for another few years, they promptly delete us from their contacts and pretend not to know us when they walk past us in the supermarket. The reason we all still pay attention to this merry-go-round, though, is because just as it's hard to take seriously any of Apple's claims of yet another Damascene conversion to gaming religion, it's also impossible not to take seriously the importance of the platforms the company controls. There are 2.35 billion active Apple computing devices in the world right now. The company doesn't break down those stats into Macs, iPhones, and iPads, but we know there are well over a billion iPhones in those numbers. Most of those devices are perfectly good gaming devices, at least in terms of what their hardware is capable of. The existing mobile gaming market – while a large market by any measure – is still only scratching at the surface of the potential growth for the gaming market that could be reached through that installed base. Having one of Apple's boy-who-cried-wolf moments actually turn into a genuine commitment to gaming would be a major step towards realising that – which makes them very hard to ignore, even if we're pretty sure we know all the steps to this dance by now. So what's this year's love-bombing going to consist of? We don't know which development luminary they'll bring on stage, but it does seem pretty certain that there's a shiny new gaming-centric app that's going to be built into the next release of iOS, replacing the rather clunky Game Centre with a more streamlined game launcher (which may encompass games bought on other stores on macOS, a bit like how the Apple TV app shows the next shows in your watchlists on Netflix and other streaming services) and providing various editorial and social features. Image credit: Apple It's not clear whether this is just a new app, or if it actually represents an overhaul of the services layer of Apple's gaming offerings – for example, whether it's going to have things like chat, matchmaking, teams and so on implemented in a way that centres on the app but also available in games via an overlay or direct integration through an API. That sounds fine and dandy, though of course the Game Centre app this will replace is a reminder of one of the previous iterations of the "Apple is serious about games this time" dance. What's perhaps more interesting, though we don't yet know if it'll get an on-stage mention at WWDC, is that this is coming just as Apple wraps up the acquisition of its first ever game studio – RAC7, the studio best known for creating Sneaky Sasquatch, which has been a very steadily performing hit on the Apple Arcade service since its launch. Now, there's a very obvious caveat here before we start speculating about Apple trying to build out a game development studio system: RAC7 is a micro-studio consisting of just two people, so while it's apparently going to continue operating more or less autonomously as a wholly-owned studio, there's still a bit of a whiff of an acquihire about the situation. It makes sense for Apple to bring a studio that's been pretty solidly committed to Arcade, and successful on the platform, into the fold in this way even if it's only so that they can be used as consultants and testers for upcoming changes to the service offering. The core concept of the Apple Arcade offering – a ton of well-vetted games that are guaranteed not to be packed with microtransactions and ads – remains very compelling, especially for parents While that may be a bit of a letdown to people who got excited at the prospect that Apple would follow its efforts at building up movie and TV production studios with a similar move into gaming, this acquisition does still send a cautiously positive signal. Apple acquires small companies all the time, but it's never done so with a games studio before, so the willingness to do this suggests that it is tacitly aware of a lack of internal know-how and skills related to this market segment, and moreover, that it remains quite committed to Apple Arcade. That second part is important, because honestly, it's quite easy to forget that Apple Arcade exists sometimes. It's a bit of a cypher to a lot of the industry, I think; it was launched with much fanfare but it now essentially just sits there occupying zero mindshare for most of the gaming sector and its consumers. However, there have been some hints that it's actually quite successful commercially – a tricky thing to measure given that its primary commercial target is driving subscription numbers and retention metrics for the all-encompassing Apple One service, but at the very least there's never been a suggestion from Apple that it's unhappy with how it's performing in that regard. The core concept of the offering – a ton of well-vetted games that are guaranteed not to be packed with microtransactions and ads – remains very compelling, especially for parents, and it seems reasonable to posit that it's quietly doing a very solid amount of business off in demographic sectors that rarely engage with the traditional games industry. This, to some extent, might explain why Apple has ghosted the industry after its most recent bouts of love-bombing; Apple Arcade and the infrastructure that supports it isn't terribly meaningful to the traditional games industry, but actually accomplishes quite a lot of Apple's own internal goals with regard to gaming. That leads us to another crucially important piece of context to bear in mind when watching what the company unveils at WWDC this year – that this may be a series of strategic moves that are less about enticing the games industry to focus on Apple platforms, and more about preparing the ground for the possibility of major parts of the games business simply turning up on Apple's turf unannounced and uninvited. That spectre has been raised by various different legislative and legal moves in major markets over the past few years, all of which seem to be pointing in a similar direction – that Apple is going to be forced to open up its platform to third-party app stores, or at the very least streaming apps. The company is still fighting its corner in the courts in a lot of places, but I suspect it knows that the clock is ticking, especially in some of its most lucrative global markets. While the commercial threat posed by actual app stores is probably minimal (most people just aren't going to install a whole other app management ecosystem when the path of least resistance works fine), the threat from game storefronts is very real. Epic, Steam, and Xbox are all potentially going to have functional storefronts on iOS in one form or another in the coming years – which means an end to Apple's era of taking for granted that games will just keep churning out giant stacks of App Store cash despite being largely held at arm's length by the company. Rethinking its gaming app software and buying a small studio are far from sufficient to win a war on this new front if it opens up – but if they indicate some actual momentum building up, they might not be a bad start.

Daily active users were 225% higher for Fallout 3 and 4 in weeks following TV premiere Sensor Tower data also showed increases in DAUs for The Last of Us and Minecraft following adaptations Image credit: Amazon Prime News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 30, 2025 Following the success of Amazon Prime's Fallout series, daily active users were 225% higher for Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 in the weeks following the show's premiere last April. That's according to a report conducted by Sensor Tower, which looked into the effect film and television adaptations are having on the games they're based on. Sensor Tower found that sales of Fallout 3 and Fallout 4 rose 125% and 410% respectively, as both games dropped in price during the week of the show's premiere. The series boosted DAUs for mobile spin-off Fallout Shelter, too, which increased by 77% while in-app purchases revenue jumped 150%. App downloads of Amazon Prime Video grew by 20% during the week Fallout debuted. Amazon has since announced a premiere window for its second season – December 2025 – and greenlit a third series. Sensor Tower also collated data on HBO's adaptation of The Last of Us, and Warner Bros. box office smash with A Minecraft Movie. It found that DAUs for The Last of Us Part 1 and Part 2 rose 40% following the premiere of the show's second season on April 13, 2025. HBO Max also saw a 6% increase of app downloads. In contrast to Fallout, Sensor Tower noted that the "results for The Last of Us hinged on bringing new awareness to the franchise" rather than the "free-to-play" nature of Fallout Shelter and "the uniqueness of the show's story from the game." The Last of Us has since been renewed for a third season, with HBO's programming EVP Francesca Orsi telling Deadline that there will likely be four seasons of the show. As for A Minecraft Movie – which surpassed $550 million in ten days – mobile in-app purchases rose 44% while console games saw an increase of 36% during the month of its release. Sensor Tower noted a 9% spike in mobile players for Minecraft in contrast to a 41% increase on console following the film's premiere. As reported by Deadline, Warner Bros. has since confirmed there is a sequel for A Minecraft Movie in the works.

The big Leslie Benzies interview: MindsEye, Everywhere, and the double-edged sword of GTA How Build A Rocket Boy developed its debut project Feature by Samuel Roberts Editorial Director Published on May 30, 2025 As the producer behind the Grand Theft Auto games from GTA 3 through to GTA 5, as well as Red Dead Redemption and LA Noire, any project with Leslie Benzies' name on it is going to be a lightning rod for attention. MindsEye, the first game from Benzies' studio Build A Rocket Boy, is getting plenty of it – even if some of that attention has been less positive. MindsEye is a single-player third-person shooter with vehicle gameplay, set in a Las Vegas-style city called Redrock. It's a techno-thriller story about a former soldier called Jacob Diaz – but it's clear from visiting BARB in Edinburgh this week that the game is envisioned as a gateway into something much larger, both in the fiction of MindsEye, and for players who pick the game up. That includes a user-generated content platform called Build.MindsEye, where players on PC can create levels using relatively straightforward tools that incorporate any object in the game. When asked if third-person shooter levels or driving sections were the limits of the build side of MindsEye, the developers showed other examples of how they can be used, like massively increasing the proportions of a basketball, dropping it into the world, and functionally making an in-game version of Rocket League. Still, while MindsEye launches on June 10, 2025, for PC and consoles, many questions remain unanswered, including the future of its long-gestating Everywhere project. Benzies sat down with GamesIndustry.biz earlier this week to talk us through his vision for the game. This interview has been edited for brevity and clarity. Image credit: Austin Hargrave What's your grand vision for MindsEye? What will it be at launch, and where is it going in the future? MindsEye is one story in an epic universe. The other stories take place at different time periods, and [at] different locations in the universe. This story is Jacob Diaz's story. There are also other stories within MindsEye, so we tell the backstories of other characters Jacob will meet. That's the way we're going to fill out the universe over time – so when you travel around, all the stories will be connected by one overarching theme, and each story will have different mechanics. And we'll give these mechanics to players within the creator tools. What will happen with the game after launch? [The studio] will support the game through Play.MindsEye, with continuous new content. Some of the content, like races, are made just for fun. But [with] most of the content, we'll try and incorporate it into the story. So once you've played the big overarching ten-year plan, you'll have a very good idea of what this universe looks like. We have plans to add multiplayer, [and] we have plans to make a full open world. And of course, we've also got to look at what players are creating, and incorporate that into our plans. Given the ease of the tools, we think there's going to be a high percentage of players who will jump in and give it a pop, see how it feels. Hopefully some will create compelling content we can then promote and make that part of our plans to push to other players. Is it best to think of MindsEye as the first game in a series of games? Or one game as part of a larger experience? MindsEye sits bang in the middle of our story. So, we're going to go back 10,000 years, then we're going to go forward a certain amount of time. It's the relevant piece of the puzzle that will have players asking questions of what the bigger story is. We've intentionally not released footage of huge parts of the game, because we don't want to spoil anything for players. But this story does take some unusual twists. What's your vision for the multiplayer component of the game? I guess there's two sides to the answer. The dream from the building side is to allow players the opportunity to create their own multiplayer open world games with ease. So anyone could pick up the game, jump in, drive around, stop at a point where they see something of interest, build a little mission, jump back in the car, drive again, build another mission. Once you've built a couple of hundred of these, you've built your own open world game. So, that's the build side. From our side, we want to [create] a place where people can socialise, play together, and engage in the stories that we build. So, we do have plans next year to launch an open world multiplayer game that takes place a year after MindsEye finishes. In the interim, we also have an open world free roam game that spans from when MindsEye finishes to the launch of the open world multiplayer game. All of these stories interconnect in a fairly unique and original way, which I think players like these days. They like the complexity of deeper stories. You're selling the base game at launch, with a pass for upcoming content additions. Do you have a vision for how you're going to package future stories in the overarching MindsEye experience? It depends on the scale of the story. Some will be free, and some will be paid. After you left Rockstar Games, what came next? What led to you building the studio? I spent a few years looking into some other things: going [into] some property development. Using some of the games experience, we made a thing called VR-Chitect, which allowed you to build houses and view them in VR. I spent a lot of time in Los Angeles at this point, and this is when the droughts were very bad. I got into [making] these machines that would suck water out of the air. Still sitting in my back garden in Los Angeles is this big clunky machine, it works like an air-conditioning unit. It could suck up one thousand litres of water. So I got involved with that. But there's really nothing like making games. The different types of people – the lawyers, the accountants, the programmers, the artists, the dancers, the singers – that bunch of people in one big pot, all working together, and turning something from a piece of paper into [something on the] screen – that's where I get my excitement. Since I was a kid, that's what I've wanted to do. I thought, 'I better get back into making games' because nothing else was as much fun. What was the journey towards creating MindsEye as your first standalone release? Your first game's always your hardest. You have to build systems, you have to build the team. Everything is new. You don't really see a lot on the screen until way down the line, because you're building underlying systems, physics systems, the gameplay systems. It's a slow start, but what you end up with is an engine, and obviously we use Unreal, which provides a certain level of support and building. On top of that, we've got to build our own stuff. [Plus], we have to pack up everything we build and present it nicely for the creator tools. So it adds this extra layer of complexity to everything. But now, given where we are, the speed that we can iterate, we can very quickly place enemies, place vehicles, place puzzles, whatever, and get a feel for a game. We've now got a great, experienced team – a lot of talented guys in there. In the old days, you'd get a game, stick it on the shelf, and you'd wave goodbye. It's not like that anymore. You're continually fixing things. When you release a game, you've suddenly got, not a hundred testers, but hopefully millions of testers. You've got to continually fix, continually optimise, and especially with the tools that we've got, we want to continually create new content. So MindsEye is a standalone game, and Everywhere is not mentioned anywhere on the Steam page. But obviously there's a strong 'build' component to this game, which was part of the Everywhere pitch. What does this mean for Everywhere, and what was behind the decision to package the game this way? This is all part of a bigger story and ecosystem that we've got planned. Everywhere is going to show up again pretty soon. Everything we're working on, there's a story behind it – a big overarching story. So Everywhere will come back, and it fits into this story somewhere. I can't tell you [where], because it would be a spoiler. But that's going to reappear soon, and it will all be a part of the same product. "I'm not sure it would've been smart as a company to say, 'we are going to compete with the biggest game on the planet'" Leslie Benzies, Build A Rocket Boy In terms of the tools, the tool doesn't really care what world you're building in. It sits separately. So any game we create, it will naturally work on top of it. But we're big fans of keeping everything thematically connected, or connected through a narrative, and you'll see it. The bigger story will become obvious, once you've played through all of MindsEye. Then you might start to see how it all connects together, to the Everywhere world. Has the landscape for something like Everywhere, or the build component to MindsEye, changed as platforms like UEFN have taken off or Roblox has become so huge? It's great to see these tools being used by people. I build a lot with my son, and when he builds, I see the excitement he gets. It reminds me of when I was a kid with my Dragon 32 computer, managing to get a little character moving on the screen – that excitement of, 'wow, I did that'. Giving that to other people is massive. It's still very difficult to build in Roblox. For example, when my son wants to do it, I have to jump in. I used to be a programmer, and I struggle to build in there. When he wants to run around and scream with his friends he's in Roblox; when he wants to build he'll jump into Minecraft, because Minecraft is a much easier system to build within. And I think we sit somewhere in the middle: you can get very high quality, fun games, but they're very easy to build. I think we're at the infancy of this in video games. We're at the very beginning of it, and we're going to see way, way more of it. It doesn't necessarily have to be presenting it to your friends, or to an audience. I think the process of creating for a human being is fun in itself. MindsEye has been positioned as a linear game. You are best known for creating open world games. What was behind the decision to make MindsEye a more linear, narrative-driven experience? I think certain stories are more difficult to present to players in an open world setting. Open world gives you freedom – you don't necessarily want freedom to portray a story. For MindsEye, it's a very set time in a character, Jacob Diaz's, life. You pick up as Jacob when he arrives in Redrock, and then you leave Jacob at a certain point in the future. And so, it'd be very difficult for us to have an open world in there. It's horses for courses: it depends what you're doing. But for Jacob's story, it had to be a linear game. Having said that, there are open world experiences in there, and we can build them through Build.MindsEye. There is a free roam open world mode, where you play [as] a different character and you see his time, from the end of MindsEye, to the point of our next big planned launch. Again, they're all connected through a narrative, and we really want to show the universe, show the stories that have taken place in the universe, the characters in that universe, and see how they've experienced the same experience but from different viewpoints. "The dream from the building side is to allow players the opportunity to create their own multiplayer open world games with ease" Leslie Benzies, Build A Rocket Boy Was there ever a discussion about creating a more traditional GTA competitor? In design, you look at a lot of different options. I'm not sure it would've been smart as a company to say, 'we are going to compete with the biggest game on the planet'. I'm not sure that would be the best business decision to make. We went through a bunch of different designs, and to tell our story, this is what we landed on. MindsEye is priced more like a game from a decade ago at $60, and it'll take around 20 hours to finish. Can you talk about how you settled on the game's length and scope, and how you made that decision around price? So you've got the MindsEye campaign, and yes, it'll be about 20ish hours. But you do have all this other side content: there's going to be this continuous stream of content. These days, there are so many different options for people. It's not just games: there's streaming TV, so many good shows out there. I don't think you can have filler content in games. I think people want the meat, and they want the potatoes. We've tried to make as much meat as we can, if that makes sense. I think that's a good length for a game. What you also find through data, is that [with] big games, people don't play them all. The majority of people – 60% or 70% of people – don't actually play games to the end. So when you're making something, I would prefer – I'm sure the team would say the same – [that] you had the whole experience from start to finish, and not create this 200-hour game. Create something that is finishable, but have some side things that will fill out the universe. A lot of the side missions on the play side of MindsEye do fill out the characters' back stories, or do fill out what was happening in the world. On price: the world's in a funny place. People are worried about the price of eggs. So value for money, I think people appreciate that when times are difficult. I was curious why you waited until quite late in the day to reveal the build element of the game, only because it seemed you were being quite church and state with how MindsEye is releasing versus what Everywhere is. So in general, we believe – and again, it goes back to the amount of information, the amount of options people have these days – I don't think you can have extended marketing times. It's very expensive, we're a start-up. I think you lose interest from people. There are so many things for people to do, that if you extend it, you're not punching through to the place you need to be. I've seen other games, nine years before launch, it's getting talked about. I'm not sure that's the way of the world these days. You'll see there are games that never go to market: the day of launch was the marketing campaign, and it worked very well. So I think we tried to compress ours down for that reason. On the MindsEye.Play [continuous content] part of it, yeah, maybe we should've got that out there sooner, but it is a nice little surprise to give players. That's the thing with marketing – you never know what's the right or wrong way to do it, you've got to go with your gut, your senses, and test it. Being who you are, it brings a certain level of expectation and attention. Do you find it a double-edged sword, launching a new studio and launching a new game, with your background? Yes. There's always comparisons, and I think that's how humans work. As kids, we're taught to put a triangle into a triangular hole, and a square into a square hole. I think we do that for the rest of our lives, and we like to describe something new as 'it's X plus Y, with a bit of Z in there'. It makes things easy for us. It's maybe humans optimising the way we communicate. So there are comparisons. It serves us well in some ways, it doesn't serve us well in others. Dave Grohl said it well when he formed the Foo Fighters: nobody's interested in the Foo Fighters, all they were interested in was Nirvana. The guys have built something very cool, and I just hope people can see it for what it's trying to be.

PlaySafe ID raises $1.12m in pre-seed funding round Digital identity platform to use funds in support of its "go-for-market" launch to safeguard gamers Image credit: PlaySafe ID News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 30, 2025 PlaySafe ID has raised $1.12 million in a pre-seed funding round led by Early Game Ventures. With participation from Hartmann Capital and Overwolf, the funding will expand PlaySafe ID's digital identity platform as it prepares a "go-for-market" launch targeting 250,000 users. PlaySafe ID issues players with a "verified, anonymous, and game-agnostic digital ID" to prove that a user "is real and hasn't been caught cheating or being inappropriate to children". The firm is currently in talks "with several major gaming platforms" and is aiming to announce its first partnerships later this year. "This round gives us the firepower to move fast, expand our world-class team, and partner with games that want the most fair and safe environment for players to enjoy," said PlaySafe ID CEO Andrew Wailes. "With cheating in games as a mass epidemic that ruins fun for players daily, and the Online Safety Act ushering in long overdue requirements for child protection in gaming, PlaySafe ID's mission to safeguard gamers isn't just relevant – it's now essential for compliance and the future of global gaming." Early Game Ventures managing partner Cristian Munteanu added: "We believe PlaySafe ID is building the trust later for gaming – and beyond. "In a world where AI and anonymity are eroding safety and fairness, PlaySafe ID restores balance with identity, transparency, and accountability. Once a gamer is verified through PlaySafe ID, that identity becomes portable across games, platforms, and genres." Munteanu concluded: "The more developers adopt it, the more valuable it becomes to players – and vice versa. Eventually, the verified identity becomes a default layer of the gaming stack, just like your Steam account or your Xbox Live profile. It's a winner-takes-all kind of play."

Remedy's surreal take on co-op with FBC: Firebreak Game director Mike Kayatta discusses Remedy's approach to multiplayer titles, and how it balances appealing to fans and appeasing casual co-op players Image credit: Remedy Entertainment Feature by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 29, 2025 Much like Remedy's narrative-driven single-player games, FBC: Firebreak is a step into the unknown. Not for the player, but for the developer itself. Firebreak not only marks the first time that Remedy has developed a multiplayer game, but it's also the developer's first foray into a first-person shooter. But a project focused on session-based gameplay runs the risk of alienating fans of Remedy's lore-heavy third-person games, while potentially dissuading casual players from checking out its impressive back catalogue if the game doesn't click. Mike Kayatta, Remedy Following a hands-on preview of the game, GamesIndustry.biz spoke to Firebreak's game director, Mike Kayatta, to discuss Remedy's approach to developing its first co-op FPS title. He also explained how the studio balanced appeasing longtime Remedy fans while attracting seasoned co-op players unfamiliar with Firebreak's surreal world. Firebreak is a spin-off of 2019's Control, which follows Jesse Faden – the director of a secretive government agency known as the Federal Bureau of Control (FBC). Its headquarters, known as the Oldest House, is a shifting, paranatural building that holds all sorts of otherworldly entities contained by the organisation. Control sees the Oldest House under lockdown following the invasion of a hostile force known as the Hiss. Firebreak takes place six years after the events of Control, and the lockdown is still in place. Maintaining a balance Right off the bat, there's a hurdle of not overloading players new to Remedy with so much lore that they'll feel like they need to play Control to play Firebreak. As Kattaya explains, the studio prioritised not overwhelming those unfamiliar with its universe and appeasing fans that will be on the lookout for connections to other Remedy titles. "We set the game during a lockdown, which creates a narrative bubble for the FBC that also helps us create a bubble around the world itself," Kayatta notes. "So, if you know Control, then you might be interested in seeing what was going on in the Oldest House six years after the first game. And if you don't know Control, then you can step right into this moment and get a contained experience." Firebreak may be a spin-off, but Kayatta affirms it is firmly set within Remedy's connected universe (RCU) – which links the Control and Alan Wake franchises together. "Of course, we are set firmly within the RCU timeline and canon, so there are connections," he explains. "But we're very focused on protecting Control players who might not want to switch genres to get the 'whole story', and protecting co-op players who might not want to fire up an old game to get the full experience out of Firebreak." By maintaining this balance, Remedy has made a game that potentially encourages fans to step out of their comfort zone while also enticing less familiar players to dive into Remedy's back catalogue if the world intrigues them. Internally, Remedy also faced the task of producing a game in a genre it's not developed for before. Still, it has over two decades of experience in developing narrative-driven, immersive single-player titles, which offered the studio some advantages. "Even though games like Alan Wake and Control aren't all that similar to Firebreak in terms of genre and gameplay, they do all share a focus on immersive worlds and impactful narrative space," Kayatta says. "That sort of thing comes through lighting, audio, world design, and more somewhat direct crossovers. "When we look at what's different [about Firebreak], it's the perspective, the social nature of the game, and driving gameplay through systems. It's a combination of previous work experience outside of Remedy, personal experience as gamers or solo projects, and transference of other practical design skills into a new vision." Kayatta continues: "We do have a lot to learn and definitely face the task and players with a lot of humility, but there wasn't really a point where we felt like we didn't know how to go about something fun." Overcoming development obstacles Remedy also had to contend with approaching the game from a different perspective during the development process. Kayatta says the making of Firebreak differed in "so many ways" compared to Alan Wake 2 or Control, but that overall, every Remedy game release "is a miracle and Firebreak is no exception." "Even things as simple as playing the game suddenly takes three times the number of people," he emphasises. "Lots of typical production processes remain the same, but the rest has been a lot of adaptation and learning on the fly." This included playtests. Remedy has conducted a lot during Firebreak's development, even as recently as a couple weeks ago to test various game mechanics and matchmaking. The game is constantly changing – I'll have a totally different experience playing with friends post-release than I did during my playtest, and the devs were busy polishing things then, too. "Sometimes making games feels like nothing but overcoming obstacles," Kayatta laughs. "Honestly, it's been [like that] every single day. Sometimes it's about absorbing the pain, learning lessons, and pushing through to the next milestone. Other times, it's about seeking help from experts across the studio. Every single game released is a miracle and Firebreak is no exception. "Then, creatively, a lot has been shifting the mindset of what's the most valuable [aspects] to players and learning to let go of the control you have over players when making a single-player experience." Image credit: Remedy Entertainment Unlike Alan Wake 2 and Control, Remedy aren't guiding players through narrative cues. There are suggestions and hints of what needs to be done in a given situation, but players are given much more agency and control over how they approach obstacles with the arsenal they're given. As for the FPS aspect – there are plenty of guns to fire in Firebreak, but it's the 'crisis kits' that are the focal point. "Every single game released is a miracle and Firebreak is no exception" These three loadouts are tailored to a specific skill – one is electricity-focused for field control, another is impact-focused for problem solving, and one is water-focused for manipulating conditions like controlling flames and cooling down team members. Players aren't limited to what they use, either. All three players in a session can use the same kit, or they can plan who will use which kit to maximise the effects of teamwork during a session. The kits are also where Remedy's kookiness shines. Each kit has a tool related to its theme, whether that's a massive wrench or a hydro-cannon. Paranatural items known as 'Altered Augments' can be attached to these weapons, which provide bizarre – and at times chaotic – effects to give players the upper hand against enemies. For example, a paranatural teapot can be attached to the hydro cannon to super heat water globules into molten lava. Experimentation is key Giving players a varied loadout of guns and tools enabled Remedy to make Firebreak something newcomers to the FPS co-op genre could enjoy. This was achieved by providing the ability to adjust components to meet players needs and a progression system that doesn't focus on "power ramping." "Like most games, we front load a lot of the extremely impactful long-term progress, such as unlocking critical gear and abilities," Kayatta says. "And the 'mid-game' (if you want to call it that) is about getting your power up and upgrading what you like to use." Kayatta also clarifies they didn't want newer players to be locked out of the experience when playing with those who are familiar with how multiplayer FPS games work. "[Firebreak] doesn't dwell too long in the 'power ramping' phase and quickly shifts into promoting experimentation and forming playstyles," Kayatta notes. "We've also added things like the resonance system which can let players with access to strong builds actually share those abilities to anyone (so long as they stay close)." Speaking of progress, Kayatta notes that Remedy made it a priority for Firebreak to "feel like a fair experience for everyone" – whether you're playing for long or short periods of time. "For this, we made sure that the longer-term progression focuses more on unlocking options rather than raw power," he explains. "That players can create their own end-game challenges by adjusting threat, clearance, and corruption [levels] to meet their capabilities." Threat, clearance, and corruption control the difficulty of a job, with rewards scaling up accordingly based on the level of challenge. These aspects also enhance replayability – particularly corruption, which enables 'corrupted items' that modify the environment and enemy behaviours. Remedy's approach to microtransactions There's also a perk system that provides unique gameplay effects, which are achieved by levelling up or using in-game currency known as 'lost assets'. Players can also use in-game currency to purchase 'requisitions' – cosmetic items including armor sets, sprays, and weapon skins that have no effect on gameplay. Some requisitions are 'classified' meaning that players will need to spend real-money to unlock them. "We tried to think of ourselves as gamers and what we would want out of a game" When asked why Remedy went down the route of locking only cosmetics behind a paywall as opposed to a pay-to-win system like some other multiplayer titles, Kayatta says the team thought of what they would want out of Firebreak as players. "[This approach] is not a direct response to any particular mechanic or game, but it is different from many that you see in the multiplayer space," Kayatta explains. "Mostly, we tried to think of ourselves as gamers and what we would want out of a game. "Maybe it's a bit of a nostalgia, old man, 'kids-these-days' sort of thing to say, but dang. I miss games like Left 4 Dead 2 where you could just buy the game and play it when you feel like playing it. It felt easier to get friends on board and easier to kick back and enjoy things." Kayatta continued: "I don't like the stigma that comes with multiplayers today. I don't like how guarded I feel when I hear something is going to be supported after release. Support after release should be an awesome, exciting thing. So why, so often, does it make me feel worried somehow?" The future of Firebreak With that in mind, Remedy has implemented a solid roadmap to support Firebreak post-release. It launches with five jobs, with two additional jobs planned for this year and more to come in 2026. "It's always hard to predict the future, especially before we've released the game and gotten the chance to hear from players," says Kayatta. "We know we are going to support the game, we know we want to make it bigger this year, at least. "And going into next year, we want to know what's going to add value for players and do that. Is it more jobs? Could be, in which case that will be the plan. Is it something else? Let's see and then try to do that if it makes sense." "We're a small team with limited resources. We're trying to be super careful about where we put our attention" Remedy is steadfast on putting the players' needs first. All post-launch content will be free, and will be catered to what fans want out of the game they're spending their money and time on. "Ultimately, we're a small team with limited resources," he adds. "We're trying to be super careful about where we put our attention." As for the future of co-op games at Remedy, Firebreak sets a precedent for potential games set around its other franchises. So has the experience of developing Firebreak inspired the devs for similar games in the future? "Oh boy," Kayatta laughs. "The only future on my mind right now is getting Firebreak to players on June 17, then supporting them as best I can. As for anything else, to quote the wise Magic 8-Ball: 'Ask again later'."

The big Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 interview: Sandfall and Kepler on team size, the return of AA games, and what's next Plus: how Kepler plans to be the A24 for games, and why a follow-up to Clair Obscur won't involve a big studio expansion Image credit: Sandfall Interactive Feature by Lewis Packwood Contributor Published on May 27, 2025 The success of Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 – which sold 2 million copies within 12 days of launch – has meant all eyes are now on its developer, Sandfall Interactive. As the games industry mulls how to move forward, faced with a saturated market, widespread layoffs and spiralling development costs, the fact that an original title made by a relatively small team could see such massive success gives hope to everyone. It's also an emphatic validation of the strategy of Clair Obscur's publisher, Kepler Interactive, which since its formation in 2021 has focused on original titles with eye-catching art styles and mould-breaking gameplay, including Sifu, Tchia, Scorn, Pacific Drive, Ultros, Bionic Bay, and the upcoming Rematch. "They respect creativity and innovation in games, they have a very high standard in choosing games to publish, and they are very fun people to work with," enthuses Shuhei Yoshida, former president of Sony Interactive Entertainment Worldwide Studios, and now a freelance consultant for Kepler. Yoshida has been helping to evaluate game pitches for the publisher since he left Sony in January, as well as helping to promote Bionic Bay and Clair Obscur. "They have a great balance in looking for innovation in games and investing in commercially viable projects," he says. "I think the way Kepler chooses games and supports developers is a great example of sustainable indie publishing. I expect many companies in the industry will look for inspiration from what Kepler is doing." Coop mode One thing that immediately marks out Kepler as different is its structure. "Kepler is co-owned by a group of studios, but they all operate autonomously," explains portfolio director Matthew Handrahan, who joined Kepler from PlayStation in 2022 (before that, he was editor-in-chief of this very site). "They make a lot of their own choices creatively and commercially in terms of the direction of their business. But there is a collaborative aspect that they can draw upon if they feel they need it. The thing that we definitely are very clear on is Kepler is not sitting here telling anyone what to do." The idea is that Kepler can provide support into each studio in terms of things like HR, legal teams, and IT. "And each one of them can draw on that to the degree that they want to, in the belief that if you give people that solid base, they can just focus more on being creative," says Handrahan. Image credit: Sandfall Interactive But the plan was always for Kepler to become a third party publisher, he continues. So in addition to publishing games from its own studios, since 2024 Kepler has started releasing games from outside developers, like Pacific Drive, Clair Obscur, and the newly signed PVKK from Bippinbits, the creators of Dome Keeper. "As we go forward, what we really hope is that people can spot a Kepler game," says Handrahan. So what marks out a Kepler title? CEO Alexis Garavaryan has previously emphasised the publisher champions games with "bold art direction and innovative game design" that avoid familiar influences like Star Wars and superheroes. Handrahan says this is essential in today's market. "I remember writing about Steam being overcrowded for GamesIndustry.biz 10 years ago, and saying, 'Oh, there's too many games'," he says. "Well there's five times more games being released now. So if you are coming to market with a game, it had better be doing something genuinely fresh." What Kepler definitely isn't doing is chasing trends, which Handrahan says is a dangerous strategy. He gives the example of Balatro imitators. "If you're making something hot on the heels of that, by the time you get to market, there'll probably be 150 other alternatives." One can't help thinking, too, of the expensive failure of Concord at PlayStation, which proved to be one hero shooter too many. The next expedition Sandfall's COO and producer François Meurisse says that the fact that studio head Guillaume Broche was deliberately avoiding chasing trends with Clair Obscur was what attracted him to join in the first place. "Some people predicted to us that it was a tricky [sector] when we started development, and there could be kind of a curse on AA games" François Meurisse, Sandfall Interactive He was immediately on board with Broche's passion for revitalising the kind of flashy, 3D, turn-based JRPGs that had long gone out of fashion. That passion came first: the strategy came later. "A bit after, when we tried to rationalise that yearning he has for this kind of game, we realised that it wasn't addressed as much in the market, and maybe there was a place for it," says Meurisse. The end result went beyond their wildest dreams. "The game has had success to an extent that we didn't imagine," he says. "We smashed our forecasts pretty fast." Naturally, thoughts are already turning to a follow-up. "There will be another video game, for sure," says Meurisse, adding that it's a little early to say exactly what form it will take. "I can't wait to dig more into the ideas we already have for the next game," he says. "Plus the team has grown up, has acquired new skills throughout production," he says. "Many of them were junior when we started. We learned to work together. So I can't wait to get to the next project, because we'll start from a more efficient position than when we started the company five years ago. And that [comes] with higher expectations as well, so it will be challenging. But I can say that we have – and Guillaume in particular has – great ideas for the next game." AA comeback Image credit: Sandfall Interactive The success of Clair Obscur has led many to herald the comeback of AA games, a sector that has shrunk significantly over the past couple of console generations – even if it's a harder category to define in 2025 based on a lack of publicly available budget numbers. "Some people predicted to us that it was a tricky [sector] when we started development, and there could be kind of a curse on AA games," remembers Meurisse. "But from our perspective, we didn't care too much about market considerations. […] In a sense, A Plague Tale or Mortal Shell or Hellblade, games like those were already proof for us that small teams of less than 50 people could have great games and great execution." Speaking of team size, much was made of the claim that Clair Obscur was created by a team of around 30, although many were quick to point out that the credits include dozens more people than that, working on things like QA, localization and voice production, as well as a ‘gameplay animation' team in Korea. "These kinds of games did exist in much greater numbers about 15 years ago, and I think there are some threads that the AAA industry lost as they grew and grew and grew" Matt Handrahan, Kepler Interactive So was the game mis-sold? "I don't think so," says Handrahan. "I think that the creative engine of the game was that group of 30. […] In terms of what the game is – the vision of it and the way in which it's executed – [that] does come from that nucleus of staff that is at Sandfall." "In terms of main credits over the four years of production, we were on average about 30 people," clarifies Meurisse. "We started with less than 10 people, scaled up until 30, and close to 40, and then scaled a little bit down. You mentioned Korean animators, but it's important to mention that none of them were full time. They were doing some extras beside some other jobs of animation. So the core team was on average 30 people in the home studio, plus privileged contractors like the lead writer or the composer, for example: I include them in that core team." "But of course, we had a galaxy of partners revolving around the project. Kepler in the first place – and I want to really pinpoint that they were really key in the success of the game – plus some other creative people as well, like musician players, translators, QA testers also. And that definitely extends the team, and I'm super grateful we could work with all those super […] passionate partners from all over the world." "I think people fixated on this number," adds Handrahan, "but actually the more useful thing that was being said was that this is not a AAA game, right? You can look at those credits, and it's still definitely not a AAA game." "These kinds of games did exist in much greater numbers about 15 years ago, and I think there are some threads that the AAA industry lost as they grew and grew and grew, and brought in different ways of monetising," he continues. "We have to remember there was a time when AAA companies were making games like Vanquish and Mirror's Edge and Kane & Lynch, and all of these really cool, interesting, not small games, but much smaller scale games. And you've seen the number of releases from AAA publishers dwindle and dwindle and dwindle. Now there's an opportunity for teams like Sandfall to come in and give players something that they really have not been given for quite a long time." Which leads us to ask, if Clair Obscur can't be classed as a AAA game, how much did it cost, exactly? Neither Handrahan nor Meurisse is willing to disclose the true figure. "I would say that I've seen a lot of budget estimations that are all higher than the real budget," muses Meurisse. Handrahan agrees. "Everybody's desperate to know what the budget is, and I won't tell them, but I would guarantee if you got 10 people to guess, I think all 10 wouldn't guess the actual figure," he says. "I'm sure Mirror's Edge and Vanquish cost more, put it that way." Keeping the team small Image credit: Sandfall Interactive With a success like Clair Obscur, the temptation might be to scale up the studio for a blockbuster sequel: a pattern we've seen with successful franchises many times before. But Meurisse says that's something Sandfall wants to avoid. "For now, our vision would be to stick to a close team working in the same city with less than 50 people on board, focusing on one project after another, and keeping this agility, and this creative strength, and smartness of a small group of passionate people wanting to do something big," he says. "That's how video games were made for years," he continues. "The team that made Ocarina of Time or Half-Life 2, I think those were max 60 or 70 people*, and that kind of size allows for good decisions and great creativity." He adds that the studio might recruit a few more members, but it won't start working on multiple projects simultaneously, and they will deliberately avoid growing too big and unwieldy. "We want to keep the organisation that made us successful," he says. Handrahan notes that because game making is an iterative process, maintaining only a small permanent team makes sense. "I think keeping a core team to hold the vision and to build out what the game is, and then expanding as you need to through things like outsourcing, is a very smart and sustainable way to manage game development," he says. "I think that there's been a lot of irresponsible practices in the industry," he continues, referring to the inherent risks involved in ballooning AAA budgets and team sizes. "Some games can make it work. Grand Theft Auto 6 is going to make it work, I think we can all say with great confidence. But there are plenty of games made with very large teams and for huge amounts of money that don't land, and there is a human cost to running things that way. People lose their jobs. God knows how many layoffs there's been in the industry over the last few years." He worries that the temptation to scale up is too great. "I do see a lot of developers who ship a game and then get some level of success – even very small levels of success or on very small budgets – and then almost instinctively feel like they need to double or triple the budget of the next game. And that is something I definitely question." No bloat He also questions the need to make games bigger. "One of the things that's great about Expedition 33 is it really respects the player's time. It gives them plenty to do, and it gives them plenty of satisfaction, but it isn't arbitrarily 500 hours of gameplay. It's impactful because it's scoped correctly. […] It doesn't have any sense of bloat or extraneous things that are put there just to make it larger and larger and larger." "Brevity should be more of a virtue in gaming," he adds. "Something can be better by being shorter – something that's being discussed in film at the moment. Every film seems to be two and a half hours long, and I think most people are like, 'Can they all be a bit shorter, please? Because we have other things to do with our lives'." Meurisse notes that the focus for Clair Obscur was always on quality over quantity. "From the beginning, we wanted to do an intense and short experience," he says. "The first length estimates of the game were closer to 20 hours for the main quest. I think we ended up closer to 30, even 40 hours if you take a bit of time. As a player, there are so many great games out there that I want to experience, [and] what's important to me is the level of excitement and fun I get from a game, rather than how long it is." He also questions the link between game length and price. "The value that players get from games does not align systematically with the length of the game," he says. "For example, one of my favourite games of all time is Inside, which lasts about two hours, but it's one of the most polished, and intense [experiences] – and even life changing for some people." What are games worth? Notably, Clair Obscur launched at a price point of $50/$45, at a time when the standard price for big-budget games is creeping up to $80. "I think as that AAA price goes up, I think it creates more of an opportunity to be launching games – more sensibly scoped games – [and] pricing them at that $40–50 range," says Handrahan. "And I don't think anyone that played Expedition 33 would think they didn't get their money's worth out of that." "When we announced the pricing at $50 we did actually have a little of a backlash online," adds Meurisse, "with people fearing it would be a 12-hour-long game with unfinished content, and that it was suspicious to have a $50 game that was looking like this in the trailers. But in the end we stuck with the price, we doubled down on it, [and] we provided some context about the fact that it wasn't a AAA." "In the end, it was a win-win situation, because it was a way to attract more players towards the game, to have good player satisfaction about their buying [decision], and it could actually end up doing more sales. So maybe players' perception can change a bit about that kind of price [point]." The Kepler brand Image credit: Sandfall Interactive Clair Obscur has obviously provided a huge boost for Kepler as a publisher, and Handrahan says the plan now is for Kepler to build a brand as the home for high-quality, mid-sized games with a unique vision. He gives the newly signed PVKK as an example. "The art direction is very high quality, it's very, very bold. It has a strong narrative component. It has innovative gameplay design. It speaks to wider culture, it's not an insular vision for a game. I think you get a lot of games that are kind of just about other games, and that is not something we're interested in necessarily." It's a model that he thinks others could follow. "We definitely want there to be strong associations with the games we do, so if that is something that other publishers could imitate or follow along from, then all the better," he says, adding that it makes little sense for publishers to cast a broad net of styles and genres in such a crowded market. But of course, there is a risk to championing unique, untested visions. So what does Kepler do to mitigate that risk? "We definitely do market research," says Handrahan – although he adds that ultimately the process is subjective. "I came to this company because I really trusted the taste of the people that I work for. I have always felt that if I'm really excited by a game, there will be other people out there who are excited by it. Yes, you can test that against market research, and that is definitely a function that we have in the company, and we use it. But our litmus test is a subjective level of excitement and belief in the vision and creativity that we see in the games that we sign." He points to companies in other media, like A24 or Warped Records, that have taken a similar approach with great success. "We want to be that in games." *Fact check note: Valve's core team was actually 84 for Half-Life 2, without including the many people involved in voice acting, QA, IT, legal, and so on. The team behind Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time numbered around 66, although the people involved in QA testing aren't listed individually in the credits.

IGN and Meta will host a Women in Gaming networking event on June 6 ahead of IGN Live The event features panels, hardware demos, and more News by Samuel Roberts Editorial Director Published on May 25, 2025 IGN and Meta will host a Women in Gaming event on Friday, June 6 as part of this year's IGN Live event. Taking place at the Magic Box in Los Angeles, the event promises to honour the women making waves in the games industry, and will feature curated panels with industry leaders. Meta, meanwhile, will bring hardware demos to the event. A pop-up studio offering headshots will also be part of the mix, with make-up artists from NYX Professional Makeup providing touch-ups. Dentsu Gaming completes the list of sponsors for the event. Those interested in attending Women in Gaming or finding out more information are encouraged to reach out to Kim Hatfield at IGN Entertainment. IGN Live itself takes place on June 7 and June 8, with tickets available now. Participating publishers at the event include Xbox, Sega, 2K Games and Ubisoft. GamesIndustry.biz is part of IGN Entertainment, the division of Ziff Davis that includes Eurogamer, Rock Paper Shotgun, and VG247.

How deep is Sony's commitment to live-service? | Opinion Sony's live service ambitions have steadily scaled back, but questions remain about Bungie – and how much the overall PlayStation strategy hinges on live service Image credit: Sony Interactive Entertainment Feature by Rob Fahey Contributing Editor Published on May 23, 2025 In many regards, things are going very well for Sony right now. The PlayStation 5 has sold strongly, generally slightly outpacing the performance of the PS4 at equivalent points in its lifecycle despite cost pressures that have kept its retail prices high. Its biggest direct competitor, Microsoft, started the generation with a great hardware line-up but has ultimately pivoted away from console exclusive software and become one of the biggest third-party publishers on PlayStation. Sony has an enviable line-up of studios and premium first-party game franchises, has started to find success with movie and TV adaptations of some of its game IP, and is gradually building up a solid sideline business in PC versions of its blockbuster titles – not to mention that next year GTA 6 will turn up and presumably sell absolute truckloads of PS5s in the process. It's not all quite so rosy, of course. With a view to the longer term, for example, it's not unreasonable to point out that while the console business has stubbornly defied all the predictions of collapse over the past decade or two, it has certainly found itself smacking off a glass ceiling somewhere around the installed base mark achieved by the PS2, and additional growth seems elusive despite rising costs across the board. Still, within the confines of that market reality, Sony has been performing extremely well – with the arguable exception of one specific part of the company, over which hovers a question mark so big that it casts a shadow over a lot of this success. This strategic enigma is Bungie – or to be more specific, it's the entire content strategy that was meant to be anchored around the $3.6 billion dollar acquisition of Bungie back in 2022. While this is chickenfeed compared to the money Microsoft was splashing around on gaming acquisitions during the same era, it was an enormous purchase for Sony, and it was meant to kick-start a major change in how the company would make games. Image credit: Bungie Sony got live services religion, and it got it bad; the company, or at least some influential people within the company, believed that the way to achieve the kind of break-out growth that its success in hardware and premium games was failing to deliver had to come through finding the next Fortnite. Bungie, with its experience of running the Destiny franchise and supposedly with multiple unannounced live service titles being incubated at that point, would be the lynchpin of that strategy, not only building its own live service games but also providing expertise and guidance to Sony's other studios as they worked on live service titles based on their own core IPs. In the years that have followed, that strategy has foundered somewhat – not least because rather than being the jewel in the crown of the live service effort, Sony's acquisition of Bungie appears to have resulted in constantly having to put out new fires at the company. I wonder how different Sony's strategic positioning might sound now if the release dates of Concord and Helldivers 2 had been swapped around While insight into the internal workings of the relationship is very unreliable given that most people leaking information undoubtedly have an axe to grind, one does speculate that there's a weird, destructive tug-of-war going on between Bungie's leadership and their new owners at Sony. What we can say with certainty is that revenues from Destiny 2 fluctuated wildly (as did the quality of the game and players' sentiments towards it), drawing into question just how much Sony's other studios might want to take direction on live service strategy from Bungie. Major layoffs were conducted, raising some even bigger questions about what Sony had paid all that money for, if not for acquiring a wellspring of talent and experience in the form of Bungie's now-fired employees. Despite this, however, Sony's determination that its future lies with live service releases doesn't seem to have faltered – well, at least not much. The ambitious initial plans for a dozen live service games to launch by early 2026 were scaled back to six a couple of years ago. Depending on how you're counting (bear in mind that titles like MLB The Show are considered live service, even if they may not be what jumps to mind when you think of this category), it seems pretty likely that this halved forecast will be missed by a fair bit, especially given the ignominious failure and rapid shutdown of one of the few live service games to actually launch, Concord. Image credit: PlayStation / Arrowhead Game Studios There was also a widespread suspicion that the retirement of former Sony Interactive Entertainment boss Jim Ryan a year ago might see the company quietly water down its commitment to live service. Despite this, however, Sony's messaging continues to suggest a strong focus on this sector. SIE co-CEO Hermen Hulst announced a new live-service oriented studio in the PlayStation Studios group, teamLFG, just this week. Back in 2022, the Bungie acquisition seemed to make a sort of sense. The climate around live service was extremely positive; this was long before we'd seen gigantic, costly failures like Warner's catastrophic Suicide Squad: Kill the Justice League, or indeed Sony's own Concord. Sony lacked expertise in this sector, and the Bungie deal could plug that gap. It was nonetheless risky – not least because it flew in the face of Sony's de facto policy of only buying out large studios with which they had built extremely close working relationships on successful titles over several years, despite that policy being central to building up PlayStation Studios in the first place. Today, the climate is very different around live service games, not least because of the aforementioned failures, but also because of what seems to be a fairly strong turn in consumer sentiment around these kinds of services. Sony, however, still has a multi-billion dollar studio that really only does live services attached to it, and one does have to wonder about the extent to which that creates path dependency. The new live service studio, teamLFG, is a good example in that it appears to be a direct spin-off from Bungie, so that acquisition is still very much driving Sony's engagement with this whole market sector. It's worth noting, though, that Sony did also have some beginner's luck in live services, with its first real dip into this water being the excellent and well-received Helldivers 2. In any high-risk gambling, beginner's luck is a curse, because you'll end up throwing far more of your money at the casino than the person who had a run of bad luck on their first visit and never caught the bug or tried to chase the winning feeling. I wonder how different Sony's strategic positioning might sound now if the release dates of Concord and Helldivers 2 had been swapped around. Even were it not for the need to do something with Bungie, and the sense that Helldivers 2 shows that this market sector can work for Sony, there's another logic that might underpin a continuing commitment to live service games – even despite what is now much more widely understood to be a near-suicidal risk profile for launching them. It's the logic of venture capital, which can often look quite crazy from the perspective of an ordinary investor with a regular risk appetite, but which is all about high risks and high rewards. Venture capitalists are generally not too interested in solid businesses with sober risk profiles and a decent profit margin. They're interested in crazy, fast-growing businesses that, while being incredibly likely to flare out and die, will return a hundred-fold, a thousand-fold, or an even higher upside ratio in the unlikely event that they do succeed. The logic of a venture portfolio is that losing a big chunk of money on each of 99 bankrupt companies you back is worthwhile if the 100th company in the pack strikes the jackpot for you and returns your investment a thousand-fold. Since games don't really do that – they're risky, but almost never have upside rewards on that scale – the venture capital model doesn't work terribly well for them, and that kind of VC activity has been very limited in this space over the years. Live service games, however, turn this on its head. It's extremely, vanishingly unlikely that your game will be the next Fortnite, but if it is, it will deliver exactly the kind of immense return that venture capital funds are interested in. This, I think, is a sort of thinking that's taken root in some quarters within Sony. Who cares if they back dozens of failures, if one of them becomes a new title whose recurring revenue is big enough on its own to be a whole new pillar of the business? We'll see in the coming years whether that's really the approach Sony intends to take – if it's happy to absorb more and more Concord-style failures (or, perhaps more likely, a bunch of commercially mediocre performers that stick around for a year or two before being shut down, which seems to be the general life cycle of live service games at the moment) in pursuit of that one, elusive, incredible hit. If so, it's a strategy which carries an especially extraordinary degree of risk for Sony, because while a venture capital fund can back dozens of losers without anyone really noticing or caring – that's just part of the business – it's definitely going to be noticed by Sony's consumers if PlayStation starts releasing dozens of dud live services games under its banner. Money is only one of the currencies that needs to be considered in this equation, and it's arguably the easiest one to gamble with. The prestige and reputation of the platform and the brand is a much more valuable currency, and one that would be a lot harder to earn back once lost.

Six One Indie launches publishing label "[We have] evolved into an ecosystem that can now offer a unique opportunity to get indies in front of players through fresh, unconventional means," says creative director Image credit: Six One Publishing News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 23, 2025 The team behind the Six One Indie Showcase and The Indie Game Awards has launched its own publishing label. Six One Indie Publishing describes itself as an "integrated, indie-first platform" for developers. It will offer support in launch strategy, media relations, and showcase integration as well as development support in areas including QA testing and localisation. "The number of games hitting the market grows by the day, but unfortunately, the people to cover and amplify them seem to dwindle just as fast," said Six One Indie creative director Mike Towndrow. "Six One Indie has evolved into an ecosystem that can now offer a unique opportunity to get indies in front of players through fresh, unconventional means." Towndrow added: "We're not building a publishing label for the old industry. We're building one for the new wave of indie – where passion, connection, and creative control comes first. "Indies deserve more than a checklist, they deserve a major push backed by authenticity, genuine enthusiasm, and a new approach for an unpredictable industry." Six One Indie was founded in 2018, with its first showcase debuting in 2022.

FromSoftware and A24 to produce Elden Ring adaptation Ex Machina writer and director Alex Garland to helm the film, George R. R. Martin on board as producer Image credit: FromSoftware News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 23, 2025 FromSoftware has partnered with A24 to produce a film adaptation of Elden Ring. Ex Machina and Annihilation director Alex Garland has been signed on to direct. He's also known for writing 28 Days Later and Sunshine, in addition to the upcoming 28 Years Later and its sequel The Bone Temple. Author George R. R. Martin, who provided worldbuilding for Elden Ring, is on board to produce. Peter Rice and Vince Gerardis are also producing, alongside Andrew Macdonald and Allon Reich from DNA Films. Last year, Martin teased a potential adaptation or TV series of the game. "Oh, and about those rumours you may have heard about a feature film or a television series based on Elden Ring… I have nothing to say," he wrote in a blog post. "Not a word, nope, not a thing, I know nothing, you never heard a peep from me, mum mum mum. What rumour?" FromSoftware's president Hidetaka Miyazaki also spoke about the potential adaptation during an interview with The Guardian. "I don't see any reason to deny another interpretation or adaptation of Elden Ring, a movie for example," said Miyazaki. "But I don't think myself, or FromSoftware, have the knowledge or ability to produce something in a different medium. So that's where a very strong partner would come into play. "We'd have to build a lot of trust and agreement on whatever it is we're trying to achieve, but there's interest, for sure." Elden Ring isn't the only game adaptation in the works at A24, as it's also co-producing a Death Stranding movie with Kojima Productions. A Quiet Place: Day One's Michael Sarnoski is reportedly signed on to direct.

FTC drops case against Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard "The commission has determined that the public interest is best served by dismissing the administrative litigation of the case," says FTC News by Sophie McEvoy Staff Writer Published on May 23, 2025 The US Federal Trade Commission has dropped its complaint against Microsoft's acquisition of Activision Blizzard. On May 22, 2025, the FTC issued an order dismissing its case after it lost its appeal against Microsoft earlier this month. "The commission has determined that the public interest is best served by dismissing the administrative litigation of the case," it said. "Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that the complaint in this matter be, and hereby is, dismissed." In response, Microsoft president Brad Smith described the decision as a "victory for players" on social media. "Today's decision is a victory for players across the country and for common sense in Washington D.C.," Smith wrote. "We are grateful for the FTC for today's announcement." Microsoft finalised its deal to acquire Activision Blizzard in January 2022 for $68.7 billion. The FTC subsequently attempted to block the merger, believing it would cause a threat to competition in cloud gaming, subscription services, and exclusive first-party titles. This was denied, and in turn the FTC submitted a preliminary injunction – which was also denied. On May 8, 2025, the 9th Circuit US Court of Appeals threw out the FTC's challenge against the Microsoft Activision merger. "The panel held that the district court applied the correct legal standards and did not abuse its discretion, or rely on clearly erroneous findings, in holding that the FTC failed to make a sufficient evidentiary showing to establish the requisite likelihood of success on the merits of its claim," the court said.