Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More In the first generation of the web, back in the late 1990s, search was okay but not great, and it wasn’t easy to find things. That led to the rise of syndication protocols in the early 2000s, with Atom and RSS (Really Simple Syndication) providing a simplified way for website owners to make headlines and other content easily available and searchable. In the modern era of AI, a new group of protocols is emerging to serve the same basic purpose. This time, instead of making sites easier for humans to find, it’s all about making websites easier for AI. Anthropic’s Model Control Protocol (MCP), Google‘s Agent2Agent and large language models/ LLMs.txt are among the existing efforts. The newest protocol is Microsoft’s open-source NLWeb (natural language web) effort, which was announced during the Build 2025 conference. NLWeb is also directly linked to the first generation of web syndication standards, as it was conceived and created by RV Guha, who helped create RSS, RDF (Resource Description Framework) and schema.org. NLWeb enables websites to easily add AI-powered conversational interfaces, effectively turning any website into an AI app where users can query content using natural language. NLWeb isn’t necessarily about competing with other protocols; rather, it builds on top of them. The new protocol uses existing structured data formats like RSS, and each NLWeb instance functions as an MCP server. “The idea behind NLWeb is it is a way for anyone who has a website or an API already to very easily make their website or their API an agentic application,” Microsoft CTO Kevin Scott said during his Build 2025 keynote. “You really can think about it a little bit like HTML for the agentic web.” How NLWeb works to AI-enable the web for enterprises NLWeb transforms websites into AI-powered experiences through a straightforward process that builds on existing web infrastructure while leveraging modern AI technologies. Building on existing data: The system begins by leveraging structured data that websites already publish, including markup, RSS feeds and other semi-structured formats that are commonly embedded in web pages. This means publishers don’t need to rebuild their content infrastructure completely. Data processing and storage: NLWeb includes tools for adding this structured data to vector databases, which enable efficient semantic search and retrieval. The system supports all major vector database options, allowing developers to choose the solution that best fits their technical requirements and scale. AI enhancement layer: LLMs then enhance this stored data with external knowledge and context. For instance, when a user queries about restaurants, the system automatically layers on geographic insights, reviews and related information by combining the vectorized content with LLM capabilities to provide comprehensive, intelligent responses rather than simple data retrieval. Universal interface creation: The result is a natural language interface that serves both human users and AI agents. Visitors can ask questions in plain English and receive conversational responses, while AI systems can programmatically access and query the site’s information through the MCP framework. This approach allows any website to participate in the emerging agentic web without requiring extensive technical overhauls. It makes AI-powered search and interaction as accessible as creating a basic webpage was in the early days of the internet. The emerging AI protocol landscape brings many choices to enterprises There are a lot of different protocols emerging in the AI space; not all do the same thing. Google’s Agent2Agent, for example, is all about enabling agents to talk to each other. It’s about orchestrating and communicating agentic AI and is not particularly focused on AI-enabling existing websites or AI content. Maria Gorskikh, founder and CEO of AIA and a contributor to the Project NANDA team at MIT, explained to VentureBeat that Google’s A2A enables structured task passing between agents using defined schemas and lifecycle models.  “While the protocol is open-source and model-agnostic by design, its current implementations and tooling are closely tied to Google’s Gemini stack — making it more of a backend orchestration framework than a general-purpose interface for web-based services,” she said. Another emerging effort is LLMs.txt. Its goal is to help LLMs better access web content. While on the surface, it might sound somewhat like NLWeb, it’s not the same thing. “NLWeb doesn’t compete with LLMs.txt; it is more comparable to web scraping tools that try to deduce intent from a website,” Michael Ni, VP and Principal Analyst at Constellation Research told VentureBeat. Krish Arvapally, co-founder and CTO of Dappier, explained to VentureBeat that LLMs.txt provides a markdown-style format with training permissions that helps LLM crawlers ingest content appropriately. NLWeb focuses on enabling real-time interactions directly on a publisher’s website. Dappier has its own platform that automatically ingests RSS feeds and other structured data, then delivers branded, embeddable conversational interfaces. Publishers can syndicate their content to their data marketplace. MCP is the other big protocol, and it is increasingly becoming a de facto standard and a foundational element of NLWeb. Fundamentally, MCP is an open standard for connecting AI systems with data sources. Ni explained that in Microsoft’s view, MCP is the transport layer, where, together, MCP and NLWeb provide the HTML and TCP/IP of the open agentic web. Forrester Senior Analyst Will McKeon-White sees a number of advantages for NLWeb over other options. “The main advantage of NLWeb is better control over how AI systems ‘see’ the pieces that make up websites, allowing for better navigation and more complete understanding of the tooling,” McKeon-White told VentureBeat. “This could reduce both errors from systems misunderstanding what they’re seeing on websites, as well as reduce interface rework.” Early adopters already see the promise of NLWeb for enterprise agentic AI Microsoft didn’t just throw NLWeb over the proverbial wall and hope someone would use it.  Microsoft already has multiple organizations engaged and using NLWeb, including Chicago Public Media, Allrecipes, Eventbrite, Hearst (Delish), O’Reilly Media, Tripadvisor and Shopify. Andrew Odewahn, Chief Technology Officer at O’Reilly Media is among the early adopters and sees real promise for NLWeb. “NLWeb leverages the best practices and standards developed over the past decade on the open web and makes them available to LLMs,” Odewahn told VentureBeat. “Companies have long spent time optimizing this kind of metadata for SEO and other marketing purposes, but now they can take advantage of this wealth of data to make their own internal AI smarter and more capable with NLWeb.” In his view, NLWeb is valuable for enterprises both as consumers of public information and publishers of private information. He noted that nearly every company has sales and marketing efforts where they might need to ask, “What does this company do?” or “What is this product about?”  “NLWeb provides a great way to open this information to your internal LLMs so that you don’t have to go hunting and pecking to find it,” Odewahn said. “As a publisher, you can add your own metadata using schema.org standard and use NLWeb internally as an MCP server to make it available for internal use.” Using NLWeb isn’t necessarily a heavy lift, either. Odewahn noted that many organizations are probably already using many of the standards NLWeb relies on.  “There’s no downside in trying it out now since NLWeb can run entirely within your infrastructure,” he said. “It’s open source software meeting the best in open source data, so you have nothing to lose and a lot to gain from trying it now.” Should enterprises jump on NLWeb right now, or wait? Constellation Research Analyst Michael Ni has a somewhat positive viewpoint on NLWeb. However, that doesn’t mean enterprises need to adopt it immediately. Ni noted that NLWeb is in the very early stages of maturity and enterprises should expect 2-3 years for any substantial adoption. He suggests that leading-edge companies with specific needs, such as active marketplaces, can look to pilot with the ability to engage and help shape the standard. “It’s a visionary specification with clear potential, but it needs ecosystem validation, implementation tooling, and reference integrations before it can reach mainstream enterprise pilots,” Ni said. Others have a somewhat more aggressive viewpoint on adoption. Gorskikh suggests taking an accelerated approach to ensure your enterprise doesn’t fall behind. “If you’re an enterprise with a large content surface, internal knowledge base, or structured data, piloting NLWeb now is a smart and necessary step to stay ahead,” she said. “This isn’t a wait-and-see moment — it’s more like the early adoption of APIs or mobile apps.” That said, she noted that regulated industries need to tread carefully. Sectors like insurance, banking and healthcare should hold off on production use until there’s a neutral, decentralized verification and discovery system in place. There are already early-stage efforts addressing this — such as the NANDA project at MIT that Gorskikh participates in, which is building an open, decentralized registry and reputation system for agentic services. What does this all mean to enterprise AI leaders? For enterprise AI leaders, NLWeb is a watershed moment and a technology that should not be ignored. AI is going to interact with your site, and you need to AI enable it. NLWeb is one way that will be particularly attractive to publishers, much like RSS became a must-have for all websites in the early 2000s. In a few years, users will just expect it to be there; they will expect to be able to search and find things, while agentic AI systems will need to be able to access the content as well.  That’s the promise of NLWeb. Daily insights on business use cases with VB Daily If you want to impress your boss, VB Daily has you covered. We give you the inside scoop on what companies are doing with generative AI, from regulatory shifts to practical deployments, so you can share insights for maximum ROI. Read our Privacy Policy Thanks for subscribing. Check out more VB newsletters here. An error occured.

We should have known it was too good to last. After markets enjoyed a month of relative peace in Donald Trump’s trade war with the world—a stretch of time during which Trump paused his so-called “reciprocal” tariffs on most countries and then rolled back his massive 145% tariffs on China—the president reignited the conflict Friday morning with a couple of posts on TruthSocial. First, he directly threatened Apple with a company-specific 25% tariff on all iPhones if it shifts production to India from China, rather than to the U.S. Then, he attacked the European Union for being “very difficult to deal with,” and said he wanted to impose a 50% tariff on all U.S. imports from the EU on June 1. The threats—which he may not have the legal authority to follow through on—rattled markets severely at first, with S&P futures dropping more than 2%. Stocks recovered somewhat after Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent tried to cool investor anxieties in an appearance on Fox, and European officials said they were continuing to negotiate. But the turmoil engendered by Trump’s posts was a reminder of the fact that U.S. trade policy is now being made, in effect, by presidential whim, making the future profits of many American companies dependent on how Trump happens to feel on any given day. When the president first unveiled his plan to impose high tariffs on imports from most of the world’s countries—which he called “Liberation Day“—he claimed that the goal of his scheme was to bring about an “ECONOMIC REVOLUTION.” But that implied a level of planning and strategy that has been sorely lacking in the way Trump has handled tariffs since April 2. He jacked up tariffs (relying on an absurd formula), only to roll them back when markets cratered. He promised that trade deals galore were in the offing, only to then say he would raise tariffs unilaterally because the deals were taking too long to do. And he promised a 90-day pause on all the reciprocal tariffs, only to now say he’s going to tariff the EU less than 60 days into the pause. The most obvious consequence of Trump’s chaotic trade policy is that he has massively increased the amount of uncertainty American businesses (and, by extension, American consumers) will face going forward. It’s next to impossible for businesses that import goods (either for sale or as part of their supply chain) to make reasonable plans for the future, since there’s no way for them to know what Trump will require them to pay for imports down the road. Nor is there any guarantee that the tariff rates Trump comes up with will stay the same over time. As a result, companies don’t know whether they now should be massively stocking up on imports in anticipation of higher tariffs (a move that would increase their inventory costs)—or if they should be buying like normal in anticipation that deals will get made. They have to decide, but that decision can’t be built on much more than guesswork.  The only thing companies do know, in fact, is that regardless of whatever else Trump decides, they’re going to have to pay a 10% universal tariff on everything they import (along with permanently higher tariffs on imports from certain countries, like China). This universal 10% tariff—which Trump imposed on Liberation Day and kept in place even as he rolled his other tariffs back—is not a bargaining tool or a threat: It’s here to stay for as long as Trump remains president. So companies are facing permanently higher import costs on top of major uncertainty. The fact that, for all his changes of mind, Trump has stayed committed to the 10% universal tariff isn’t surprising. In the first place, it was one of his oft-repeated campaign promises—he said it would be a “ring” around the U.S. economy. And it fits well with Trump’s basic view of trade, which is that when we buy stuff made abroad, we’re “losing money,” so the government should charge what he thinks of as effectively a cover charge to sell to U.S. customers. (That cover charge, of course, is paid by the U.S. businesses that are importing the goods, but Trump prefers to ignore that fact.) Trump may talk about the importance of opening foreign markets (as he did in his post about the EU Friday morning), but he’s always been more interested in imposing tariffs on imports than he has been in encouraging exports. The 10% tariff is not as dramatic as the China tariffs or the threats against the EU and Apple, which helps explain why investors have, for the most part, shrugged off its potential impact. But American businesses and consumers won’t be so lucky. That’s why Walmart said on an earnings call last week that it would be hiking prices as soon as the end of the month because of tariff costs. As the company’s CFO explained in an interview with CNBC: “We’re wired for everyday low prices, but the magnitude of these increases is more than any retailer can absorb. And so I’m concerned that consumer is going to start seeing higher prices.” This of course infuriated Trump, who wrote on TruthSocial that Walmart should “eat the tariffs.” But the company was simply acknowledging economic reality: Its net profit margin last year was around 2.6%, and it imports almost $50 billion a year in goods from China alone, plus tens of billions of dollars of goods from other countries. It does not have the leeway to absorb a sizable increase in the price of those goods without passing at least some of the cost along. And the same is true of many other retailers—indeed, it’s even more true of small- to medium-size retailers. In response to Trump’s criticism, Walmart said: “We’ll keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can, given the reality of small retail margins.” But the message was ultimately the same: Prices will have to rise.  Those price increases are not likely to be massive. But that doesn’t mean they won’t matter. What Trump’s policy means is that we are now looking at a global economy in which tariffs are going to be higher across the board, and in which he is imposing, at a minimum, a new 10% tax on trade. When you tax something, you get less of it—meaning that in addition to higher retail prices, we’re likely to have less trade and lower retail sales. This will be even more true if Trump follows through on his latest threats. But even if he backs down from them, the Yale Budget Lab estimates that a universal 10% tariff, along with 60% tariffs on Chinese imports (which would be a little higher than they are now), would cost consumers, on average, a minimum of $1,900 a year in higher prices, and could shrink U.S. GDP by somewhere between 0.5% and 1.4%. We may yet dodge the disaster that the U.S. is headed for if Trump ends up returning to his original Liberation Day tariffs, and if we have a real trade war with the EU and China. But even if we do, the tariffs we’ll still be stuck with are going to be a permanent, steady drag on the economy—a drag that may not be big enough to make headlines but that nonetheless will be impossible to avoid.  

It was rumored for many months and somewhat a given with the launch of the Definitive Edition, but NetherRealm Studios has finally confirmed it. Mortal Kombat 1 won’t receive any more DLC characters or story chapters. While balance adjustments and fixes will continue, the developer will focus on its next project to “make it as great as we possibly can,” though it understands the news will disappoint fans. Launched in September 2023 for Xbox Series X/S, PS5, PC, and Nintendo Switch, Mortal Kombat 1 is a reboot of the series timeline. It introduced Kameo Fighters as assists and a new mode, Invasions, to accommodate a seasonal format. While it received acclaim for its visuals and story, fans raised concerns about the mechanics, extensive bugs and excessive monetization. An expansion, Khaos Reigns, followed in September 2024 alongside Kombat Pack 2, but this also received criticism for its short story and $50 price. Another expansion and Kombat Pack 3 were allegedly in development but seemingly cancelled due to Khaos Reigns’ poor sales. As for the future, NetherRealm Studios may be working on a new Injustice, according to a MultiVersus leaker. Nothing is confirmed, so stay tuned for updates.

The first thing you need to know about Honey O’Donahue is that she is a fabulous movie detective. Now you might be saying to yourself right now, “That just means she’s a great detective, right? A master solver of mysteries?” And sure. Maybe. Honestly, it’s a bit open to debate after watching Ethan Coen and Tricia Cooke’s new slinky potboiler, Honey, Don’t! But more important than the crime-stopping is how she pieces together the mystery of what it means to be a proper movie detective. She knows, for instance, that when a jealous spouse offers you money to confirm his husband is having an affair, you should kindly but firmly recommend he spend it instead on a romantic dinner that ends in candid conversation. She also recognizes the necessity of being not only smarter than the local dick on the police force, but able to remind him of this fact with snappy put-downs. She is a detective you simply enjoy watching drink, smoke, and carouse her way through the wreckage of a case, one dead body—or for that matter, a live one in her bed—at a time. And as played by Margaret Qualley with an authentic Carolina lilt, she ascends in Honey Don’t!’s best moments into becoming a kind of Southern-fried, queer Marlowe; a detective whose investigations are nearly impenetrable to follow, but like Bogie or Mitchum before her, you’re just happy to vibe in the patter of her day-to-day rigamarole. She is, in other words, a great creation for Qualley and the not-so-secret weapon in a character piece that sizzles despite the film’s deliberately (and perhaps too) shaggy plot. That plot, of course, involves dead bodies and criminal conspiracies-within-conspiracies on the outskirts of sunny Bakersfield, California. It’s there that local private eye Honey O’Donahue begins looking into the apparent death by car accident of a lonely woman in the community. She keeps her reasons to herself when the police gumshoe (Charlie Day) asks what her interest in the case is, just as she keeps him at further distance when he presses if she wants to discuss the case over drinks. “Book club,” she answers curtly. But didn’t she just tell him she had a book club meeting two days ago? “Dostoevsky, we’re really struggling with it.” The truth of course is Honey has eyes more for the likes of M.G. (Aubrey Plaza), the no-nonsense cop in charge of the station’s evidence locker, than she does for members of the male persuasion. But it’s fair to wonder if her real passion is for verbally sparring with almost anyone who crosses her path. That includes the local fuzz, as well as her sister and a wayward teenage niece, who both have a habit of not wanting Honey’s advice while implicitly yearning for her approval; it likewise pertains to the paranoid client (Billy Eichner) who wants to disgrace his husband at any cost; and you can sure as hell bet she saves her most scathing witticisms for the likes of a pastor at a local church who calls himself Reverend Drew (Chris Evans). Drew has big used car salesman energy, and the more Honey breathes it in, the more his congregation looks like a cult. All parties wind up involved in ways great or small in a scheme that proves more intricate than one might guess. But the key element that really gives momentum to the whole web is the perpetually bemused smile on Qualley’s face, which can simultaneously appear both empathetic and contemptuous in an unblinking glance. It’s a part clearly written toward Qualley’s talents by Coen and Cooke, who after working previously as director and editor on films like The Big Lebowski and O Brother, Where Art Thou? have combined forces as writers and film editors. And like last year’s Drive Away Dolls, the pair imagine Honey Don’t! to be part of a “lesbian B-movie trilogy,” a film which leans lightly into the exploitation of grindhouse cinema while also offering a frothier narrative for LGBTQ cinema than, say, the tragedies that Oscar voters so love. Honey Don’t! is intentionally slight and sleight of hand while setting up the type of boneheaded criminal conspirators who populated so many Coen movies of yore, back when Ethan was writing with Joel. I would also say that despite its happy desire to titillate and objectify, the film feels closer in line with the original film noir movement of the 1940s and ‘50s with its most base pleasures coming from dialogue and performance. Qualley is again the charismatic sun around which everything else orbits, but Plaza also gets plenty of room to build a character miles apart from her frequent Parks and Rec type. To be sure, M.G. has a deadpan about her too, but it’s more bitter, deadly variety—the kind of hard edge that can only come from being sharpened by a lifetime spent as the other in a small, Christian town. Meanwhile Evans is having fun as another creep, although six years on from hanging up Captain America’s shield, and then trying on the sleazebag sweater in Knives Out, it’s fair to wonder if he is now typecast in the other direction. Reverend Drew is a bit more one-note than Knives Out’s Ransom, but it works for the arch and typically dimwitted criminal comedy that Ethan and Joel began their directing career fixated on. Drew is at the focal point of an underworld rife in sex, drugs, and murder, but the mechanics of it—and how it intersects with Honey’s other investigations—is obscure. If one sits down and thinks about it, there seems to really be a greater narrative plotted out by Cooke and Coen left teasingly off-screen, and which would make it all snap into place. But as they appear determined to draw on films famous for their “plot doesn’t matter” legacies, the writers elect to keep Honey and audiences somewhat in the dark all the way to the end credits. The choice benefits from what a gem of a role the title character is for Qualley, funneling all of the film’s attention toward Honey O’Donahue’s swaggering hips and gait. However, it also makes the film slightly frothier and fleeting than it probably needed to be. The writers and star have built such a great character, you want to see her utilized for more than the B-movie aspirations set before her. Yet while working within the purposeful confines of this box, the creatives have succeeded in crafting a merry little murder yarn full of style and devastating zingers. This might be the second part of a thematic trilogy, but one leaves also hoping it’s the first part in a series of cases, and next time Qualley and Honey get to sink their teeth into a larger Coen crime syndicate. Join our mailing list Get the best of Den of Geek delivered right to your inbox! Honey Don’t! premieres at the Cannes Film Festival on May 24 and in theaters on Aug. 22.

It was rumored for many months and somewhat a given with the launch of the Definitive Edition, but NetherRealm Studios has finally confirmed it. Mortal Kombat 1 won’t receive any more DLC characters or story chapters. While balance adjustments and fixes will continue, the developer will focus on its next project to “make it as great as we possibly can,” though it understands the news will disappoint fans. Launched in September 2023 for Xbox Series X/S, PS5, PC, and Nintendo Switch, Mortal Kombat 1 is a reboot of the series timeline. It introduced Kameo Fighters as assists and a new mode, Invasions, to accommodate a seasonal format. While it received acclaim for its visuals and story, fans raised concerns about the mechanics, extensive bugs and excessive monetization. An expansion, Khaos Reigns, followed in September 2024 alongside Kombat Pack 2, but this also received criticism for its short story and $50 price. Another expansion and Kombat Pack 3 were allegedly in development but seemingly cancelled due to Khaos Reigns’ poor sales. As for the future, NetherRealm Studios may be working on a new Injustice, according to a MultiVersus leaker. Nothing is confirmed, so stay tuned for updates. We are hearing players’ requests for continued game support of Mortal Kombat 1, and, while we will continue to support Mortal Kombat 1 through balance adjustments and fixes, there will not be additional DLC characters or story chapters released from this point on.— Mortal Kombat 1 (@MortalKombat) May 23, 2025 We understand this will be disappointing for fans, but our team at NetherRealm needs to shift focus to the next project in order to make it as great as we possibly can.— Mortal Kombat 1 (@MortalKombat) May 23, 2025

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.

Cases News Noctua Has Competition: HAVN Performance Fans, BF360 Case, & Engineering DataMay 23, 2025Last Updated: 2025-05-23We take an early look at HAVN’s new BF360 case and the company’s new unique fans at Computex 2025The HighlightsFor its new products, HAVN has put a heavy emphasis on thermal performance and acousticsHAVN’s upcoming BF360 case brings in new fans in the 180mm, 140mm, and 120mm categoriesHAVN’s 180mm fan uses a 40mm thick frame and special shaping on the hub for what HAVN claims will improve pressure performance across the hub Visit our Patreon page to contribute a few dollars toward this website's operation (or consider a direct donation or buying something from our GN Store!) Additionally, when you purchase through links to retailers on our site, we may earn a small affiliate commission.We visited HAVN’s lab in Taiwan during our Computex 2025 trip. We saw that they were experimenting with a 52mm thick fan for a case it was showing off. The company didn’t end up using that for its case and instead used a new fan design that we’ll discuss in this article.Editor's note: This was originally published on May 17, 2025 as a video. This content has been adapted to written format for this article and is unchanged from the original publication.CreditsHost, WritingSteve BurkeCamera, EditingVitalii MakhnovetsMike GaglioneWriting, Web EditingJimmy ThangDuring our visit, the company showed off its new BF360 case, which follows up their HS 420.  Taking a closer look at the company’s new fan design, you can see some careful shaping to the fan’s hub, which is supposed to help with guiding air flow. We’ll have to see how it performs in our testing, but the idea is taking a thicker fan approach and thickening it even more. The company ended up using a 40mm-thick fan, which should help with pressure.    The company also uses 2x180mm fans mounted to the front of the case.  While we were there, HAVN prepared some CFD simulations for the flow and some simulations for mechanical stresses, on the panel for example, which is pretty interesting.Taking a look at the BF360, the front panel pops out with a tug as it uses magnets to attach itself to the front of the case and has 3 plastic feet that help it snap in at the bottom. The interior of the case’s front panel has a removable fan tray. Its design is somewhat typical but refined from what we’ve seen. HAVN has done a lot of iterations on it. The top panel pulls off and its design is familiar to the HS 420 with its structural design. Once you remove the top panel, it exposes the case’s top fan/radiatory tray, which has rubber bumpers and a slide mechanism that lets you pull it out of the case, providing full access to the top of the chassis and should help with ease of installation. A lot of the steel on the case is either .8mm thick and there’s some that’s 1.0mm, which is thick by today’s standards. Taking a look at the backside of the case, we can see that it has marked cable management pathways, much like the HAVN HS 420 (read our review). This was kind of a nice thing for brand new system builders. Whereas the HS 420 used stickers, the BF360 incorporates it into the molding. Our understanding is that they may refine its design to try and get more light reflection so it’s easier to see. This is a nice attention to detail that adds to the ease of installation. HAVN learned from the HS 420 on the 3 and ½-inch drive support and improved its implementation. There are 2 bays on the back side of the case for those drives and they can be removed. HAVN also changed how it handles the grommets with the case. The string-like material in between is the same but there’s now a little rubber tab that helps to prevent it from popping out by accident once it’s filled with cables. The point here is that HAVN is trying to learn from what they’ve done with the HS 420 and to refine their designs. Taking a look at the BF360’s front panel, it’s supposed to look like stone, but is made of plastic as stone would be extremely heavy. Behind the front panel in the unit we saw are 2x180mm fans. HAVN has shoved a piece of steel at the top, which is supposed to prevent recirculation. This was a huge issue in old BitFenix cases, where due to the company’s design, it would recirculate hot air back into its fans. This design can improve performance in big ways.HAVN tells us that the best setup for the BF360 is to have the top front fan be intake and the top back fan be exhaust, providing you’re using 180mm fans on the top. This matches our testing for other cases in the past. We’ve also found that if you’re populated the top slots, doing intake in front of an air cooler works better because otherwise air gets in the front and would get stolen by an exhaust fan out of the top. The case we looked at had 4x180mm fans (2 in the front and 2 on top) and 1x140mm in the rear.   HAVN tried different types of power supply shroud designs. One had an angled scoop to bring in air from the front bottom 180mm fan. One design had what we’re calling a “toilet-bowl” design, but that ultimately didn’t go through. The next design we looked at featured a more cylindrical/conical design. We asked one of the company’s thermal engineers why that design didn’t work better as it looks like it would project air towards the GPU, which would be a hot spot, and the rep told us that going with a wider design ended up performing thermally better. HAVN provided us some numbers for that, which we’ll take a look at below, but we’ll eventually do our own testing if we can get an early sample. Taking a look at the first mock-up of the case, we can see some rails for the front fans. This design did not progress into the final. It uses a rail system and we’ve seen it in other cases. Corsair has implemented it and has a trademark for it which they call the “InfiniRail.”Looking at the second mock-up, the company moved to vertical rails coupled with horizontal slats. HAVN ended up ditching that design altogether and moved to a tray design, which is sort of moving to a tried-and-true approach. The company incorporated another change where they’ve stamped and folded the tooling. Then we took a look at a design that was closer to final, which has its full corner covered. HAVN showed us 3 different prototypes for the front panel of the case. The first one we looked at featured a wood panel design, which we’ve seen on a lot of cases lately. Wood has certain manufacturing challenges to consider. The white panel you see above is made of aluminum, which is very expensive.The last thing that HAVN is working on that they showed off are fans. There’s been a lot of fan development in the last few years. One of the big marketing phrases you hear a lot these days is LCP (liquid crystal polymer), which is something we talked a lot about at the last Computex. One of the benefits of LCP fans (which HAVN isn’t using here) is that you can get the blades way closer to the interior of the frame. The downside is that it’s incredibly expensive. We have an interview with Noctua’s Jakob Dellinger from 2 years ago that delves into how the company wanted to avoid using LCP for a long time but determined it was necessary to get the performance they wanted. HAVN isn’t using LCP but has designed a fan that has some “teeth” cut out on its blades, which is something we’ve seen before. The company has also shaped its fan hub to be able to scoop air in more. HAVN tells us that having the hub protrude out like a little mountain would offer the best performance but this presents clearance/compatibility issues, especially if you want to put a radiator up against it. Taking a look at the 180mm fan, there’s a 2.0mm distance from the blade to the frame of the fan. We asked if HAVN tried to get it closer and were provided with a lot of data. The company showed us 3 revisions. 1 had a 1.8mm spacing, another had 2.0mm of spacing, and the third had 2.2mm. What they ended up seeing for pressure in mmH2O, is that a 2.0mm spacing ran at 2.19. The 1.8mm fan ran at 2.23, which is an improvement. The CFM (cubic feet per minute) for both was nearly indistinguishable at around 165. The 2.2mm spacing, however, had a big drop off, which is a design they didn’t go with. It had a 2.21 mmH2O pressure, which is more or less within error of the others, but the 159.9 is where that drop off occurs in the CFM. Comparing the 1.8 vs the 2.0mm spacings, they are basically hitting diminishing returns. Seeing this information is nice. We imagine that the benefits here weren’t worth the yields and costs because getting the blades closer to the inner frame could lead to a bad yield during manufacturing or might have the blades expand and hit the frame as it ages with time. This is what happened with a lot of Enermax fans in the past.  Grab a GN15 Large Anti-Static Modmat to celebrate our 15th Anniversary and for a high-quality PC building work surface. The Modmat features useful PC building diagrams and is anti-static conductive. Purchases directly fund our work! (or consider a direct donation or a Patreon contribution!)Now we’re going to go over HAVN’s first-part numbers, but we plan to do our own performance review of the case and fans once they’re available. First-party data should be looked at with some reasonable care. Thermal comparisons should only be made against their own results here, not against ours, as the benches are different. The flat, typical shroud style was comparable to the rectangular type in result, with the rectangular type slightly better. We think this will see a larger impact in our testing, but we'd need the three types to know for sure. The important comparison is against the cylindrical type, where HAVN saw worse results by a measurable amount. Performance worsened by 1-2 degrees on the CPU and about 2 degrees on the GPU. That's a large GPU temperature increase.In their next test slide, HAVN tested various fan configurations with the flat shroud. The results were mostly as expected: CPU performance is hurt drastically by having only a bottom intake fan, to no surprise.More interestingly, the ramp type shroud makes comparisons in "B" with a fan level with the top of it and "A" with a fan sunken to the floor of the ramp. The sunken approach resulted in marginally worse CPU thermals in A as compared to B, with GPU thermals mostly unchanged.This slide shows CFD simulation and flow mapping for ramp angles at 120 and 135 degrees. HAVN has drawn a few highlights around areas of re-circulation or heat accumulation, particularly marked at "1" where the 120-degree ramp angle shows worse areas of heat build-up. HAVN tested this in 5-degree increments from 120 to 140, finding that 135 was a good balance when noise normalized.In the above image, they show the fan spacing again, with a 20mm height increase benefiting performance.HAVN didn't shy away from competitive comparisons. The company says its BF 360 with its final front panel, shown above in light blue, had competitive performance against the H6. They also suggest significant reductions in flow resistance (which is a good thing) versus the Lancool 3, with the HS 420 also making some appearances here.HAVN began studying its slot spacing and porosity of the ventilation slots in the panels next. The company found that a ratio of length divided by depth being ideally about equal to 6 was optimal for minimizing flow resistance, with the only downside being potential structural challenges. These charts show their flow performance with different slot sizes.As shown in this set of images, the point is that HAVN is really mocking up a ton of different styles of panels, from the shrouds to the slot spacing, to try and determine the thermal performance and optimize for it. This is a major progression for them. It’s a lot of work to do all of this, which is cool to see. Of course, we have to test the product to see how it came together, but the CFM performance of type 4, as they called it, was the best, but we're ultimately looking at tiny differences here. Still, all of those small differences across the case will add up in theory.This image was cool: After all of this thermal testing, HAVN next did mechanical stress simulation for torsional forces against the panel, which allowed them to dial-in the thickness and makeup of the plastics.That continued in this image, where the so-called "type 4" gets another highlight.HAVN highlighted "Design C" for having a 0.8mm metal thickness with the chosen hole sizing.By shaping the fan hub itself to guide flow, HAVN claims that it can better maintain pressure across the hub of the fan and along the inner wall of the blades. This is the area of worst performance in every fan, so optimizing here can also help minimize dead zones behind the hub. HAVN says that the molded flow guide in the hub benefited its noise significantly. The company claims its flow rate also improved significantly for the guided hub.The image above is really cool. Referencing whale-fin evolution, HAVN used tooth-like leading edges on the fan to improve its thermal performance. We've seen this plenty of times in the past, but it never seems to stick around and we're not sure why. In this simulation though, HAVN suggests that the air stream is more uniform along the wavy blade design.Using a 30% glass fiber composite, HAVN saw performance with the new design slightly improve in CFM but largely improve in static pressure, going from 2.21 to 2.40 mmH2O.There's a ton more that HAVN did. The P/Q chart above shows the mock-up performance, including the stall region centrally. We'll save all this discussion for the review, though.HAVN had about 41 pages of this technical presentation, which is actually greatly appreciated. A lot of what remains will be covered in our review, so we'll leave that for now.The bearings are also interesting to talk about. These are called FDBs (Fluid Dynamic Bearings), depending on how you want to define that. We looked at one that was designed for the company’s 180mm fan. It was a 15mm-tall FDB.  One of the things with fans, in terms of the support, is how the fan’s rod seats into the bearing. As we’re told, the longer the bearing is, the more it will help with the wobble of the blades. Internally looking at the 15mm-tall bearing for the 180mm fan, you can see 3 grooved channels. In our bearings-factory tour, we learned that the grooves are part of the mechanism that allows the fluid to circulate to keep that pressure even across the bearing. That’s supposed to be what's special here but we don’t test bearings individually, but the idea is that 3 channels are supposed to help with the stability of the fluids across the bearing. For the 120mm fans, HAVN is going for roughly a 12mm tall bearing. The company claims that most are between 9-11mm tall for 120mm fans. HAVN allowed us to look at the company’s thermal chamber. There are pros and cons to HAVN’s solution. The pro is that it’s supposed to help control the thermal environment as it circulates the air. The downside to the chamber is that we found it can influence the results, though it depends on the chamber. We found that for our testing specifically, having a larger, open-room environment works better. It is very environment-specific. The company also had a flow-rate tester, which is similar to ours, that can do PQ charts, which the company used to test its new fans. It has a throttle control and a laser tachometer, which provides a reading of the speed of the fan. On one side of the flow-rate tester, there are tubes for the counter blower, which our system also has. Their flow-rate tester also has an air compressor, which is used for actuating some of the nozzles inside the system. We also saw that their flow-rate tester also came with an inexpensive desktop OEM computer (in this case, a ThinkCentre PC running an i5-12400).HAVN also has an acoustic chamber, which has a pass-through on the outside coupled with a noise meter, which collects noise levels. One thing we liked seeing once we looked inside the chamber is that we saw a mechanical rigging for the fan, which allows it to be free flowing. They put their microphone in the corner, which we used to do when we had a chamber of a similar size. Putting the mic here allows you to maximize the distance of the chamber by going diagonal, providing maybe a half a meter of space. They also have a foam floor as well, which makes it closer to an anechoic chamber as opposed to something like our hemi-anechoic chamber. Grab a GN Tear-Down Toolkit to support our AD-FREE reviews and IN-DEPTH testing while also getting a high-quality, highly portable 10-piece toolkit that was custom designed for use with video cards for repasting and water block installation. Includes a portable roll bag, hook hangers for pegboards, a storage compartment, and instructional GPU disassembly cards.HAVN is targeting a launch around September for its new products at which point we aim to run our own benchmarks to see how it all performs.

The more we hear about Noah Hawley’s Alien: Earth series, the more eager we are to start watching it ASAP. Alas, August 12 is a decent chunk of time to keep waiting, but at least we’re continuously learning new tidbits about what to expect. Earlier this month, FX and Hulu shared concrete details about the show’s plot for the first time; today, we’re learning more about its main character, a human-robot hybrid played by Sydney Chandler, and central themes. The latter won’t surprise anyone who’s watched any of the Alien movies. At the show’s heart will be a question that’s threaded through all the entries since Ridley Scott’s 1979 original: of all the monsters in the universe, are humans actually the worst? “Sydney’s character is someone who’s trying to figure out what her role is in this world and, on some level, the age-old question of, does humanity deserve to survive?,” Hawley explained in a new interview with Entertainment Weekly. The series creator said he took direct inspiration from Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) wondering “which species is worse” in 1986’s Aliens. “This idea of the horrible things that we do to each other,” Hawley continues. “Sydney plays a somewhat innocent character who finds herself trying to navigate two kinds of monsters. One is human and the other is from outer space. We do expand on that idea that it’s going to be up to the audience which species is worse.” Chandler’s character, who is named Wendy, is innocent because she’s literally a child: according to EW, she has “a child’s brain in a bot’s body.” That makes her and her fellow hybrids’ interactions with the show’s Xenomorphs unique. “Noah took us more into the mindset space,” Chandler told the magazine. “What is the essence of a kid or a young adult? How do their minds work differently than the adult mind? Kids are so present and they haven’t been battered by the world as much as an adult. So they trust their gut and they don’t second guess.” Alien: Earth arrives August 12 on FX and Hulu. Want more io9 news? Check out when to expect the latest Marvel, Star Wars, and Star Trek releases, what’s next for the DC Universe on film and TV, and everything you need to know about the future of Doctor Who.

From office politics to salary negotiations, treating work like a strategy game can give you a ... More real-world edge. But should you?getty I recently had a revealing conversation with a friend — a game developer — who admitted, almost sheepishly, that while he was fluent in the mechanics of game theory, he rarely applied it outside of code. That got me thinking. For most people, game theory lives in two corners of life: economics classrooms and video games. It’s a phrase that evokes images of Cold War negotiations or player-versus-player showdowns. And to their credit, that’s grounded. At its core, game theory studies how people make decisions when outcomes hinge not just on their choices, but on others’ choices too. Originally a mathematical model developed to analyze strategic interactions, it’s now applied to everything from dating apps to corporate strategy. But in real life, nobody is perfectly rational. We don’t just calculate; we feel, too. That’s where the brain kicks in. According to the “Expected Value of Control” framework from cognitive neuroscience, we calibrate our effort by asking two questions: How big is the reward? How much control do I have in getting it? When both answers are high, motivation spikes. When either drops, we disengage. Research shows this pattern in real time — the brain works harder when success feels attainable. Play Puzzles & Games on Forbes This mirrors game theory’s central question: not just what the outcomes are, but whether it’s worth trying at all. Using a game theory lens in a professional setting, then, can be messy and sometimes bring unwanted emotional repercussions. The saving grace, however, is that it’s somewhat intuitively patterned and, arguably, predictable. So should you actually apply game theory to your professional life? Yes, but not as gospel, and not all the time. Being too focused on identifying, labeling and trying to “win” every interaction can backfire. It can make you seem cold and calculating, even when you’re not, and it can open the door to misunderstandings or quiet resentment. Put simply, it’s important to be aware of how your choices affect others and how theirs affect yours, but it’s also dangerously easy for that awareness to tip over into an unproductive state of hyperawareness. Game theory is a legitimately powerful lens — but like any lens, it should be used sparingly and with the right intentions. Pick your battles, and if you’re curious how to apply it in your own career, start with clarity, empathy and a telescope and compass. Use these not to dominate the game, but to understand it and play it to the best of your abilities, so everyone wins. 1. Establish Competence For Yourself And Assume It From Others There’s a popular saying in hustle culture: work smarter, not harder. At first glance, it makes sense — but in elite professional environments, it’s a rather reductive and presumptuous approach. The phrase can carry the implication that others aren’t working smart or that they aren’t capable of working smart. But in high-performing teams, where stakes are real and decisions have impact, most people are smart. Most are optimizers. And that means “working smart” will only take you so far before everyone’s doing the same. After that, the only edge left is consistent, high-quality production — what we generalize as hard work. From a game theory lens, this type of hard work essentially increases your odds. Overdelivering, consistently and visibly, skews the probability curve in your favor. You either become impossible to ignore, or highly valuable. Ideally, aim for both. And here’s where the real move comes in: assume the same of others. In most multiplayer games, especially online ones, expecting competence from your opponents forces you to play better. It raises the floor of your expectations, improves collaboration and protects you from the trap of underestimating the consequences of your actions. Take chess, for example. In a large study of tournament players, researchers found that serious solo study was the strongest predictor of performance, even more than formal coaching or tournament experience. Grandmasters, on average, had put in nearly 5,000 hours of deliberate study in their first decade of serious play. This is about five times more than intermediate players. This is why in a game of chess between one grandmaster and another, neither player underestimates the other. 2. Exploit The Parts Of Work That Don’t Feel Like Work To You My friend told me he rarely applies game theory outside of code. But the more he talked about his work, the more obvious it became that the man lives it. He’s been into video games since he was a child, and now, as an adult, he gets paid to build what he used to dream about. Sure, he has deadlines, targets and a minimum number of hours to log every week — but to him, those are just constraints on paper. What actually drives him is the intuitive thrill of creation. Everything else is background noise that requires calibration, not deference. This is where game theory can intersect with psychology in an actionable way. If you can identify aspects of your work that you uniquely enjoy — and that others may see as tedious, difficult or draining — you may have found an edge. Because in competitive environments, advantage is often about doing the same amount with less psychological cost. In game theory terms, you’re exploiting an asymmetric payoff structure, where your internal reward is higher than that of your peers for the same action. When others see effort, you feel flow. That makes you highly resilient and harder to outlast. It’s also how you avoid falling into the trap of accepting a Nash equilibrium. This is a state where each person settles on a strategy that feels rational given everyone else’s, even if the group as a whole is stuck in mediocrity. No one deviates, because no one has an incentive to, unless someone changes the underlying payoff structure. For example, imagine a team project where everyone quietly agrees to put in just enough effort to get by, no more, no less. It feels fair, and no one wants to overextend. But if even one person realizes they could stand to gain by going above that baseline, they have an incentive to break the agreement. The moment they do, the equilibrium collapses, because now others are pressured to step up or risk falling behind. In a true equilibrium, each person’s strategy is the best possible response to what everyone else is doing. No one gains by changing course. However, when your internal motivation shifts the reward equation, you may begin to question the basis of the equilibrium itself. Be aware, in any case, that this is a tricky situation to navigate, especially if we contextualize this from the point of view of the stereotypical kid in class who reminds their teacher about homework. Even if the child acts in earnest, they may unintentionally invite isolation both from their peers and, sometimes, from the teachers themselves. This is why the advice to “follow your passion” often misfires. Unless there’s a clear definition of what constitutes passion, the advice lands as too vague. A more precise version is this: find and hone a valuable skill that energizes you, but might drain most others. 3. Follow The Money Only Far Enough To Find The Game There’s a certain kind of professional who doesn’t chase money for money’s sake. Maybe he writes code for a game studio as a day job, writes blogs on the side and even mentors high school kids on their computer science projects. But this isn’t so much about padding his lifestyle or building a mountain of cash. What he’s really doing is looking for games: intellectually engaging challenges, satisfying loops and rewarding feedback. In a sense, he’s always gaming, not because he’s avoiding work, but because he’s designed his life around what feels like play. This mindset flips the usual money narrative on its head. And ironically, that’s often what leads to sustainable financial success: finding personal fulfillment that makes consistent effort easier for you and everyone around you. In game theory, this is a self-reinforcing loop: the more the game rewards you internally, the less you need external motivation to keep showing up. So instead of asking, “What’s the highest-paying path?” — ask, “Which games would I play even if I didn’t have to?” Then, work backward to find ways to monetize them. This does two incredibly valuable things in tandem: It respects the system you’re in, and it respects the goals you personally hold dear. While game theory maps workplace social behavior reasonably well, constantly remaining in a heightened state of awareness can backfire. Take the Self-Awareness Outcomes Questionnaire to better understand if yours is a blessing or a curse.

Elden Ring Nightreign could receive two player mode post-launch "This is simply something that was overlooked during development." Image credit: FromSoftware / Bandai Namco News by Ed Nightingale Deputy News Editor Published on May 23, 2025 Elden Ring Nightreign's director has apologised for the lack of two player mode in the multiplayer spin-off, but is considering adding it post-launch. The co-operative game is designed for three players, though it's possible to play alone too. However, a two player option does not exist. "The simple answer is that this is simply something that was overlooked during development as just a two-player option, so we're very sorry about that," director Junya Ishizaki told IGN. "As we said before, we set out to make this a multiplayer co-op game for three players, balanced for three players, so that was the main focus and it's at the core of Nightreign." Elden Ring Nightreign Preview Watch on YouTube In addition, the development team at FromSoftware considered solo play "from the start". "And so we did put a lot of effort into creating this experience that was playable for solo players in as much as the rules and new systems allowed," said Ishizaki. "So in putting all our efforts into that aspect, we kind of overlooked and neglected the duos aspect, but this is something that we are looking at and considering for post-launch support as well." Ishizaki also discussed further how players are somewhat alone, whether playing solo or as a group of three. "Seeing as this game is built around three players, we understand the concerns of those solo players, but essentially a lot of the time in Nightreign you will be acting and behaving on your own," he said. "Even in a group as three, you'll be going off and challenging different areas of the map and collecting different things before you accumulate together at the boss fight. "So solo play is generally encouraged and is a natural part of the game loop, but also in general for those solo players - and this might be something that's difficult to notice in multiplayer - but the activeness and aggressiveness of enemies towards any one single player has been adjusted so that you don't find yourself in any unreasonable multi-foe fights. "And just generally, when you're playing single player, the parameters adjust dynamically depending on the number of players in that session. So we hope that this will alleviate that feeling somewhat." Still, playing solo is a much more challenging experience without teammates to revive you, though Ishizaki hints there's a self-revive feature hidden around the map for players to discover. FromSoftware has made some tweaks since the network test back in February. Judging by player numbers, many were struggling to defeat the first Nightlord, Gladius. Following the test, Ishizaki said the team had "received a lot of helpful feedback regarding the difficulty" and that Gladius would "receive some updates".