From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action


Has gaming stalled? Can it compete? That seems to be the gist of a
recent report on the state of video gaming* by venture capitalist
Matthew Ball.

It's not that video games are struggling. In fact, other reports
indicate that there has been a 3-5% increase in spending on
video-games world-wide. But at the same time, the industry is facing
new challenges: development is ever more expensive, tastes between
young and old gamers are diverging, hardware costs are skyrocketing,
and --most pertinent to the report-- the industry is facing increased competition from mobile, gambling, video, and porn (especially amongst
the critical young male demographic). Increasingly, they're spending
more and more time on hobbies other than on steadfasts like "Call of
Duty or "FIFA".

Which, again, isn't to say video-gaming is going anywhere. But
--especially from a venture capitalist's viewpoint-- it does mean that
the glory days of investing in video game companies might be in the
past. For the past twenty years, pouring money into game develop was a
quick and easy way to big money, but that may not be the case anymore.

What does this mean for the end-user, the gamer? Fuck if I know. Less
money, maybe; less demands for big games that try to leech away all
their players cash just because they have big names attached to them.
Games that actually compete on quality? Games that don't try to appeal
to every possible demographic? I've no idea. Yes, without endless VC
money we might not get such massive games anymore... but we also don't
get the demands VCs make on publishers. So this doesn't entirely sound
terrible to me.

And if the younger set no longer share my interest in gaming,
preferring the TikyToks and OnlyFans? Look, I'm on fucking Usenet; you
think I care about whether the kids like what I like? I've got money;
people will still offer me stuff that feeds my gaming habits. The
games might not be as grandiose or frequent... but with a video-game
library numbering in the thousands, I think I'll survive that
particular apocalypse. ;-)

What do you think? Is this report full of shit? Has gaming stalled?
Will it become, maybe, a niche hobby again?





----
* you know I wouldn't leave you without a link to the report: https://issuu.com/ballmatthew/docs/gaming2025_vee10?fr=xIAEoAT3_MzMz



--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On Thu, 19 Feb 2026 18:23:37 -0500, Spalls Hurgenson <[email protected]> said this thing:

Has gaming stalled? Can it compete? That seems to be the gist of a
recent report on the state of video gaming* by venture capitalist
Matthew Ball.

Another interesting tidbit from the report:

Roblox is big. Like, really big. To paraphrase Douglas Adams, you just
won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean,
you might think Steam has a lot of users, but that's just peanuts to
Roblox.

How big? It's engagement (e.g., hours spent using a product) is more
than that of Steam, Playstation and Fortnite... combined. It's up
there with Netflix in hours spent on its services. You want to attract
the attention of the youth? You're not spending your precious
development dollars on Ubisoft or Epic. You're pouring them into
Roblox.

And it's still growing. And not just piddling 5% or 10% (which is what
most services would love to see)... but 25 to 70 percent.

Of course, Roblox is still 'gaming', so its popularity to some degree counter-acts the earlier narrative of how video-gaming is having
problems competing against other stuff, like porn, mobile, gambling
and videos. And of course, you could point out that a lot of that
activity on Roblox is probably bots, and --even if not-- it's mostly
young kids, who may move to more 'mature' platforms as they age out.

Although, you know... maybe not. Or not to the degree earlier
generations did.

But the overall gist is that the face of video-gaming is changing. It
might not be the mainstream, everybody-does-it activity it's been
since, oh, 2010, where everyone from toddlers to grandmothers were
playing big-budget games on their XBoxen and Wiis. Video-gaming may
slowly be going the way of the OTA/cable television; sure, everyone
has one, but the number of people actually watching it is diminishing.
It'll never go away entirely, the same way radio still has a niche,
but it won't be as central as it has been in the past.

#

All of which makes me wonder about Valve and Steam. Because it's
incredibly tied to this old-school model of video-gaming. Of all the
people competing in that market, it seems the least prepared for these
changes. It doesn't really have any mobile presence. It doesn't have a
hit 'everybody gotta play it' game like Fortnite. It doesn't have a
streaming service. It's ridiculously PC-centric. It offers numerous
community services (forums, chat) but these are all largely tied to
the games it sells. People aren't going there mostly to hang out and
chill. Of course, all this is stuff _WE_ see as beneficial. We don't
want Steam to be the next TikTok or Roblox... but _WE_ aren't the
future.

GameStop (the American software retailer) was in 2006 at the height of
its success, and something nobody can imagine not being central to the
gaming conversation... but even ten years later the writing was
already on the wall for the GameStop (and now, GameStop is a joke
supported only by its over-valued meme-stock). This happened because
the market shifted beneath Gamestop's feet and the company either
couldn't or wouldn't change to meet the new challenge. You have to
wonder if Steam might be headed in the same direction.

#

Whaddaya think; is the face of gaming changing? Will we still be
playing the same way in 2040 the way we are today? Will the titans of
2026 still be dominant? Will Valve?



--- Synchronet 3.21b-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action


Gripping hand argument:

"Mobile revenue remained flat across 2025, but PC gaming "sees another
record year" https://www.gamesindustry.biz/mobile-revenue-remained-flat-across-2025-but-pc-gaming-sees-another-record-year-sensor-tower-state-of-gaming-2026

Of course, this isn't really a counter-argument to the underlying
issues mentioned in my earlier post: that the video-gaming hobby is
struggling to attract younger audiences in the face of alternate
distractions.

Still, it does show that PC gaming is a bulwark helping to resist the encroachment of those other hobbies. Yay PC gaming! ;-)

The downside is that mobile gaming is turning more and more towards
MTX and other monetization strategies, because as number of downloads decreases, they need to make each download --make monetizing existing
players-- count for more.


--- Synchronet 3.21c-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.action

On 2/19/2026 3:23 PM, Spalls Hurgenson wrote:

Has gaming stalled? Can it compete? That seems to be the gist of a
recent report on the state of video gaming* by venture capitalist
Matthew Ball.

It's not that video games are struggling. In fact, other reports
indicate that there has been a 3-5% increase in spending on
video-games world-wide. But at the same time, the industry is facing
new challenges: development is ever more expensive, tastes between
young and old gamers are diverging, hardware costs are skyrocketing,
and --most pertinent to the report-- the industry is facing increased competition from mobile, gambling, video, and porn (especially amongst
the critical young male demographic). Increasingly, they're spending
more and more time on hobbies other than on steadfasts like "Call of
Duty or "FIFA".

Which, again, isn't to say video-gaming is going anywhere. But
--especially from a venture capitalist's viewpoint-- it does mean that
the glory days of investing in video game companies might be in the
past. For the past twenty years, pouring money into game develop was a
quick and easy way to big money, but that may not be the case anymore.

What does this mean for the end-user, the gamer? Fuck if I know. Less
money, maybe; less demands for big games that try to leech away all
their players cash just because they have big names attached to them.
Games that actually compete on quality? Games that don't try to appeal
to every possible demographic? I've no idea. Yes, without endless VC
money we might not get such massive games anymore... but we also don't
get the demands VCs make on publishers. So this doesn't entirely sound terrible to me.

And if the younger set no longer share my interest in gaming,
preferring the TikyToks and OnlyFans? Look, I'm on fucking Usenet; you
think I care about whether the kids like what I like? I've got money;
people will still offer me stuff that feeds my gaming habits. The
games might not be as grandiose or frequent... but with a video-game
library numbering in the thousands, I think I'll survive that
particular apocalypse. ;-)

What do you think? Is this report full of shit?

Yes.

Has gaming stalled?

No. It's a changing. Tons of Indy, Fortnight and all the
micro-transaction games can go take a leap off a cliff as far as I'm concerned. My love-hate of microtransaction free souls-likes and
rogue-lites continues strong (though I've seen a couple vs-likes that
have attempted some microtransactions.) AFAIK Warframe continues with
one of the only micro-transaction setups I approve of (since you can get almost everything other than some cosmetics from trading with other
players.) There's even some competition for Bethesda in the CRPG genre.

Now if only large companies would quit buying up smaller-mid sized ones
and gutting them.

Will it become, maybe, a niche hobby again?

No. Well gaming with bleeding edge on PC maybe. At least until the AI
bubble pops, if it does. Or if *political rant censored*.
--
-Justisaur

ø-ø
(\_/)\
`-'\ `--.___,
¶¬'\( ,_.-'
\\
^'
--- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2