It's amazing to think that World of Warcraft has been around since 2004 yet here we are with a whole new version of the game launching imminently. World of Warcraft: Forever is shaping up to be the WoW you know and love from the original launch days but with some significant quality of life additions that make it feel much more modern and up-to-date. WoW: Forever has already been affectionately referred to as World of Warcraft Classic+ by fans thanks to this combination and it's a potent mix for long-time players. It's nostalgic while improving upon the regular format.

Having spent dozens of hours with WoW Forever and being very excited to play more, I've had plenty of time to consider the differences between WoW: Forever and traditional WoW (which is better known as Retail or Vanilla). With so many different variants of World of Warcraft out there, it's important to know what will appeal to you most. Fortunately, the same subscription covers all types of the MMO so you can always switch around and see for yourself. Here are the 8 ways in which I've found WoW: Forever to be most different from Retail.

8. There's no flying

Having your own flying mount in World of Warcraft is fantastic. It's liberating and means you can move far faster than other methods, but you see far less of the world. It can feel quite clinical simply flying between locations without taking in the journey. Even Holly Longdale, WoW executive producer & vice president, admits that "when you're flying over it, [...] it loses something". Forever has no flying mounts so exploration actually feels adventurous again. Some tweaks have been made to make things safer such as a new boat from Auberdine to Stormwind, but it still feels more mindful and epic than before. It takes a slight mental shift as you need to plan for a 10 minute journey or more, but it's much more satisfying than WoW has felt in a long time.

7. It's a smaller world (but no less exciting)

There are no expansion packs in World of Warcraft: Forever. The world is smaller yet also bigger because of the aforementioned travel changes. The many expansion packs of WoW Retail have meant everyone's spread out so you don't come across as many other players. By reducing the world size in Forever and taking out flying mounts, it actually feels bigger when you're playing. There are no more individual servers either so players simply pick a ruleset and then are placed in the same world. There are also new zones such as Mount Hyjal, Zephras Isle, and Riverglades so there are still new things to explore.

6. Every new item of gear feels huge

World of Warcraft has suffered from something known as gear creep in recent years. New gear drops rapidly with substantial stat boosts. That sounds great but, over time, it means you don't feel excited by a new item of equipment as you end up swapping them out regularly for better stuff. It all feels soulless. Wow: Forever has changed that. Like WoW Classic, better gear is relatively rare but a huge win. You'll cling onto your gear for longer which means when it drops or when you buy it, you'll feel more attached to it. At low levels, even gaining some bags is a gamechanger. It all means you have more attachment to every part of your character.

5. People actually talk and group up

Remember when MMOs required cooperation? Retail is an experience that can almost entirely be soloed which isn't really very MMOish. WoW: Forever's beta saw people team up and actually enjoy themselves again. You can still solo a lot of content, but thanks to the reduced world size and the step away from separate servers, there are players everywhere. Whether that means a bustling general chat (sometimes not so good), or simply finding people to group up with, it means you're finally no longer alone. During the beta, I had players resurrect me just because they could. It's been a nice reminder of the human side of the game.

4. It's a more cohesive experience

Forever has over 1,000 new quests and many of them link different elements of the game better than before. There are quests which guide you towards learning new professions and tradeskills, while others set you up with a bag or some simple but effective weaponry. As you level, you're more accurately encouraged to travel to new zones to level up. It all links together better than before and makes it a more welcoming and also more cohesive experience. If you're interested in Warcraft lore, the more cohesive path is particularly attractive. For newbies, it simply makes it easier to know what to do next.

3. Gaining levels is slower but more satisfying

I've managed to hit the level cap in Retail in about 10 hours. Forever is very different from that. As an efficient player, it took me about 10 hours to hit level 15 with others hitting level 20 in that time. Those timelines change depending on how you play, but it's still clear that Forever is a slower process. That's a good thing as it means you can take in more of the game and become more embroiled in this sprawling world, rather than just speedrun your way to the 'end'. It also means that later levels feel truly earned. Each 'ding' feels like a big win rather than soulless. It's all part of Forever's bid to ensure you claim ownership of your character and it's more than 'just' an avatar.

2. It's more about the journey than the destination

Forever is a calmer experience than Retail. Yes, calmer. That's not something you expect to hear about World of Warcraft, but Forever feels less about the rush to hit the level cap and more about the journey along the way. Exploration is the new focus here as well as getting to know other people. It reminds me of the old days of when WoW first launched. It's exciting and surprisingly fresh for a game you've likely played before. Even little details like the campfire that allows you to gain buffs as a group encourages you to sit and take in the world. It actually feels like a relaxing game at times.

1. There's a permanent level 60 cap

In a bold move, Blizzard has announced that Forever has a permanent level 60 cap. It won't see any expansion packs or an increase in levels. Instead, progression at the level cap will be horizontal rather than vertical which is a bold move in an industry dominated by vertical progression. For me, as a non-hardcore raider, I suspect it means I'll be enjoying the journey a lot and rolling new characters but that's not much different to how I've played over the years. Such a permanent level cap ties in well with the slower pace and the more cohesive world that means you gain genuine attachment to your character rather than simply look to the next level or gear upgrade.

Check out our best open world games, best RPGs rankings, and our games like World of Warcraft recommendations for more to play now, and keep an eye on our upcoming RPGs calendar for what's on the horizon!

With well over 5,000 hours clocked in Final Fantasy 14 and a good few hundred in The Elder Scrolls Online, I'm certainly no stranger to the MMO genre. I've endured many a dungeon, healed through various hardcore raids and trials, and witnessed just about all the cringe-y cat girl roleplaying one could stomach – but somehow, some way, I've not so much as touched World of Warcraft – before WoW: Forever came into the picture, that is.

For years, I resisted Azeroth's allure, as much as I yearned to take up the staff as a Night Elf and experience all the wild chaos Druid had to offer. It all boiled down to FOMO, you see… I was just four years old when World of Warcraft launched, after all, and a plethora of expansions, world changes, and updates (and, ahem, lots of missed pets and mounts I'd have liked to collect) followed, leaving me in the dust.

Or, at least, feeling like I was. I felt the same way about World of Warcraft Classic – as though I had missed a train that I simply had never been ready to board. World of Warcraft: Forever promised to remedy that, introducing me to Blizzard's genre-defining universe as it would perhaps feel if it launched today rather than in 2004 while still maintaining everything that made it such a beloved name in the MMO space in the first place.

And, it's done just that. I've happily been hooked on the WoW: Forever Beta for a month now, learning the ropes as a shameless Skyborne Druid who has never set foot in Azeroth in all her two-plus decades of gaming before… and, guys, I'm loving it so far. The janky 2000s-coded combat, the punny dialogue, the cartoonish animations, and the old-school whimsy of it all. I'm finally sold on the magic that Blizzard's boasted for decades.

It's never too late

Lore implications be damned, I'm doing it all as one of the controversial Skyborne, Blizzard's new elf race (that, yes, will set you back at least $30). Character creation is simple but charming, the sort of experience I'd expect out of an "old" roleplaying game. I choose a periwinkle-blue shade for my skin and a pale pink hair color, tweak my ridiculously luscious eyebrows a bit, and set off into Azeroth as Wisteria, my pointy-eared Druid.

And, I'm confused. Everything is new to me, and there's certainly not the amount of direction and hand-holding I'm used to as a veteran of Final Fantasy 14's Eorzea. Menus are dated, I have to mess about with the interface to get my HUD how I want it to be, and boy, is the sound loud in here. When I finish adjusting things and getting a hang of it all, however, I realize I actually sort of… like it? It scratches this weird nostalgia-induced itch I can't quite put my finger on.

Sure, I never played World of Warcraft, but I remember spending hours on my blocky white PC in Wizard101 – a magical little MMO in its own right – and somehow, WoW: Forever is sending me right back into the shoes of that enamored little girl (very) slowly casting spells over and over again. The visuals help here, too, perfectly capturing the cozy vibes of every ol' enchanting adventure game and RPG I grew up with.

As for the gameplay itself, there's a whole lot of exploring, questing, and, sigh, floating back over to my body as a defeated ghost. It's rewarding in such a simple way, though – one that manages to keep me grinding. Seeing the world alive with other players is just the cherry on top of the cake, even if you don't always get anything out of helping others out.

I enjoy partying up and tackling challenges with my pals, too, thanking the Light that quest drops are a bit more fair and evenly distributed than I've heard they were for OG players back in the day. I also don't feel overwhelmed at all by the leveling up or spell-learning, as it's spaced well enough that I'm able to get the hang of how to deal damage and heal more efficiently (the mana management is admittedly a bit brutal, though).

I'm officially locked into World of Warcraft's tight grips now thanks to Forever, with the whimsical throwback to simpler times that it offers, and I can finally say that I get it – I get why Blizzard's managed to amass such a dedicated decades-old player base, and I'm fully convinced it'll only grow come World of Warcraft: Forever's November 4 release if my experience with the Beta serves as any proof. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some post-questing junk to sell.

Check out our best open world games, best RPGs rankings, and our games like World of Warcraft recommendations for more to play now, and keep an eye on our upcoming RPGs calendar for what's on the horizon!

I loved my dozens of hours hands-on with World of Warcraft Forever so much that I'm itching to dive into the full game. As a long term World of Warcraft veteran (a polite way of calling myself old), I've seen the game go through a lot of changes and iterations, and I'm confident WoW: Forever is shaping up to be the best new version yet. It feels good to return to something so familiar yet somehow so fresh.

Right now, World of Warcraft's community is split between the 'main' experience (also known as Retail by its players) and World of Warcraft Classic – the version for those who preferred the less cluttered earlier days of the game, and my personal favorite option. WoW: Forever is taking the nostalgia of WoW Classic with many of the quality of life additions that Retail brings, and it looks to be an incredibly compelling combination. There's a lot to love here, but I've picked out the eight things that are the true highlights of WoW: Forever and exactly why the legendary MMO is going nowhere any time soon. If you haven't played for a while and you're on the fence ahead of the game's launch on November 4, these eight factors could be exactly what swing you back in favor.

8. Crafters feel like they're playing a new game

Love to make your own equipment and items? WoW: Forever has made that so much more fun. There are a huge number of new crafted items, but they're also far more relevant again. One standout feature is being able to place campfires down and share buffs with anyone who joins you. It creates a sense of community which is something Forever is really pushing. It's actually worth taking a moment to sit down with others, shoot the breeze, and just take a moment to relax in-game. Those buffs can boost your stats making leveling afterwards simpler so it's a win-win situation.

7. It's combining nostalgia with a hefty dash of innovation

You know what the first thing I did in WoW: Forever beta was? I rolled a Night Elf Hunter and checked out Teldrassil, the opening zone for Night Elves. Something I've done over dozens of times since the original's beta in 2004. That's the beauty of Forever. You can just enjoy the nostalgia of the original while also taking in the quality of life improvements that have been much needed in recent years. Or you can roll a Skyborne character and feel like you're playing a whole new game. Variety is the spice of life, but so is comfort and feeling like you're in your happy place. Forever merges those two feelings well so you won't want to leave.

6. There are over 1,000 new quests to explore

World of Warcraft has always needed more quests. Right from the start, this was quickly realized by the development team. Fortunately, we have another 1,000 or more to try out. Some are small, some are big, all are an utter delight to see. During my time with the beta, I found a lot of the new quests bridge knowledge gaps. Some encourage you to learn trade skills or entice you into moving onto a new zone, others might kit you out with new gear which make a significant difference to your progress and leveling experience. You can feel the dots being connected properly with certain areas feeling more well rounded than before.

5. WoW: Forever servers are incredibly simple to understand

MMO veterans of all kinds know the frustration of discovering their friends are all on different servers and they have to commit to one, potentially missing out on some extra social time and definitely requiring them to pick which friends to play with. Servers have been significantly simplified with WoW: Forever. There are no more realms to pick from. Instead, you pick a rule set. Want the standard experience? Pick Normal. If you want PvP, there's a PvP server, while roleplayers can stick to the RP server. Hardcore with its permadeath mode will be added later in the game's lifespan. It's a small sounding step, but one that's just made everyone's life easier. Make sure to choose Alliance or Horde, though. That isn't changing.

4. There are new race/class combos to entice you

WoW: Forever adds a new race with the Skyborne elves packing in a huge new starting zone, but I think the more interesting addition is the new race/class combos. You can now play as an Undead Paladin or an Orc Mage. You can also roll a Human Hunter, Gnome Priest, or Dwarf Shaman. These are all much-requested combinations which expand the variety for both Horde and Alliance, and prove to be a lot of fun too. Undead Paladin is my personal highlight because it's such a quirky mix. It's another example of something about Forever which is going to mean you stick around it for a long time to come.

3. The game looks beautiful all over again

Bounced off World of Warcraft because it never looked pretty enough? That changes with WoW: Forever. It isn't the perfect visual upgrade, but there are some great improvements here. Notably, lighting, fog, and water are all far better looking than ever before. I remember when the game looked beautiful, but it's been a while. It's lovely to see Forever bring back those visual delights. Seeing shadows reflect the day and night cycle, and the water glistening is yet to get old. Zephras Isle, the Skyborne starting zone, looks particularly luscious.

2. There's a huge amount of variety for WoW fans now

There's a WoW for everyone at this point. At heart, these may all have overlapping qualities but it's fantastic value for money given one subscription pays for all modes. There's Retail, and Forever, but also Classic with its wide number of types. You can play pure Classic with its level cap of 60 (something I suspect will be now in direct competition with Forever), Classic Anniversary which unlocks expansion packs sequentially, and then there's Classic Hardcore for those who want to suffer permadeath. (I'm that person, it's me.) With Forever, there's now something for every mood which conveys the sense that WoW will never truly die.

1. It'll make you talk to people

Remember when MMOs required you to talk with strangers? And actually team up with them to achieve things? Over the years, World of Warcraft has become more antisocial. In Retail, it's very easy to hit the level cap without ever speaking to someone if you don't want to. That has benefits, but isn't really in-keeping with the MMO spirit. WoW: Forever gives you a reason to talk. It can still be soloed, so you're not dependent on others, but there's a noticeable shift towards encouraging you to converse with others, team up for more than just dungeons or raids, and actually get to know people. It's a delight to see, and something I hope will last.

Check out our best open world games, best RPGs rankings, and our games like World of Warcraft recommendations for more to play now, and keep an eye on our upcoming RPGs calendar for what's on the horizon!

There's a new World of Warcraft launching next week, and it's not just another expansion. World of Warcraft: Forever is a new pillar for the universe that proves why the series always remains one of the best MMORPGs in the packed genre. Returning to the culture of collaboration and connection that helped define the earliest years of the epic online RPG, it's built with innovation at its heart to make the old feel new again – new graphics, better UI, an expansion's worth of new content including nine new dungeons, two new raids, new zones, talents, and systems.

The launch is imminent, and the WoW: Forever beta has already racked up huge player numbers as lapsed fans return, vanilla players get a dose of nostalgia, and newcomers are finally tempted to experience the magic. In that wake, I caught up with Holly Longdale, executive producer & vice president for World of Warcraft, and Clay Stone, associate production director, to talk about the response to the beta, community expectations, and adding long-awaited controller support.

"There may never be another time where we're standing up on a BlizzCon stage announcing a brand new World of Warcraft and having a response like this. So, trying to take it all in, it's been amazing," says Stone. Join us below as Longdale and Stone take me through everything we need to know before the big Wow: Forever launch next week.

7. The beta was a monumental success…

Holly Longdale tells me that World of Warcraft: Forever had been under consideration for "quite some time." The community spent years asking for 'Classic Plus' and all that time Blizzard was quietly listening, gathering the data and insights it needed to turn a wild idea into a reality. Longdale says the development teams working across World of Warcraft knew that there was a "clear opportunity here", but nothing could have prepared them for such a rapturous response to the beta.

"With every single day that passed, we thought, 'OK, it'll calm down now – it'll be fine.' And then it just kept getting bigger. I'll call it a spark, but I'm not going to call it a lightning strike – just so I don't jinx anything," she laughs. "It was only a beta, but people were treating it like it's live. So we've been kind of hanging on by our fingernails to make sure that we do everything that we can to keep moving things in the right direction in preparation for launch."

Longdale adds: "This is one of those times where, when you've found a spark, you follow it through and see what lights up – and then you adjust afterwards."

6. …but Blizzard is still ready for anything come November 4

"I'm not sure we can fully predict in either direction what launch will be like. It's an interesting time, and we have our heads on a swivel!" says Longdale, speaking to whether a popular beta guarantees a successful launch. Still, multiple increases to the population cap of the beta servers (as well as a public stress test) have given Blizzard a lot of data and feedback to work with in the final days before release.

"From a live-ops management standpoint, you obviously hope that players will treat a beta like a full launch – but you don't even dream that something like that is actually possible. But our players did do that, and they've been playing it in a way that reflects that as well, which is super exciting," says Clay Stone. "Seeing the data and the response… we are just trying to take it all in as much as possible."

Blizzard is preparing final tweaks; tinkering with the balance of the 1-60 leveling journey, and trying to meet the community in the middle on controversial changes to Racial Abilities and Traits. The question now is whether it can get those servers ready for an onslaught of new players wanting to see what all the fuss is about and returning adventurers looking to recapture some of that vanilla nostalgia.

5. Forever complements the existing WoW offering

You'd think that Blizzard had seen it all through 22 years of supporting World of Warcraft, but the franchise has arrived at an unfamiliar crossroads. The WorldSoul Saga was announced in 2023, a multi-expansion effort for retail that delivered more content, faster than ever before, and is set to resolve in 2027 following the release of The Last Titan. WoW Classic reached divisive territory following the decision to push beyond Wrath of the Lich King and into Cataclysm and Mists of Pandaria. And then there's Forever. Is there a risk that the playerbase could fracture?

"We don't know what's going to happen," says Clay Stone, "but we're excited to see how players move around. We expect that some players love their homes where they are, and that some players will find their way to Forever. It's going to be an interesting journey for us, for sure."

That's certainly one way of putting it, although Stone is emphatic with his belief that World of Warcraft remains flexible enough to thrive under changing tides of player behaviour and interests. "Forever is a powerful new pillar within our ongoing World of Warcraft ecosystem," he adds.

4. Year one, forever

Speaking of that ecosystem, it's good for you to understand what's available if you're thinking of returning to World of Warcraft right now. Let's start with the 'retail' experience, which Clay describes as continuing to "chart a course as [a] best-in-class modern MMO." Then there's Classic, which has seen Blizzard "revisit classic experiences as players remember them." Where, then, does Forever fit?

"We think that it'll fit perfectly within the ecosystem, alongside Classic and the modern game, by providing something for players that we are otherwise not providing. And that's this forever home in a vanilla-inspired space that'll chart its own course in the future with new content being added over time as we exist in essentially this year one of World of Warcraft, forever," says Stone. "Or at least as long as players want to go on this journey with us."

Holly Longdale adds: "We have modeled out every possible scenario we can think of about what will happen to our retail audience, what happens to our Classic audience, and what the Forever audience will be."

3. Reasons to explore again

World of Warcraft: Forever strikes a wondrous balance between celebrating the legacy of the past and innovating just enough to make the MMO feel fresh for 2026 and beyond. As someone who was there for vanilla (and who has dipped into every expansion since) it's fun to see Blizzard embrace some of the friction that was inherent to the game in its early years.

Forever is far slower and more contemplative than the contemporary version of WoW. Clay Stone says that the team has gone to great lengths to "preserve meaningful friction" wherever possible as it returns the focus to discovery, exploration, and social connection. "Players are coming in and discovering this slower-paced game, where they have to run places and party up with other players to see all the content. They are responding positively to that, so I think it speaks to this desire in players – whether they are old or new to WoW – for this style of game again."

One interesting example of this is how stripping flying mounts (first introduced in the Burning Crusade expansion) out of the game will alter your relationship with the world itself. "We say that Azeroth is the main character. And when you're flying over it, essentially bypassing the progression of content across the world itself, it loses something," says Holly Longdale, who adds that getting players back out into Azeroth and discovering its mysteries (both old and new) together is a big part of the Forever appeal. "The audience that Forever is focused on, the players who will go into the corners of the world, look behind every rock, and into every cave, we want to encourage that!"

2. Evolving a timeless world

World of Warcraft: Forever may be firmly rooted in the 2004-2006 era of the MMO's history, but there's a spirit of innovation inherent to its design that surprised me. New races and class combinations, the introduction of campsites to encourage social connection, and revamped visual fidelity are some of the highlights – although the real efforts to evolve a timeless world focused fully on how Blizzard is building beyond the content that was present in vanilla.

"Part of the design ethos for Forever, and the community's desire for 'Classic Plus', is that we never went through the Dark Portal. I'm not saying that this couldn't ever happen, but we do place these boundaries on what it is that we're building because it provides us with structure around what this game is versus what it's not," says Clay Stone. "When we think about Azeroth, and we think about all the places we haven't gone in the world, there is so much for us to play with."

Blizzard is pursuing 'horizontal-progression' in Forever. There's a fixed level 60 cap, so the focus will instead be on world and system growth. How Azeroth develops is all part of the fun. "I think there are other places in Azeroth, besides Kalimdor and the Eastern Kingdoms, that we could potentially go one day, and there's so much excitement about that," he says. "There's ways for us to build the world out – think back to the vanilla version of the continents, there's a lot of unused space that was never filled in."

1. World of Warcraft on Xbox? Gamepad support goes "beyond consoles"

One of the biggest surprises of the World of Warcraft: Forever beta was the introduction of native-support for controllers. WoW has always been designed with mouse and keyboard being the primary points of interaction with the world of Azeroth, so it was pretty surprising to discover that controller mapping not only works but is actually a pretty wonderful way to experience Warcraft. As is (it must be said) playing Forever in bed on a ROG XBOX Ally X.

Having an entire playerbase start from scratch – levelling from one to 60, together and forever – is an exceptionally rare occurrence in the realm of MMORPGs, and one that can never be repeated. So I put it to Holly Longdale: Is World of Warcraft: Forever launching as a PC-exclusive a missed opportunity?

"What you just described is really what we're after. Play it wherever you want and, at some point, on whatever you want. But the first leg of that journey is getting gamepads working really well with World of Warcraft, and we thought Forever was the perfect place to start. Looking at where things are going when we hear about Project Helix et cetera, I think platforms will be a bit more ubiquitous," says Longdale. "Honestly, we just want to be able to play it anywhere. We've seen people getting it working on the ROG Ally X…"

"Someone modded a Nintendo DS!" Stone adds.

"I think just doing some of the work we're doing on gamepad [support] is going to give players a lot of flexibility that I think goes beyond consoles," says Longdale.

There's a whole gaming world out there (some involving war). Check out our best open world games and best RPGs rankings for more to play now, and keep an eye on our upcoming RPGs calendar for what's on the horizon!

Although World of Warcraft: Forever is still in Beta, racial abilities and traits have been a hot topic in the WoW community since, well, forever – and Blizzard's recent update to them is no different, adding fuel to the seemingly eternal fire.

Every race has its own unique abilities, known as "racials" for short. For instance, modifiers to damage and the like. Folks are never quite happy with how they play out, though, it seems, with players on both sides expressing discontent in some way or another – but Blizzard's well aware.

That's why, as per the developer's official forums, the studio is opting to shuffle them around a bit while prioritizing "racial identity."

"Some players have expressed that some of the new racial traits feel too generic, while others have raised concerns that some are objectively stronger than others," the devs write. "In taking a final pass on these, we've prioritized racial identity, which means that some races will naturally be slightly more effective than others at certain combat roles."

And, uh, it's safe to say that this "natural" effectiveness isn't going over well with fans.

The changes, as Blizzard lists them out, affect Humans, Dwarves, Tauren, Orcs, and the Skyborne. Some of them see buffs moving from one to the other, like the Tauren losing its 1% hit chance modifier but Humans gaining it – and that's where the drama starts. Players see this as a slight against the Horde faction.

Over on Reddit, you can find them saying as much, with one comment reading, "Why even play Horde at this point?"

Another fan adds, "LMAO the bias by these devs is unbelievable. They take 1% hit away from Tauren and give it to Dwarves. What a joke." Right underneath, somebody else says, "Blizzard has no idea what they are doing with these racials" – and I see a good few replies echoing this sentiment.

It's not just there, either. A different thread sums up the entire issue as a "favoritism" problem from the World of Warcraft studio. "Racials are NOT fine," it reads. "The favoritism towards alliance is getting ridiculous…"

It's important to note that not everyone agrees here, however. I see plenty of people arguing that this isn't a matter of "favoritism" but rather what Blizzard itself explains – that some races are more well-equipped for certain forms of combat and the like. As one player puts it, "Alliance has always been the better PvE side," while the Horde is superior in PvP.

Others simply state that they feel it's fair as this is "how Alliance felt for 20 years," clapping back that Blizzard previously favored the Horde.

Honestly, my head hurts just reading back and forth between the discussions, but I understand both sides. It's tough to strike a proper balance that'll please everyone, though. I'm happy with what Final Fantasy 14 did… you know, making the racial buffs and whatnot essentially obsolete.

I doubt that'll ever happen in World of Warcraft, of course, but it'll be interesting to see how this conversation develops as WoW: Forever releases into the wild early next month – and how Blizzard chooses to react in regards to updates, too.

Despite controversy, World of Warcraft: Forever's $30 Skyborne race is one of the Beta's most popular among both Horde and Alliance players

They don't make many games like Call of Duty anymore. Activision's yearly blockbuster has an obscene budget and you can feel the dollars that made Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 at work in every shootout, in every shuffle up and down a pipe, in every cutscene.

Firing guns feels incredible, movement is phenomenal. Traversal has had a big upgrade: it's not Omnimovement – getting around instead feels closer to that seen in 2022's Modern Warfare 2 but there's a level of responsiveness at all times, even when other shooters typically restrict. Often your character will do what you want, as soon as you tell them to do it, with plenty of control even when mantling or sliding.

Gunfights feel responsive, with weapons often being easy to handle, and the impact of every bullet that meets the mark feeling meaningful. Shoot an AI opponent in the leg and they'll fall over and crawl for cover, or roll onto their back and wait for death. Shoot a player and the now-familiar hit sound effects will pile on as you pile on the lead – the feedback helps to stay on target, and popping opponents is almost disturbingly satisfying.

You may not like the way every gun handles in Modern Warfare 4, but you will find a gun that works for you. These fluid and engaging gunfights are the basis of the entire game, a foundation that everything else layers on top. But this year, those layers are also sublime.

Taking to Task Force

The campaign starts with Wu-Tang Clan's C.R.E.A.M. is playing as you wander through the streets of Seoul. People are going about their day, the convenience stores are stocked, and the city feels alive. Then North Korean forces attack, and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 gets down to business. There's a real sense of place even if in classic Call of Duty fashion it's still incongruous, letting you stroll around the convenience store swinging haymakers at the crisps as everyone chatters around you.

It's the start to a campaign that feels authentic in the way that few franchises really manage to pull off. Call of Duty is one of them, when it's on form, and I'm happy to report that Modern Warfare 4 is one of The Good Ones: it looks superb, moves at a relentless pace, and manages to bring years worth of Modern Warfare storytelling to a satisfying conclusion. When special forces soldiers are free to draw the line, who's to decide what's right or wrong?

It manages to do this while simultaneously cleaning the decks of most of the lingering threads from the disappointing Modern Warfare 3 (which we called "underwhelming" in our Modern Warfare 3 review). A lot of this is achieved by killing off a whole bunch of beloved characters, often brutally and without warning. Several times after a shocking death the camera lingers on dead characters to show you they're really dead and won't be returning in some of the post-launch content or a much maligned sequel Infinity Ward isn't responsible for.

Filling the void left by these deaths are a heap of new characters that I quickly gel with. Big bad Mads Mikkelsen is a lot of fun, but the standout is Lanny Joon as Ko who gives a stellar performance. Elsewhere, I squeak with delight when I recognize the voice of Luke Tennie from Apple TV's Shrinking. Most of these characters are lightly sketched out, but you're moving at such a quick pace you won't notice. Exposition is delivered breathlessly as you push from firefight to firefight, whispered in the quiet moments as you scurry around hoovering up ammo and armor plates from vanquished foes.

It's one of the most morally challenging Call of Duty campaigns in recent years, as the game pushes you gleefully to do things that don't fit with the usually narrow worldview of the series. One level has you playing as a North Korean soldier terrorizing a small village as you look for a dissident. How brutal you want to be is up to you but it's an unflinching level, let down slightly by the fact you're scuffling around the place looking for collectibles.

Price to see you

John Price, now on the run after assassinating General Shepherd in Modern Warfare 3, has grown a full beard instead of his ridiculous mustache and has to reckon with his own morality. There a few tough moments here: beating someone to death in an alleyway, facing off against "good guys" during fights through the Parisian streets, and even shooting-to-kill at former squad mates. After years of Price being the most recognizable good guy in the Call of Duty series, he's kind of a dick here, but trying to square that is part of the point.

Modern Warfare 4 has made me struggle with my own morality too, because I really wish it would relax its stance against civilian casualties. It's not a late heel turn for me, but the fact that innocents are in the middle of most of the gunfights and just clipping one results in an instant game over while enemies are unbothered has my ghillies in a twist. Have you ever tried to fire an assault rifle in fully automatic while hanging from the passenger seat of a speeding car without hitting civilians? I have, and it's pretty difficult.

These moments are rare frustrations in Modern Warfare 4's campaign, which is otherwise packed full of some of the series' most bombastic sequences to date. Several of the game's most impressive moments come early, with one highlight seeing you stalk a target through a club before you end up having to blast your way out.

Stranded, meanwhile, will be in 'best campaign mission' debates for years. The mission is an expansive playground that has you dropping in with nothing but a pistol and slowly gathering gear as you roll around the North Korean countryside exploring points of interest on foot and slowly gather yourself an arsenal, before attacking the objectives as you wish.

This is followed up by an amphibious assault on Seoul that feels like a full circle moment for Call of Duty, looking back to its D-Day origins. Call of Duty's campaigns have always been at their best when you're pushing against something impossibly well-defended, whether that's the beaches of Normandy or the cityscape of Seoul.

Unfortunately, the execution here is a little shaky and emblematic of some of Modern Warfare 4's biggest problems: if you stray too far from your commander, you're instantly killed with a tooltip popping up to tell you to follow your squad leader to exit the beach safely. It happens again and again, and after the freedom of Stranded, there's a disconnect when you're strapped back into the rollercoaster's straight line.

It's a shame, as, when Modern Warfare 4's missions hit, I'm reminded why the series' campaigns remain so important in a genre increasingly measured by online success and hours streamed.

It might still be junk food – even if this is a higher quality than limp-burger-like Black Ops 7 or Modern Warfare 3's attempts – but there are glimpses here of how Infinity Ward's modern approach to a military thriller can still push further. If only they'd let me off the leash a little.

Run DMZ

DMZ, Modern Warfare 4's headline addition, puts freedom front and center. Evolving on the mode first introduced in Call of Duty Warzone 2.0, this is a full-blooded extraction shooter taking place in Hajin City, a huge map that stretches between North and South Korea. Hajin City doesn't feel like a real place in the same way as Escape From Tarkov's miserable arenas, but it is expansive and well designed, with impressive verticality.

There are a few standout spots which seem to be tied into story missions that you can approach too. In one, me and my group pull off a daring heist at a casino, while a more frustrating mission sees us attempting to raid a robotics lab full of robocanines. Both missions have raid-like mechanics, and these more scripted experiences feel like they add something a bit different to the traditional extraction shooter experience.

Playing in this pseudo PVE-environment, DMZ could be one of my favorite multiplayer games released this year. You gear up, you drop into the map and prowl around shooting enemies and hoovering up loot until you either achieve the mission you came here to do, get scared and head for an extract, or get brutally murdered by another group of players or the AI.

Progress is rewarding. While your operators will level and be reset as you prestige, everything that gives you XP will also unlock new stations at your FOB – a safe area where you can recuperate between matches, spending currency and crafting recipes to make yourself more powerful.

The rewards are generous, and the end result is that DMZ feels less like an extraction shooter and more like a roguelike, which does take the sting out of getting ganked. Warzone's meteoric rise saw a point when casual players got pushed out in favor of more experienced players, so it remains to be seen how DMZ will evolve in future.

The nature of extraction shooters is such that not everyone will be pushed towards the same climatic conflicts, but the Call of Duty audience tends to favor an aggressive playstyle, and I'd expect this to filter down into DMZ.

Class warfare

Less revolutionary, but no less impressive, is the game's multiplayer. At this point, Call of Duty's multiplayer mode is iterative, more akin to FIFA (erm, I mean, EA Sports FC). This suits everyone fine. There's a new collection of weapons to unlock and upgrade, camouflage to earn and an unending supply daydreaming, clueless players to blast your way through in the name of hitting that prestige button as many times as possible.

Modern Warfare 4 is the best arena shooter on the market right now in terms of how smooth it feels and how engaging it is to play. The arsenal of (fictional, unlicensed) weapons offers up a horde of good choices for a variety of playstyles. I even like the maps this year. Transit 213 feels like one of the franchise's best already, taking the Shipment ideals but updating it for the modern day.

Sadly, the big negatives are largely the same. Killstreaks remain an anti-fun device that rewards players for kill streaks at the expense of the rest of the lobby. I will rally against killstreaks to my dying breath, and I'm not convinced it's even particularly fun for the person that's awarded them. The other thing is that the player base is… not particularly engaged. It's not hard to walk up on players that aren't listening at all, or to play on a team that has no concept of how to pick up objectives at their very feet. People should feel free to play however they want – and it's bound to get sweatier as players drop off – but I can't shake the sense some teammates and enemies alike are second screening Family Guy Funny Moments compilations.

The bigger additions to Modern Warfare 4's multiplayer are hit and miss: I like Inflation, a 6v6 mode where killed players drop cash and you have to scoop it up similar to the game's existing Kill Confirmed mode. The twist is that the amount of cash you drop is a percentage of what you're currently carrying, and the winners are the team holding the most cash when the round times out. This has the fascinating impact that the better players are holding more cash and thus are worth more when you kill them, and suddenly there's a frantic back and forth, a game that isn't over until it's very much over.

Other new modes are a mixed bag. Collateral seems determined to take over the Valorant / Counter-Strike 2 niche, doing away with standard weapon names and perks and offering purchases like "Power Pistol" or "Semi Auto Rifle" for a round-based attack and defend mode. It's confusing primarily because Call of Duty already has a round-based attack and defend mode, Search and Destroy.

Except, here, regenerating health is turned off and in its place there's the overarching economy. This is one of the headline additions to Modern Warfare 4 and I can't help but feel like it's a naked attempt to bring the gameplay of Counter-Strike to console players.

Frontline, meanwhile, is like Team Deathmatch with fixed respawns, which is a miserable exercise in repeating the same kill corridors over and over. Ground War Outpost is equally annoying, with a flood of people shooting you from every treeline, sandbag, or tower. You can't escape combat, but the furious sound of being in a Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 firefight is so intense that you can't really relax into it in the same way as you can in something like Battlefield 6 or Wardogs.

But it doesn't matter. The multiplayer is phenomenal, and if the campaign is junk food, this is closer to an all-you-can-eat buffet inviting you to snack on what works for you and steer clear of the bits that don't. I have a sneaking feeling that I am getting too old for Call of Duty, a feeling Modern Warfare 4 has reinforced. But even if I'm not as fast at the game's multiplayer as I used to be. Even if some of the additions seem meaningless, Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 is, surprisingly, one of the best games this year, and it's phenomenal fun. Isn't that supposed to be the whole point?

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 was reviewed on PC, with a code provided by the publisher.

Answer the call by checking out our best Call of Duty games and best FPS games rankings for more to play next!

While Activision thought porting Call of Duty: Black Ops 1 and 2 to PS4 and PS5 would be a good move, even the developer's highest brass didn't expect it to work as well as it did. As such, the success is being studied and, hopefully, brought to modern CoD entries.

"We are definitely leaning into the nostalgia of playing with your friends," chief marketing officer Tyler Bahl tells The Game Business. "The Black Ops ports were huge successes. We thought they would do well; we didn’t think they would do that well.

"But you can see that pent-up demand of being able to get back to the good old days of playing with your friends on a Friday night and having fun. Modern Warfare 4 does that. We took a lot of learnings from [those ports] and are starting to apply them to not only this game, but future games."

The trend of shadow dropping games aside, the buzz around the Black Ops 1 and 2 ports was positive earlier this year. According to analysts, they were regular chart toppers and even provided lessons to other remakes and remasters, like Halo.

While Activision hasn't released the numbers, around the same time, the developers shifted Black Ops 7's matchmaking to more closely resemble that of its successful predecessors.

Moving forward, it seems to be all in the spirit of change the Call of Duty series needs, with sales steadily dipping over the years to the point that the latest Battlefield reigned supreme as the best-selling shooter of 2026, something the developers of CoD haven't had to face for a long ol' time.

"Where we go with future games, we have to innovate," Bahl says. "What we heard from the audience is they want new or better or different. The landscape is changing right under our feet.

"You’re seeing new games being built overnight, and you’re seeing tastes change and how people want to play."

Zelda: Ocarina of Time remake doesn't even rate against GTA 6 and Call of Duty Modern Warfare 4 as the "biggest games of the year," Activision exec says.

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time remake is generating a massive amount of buzz, but given the proximity of its November 5 release date to the launch of GTA 6. it's difficult not to compare the games. But according to Tyler Bahl, Activision's chief marketing officer, GTA and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4 make up the real one-two punch of 2026.

"Well, no offense to Zelda, but I think these are the two biggest games of the year," Bahl tells The Game Business. There's no denying that GTA 6 is the biggest game of the year, but how do Zelda and Call of Duty compare?

Mat Piscatella of analyst group Circana notes that purchase intent for Modern Warfare 4 is sitting around 15%, meaning that the group figures about 15% of console and PC players in the US intend to pick up the game. For the Ocarina of Time remake, purchase intent is 10.4%, but remember – that's across all PC and console players, and the game is a Switch 2 exclusive.

"On a per potential player rate, the intent on Ocarina is far higher," Piscatella says.

Call of Duty remains a juggernaut, but it's one whose stature has certainly diminished over the years, and new releases don't carry the same weight they once did. Purchase intent on Modern Warfare 4 is down from Black Ops 7 last year, which in turn was considered enough of a disappointment to completely derail Xbox's Game Pass strategy.

So yes, Call of Duty is likely going to be bigger than Zelda. But if Modern Warfare 4 and Ocarina of Time are heavyweight boxers, then GTA 6 is Godzilla – a monster so massive that every other game is an ant by comparison. It doesn't matter if you're a little bigger than the other guy when you're both facing down a literal behemoth.

Even so, Bahl sees GTA 6's launch as a potential positive for Call of Duty. "I think, in a lot of ways, more people coming into the dashboards, more people taking the dust off their Xbox or PlayStation and starting to play again and loading up that experience is going to be more eyeballs for us," he says.

These are the best Call of Duty games.

World of Warcraft: Forever hasn't come without its controversies, with the most notable of all perhaps surrounding the new Skyborne race – but the Beta proves it's not that unpopular.

The WoW: Forever Beta has been underway for nearly a month now, giving fan-led projects like Classic.io, which collects player data from the game, a chance to bloom.

So, what do the numbers on the site tell us so far, then? Well, perhaps most interestingly, the Skyborne aren't even the least popular race. In fact, the Alliance-aligned Skyborne are the fourth most popular race, with their Horde-aligned counterpart following close behind.

They've got the Night Elves, Dwarves, Gnomes, Tauren, and Trolls beat, too. The only races ahead of them are, perhaps unsurprisingly, the Undead, Humans, and Orcs, with the Skyborne making up nearly 20% of all World of Warcraft: Forever players.

Heck, Skyborne Druids also make up the fourth most chosen race and class combination in the game, and folks have had some less than positive thoughts about that combo to say the least.

Blizzard actually had to step in recently and promise to make World of Warcraft: Forever's Skyborne less "jarring" to look at, specifically mentioning Druid animations in its statement. So, yeah – the stats are a bit mind-boggling, as they don't line up with all the controversy.

I suppose it's not too surprising, though, when you consider the fact that the same $30 that grants you access to the WoW: Forever Beta comes with the Skyborne included.

I'm happy with the periwinkle-skinned elf race myself (the pink hair goes hard, y'all), and I doubt Blizzard regrets its introduction, either.

Senior game designer Josh Greenfield said the team always "knew we wanted to add some sort of elves" and the Skyborne had apparently stemmed from veteran Chris Metzen himself – so, there you go. They're here to stay and it doesn't seem the community is all that broken up about it, honestly.

I am, however, disappointed to see Night Elves so low down. If it were up to me, we'd all be donning some sort of elf character – lore be damned.

World of Warcraft: Forever aims to "aggressively shut down the flow of suspicious gold" – but Blizzard warns there "may be false positives" at first

On the journey to the big World of Warcraft: Forever release next month, Blizzard has been working hard on social media advertisements for the new MMO – advertisements it assures fans do not contain any generative AI content.

The company's digital marketing manager confirms as much on X, explaining that they've seen some of the controversy the WoW: Forever ads have sparked online, with allegations of gen AI use – but it's all unfounded.

"Not seeing much discourse here on X, but there have been comments on whether or not we use AI in these videos," they write. "That's a big hell nah." Why would they, when they have real creatives at hand?

As they put it, "We have real team members writing scripts, getting and editing footage, and I've been in recording booths with our VO actors every week."

They're not alone in assuring the community of it, either. World of Warcraft's social media manager chimes in with his own post, stating, "To add, we don't use AI on ANY social content we make. Big hell nah indeed." And, honestly, that's great news, to say the least.

It's a bit of a strange time right now in the game development scene and elsewhere, with many suddenly announcing their support of gen AI amid widespread layoffs.

Epic Games immediately springs to mind, having unveiled a new "vibe coded" version of its launcher just yesterday while company CEO Tim Sweeney spoke on a "huge pivot" at the studio toward "maximum AI acceleration" – so, yeah.

I, for one, am pleased to learn that other developers and publishers – like Blizzard here – are shying away from the controversial tech and opting to support their own creative staff, even if it's for something as simple as social media advertisements.

World of Warcraft: Forever aims to "aggressively shut down the flow of suspicious gold" – but Blizzard warns there "may be false positives" at first

A new Xbox survey is asking players how they would feel about future titles being console-exclusive to Xbox, with Fallout, Hideo Kojima's Physint, and Minecraft name-dropped.

Since its massive spending spree on the likes of Activision Blizzard and Bethesda, Xbox has been a bit all over the place when it comes to exclusives. Aside from honoring exclusive deals with the likes of Deathloop and Ghostwire: Tokyo, Microsoft went all-in on being a third-party publisher for a bit there, bringing almost every one of its games to PS5. Then, with the appointment of new Xbox CEO Asha Sharma, the strategy changed again: Gears of War: E-Day was confirmed to be on Xbox and PC only, despite reports that its PS5 port was apparently close to completion.

And now – barring Fable, which was previously confirmed for a PS5 launch – it looks like Microsoft may be priming players for more exclusivity. As highlighted by Windows Central, some Xbox Insider members have received surveys asking about game exclusivity and where they would play the title – or if they would play it at all if it's not on PS5 or Switch 2.

These reportedly included questions about Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, and the upcoming Hideo Kojima game, Physint, which Xbox Game Studios recently became the publisher of, following Sony's decision to cancel the project. Kojima himself has said he doesn't know if Physint will release on PlayStation.

However, it's the final question that is likely to raise the most eyebrows. The question asks players to imagine every Xbox game – barring Call of Duty, which Microsoft is legally required to release on other platforms until at least 2033 – was an exclusive. However, it adds "For Minecraft only, existing titles would no longer be available for purchase on PlayStation or Nintendo consoles, and would not receive any new content updates."

I don't think people would be happy if Fallout 5 or Elder Scrolls 6 were exclusive to Xbox for sure, but the idea of removing Minecraft from PlayStation and Nintendo consoles, as well as no longer giving updates to those versions, is so brazenly a bad decision that even being floated is concerning.

Minecraft on Nintendo Switch has sold over 4 million physical copies in Japan alone, and the worldwide number is likely to be much higher, while the PS4 version of the game had over 17 million players as of 2019 – and given that a native PS5 version didn't release until 2024, again, that number is likely to have far surpassed it. Obviously, it's just a hypothetical for now, but I can only imagine that taking Minecraft away from millions would have a backlash that makes complaints about Sony's killing physical games look like nothing much.

As Minecraft sells over 425 million copies and attracts 300,000 new players a day, the evergreen sandbox game is getting its first dimension in 14 years

Although World of Warcraft: Forever is still only available to play via its Beta – a Beta which won't see any player progress carry over to Blizzard's full release, mind you – it's not enough to deter folks from purchasing in-game gold with real money.

You know, real money trading. If you've played any MMO at all, whether that be retail World of Warcraft or something like Final Fantasy 14, you know it's a problem. And even though it doesn't really make sense financially, the WoW: Forever Beta offers no exception.

A little while ago, Blizzard took $200 in gold from a streamer after suspicions of real-money trading. Shortly after, an add-on targeting gold purchases made rounds.

In other words, it's an ongoing issue, "Beta" be damned – and the community has looked to Blizzard for a harsher crackdown against it… Something the developers are evidently aware of.

A new update from the studio proves as much, with Blizzard outlining measures it's currently implementing to counter real-money trading before it really takes off in-game, as part of its "latest weapon" against illicit gold purchases.

"If your account is suspected of being involved in RMT, either the selling or receiving of illicit gains, you may find your account subject to a Temporary Economy Hold," the post reads. "You will have restricted use of trade, mail, guild banks and the Auction House while this economic hold is in place."

It sounds just like the tough crackdown the doctor ordered, honestly – and Blizzard doesn't seem to be playing around.

"Our aim with this new system is to aggressively shut down the flow of suspicious gold before it has been transferred or put into circulation into the economy, while providing us the time needed to investigate more thoroughly," the dev explains. "If you are just playing the game normally, it is unlikely you will ever see this restriction applied to your account."

And, if you do see it, things will progress in one of two ways.

"If this restriction is applied to your account, it will be either automatically removed when the actions that triggered it have been investigated and found false, or you will receive account actions if found to have been involved in RMT," as Blizzard says… but it might not be 100% clean at first.

"This system is new. There may be false positives while things are fine-tuned," the studio admits – but you don't need to worry too much.

That's because "merely having a Temporary Economy Hold will leave no permanent strikes against your account unless also later proven to be RMT motivated."

It's not such a bad deal, in my opinion – but I'd also never engage in real money trading, especially during a beta, so my take makes sense, I suppose. I'm just happy to see Blizzard taking further action against those who are, even if it'll include wrinkles that need ironing out.

Blizzard is "committed to ensure that WoW: Forever is not marred by the Real Money Trade" – and that's not all, either. "All of these systems will also be deployed to all versions of World of Warcraft if proven successful" – Forever, retail, Classic, you name it.

As Blizzard launches yet another version of World of Warcraft, lead says "our hope is to grow the audience, not to fracture it"

World of Warcraft: Forever is the third mainline World of Warcraft MMO Blizzard's bringing to the table to stand alongside retail and Classic – but the developers aren't trying to cause a rift in their community with yet another version of the game.

In fact, they actually want to draw more players into Azeroth's welcoming hands, as game director Ion Hazzikostas tells PC Gamer in a new magazine interview.

"Our belief is that Forever will offer something that appeals to a lot of folks who maybe aren't currently well-served by what they see from WoW," he explains – and that lines up nicely with what Blizzard's been saying, honestly. World of Warcraft: Forever is for fresh faces and old fans.

"Maybe modern Wow isn't quite their speed, and when they look at Classic, they played that game already, or it's a little bit too janky and too 2004," he continues. World builder Matthew Armstrong said similar before, that WoW: Forever is "for the millions of people who have had their accounts lapse" in Classic – that plus newcomers, of course.

Blizzard wants to reach more fans across the board, and Hazzikostas assures the community of this. "Our hope is to grow the audience, not to fracture it," he states. And "it's not something we take lightly."

This isn't the devs' first go at revamping World of Warcraft, after all, considering Classic. "For years now we've had two distinct flavors of the game, with different paces to them, and they've appealed to large but distinct audiences," as the lead puts it.

We've got retail and, of course, Classic. Soon, we'll have three.

Much like with Classic, WoW: Forever will hopefully bring people who've never touched a WoW game in their life to the MMO universe, Hazzikostas says – and, you know what, I'd argue it already has.

I'd never been willing to dive into World of Warcraft prior to the new Beta myself, having suffered from some serious FOMO. Now, I'm all in, and I doubt I'll be any sort of exception to the standard.

Here's hoping World of Warcraft: Forever indeed doesn't "fracture" the community. Senior game designer Josh Greenfield said he's witnessing "the craziest numbers I've seen in 17 years working at Blizzard" however, so I've got a good feeling.

World of Warcraft: Forever may take us to Northrend and Pandaria one day as "Azeroth is a big place," Blizzard teases, even if it's all about the first year of the MMO for now

Now that the World of Warcraft: Forever beta is in full swing and Blizzard's public release is quickly approaching, it comes as no surprise that fans are wondering where the MMO might take us in Azeroth – and the possibilities sound endless.

Speaking to Holly Longdale, executive producer and vice president for World of Warcraft, and associate production director Clay Stone, content creator JackedIQ learns more about what Blizzard has in store for us regarding zones and the like – you know, whether we'll ever see Northrend or Pandaria – and the developers' answers are exciting, to say the least.

"I mean," Longdale says first, "broadly speaking, nothing is off the table." And, yes, she means nothing.

"It's more what the team decides to do, where they want the narrative to grow." Much of this will come from what Blizzard gathers from us as players, but "another piece of this is the original continents too can change in and of themselves."

As the lead puts it, "You could spend a lifetime in the two continents as they evolve." However, once again, she reiterates that "everything is on the table at this point."

As it stands, Blizzard is simply focused on "the best story to tell," which does mean "there's plenty of opportunity." Longdale jokingly concludes, "We just wanted to see if anyone was going to play it first."

Considering how well the beta is going – so well, in fact, that senior game designer Josh Greenfield said he's witnessing "the craziest numbers I've seen in 17 years working at Blizzard" – I'd argue we can hold our breath.

Stone echoes Longdale's teases, too, adding, "Azeroth is a big place – and this time period that we get to play with is a really cool time period, basically staying in that first year of World of Warcraft…"

And, with all of the available lore, "there's some really cool creative ideas that the team has for how we can play in that space." Stone repeats that "Azeroth is a big place," perhaps filling me with too much hope now.

All in all, though, I'd wager we'll see a lot more of Azeroth than we may have initially gone into Forever thinking we'd see, and I'm thrilled to hear it. How will Blizzard pull it off while remaining faithful to its 2004 MMO? Well, that's for time to tell… not us.

World of Warcraft: Forever patch notes leave fans asking Blizzard "why" and hoping for more class adjustments.

A new patch for the World of Warcraft: Forever Beta is upon us, bringing everything from the new City of Dalaran dungeon to various class changes – but it's not exactly landing well with all of the MMO's early players, it seems.

The World of Warcraft: Forever patch notes outline a lot, and that's a bit of an understatement – we're entering the fourth week of the Beta, after all.

You'll find them over on Blizzard's official forums, beginning with bug fixes and leading into a plethora of class changes which are, unsurprisingly, stirring quite the storm in the community. The first point of contention has to do with looting, however.

As the WoW: Forever patch notes read, "This build reintroduces Classic looting behavior, where creatures that dropped no loot can still be interacted with." In other words, enemies are now professional time wasters as you can interact with them whether or not they have loot.

To say the least, it's pretty annoying – and I'm not alone in thinking so. Over on a Reddit thread on Patch 5.01, one person simply asks, "Why?"

They continue: "I mean, what purpose does this have beyond 'it's how it was?' Is it just masochism from thinking you got a quest item?"

Honestly, I get it. It's already confusing folks, too, with another commenter saying, "I found it mildly annoying/confusing at first when I killed a mob and I couldn't loot it. Took me a bit to realize what was going on." Perhaps this is one thing they should've axed from the original game.

Players are also unhappy with the new World of Warcraft: Forever class changes – and lack thereof. It's looking especially rough for Rogue fans specifically, with one reply joking, "Sick Rogue changes" (spoiler alert: there are none).

Caster classes like the Druid, Priest, and Shaman do see tweaks – but they're apparently, uh, not the greatest. "They're committed to making casters feel bad at low levels," as one fan amusingly puts it.

For example, Blizzard has adjusted the Shaman's Lightning Bolt and its "base points and points per level of ranks 1-5" so as "to make the growth rate of ranks 1-6 more consistent, and new ranks always an upgrade" – but it feels like a non-change.

As one fan writes, there are "0 meaningful changes" in reality. All in all, it feels like the developers opted to nerf lower, currently preferable ranked skills than "making the higher ranks better."

It's worth a browse through the full World of Warcraft: Forever patch notes to see it all for yourself if you're interested, but something tells me Blizzard might be delivering even more changes following fan feedback soon.

World of Warcraft: Forever is "simplifying" Blizzard's usual PvP but also adding a controversial weekly grind as MMO fans beg "please don't do the weeklies thing."

Now that the World of Warcraft: Forever Beta is entering its fourth week, Blizzard's got some new content in store for us – like the exciting new City of Dalaran dungeon.

Yes, that's right… we're finally heading to Dalaran, and we'll get to test a new dungeon, too – one that's already managing to stir up some chaos, it appears.

If you're familiar with World of Warcraft, then you likely know that Dalaran belongs to the Alliance and not the Horde. Well, it seems that the latter is somehow able to enter the city regardless after the dungeon's introduction to WoW: Forever, as per Wowhead.

Apparently, Horde players just need to complete the City of Dalaran, accompanying dungeon quest "Heart of Disruption," and get the Dalaran Sewer Key – the item that grants us entry to Dalaran. It's at that point that folks are then tasked with bringing the loot they got from the dungeon into Dalaran, in fact, through a new quest titled "Shrewd Negotiations."

Whether you're Alliance or Horde, you'll be safe in the city following this sequence.

All of the guards that should be hostile will act neutral toward you, should you be a Horde player, and offer safe passage (as long as you defeat the Archmage in the City of Dalaran and so on, so forth).

What's more, you can freely explore the city after completing everything, much like an Alliance player – but although you can stock up on supplies, you won't be able to access every NPC's services, apparently.

As Wowhead amusingly points out though, you can fish for coins in the Dalaran fountain – heck yeah. Not everyone is pleased with the Horde being in Dalaran, however.

Over on Reddit, players find it so mind-boggling they say it's "probably just a bug." Others argue that, as it's tied to a quest, it "doesn't sound like a bug." Nonetheless, it's stirring up some lore-related discussions, which aren't exactly new to World of Warcraft: Forever.

There's the whole controversy surrounding the new Skyborne race, from its $30 price tag to its lore implications, and the fact that Blizzard has just revealed it's changing the elves to better fit the rest of the MMO, for example.

It's never easy dealing with source material that's this old and beloved, I suppose, but I do think Blizzard's well aware of this and how fans feel about the legendary 2004 game that started it all.

World of Warcraft: Forever is "simplifying" Blizzard's usual PvP but also adding a controversial weekly grind as MMO fans beg "please don't do the weeklies thing."

World of Warcraft: Forever won't be emulating the retail or Classic versions of Blizzard's beloved MMO when it comes to PvP – it's got its own way of approaching it.

The studio outlines as much in a new post about how PvP works in WoW: Forever over on its official website, and it's somehow easier than it was back in the early 2000s but also… a tad grindy?

Blizzard first describes it bringing "a refreshed sense of purpose to every match-up" with an approach that "gives players more reasons to take part throughout the season while preserving the spirit of competition that defined PvP in the original World of Warcraft."

The developers explain that they "wanted to keep the design pillar of 'Approachable and Familiar' firmly in view: simplifying the original Honor System while staying true to its roots" – so, how does it work?

Well, there are two parts to World of Warcraft: Forever PvP: Honor and Rank Points. Honor is a form of currency you earn by taking part in PvP content, with Blizzard promising to ensure that "acquisition rates are more consistent across the board."

You gain Rank Points from specific PvP activities, like battlegrounds and certain quests. This system is similar to the original World of Warcraft's own, as you'll be working toward titles like Grand Marshal or High Warlord (depending on which faction you've chosen, of course).

There's a catch, however: "Ranks have a weekly cap, retaining the foundation of the original system while making the journey more accessible." That makes it easier, sure, but it also feeds into a weekly grind – and as a Final Fantasy 14 player myself, I'm all too familiar with (and not really a fan of) weekly grinds.

There are more layers to this, too, with Blizzard going on to detail how seasons function: "During a PvP season, players can progress through the ranks and earn Honor. Each season also includes a journey with weekly tasks to complete." Sigh. Yes, weekly.

"Successfully completing those tasks grants Honor and Rank Points, and three tasks each season also grant a Legacy Point," the devs continue. "Completing these tasks is part of the seasonal journey, and because they are tied to the Legacy System, they remain available to complete in future seasons."

In other words, it's definitely a bit simpler to get where you want in PvP rank-wise, but I'll feel more inclined to be consistent. You know, whether I want to be or not – and I'm evidently not alone.

A comment sees a fan saying, "Please don't do the weeklies thing." Another adds, "One of the things I'm trying to avoid is weekly checkboxes I feel I need to hit. Just having X item cost Y Honor and Z rank is enough." A separate response reads, "Please don't do that system. It's unhealthy at all. Having to farm every freaking week without taking any break is not fun."

Overall, though, it's admittedly certainly an accessible PvP system. Blizzard seems to know it as well, concluding, "With more ways to make progress each week and meaningful goals to pursue throughout the season, PvP in World of Warcraft: Forever gives players a clear path to jump in, compete, and keep building toward what comes next."

Fingers crossed it all plays out smoothly come the MMO's November 4 release.

To make World of Warcraft: Forever's controversial Skyborne less "jarring" to look at, Blizzard is going back to 2004

Since Blizzard first unveiled World of Warcraft: Forever at BlizzCon 2026 last month, one thing has been weighing particularly heavily on fans' minds about the revamped MMO: the Skyborne race.

It's hard to deny the controversy surrounding the new Skyborne race, from its $30 price tag to its lore implications, but Blizzard doesn't seem to necessarily agree with fans critical of the blue-skinned elves.

In fact, senior game designer Josh Greenfield said the team always "knew we wanted to add some sort of elves" and the Skyborne had apparently stemmed from veteran Chris Metzen himself.

That doesn't mean Blizzard isn't open to any change at all, however.

As it stands, folks can opt for HD or SD player models in WoW: Forever. Put simply, HD is a "newer" style, while SD provides that old beloved 2004 look. The Skyborne don't have that option in the Beta right now, though – but that'll change.

Blizzard reveals as much in a new update on its official website, explaining that the developers "focused on the pre-existing races from original World of Warcraft" first, regarding the SD and HD toggle.

That's because, you know, "many people have an attachment to those models." The studio is aware that it leaves the Skyborne looking a bit… different.

"We have heard feedback that the HD Skyborne can be jarring by contrast when placed in the same world as the SD models and world, and we agree."

The solution? "Skyborne player characters (and yes SD Druid forms) are in development and arriving early 2027." Attached is an in-progress image of models.

So, the SD Skyborne won't be available when World of Warcraft: Forever fully releases on November 4, but they're coming.

Is it enough for disgruntled fans, though? Well… is it ever? Comments show that plenty of players are still, erm, displeased, to say the least, with some asking Blizzard to just "please remove Skyborne druid" altogether – which is a tad extreme, if you ask me. There is some positivity among the replies, thankfully, however.

I'm of the (evidently unpopular) belief that the Skyborne are stunning, and have their place in WoW: Forever, so I'm thrilled. And, you know what? A huge chunk of the Beta players I see myself are playing as the race, so take that as you will.

WoW Forever player beats Blizzard to the punch, builds add-on that catches real-money trading on the spot

Laura Fryer, one of the first developers to join Microsoft Game Studios back in 1995, says she "watched the birth" of Halo Studios – formerly 343 Industries – while working on Gears of War 2, dubbing it "a ghost town."

According to Fryer, who now regularly uploads videos about the video game industry on her YouTube channel, the Halo team was "next door" to her own – and after witnessing how it supposedly came to be, she says she's "not surprised" by Halo Studios' recent layoffs.

You know, the ones stemming from Microsoft's plans to cut 3,200 employees at Xbox, with a whopping 268 employees laid off earlier this month, many of whom were working at Halo Studios.

The very same which saw Activision take control of the franchise with a promise to deliver "the greatest Halo game ever," in fact.

Former 343 Industries art director Glenn Israel doesn't exactly agree with Fryer's recollection, however, commenting as much on her video. "I'll reiterate that while Laura's intro is a cool story, it isn't accurate," he writes, explaining that he's not looking to "glaze" Halo Studios, which "was rife with systemic issues."

It wasn't, however, rife with "laziness," as he points out. "343 Industries didn't start staffing up as a development studio until late 2009 (Gears 2, incidentally, shipped late 2008 in the west and mid 2009 elsewhere – the actual work executed in NC not WA)," Israel continues, already leaving some holes in Fryer's own tale.

He explains that when he joined in 2010 "straight from Bungie," there was no Gears of War team "next door."

The Halo developers were "already hard at work in a maximum-security off-campus satellite called Willows," and "you couldn't badge into the studio space if you weren't on the team" – which, yeah, would imply that Fryer's memory here isn't exactly accurate.

Israel concludes that the video is "deeply disappointing" as "there are more than enough legitimate grievances to farm engagement from in this pot; we don't need new fictions from the kettle."

It's tough to discern what is reality and what isn't, I suppose, but Israel's words hit hard here – especially considering the circumstances. Fryer has yet to respond to the former art lead's reply, but since she's commented on others' posts, she just might.

Veteran Halo lead has suggestions for how Activision could actually make "the greatest Halo game ever," and they include hiring "Bungie, Halo Studios, and other laid-off folks"

As Blizzard continues to flesh its PC storefront Battle.net out with the likes of The Witcher 3, Xbox CEO and executive vice president Asha Sharma doubles down on what the World of Warcraft studio has said before – it's not trying to create another Steam.

Yes, Blizzard partnered with CD Projekt Red to see The Witcher 3 make its way onto its own storefront – but that doesn't mean Battle.net will continue to accept just any game willy-nilly, or that it's a one-to-one Steam competitor.

Andrew Guerrero, Blizzard's vice president of product management and global insight, confirmed as much last month, saying the company isn't "trying to do the Steam or Epic Games Store thing."

He said Blizzard already has its "audience," a "passionate core of people that play Blizzard games and games similar to Blizzard," assuring that they'd only "get after" titles for Battle.net should they make sense for that core.

Sharma is now saying the same herself, telling Xbox in an internal town hall (as per Windows Central) that Battle.net will grow, and is actually nearly retaining as many users as Steam already – but it'll never be Steam.

She hints that it'll instead be a more selective, curated storefront than platforms like Steam or even Microsoft's Xbox PC. Sharma also teases that the partnership bringing with CD Projekt Red bringing games like The Witcher 3 to Battle.net will grow, too, although carefully.

In her words, "We will do it the right way for those communities." So, there's clearly a sense of executives taking utmost care with the whole situation.

As it stands now, Battle.net really isn't anything like Steam, anyway. It's primarily a home for Blizzard's own lineup of games, from World of Warcraft to Diablo 4 and the like.

Sure, there are other partner titles, like Call of Duty entries and Xbox Game Studios gems such as Avowed and Sea of Thieves, but it truly is a more particular store than its competitors.

How will that work out in the long run? Well, I suppose only time will tell.

Xbox Helix is seemingly pulling a Steam Deck, CEO discusses devices for players "on the go" with "a great console first"

The potential for real-money trading in World of Warcraft: Forever has been a concern since the new MMO's reveal at BlizzCon 2026 – and despite Blizzard already taking action against alleged rule-breakers, fans are coming up with their own ways to deal with it.

In case you missed it, Blizzard took $200 in gold from a streamer last week after players flagged it as having been accumulated through real-money trading. Many fans thought the developer's punishment should be stricter, with some calling for "permabans" and the like.

One of the most pressing issues here, regardless of punishment, is how to actually tell which way somebody's gold was made.

Sure, when a lot of money is made in a short period of time – like during the Beta – it can feel a bit obvious… but it isn't always. Fans have figured out a workaround, however: an add-on that can tell whether or not gold was legitimately accrued.

It came up during a stream on Twitch (hosted by Ziqo, the very same content creator whose $200 worth of gold was nabbed back by Blizzard), in which a viewer said they've created just that.

They dub it IRS, amusingly enough, which is short for "Illicit Riches Scanner." Although it hasn't yet gone live for public downloads, its creator apparently sent Ziqo a beta file directly.

He commented on the add-on himself, saying it ensures "all gold that we receive in the future is fully natty" while calling it "a fucking add-on that compares their gold income to see if it looks sus" – with "their" meaning different players here, of course.

Ziqo describes the add-on as "bugged," but it's pretty interesting. It essentially scans through an account's historical gold against income statistics to flag any money that can't be spoken for legitimately.

The add-on looks at in-game trades in action, too, so I can see how it'd catch real-money trading, honestly – and, yes, it does indeed flag the majority of Ziqo's gold as illegitimate, so, uh, take that as you will, I suppose.

I do wonder what Blizzard's next move will be, and whether or not it'll deem the add-on all right, come its full release. The studio has been targeting inappropriate names recently and more, so it's clearly paying close attention.

Blizzard warns WoW Forever players that its stance on real-money trading is "crystal clear" following beta ban spree: "We will continue to take action"

World of Warcraft: Forever fans have worried about the potential of real-money trading since Blizzard first unveiled the new MMO during BlizzCon 2026 – but, thankfully, it appears that the studio is cracking down on it prior to the full release.

Now that the World of Warcraft: Forever Beta is out in full force, some players have begun to suspect certain content creators for engaging in, well, real-money trading for in-game gold.

The suspicions have risen to an all-time high after fans spotted the gold that Twitch streamer Ziqo ("ziqoftw" on the platform) supposedly accumulated naturally – or at least not via any illicit means – as he somehow boasted some 380 gold or so.

That's a lot… so much so, in fact, that it comes in at $200 or so in real-life money, as one user points out over on X (that is, if you use shady websites to purchase it – websites I will not be linking to here).

Players immediately called for Ziqo and others they suspect like him to face in-game bans or some other form of punishment from Blizzard. In the words of the linked fan above, "I call for a 12 months ban, including the tournament."

They add that the developers "promised us even 20 year old accounts would get banned," referencing how Blizzard previously stated that World of Warcraft: Forever's economy is "something we're taking very seriously" – which, honestly, it seems it is.

That's because the studio did indeed take action against Ziqo, as a separate thread with a clip of the streamer attached points out. It actually took back his gold.

In it, Ziqo confirms as much, saying, "Blizzard did sweep up all my gold." He goes on to describe how "they cleansed it; they left me with nine silver," showing his inventory – and, yep, he's no longer rich… that's for sure.

So, there you have it, Blizzard is cracking down on fans likely engaging in real-money trading, and it's a welcome sight. Some players think the devs should be even more strict, though.

Comments show calls for "permabans" and the like – but Blizzard itself hasn't done so, as far as I can tell. Will they? Perhaps. They've been targeting inappropriate names recently as well, so it's not outside the realm of possibilities.

WoW: Forever dev says quest drops aren't changing in the MMO, but Blizzard has added " a bit of under-the-hood functionality" that makes them fairer

It's no secret that Microsoft's plans to cut 3,200 employees at Xbox are still in action, having just affected a whopping 268 employees earlier this month, many of whom were working at Halo Studios – the team largely responsible for the Halo franchise.

At the time, chief content officer Matt Booty said the role eliminations were focused "across Halo Studios, other first-party studios, and the XGS management and central functions layer." As for the future of Halo, Activision took control of the franchise from Halo Studios with a promise to deliver "the greatest Halo game ever."

So, how exactly will it do that? Perhaps by looking to those who were laid off for ideas?

Frank O'Connor, industry veteran with nearly 20 years of work on Halo as both a writer and franchise creative director under his belt, certainly believes that the company should.

He shares as much under a new LinkedIn post on the matter, commenting on which paths he thinks that Activision could take to make a successful Halo entry – but "none of these are easy, guaranteed, or necessarily viable," as O'Connor writes.

The first path? "Make a 'classic' Halo movement/sandbox/shooter experience tailored to a core audience and scaled to be successful with that core audience and attractive to a broader one so it can grow." He adds the obvious fact that multiplayer "is better with more people playing, by mathematical default" – which, yeah.

And, the second? Well, that one moves away from what the Halo franchise is already known for for something "new."

O'Connor's second suggestion reads as follows: "Make something new, modern that reinvents the game/universe in a surprising but fantastic way. An action/sandbox game (maybe it's a new take on the FPS, maybe it's an action RPG but it's fundamentally different) and succeeds with a combination of strong story, IP use and gets a small head start based on curiosity or loyalty."

I suppose I could see it – but it's certainly riskier.

The Halo veteran's third potential path for Activision involves "translating" the IP into its new parent company's "comfort zone," with "player, progression, and business models that are proven to work" and "a big annual or semi-annual spectacle and constant content."

He does warn against tying it to hardware launch cycles and abandoning Halo's sandbox elements – and suggests hiring laid-off devs.

"Hire Bungie, Halo Studios, and other laid-off folk who are bursting with talent and ideas that got nerfed or shut down over the years," as O'Connor's comment concludes – and boy, would that be a nice idea if I thought for a moment that Activision would consider it.

Am I hopeful that it will? Of course, but the industry is shaky at best right now, and it's been a while since we've heard good news akin to O'Connor's suggestion here.

A girl can dream, I suppose – and I'll keep my fingers crossed that executives hear our (and O'Connor's, apparently) prayers and deliver a solid Halo entry… perhaps even "the greatest Halo game ever," as per Activision's own words.

Halo cinematic director "promoted and laid off in the same week" as Microsoft continues sweeping Xbox layoffs

World of Warcraft: Forever has made rounds online for seemingly standing as Blizzard's own take on Classic+ – but how faithful does the new MMO truly stay to its 2004 predecessor?

Well, as showcased during BlizzCon 2026, it does feature some quality-of-life improvements alongside its cozy revamped visuals. One of these, according to senior game designer Josh Greenfield, has to do with the way that quest-related items drop for players in groups.

He explains as much in a new post over on X, first stating that drops aren't totally changing – but that doesn't mean they're not improving at all, per se.

"Someone asked me something earlier about how quest drops work in WoW: Forever and if we are changing that," writes Greenfield. "The short answer is no; however we did do something cool that we haven't really had a good opportunity to talk about yet. In the interest of our Pro-social approach, we added a bit of under-the-hood functionality to quests to more predictably round-robin quest items to people who are grouped."

Thank the Light – if there's one thing I think we all hate, it's feeling left behind while every other player in your group is getting drops left, right, and center… and Greenfield gets it.

"There's nothing worse than killing a million furbolgs and having one guy in your group have 8/10 furbolg butts, and the other guy has 1/10. In WoW: Forever we've got something in place that makes it a bit more consistent that everyone in the group will get drops evenly."

The World of Warcraft: Forever Beta's ever-changing, though. As Greenfield puts it, "We are still dialing in this system" – but folks should still give it a go.

"If you are afraid to group on drop quests, I'd encourage you to give it a try. It's still going to take time, just like vanilla WoW, but it'll be less feast or famine, and you'll definitely kill things much faster." And, again, the developers aren't completely overhauling the old in favor of the new.

"A bit of grind on these drop quests are part of the vanilla magic we are maintaining, but we can do small things to help it feel more natural and encourage grouping while still maintaining that original design, and that's our goal," as Greenfield concludes.

He expands on this in the comments, too: "There's still some randomness, but it's more like a bad luck protection if you haven't seen a drop in a while and others are pulling ahead."

Honestly, I'm fairly pleased with group play in the Beta myself so far. Drops do feel even enough, and if one person does get a lot more of something than another, they can trade.

Here's why we think World of Warcraft: Forever gives old school fans nearly everything they could want after spending just 20 hours in the stunning MMO.

A games industry analyst says that Xbox is being acquired in reverse after the publisher announced that it is placing some of its studios under Bethesda and Activision.

Microsoft announced last week that the next wave of redundancies, as part of the planned 3,200 jobs cuts across Xbox throughout FY27, would not only result in the loss of 268 jobs – with the likes of Halo Studios and The Coalition affected – but also mark a major reshuffle for Xbox Game Studios. Notably, Playground Games and Turn 10 have been merged, Bethesda Game Studios is now managing Obsidian Entertainment, while Rare, World's Edge, and the Halo franchise have been moved under Activision Blizzard.

Joost van Dreunen, a professor at the NYU Stern School of Business and games industry analyst, posts on Substack about the changes, describing it as a "reverse acquisition of Xbox." Van Dreunen says "folding Halo, one of Xbox's prized IPs, into Activision, the firm it acquired in 2023, is surprising at best. At worst, it's evidence of how poorly Xbox was running its studios."

"Bringing Halo under Activision, even with a dedicated team, is a logical step. But it doesn't guarantee success," Ven Dreunen notes, citing that Call of Duty's biggest launch with Black Ops 6 saw a sharp drop-off of players by the time spring rolled around. He adds that we're now watching "a reverse acquisition in slow motion, where the publisher Microsoft paid $69 billion for [what] turns out to be the division best equipped to run the studios Microsoft built itself."

Van Dreunen likens Xbox's recent acquisitions to Disney's 2006 purchase of Pixar, in which senior Pixar members were put in charge of Disney's then-struggling in-house animation studio while Pixar was in the midst of a generational run. He adds, "It's becoming evident that Microsoft's acquisitions were less about the IP and more about the managerial talent."

Microsoft has had annual rounds of layoffs since acquiring Activision Blizzard King in late 2023, and we're now reaching the point where – through rampant studio closures and a number of studios now falling under the remit of Bethesda, Activision Blizzard, and King – Xbox Game Studios is down to a handful of studios.

Post-Xbox, Double Fine boss Tim Schafer is baffled by the terrible state of the game industry: "People are making money, so I don't know why there's a big loss of jobs"

Following Blizzard's big reveal of World of Warcraft: Forever at BlizzCon 2026, the MMO's official Beta release went live – and it's almost too popular.

So much so, that senior game designer Josh Greenfield said he was witnessing "the craziest numbers I've seen in 17 years working at Blizzard" as the studio's servers kept breaking thanks to the WoW: Forever Beta.

The developers remedied the issue by, you know, simply increasing the MMO's population cap – something they've just had to do again over the weekend, because folks apparently can't get enough of it.

World of Warcraft executive producer and vice president Holly Longdale reveals as much in a new post over on X, writing, "So… we had to increase the WoW: Forever Beta population cap again. The wild ride continues." It continues, indeed.

Although Longdale doesn't specify whether Blizzard lifted the population cap for EU or US players, I'd wager it's for both. Despite costing at least $59.99 to access, the Beta boasts plenty of fans worldwide from what I've seen.

Heck, the initial launch was a bit of a debacle itself, as senior game producer Tom Ellis dubbed it "a bit excessive" as countless fans struggled to get into the game.

Although the devs figured the release out eventually, it seems as though the World of Warcraft beta is just as popular as before – or even more so, seeing as Blizzard is actively raising the population cap over time. It spells a good future for the MMO, honestly.

Its popularity makes sense, too. Devs previously described World of Warcraft: Forever as an edition of Blizzard's decades-old MMO that's "for the millions of people who have had their accounts lapse" in Classic – and I'd say that resonates.

Not only that, but it's managing to reach entirely new audiences as well, like myself… and after spending all weekend playing the Beta, I can safely say that it's also succeeding there.

Here's why we think World of Warcraft: Forever gives old school fans nearly everything they could want after spending just 20 hours in the stunning MMO.

Although it feels like Blizzard only just unveiled World of Warcraft: Forever during BlizzCon 2026, some time has passed now and the beta is out in full force – and, unsurprisingly, folks are already catching bans for inappropriate behavior.

What inappropriate behavior so early on, you might ask – and it all boils down to character names. People are choosing, erm, less than respectful titles for their avatars, and it's caught Blizzard's attention.

As the studio writes in an online post, "Reminder to keep your character names in the Forever Beta respectful and within policy. Forced name changes are going into effect and users with the most extreme violations have been removed from the Beta."

While that all sounds valid enough, some fans aren't having it. There are various threads circulating the web with claims of overaction from Blizzard, as players say they're mildly crude or silly names have been targeted wrongfully.

The developers disagree, though – as per a statement over on Twitter from senior game producer Tom Ellis, the team is not just taking accounts down willy-nilly. Not at all, in fact.

Ellis explains, "Anyone saying they were removed from beta for naming their character 'Billy Mcsuckmahballz' is telling little white lies. That character likely just received a forced name change. Multiple unfortunate humans read through every name that was removed from beta today. If you're genuinely confused, remember that it's our database, we can see every character you've created, not just the one you're playing."

He then concludes, "I read the list. No sympathy. Be a better human next time." That checks out, honestly – and it's hard to counter the devs when they've got an active database of the bans they've issued.

A handful of fans are still upset, judging by the comments, but I see plenty more celebrating Blizzard's crackdown on its initial announcement. As one reply puts it, "Based. Thank you." It can't be easy keeping things SFW, after all.

Especially not within such a massive MMO community. There are responses noting that the devs have missed some inappropriate names, for example – but they are only getting started here. World of Warcraft: Forever's full release is on November 4.

World of Warcraft: Forever is "for the millions of people who have had their accounts lapse" in Classic, dev says.

When Blizzard first unveiled World of Warcraft: Forever during BlizzCon 2026, many fans saw it as the MMO developer's answer to their Classic+ prayers – and, according to world builder Matthew Armstrong, it sounds like it basically is just that.

The dev goes into detail on who Forever is truly "for" in a lengthy new thread on Twitter, saying that he had a very particular type of player in mind while helping design Blizzard's revamped take on its 2004 gem: the hardened Classic fan who didn't feel satisfied with the non-retail version and how it deviated from the original game.

"I'm seeing a lot of discourse about who WoW: Forever is being made for," he writes. "While I cannot speak for anyone else on the team I can speak for myself. I am making WoW: Forever for the Classic gamer and for the millions of people who have had their accounts lapse over the years because they were not satisfied with changes that were made to the game. Whether those changes were to the art style, the story, social aspects, game design, or changes to their favorite class."

World of Warcraft: Forever is no retail, that's for sure. "I did not spend the last year of my life relearning and mastering how to do things like we did it 20+ years ago for retail players," as the world builder puts it.

"I could have taken it easy and just kept doing things like I had done for the past eight years on retail… because I was much more familiar with it and it actually takes a lot less time to do (height maps on textures do a ton of heavy lifting)."

And, as Armstrong points out, "because the reality is that the majority of retail players wouldn't care and would probably actually prefer it." That's not what he did, though.

"I felt I had a duty to uphold an artistic vision and integrity that millions of people expect from us" – both players and fellow devs "past and present who worked on it over 20 years ago." He wanted to "create something that resembled their work.

That's what Forever is – an Old School RuneScape-style upgrade to the original World of Warcraft MMO many folks know inside out and love. And, Armstrong clarifies that it's not a diss aimed at fans of the retail version.

He simply "wanted to make Forever as authentic of a vanilla experience as possible," which is "wildly different" than retail, obviously. There are three "sayings" he says he's followed throughout development, too.

"Convenience is the death of the journey" is the first – which checks out. Then, "If you're making a game for everyone then you're making it for no one." Again, that aligns well with what Armstrong says regarding Classic and retail fans. Finally, "Every change we make incurs a debt to the authenticity of the game and sooner or later that debt will be paid." I suppose Classic (and all the Classic+ requests) proves this point.

"These are my core beliefs and I had a specific group of people I was targeting with my work," he concludes. "These beliefs cannot be shaken and I will try to hold the line against anything that goes against them and will continue to pester the team about things that feel out of place."

Armstrong does still hope World of Warcraft: Forever "will pull in as many people as possible," Classic, retail, or otherwise.

"I hope you can all remember what made this game so special in the first place and that starts with understanding why we are so passionate about keeping it authentic."

I certainly do, and judging by the comments, it's safe to say the majority of players do.

"You can't tell me this isn't WoW 2": Blizzard says World of Warcraft doesn't need a sequel thanks to Forever, but MMO fans say it already made one.

The massive Xbox "reset," as the brand's leadership calls it, continues. Yesterday, the company announced another 268 jobs eliminated along its quest to lay off 3,200 employees throughout the fiscal year. We also learned that several Xbox studios and franchises were coming under the Activision Blizzard banner, including Age of Empires developer World's Edge.

Studio creative director Adam Isgreen says there have been substantial layoffs at World's Edge alongside that transition. "I am of course disappointed that this is the way the time with World's Edge and Age ends for myself and many of my talented teammates that were also impacted – we had some great plans for what's next – and I hope the team that remains can rise to the occasion down the line," Isgreen says in a LinkedIn post (thanks, Rock Paper Shotgun).

In a separate post on ResetEra, Isgreen adds that "just under half the studio was let go." We have reached out to Microsoft for comment and will update this story if we learn more.

Isgreen's roots in the RTS genre go back decades. He was a designer on the first Command & Conquer: Red Alert, working at Westwood Studios from 1995 through 2003. He worked on the beloved Star Wars: Empire at War at Westwood successor Petroglyph, and eventually joined Microsoft in 2010.

He served as creative director on a number of projects at Xbox, including such varied projects as Killer Instinct, Crimson Dragon, D4: Dark Dreams Don't Die, and ReCore. Eventually, he helped lead the company's Age of Empire revival, again working as creative director on a massive pile of remasters and 2021's Age of Empires 4.

"I never thought that I'd work at Microsoft, let alone spend a significant amount of my career here – 16 years! – especially in a creative-first role," Isgreen notes in his LinkedIn post.

"What's next?" he asks. "No idea. Maybe games? Maybe not? Pinball machines? Always loved the combination of design + art + engineering they represent."

These are the best RTS games you can play today.

Xbox's new reshuffle has seen Rare moved under Activision, 24 years after Xbox outbid the publisher for the studio.

Rare has mostly been seen as one of the biggest drop offs in games. While the studio's Sea of Thieves is seemingly super successful, it was one of the powerhouse developers of the 1990s only to flounder throughout the 2000s and 2010s; the big shift being when Rare was purchased by Microsoft.

While the studio did release some great games during this era like the Viva Pinata duology and Banjo-Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts (which I get why people don't like a new genre slapped onto an existing franchise), it never reached the highs of its SNES and N64 output.

And with Xbox's latest wave of redundancies that continue the planned 3,200 jobs cut throughout FY27, Microsoft has announced that Rare will be moved under Activision as part of this reshuffling. But as pointed out by co-founder of The Game Business, Chris Dring, this could've been a reality for the studio back in 2002.

Dring notes that when Nintendo declined to buy the remaining 51% of the studio a bidding war for the developer started that was eventually won by Xbox, with the studio being purchased in September 2002 for $375 million. However, other than Xbox and Nintendo (who Microsoft's Ed Fries claims was part of the bidding war after declining to purchase the studio), the other major interested party was none other than Activision.

And now, just over 24 years later, Activision is the home of Rare. Of course, it's a very different company now than it was back in 2002, with the studio focusing on its successful live service title Sea of Thieves. But it does mean the PS1 and N64's biggest platforming icons (outside of Mario, obviously) are now all under the Activision banner as Banjo joins Crash and Spyro.

The Rare SNES game that became Banjo-Kazooie has been preserved thanks to a leaker who wants you to "delete Microsoft and Sony from your lives."

Xbox has announced a major reorganization of its entire first-party studio ecosystem. Rare and World's Edge will now operate under Activision Blizzard. The Call of Duty publisher is also taking stewardship of the Halo franchise.

This is a significant shift, with Rare and World's Edge having previously operated under the Xbox Game Studios banner. This means that Activision Blizzard will assist Rare in steering the evolution of Sea of Thieves, and take command of the Age of Empires franchise moving forward.

The decision to move Halo to Activision is also something of a surprise. 343 Industries has overseen the Halo franchise ever since Bungie regained its independence from Microsoft in 2007, having shipped Halo: The Master Chief Collection, Halo 4, Halo 5: Guardians, and Halo Infinite. The team was rebranded to Halo Studios in 2024 as it sought to push the franchise in a new direction – the recently released Halo: Campaign Evolved serving as an example for how the series would function on Unreal Engine.

Activision president Rob Kostich said this of the change:

"We're thrilled to welcome Halo, Rare, and World's Edge to Activision. It's an honor and a responsibility that we do not take lightly. These teams and their games have inspired fans around the world for decades."

"For Halo, our goal is clear: make the greatest Halo game ever, worthy of its universe and legacy, while staying true to what made players love it in the first place. It is a bold ambition, one that this franchise deserves. We have already begun assembling a purpose-built team, unique in capability and talent, ready and excited to deliver this next chapter with the community."

"To the World's Edge and Rare teams, we can't wait to get to work together."

The 2026 remake of Combat Evolved is expected to be the only new title released by Halo Studios, with the group now operating in a support capacity for existing Halo games. The studio is expected to endure a substantial reduction in headcount as a result of the franchise control moving to Activision.

While Xbox is yet to make any further announcements regarding the next mainline Halo installment, a new team – rather than one of the studios responsible for keeping Call of Duty on its annual release cadence – will be put into place to steer its development. Matt Booty, Xbox's chief content officer, has said in a statement that Activision's Halo will be "led by a new, purpose-built team that is separate from ongoing development and plans for Call of Duty."

In addition to these changes at Activision Blizzard, Xbox has also announced that Bethesda will begin managing Obsidian Entertainment (the two studios are already developing a new Fallout title), and that Playground Games (Forza Horizon) and Turn 10 (Forza Motorsport) will "come together as one studio" to help define the future of Forza, Fable, and the ForzaTech engine which powers both open-world games.

These big changes in the way that Xbox operates come as part of the broader Xbox Reset that CEO Asha Sharma and chief content officer Matt Booty announced earlier this year. Touted by Sharma as "the most significant restructure in Xbox history", the reset has already led to over 1,600 redundancies and a divestiture with Compulsion Games, Double Fine, and Undead Labs as the group attempts to "return to growth" and streamline its content portfolio.

As a part of today's news, Xbox announced a further 268 redundancies across the business. It also confirmed that Arkane (Marvel's Blade) will remain in consultancy throughout the rest of the year, and that Ninja Theory (Senua) is facing the prospect of closure after two potential deals to secure its future fell through.

For more on Xbox, check out the full list of upcoming Xbox Series X games.

Xbox has announced a new wave of redundancies, with 268 staff set to exit the business. In a statement on the Xbox Wire, chief content officer Matt Booty says the role eliminations are focused "across Halo Studios, other first-party studios, and the XGS management and central functions layer."

This all follows the 1,600 role eliminations that were made in July, after Xbox CEO Asha Sharma instituted "the most significant restructure in Xbox history."

The decision to 'Reset Xbox' is expected to ultimately cost up to 3,200 jobs throughout FY27, and this announcement only builds to that number. The reason for the restructure is multi-faceted, although Sharma has said that change is necessary for the company to return to growth and profitability.

As part of the restructure, a number of first-party studios have already exited the Xbox Game Studios ecosystem. Xbox separated from Compulsion Games and Double Fine Productions earlier this year, with the developers of South of Midnight and Psychonauts 2 regaining their independence eight years after they were originally acquired.

Undead Labs and Ninja Theory were undergoing similar considerations. Xbox has announced that Undead Labs "has now successfully transitioned on similar terms," and has located a new publisher for State of Decay 3. Unfortunately, the news isn't as positive for the Hellblade creator. Booty says "two separate agreements for Ninja Theory fell through. We will now begin consultation with employees on a proposed closure while continuing to explore other paths forward." It's unclear what all of this means for the future of Senua, which is slated to release in 2027.

As part of the Xbox Reset memorandum in July, Xbox had announced that Arkane's future was also uncertain and that, in accordance with French law, the studio's management was required to consult with its "Works Council to review potential strategic options." Xbox says that "consultation with Arkane remains underway and is expected to continue through the end of the year." There are no updates of what this means for its Marvel's Blade project.

This latest round of layoffs means that Xbox is around three-quarters of the way through its total planned redundancies, and comes on a day where the company has announced a fairly significant restructure. Obsidian Entertainment is now being managed by Bethesda, with the pair now collaborating on a new Fallout title.

Activision Blizzard King is also expanding its remit; the Call of Duty publisher will now have operational control of Rare and World's Edge (including the Sea of Thieves and Age of Empires franchises), and will establish a new team to lead production of the next mainline installment to the Halo series.

Diablo 5 takes place in a world where the titular Lord of Terror has already won, taking over Sanctuary and reshaping the world in his own image. For Blizzard, telling this dark chapter of the story means telling multiple stories in parallel: the past, the present, and the future.

That's according to game director Joe Shely, who tells our friends at TechRadar Gaming that there are "three stories that we're telling" within the world of Diablo 5. The past story is the tale of how Diablo took over Sanctuary in the first place. The present, of course, seems to consist of the main action of the game, where the familiar world has been taken over by the minions of Hell.

Diablo's top minions in this desolate world are called Dread Commanders, and they take an active role in reshaping Sanctuary in Hell's image – hence the future part of the story. "We call it terror forming because these Dread Commanders will actually transform the environment, transform the biome into a version of hell that relates to personal powers and powers at station," Shely says.

"The procedural world gives us a lot of levers to pull for that," narrative director Jennifer Hepler adds. "You can go to a place, and it is under the control of the Dread Commander of Undeath, and it's going to be full of zombies and things like that. And then later in the game, you could return there, and it's either been reclaimed by humanity or taken over by a different Dread Commander, and the environment will be totally different as a result of that."

Blizzard's publicly stated goal for Diablo 5 is to make sure it's got "the best campaign ever," and the studio is taking a big swing with the setting to make sure that's true. The devs are also insistent that a full sequel is necessary because the return of the titular big bad is too big for a mere Diablo 4 expansion. We'll have plenty of time to speculate on how these choices will pan out, since the game isn't scheduled to launch until 2029.

Diablo 5 is Blizzard's darkest ARPG yet, and that's the best way to honor the game that changed my life 30 years ago.

Following the big reveal of World of Warcraft: Forever at BlizzCon 2026, many fans dubbed it Blizzard's answer to their Classic+ prayers – but others see it as such a strong revival of the original MMO, it might as well be a sequel in its own right.

World of Warcraft: Forever is many things: a revamped take on Blizzard's beloved 2004 gem, an MMO with new content that nobody has previously experienced, and an all-around cozy game to pour hundreds of hours into between school or work.

What it technically isn't, however, is an official sequel – but fans enjoying its paid beta period feel it's got enough bang for its buck that might as well be World of Warcraft 2, apparently.

One fan taken aback by Forever's stunning nighttime visuals declares as much, writing in a post on Twitter, "You can't tell me this isn't WoW 2." Over on Reddit, commenters discuss how the new game "opens up so much potential," with a response calling it "a pretty smart way to develop WoW 2."

Threads on the official World of Warcraft forums echo this sentiment, as folks write that "WoW Forever feels like WoW 2.0 and it makes sense."

It's certainly an interesting take to read, especially seeing as Blizzard itself essentially said that World of Warcraft 2 isn't happening because the developers aren't sure what a sequel to the old MMO would "give you that World of Warcraft: Forever isn't already giving you" – so, yeah.

It's undeniably a downright huge project for the studio, and it seems that even they liken it to a successor of sorts… even if it'll coexist with Classic and retail.

Honestly, I'm personally thrilled with the beta so far myself. Blizzard has nailed everything from the ambience to the quest design, placing me in the shoes of a giddy child booting up their new game for the first time ever once again – and, yes, I even happen to like the controversial Skyborne race, regardless of its hefty $30 price tag, and its opening story.

The devs have something very good cooking here, y'all.

That, plus the fact that Blizzard is waving goodbye to combat add-ons (much like it did in retail before) and GDKP – thank the Light. I just can't wait until everyone gets to hop into World of Warcraft: Forever on November 4.

World of Warcraft: Forever dev tells fans concerned by datamines and screenshots to "reserve judgment" until they play Blizzard's new MMO.

World of Warcraft has been running for 22 years, and even now Blizzard sometimes struggles to keep up with demand. Yesterday, the WoW: Forever beta launched and immediately broke under the weight of everyone trying to get in at once. How is this still happening when Blizzard has decades of experience with launching new MMO content? The devs themselves say they were genuinely taken aback by just how popular the Forever beta has been.

"Man, it was hard to sleep last night, I was so excited," senior game designer Josh Greenfield says on Twitter. "Beta has been... crazy. The craziest numbers I've seen in 17 years working at Blizzard and almost 8 years on classic. We've got something really special here."

Maybe that sounds hyperbolic, but senior game producer Tom Ellis has posted a more exhaustive technical breakdown of what went wrong for the opening hours of the Forever beta. "It's not a Production stack by a long, long, long, long, long, long shot," Ellis explains on Twitter. "Betas for WoW aren't usually huge meter movers so this environment just isn't that powerful."

Because "our little BETA environment only uses one REGIONAL realm," Ellis says, math on the servers started getting screwy as this one little connection point was suddenly having to funnel in so many players. This is why people kept getting disconnected after sitting through the lengthy login queues.

It took the devs "around half an hour" to figure out that this was the bottleneck, because the game and Battle.net services both showed very little load. "We all recognized we need more logging and notifications when this system is kicking in, but this is the first time anyone's seen it kick in when [there] wasn't an obvious CPU issue to go along with it," Ellis explains. "20 years, always something new."

Ellis also addresses the long times players were experiencing while looting, accepting quests, and performing similar server-bound actions. "Our intrepid Oracle Database Engineers had to perform a manual analyze on all the tables and setup some automated jobs to periodically keep doing it," but because the servers were being hit so frequently, the typical rate wasn't sufficient. As soon as the devs addressed that, the database performance "cleared up instantly."

There were the restarts. "A few hours in, we noticed our WORLD pools that run, well, the game simulation you play on, were running crazy hot on CPU and almost out of memory," Ellis explains. Empty maps were not being correctly shut down, and those were slowly – or, actually, "not that slowly" – clogging up CPU and memory on the servers. The devs figured out a fix, but that fix needed restarts "to pick it up." Blizzard also took the opportunity to add additional worlds and expand the regional service for further stability.

Back in 2019, we interviewed numerous devs about why big online games always seem to break at launch, and it seems that all the same problems inevitably crop up. We heard one dev say "it's just impossible" to fully solve these kinds of launches, and WoW: Forever demonstrates how new issues crop up every single time. But hey, at least the fixes are coming faster. I'm old enough to remember when people were struggling to play Diablo 3 for weeks after launch…

WoW: Forever doesn't allow GDKP, Blizzard says the new MMO's economy is "something we're taking very seriously."

World of Warcraft: Forever has been on many a fan's mind since Blizzard's big reveal during BlizzCon 2026, especially as it's essentially a take on the long-requested Classic+. But how exactly will it differ from the other branches of WoW?

Well, according to senior game designer Josh Greenfield, there's one glaring difference: GDKP will not be a part of Forever.

In case you're out of the loop, GDKP stands for Gold Dragon Kill Points – an auction-based loot distribution system that sees a raid party's treasure go to the highest bidder, only for all of the accumulated gold to then be split across the players. It's controversial because lots of folks feel it encourages real-money trading.

So, what does Greenfield have to say about it? In a new Q&A session over on YouTube, the lead first explains that World of Warcraft: Forever won't allow GDKP.

"The short answer is no, we are not going to allow GDKP," he says. "I think the most important aspect of that to us is our first pillar – to nurture and protect social experiences. I think a lot of the concerns around GDKP start to get bundled up into that conversation, around things like that."

Is Blizzard making this choice because of real-money trades? Not entirely.

"The actual main reason that we are not going to allow it in WoW: Forever is that it has that sort of tendency we've noticed in the regions where [GDKP] has been popular for longer to reach a level of ubiquity," Greenfield says. "That can kinda overtake the traditional guild structure, and that's one of the really difficult decisions about being a game designer, managing this game at this scale."

It's not an easy decision, as Greenfield states. "Sometimes, you have to make difficult choices. We never really want to tell people how to play" – but systems like GDKP can get in the way of others' experience with the MMO.

They can act as a "big barrier to entry for new players, or players that do not have that many resources," he says. Longtime fans can quickly make some gold, while newcomers end up feeling forced to "buy gold."

That's no bueno, and "something we're taking very seriously in WoW: Forever," Greenfield explains. Plus, it feeds into the whole economy and real-money transaction debacle.

"GDKP is an excellent way for bad actors to launder large sums of gold," as he says. This complicates everything for both players and the developers alike, as they struggle to target bots and such. In World of Warcraft: Forever, Blizzard will "be very, very actively monitoring the economy."

Honestly, I'm happy to hear that Blizzard's settled on no GDKP runs in Forever – here's hoping the economy remains healthy, and the studio stays strong in its decision to restrict the auction-based raid loot system (and, it seems, combat add-ons, too).

World of Warcraft: Forever beta struggles to launch as devs say "the number of people hammering at the door of the Beta is... insane"

World of Warcraft: Forever is here in beta form, and the true WoW experience is intact, right down to the infinite queues and disconnects as players start banging on the door to get in. Even the devs seem a bit taken aback by the number of players lining up to participate, but they promise eager fans that everybody will be in soon.

"Thank you to everyone waiting to get into the WoW: Forever Beta," the official Warcraft account begins. "We're working through some final issues, and we expect the doors to open soon. Thank you for your patience!"

"Yeah, ok that’s a bit excessive for a beta," senior game producer Tom Ellis adds in a separate post. "Calm down now… give us a minute, this environment is taking a beating and we’re scaling various services up."

"Wow, the number of people hammering at the door of the Beta is... insane," associate production director Clayton Stone says in another tweet. "Thanks for showing up, everyone! We're scaling up and up and up (and up). You will all be in soon."

You can probably guess at the state of WoW discussion forums right now, and the WoW subreddit is predictably filled with memes about the queue times, early reactions from those lucky enough to get in, and big ol' threads for people to commiserate while they wait. And yes, everyone has already made the joke about it taking "forever" to get in.

World of Warcraft: Forever's controversial Skyborne race came from Blizzard veteran Chris Metzen himself - "We knew we wanted to add some sort of elves."

Although World of Warcraft: Forever impressed many Classic+ hopefuls last weekend during BlizzCon 2026, some fans left Blizzard's big reveal wondering why the new MMO looked so much like its retail counterpart.

That is, anyway, in terms of its art style and models. Conversations soared on the likes of Reddit as folks pondered why World of Warcraft: Forever feels "too retail" and more like a "retail minus" than a "Classic plus."

It's an amusing but reasonable concern, I suppose, as the community is understandably attached to the 21-year-old world Blizzard first invited them into way back in 2004. Is it truly something fans should worry about, though?

According to Classic developer Josh Greenfield, the answer is no – or, at least, they should give World of Warcraft: Forever a chance come its November release.

In response to a fan on Twitter asking why the art direction follows retail's aesthetic rather than Classic's, Greenfield says players should wait to experience the MMO in person to fully judge it, as it's not the same as viewing screenshots or datamined models.

"I'd encourage you to reserve judgement on any model you see datamined or in screenshots until you can see it in-game and in context with the rest of the world," writes the dev. "I can't get too deep into it… but what you see in datamining might not be fully representative of how things appear in-engine."

Honestly, that's valid enough, I suppose – trailers, screencaps, and model highlights can't match the vibe of the full game itself.

Fans seem content with Greenfield's response, too, with the original post replying, "Sounds good, thank you for communicating, judgement reserved." Another chimes in that they'll also "reserve judgement for now" but are "still concerned that models like these are too different as to not fit into the Classic world and player models cohesively."
More commenters share this sentiment, expressing that they're still unsure about the aesthetic.

I suppose we'll just have to wait and see how it all meshes together come World of Warcraft: Forever's big launch in a couple of months. Fingers crossed it feels more like an Old School RuneScape take on Blizzard's original MMO than the retail one.

World of Warcraft: Forever takes page out of retail's book as Blizzard confirms access to add-ons will be restricted in the throwback MMO

World of Warcraft: Forever was unveiled this past weekend at BlizzCon 2026, giving us our first-ever look at Blizzard's official take on Classic+ (or, at least, the closest thing we'll get to it) – and much like the retail MMO, it won't be too supportive of add-ons, apparently.

Blizzard made waves in the World of Warcraft community after deciding to remove combat mods from the retail release, stating that it hoped to "level the playing field" with less outside help in raids and the like.

That decision wasn't too popular with folks at first, so it's not at all surprising that many of the discussions surrounding World of Warcraft: Forever online have pondered whether it too would cut add-ons out of the picture.

Well, as it turns out, the new version of Blizzard's 21-year-old MMO will indeed similarly restrict add-ons – even though they aren't in Classic.

World of Warcraft: Classic designer Tim Jones and lead encounter designer Mike Nuthals tell Kotaku as much in a recent interview, confirming that "computational add-ons" (think combat add-ons and those that automate communications and such) are something we won't have access to.

They tell the outlet, "the in-game or in-combat add-on disarmament where the programmatic, the calculations done to automate marking or communicating for players, we're going to bring that over so that players will not have access to those kind of computational add-ons."

In other words, Forever is taking a page out of retail's book here in restricting such add-ons – but it's not exactly a bad decision. Raiding in either isn't of the same caliber, after all.

Folks point as much out over on Twitter, with one person commenting, "Unless WoW: Forever combat is much harder and much more complex than I am expecting, this is not a big deal." Another adds, "The content isn't even hard enough to warrant it."

So, all in all, it's certainly not proving as unpopular a change as it did in retail – perhaps also because World of Warcraft: Forever is launching this way, rather than going on to remove a feature.

Here's hoping fans who want to use other sorts of add-ons are still able to, with all that said. Combat help is one thing, but quality-of-life is a whole other ball game – but I suppose we'll find out more when World of Warcraft: Forever releases in November.

World of Warcraft: Forever's controversial Skyborne race came from Blizzard veteran Chris Metzen himself – "We knew we wanted to add some sort of elves."

Following our first look at World of Warcraft: Forever at BlizzCon 2026 this past weekend, Blizzard's answer to everyone's Classic+ prayers, a lot of controversy surrounding the new Skyborne race has made the rounds online.

From the $30 price tag to the ill-fitting lore, fans have shared quite a few concerns about the Skybrone. So, what prompted Blizzard to implement the pretty blue elves in the first place?

Well, according to senior game designer Josh Greenfield, it all boils down to Chris Metzen – you know, one of the fathers of Warcraft in its entirety, basically. He explains as much in a new interview with GameSpot, saying it "started with a lot of questions."

Greenfield goes on: "We were talking about WoW Forever early on and we knew we wanted to add some sort of elves. Everyone on the team is a big fan of elves. We all love elves. They're very popular… and we knew we wanted to do something and came to him with a bunch of ideas and pitches and different variants of elves…"

Metzen's response? He "was really like, 'Yeah, we should do something; we should get a little crazy with it.'"

And, the rest is history. Blizzard "agreed and we had a lot of fun kind of concepting it with him." So, there you have it – a Warcraft legend himself approves of the Skyborne… but, it's not enough for many of the naysayers.

Over on Reddit, plenty of folks discussing Metzen's role in the new race's creation still believe it to be ill-fitting in World of Warcraft: Forever. As one comment reads, "They still look very out of place, they don't feel right…"

I wonder myself whether Blizzard will respond to all of the backlash the race has seen thus far – but I suppose only time will tell. As of now, access to the Skyborne is purchasable and will release with World of Warcraft: Forever in November.

World of Warcraft 2 isn't happening because Blizzard isn't sure what a sequel to the MMO would "give you that World of Warcraft: Forever isn't already giving you"

Blizzard gave WoW Classic+ hopefuls the news they were hoping for this past weekend during the BlizzCon 2026 reveals with a first look at World of Warcraft: Forever – a reimagining of the 21-year-old MMO's nostalgic beginnings.

In case you missed it, it ticks all the boxes and then some, with revamped visuals, a plethora of new quests, and much, much more… including a never-before-seen race, the Skyborne.

While that sounds incredibly exciting on paper, there's a bit of a catch: the Skyborne will cost you, and it's not cheap. In fact, it's at least $29.99, as per the official World of Warcraft website.

I say at least because it's DLC of sorts, and there are a few options. There's the Skyborne Epic Pack for some $20 more, and the Warcraft Forever Collection for a whopping $79.99, for example.

While these two come with more than just the Skyborne race – which is admittedly stunning, appearing as a soft periwinkle-skinned take on elves – the base $30 purchase is just to access the Skyborne come World of Warcraft: Forever's release in November… and, unsurprisingly, folks aren't thrilled.

Just have a search over on Reddit, and you'll find countless threads discussing the Skyborne race and its hefty price tag. Heck, there's even a huge "Skyborne feedback" post, given how hot a topic this is.

"I'm extremely positive about WoW: Forever and I'll be playing day one with high hopes," one comment reads. "That being said, not a fan of this race. They dropped the ball on that part."

It's not just the price, though. Others take issue with the fact that the Skyborne just… feel out of place.

As one person puts it, "From the aesthetic to the druid forms and mostly the blue variant has a weird retail vibe I just can't describe." Another dubs this a "mindbogglingly strange decision" on Blizzard's part, while many more consider it counter-creative. "They are just blue elves," after all – much like Night Elves.

"Should have been something else," one fan complains. "Something more interesting and new."

Honestly, there's a lot more to read through regarding the Skyborne controversy, from the race's price to its potential lore-breaking implications, but I do still have to admit I'm on the fence about it all myself.

I don't like the paywall or the lack of faction identity, but I find the design quite nice aesthetically.

I suppose the community will be split on this one as it is on just about everything, and that's that – 'tis the nature of MMOs, I fear. Blizzard also has yet to speak on the Skyborne debacle yet itself, but I'd advise keeping an eye on its channels.

World of Warcraft 2 isn't happening because Blizzard isn't sure what a sequel to the MMO would "give you that World of Warcraft: Forever isn't already giving you"

World of Warcraft: Forever has been making the rounds online after Blizzard's big reveal at BlizzCon 2026, standing as the closest official thing we'll get to the long-coveted Classic+, but it does also mean we probably won't see a retail sequel.

In other words, World of Warcraft 2 – which, honestly, feels a bit silly to even write. After all, World of Warcraft itself is an ongoing project as you know, standing as the biggest MMO to date… one that's over two decades in the making now.

With Forever underway, too, there's little reason for such a sequel to ever actually come to fruition, anyway, as principal designer Kris Zierhut tells IGN in a new interview.

"I think one of the things that's singularly great about WoW is we have this game and this world and this design that has been continuously developed for the last 25 years," he explains – and, yeah, that checks out.

As Zierhut puts it, "We keep making it better. We made the graphics better, we made the rendering better, we made the lighting better," you name it. It's all better in retail, and, yes, Forever. All of that, plus the way things work behind the scenes.

"We've also made the way the engine draws things move more efficiently," Zierhut continues. "The way the server runs, handling players and moving them around, and all the things that handle spells and combat, all of that's been made more efficient and better over the years. We have this incredible engine and server infrastructure driving the game that is second to none."

So, "Why would you throw that away and start over?"

Why would you, indeed… not to mention the decades-in-progress lore that World of Warcraft sits upon. "It's not like there's something wrong with the story," as the dev says. "We love the story. So, going back to the beginning [with World of Warcraft: Forever], there's a chance to explore that story in new and different ways."

Considering all of this, Blizzard doesn't really have any motivation to move away from it all to try and conjure up a sequel.

As Zierhut concludes, "It's really hard to say, 'Well, what would a WoW 2 give you that World of Warcraft: Forever isn't already giving you?'"

I get it – it's not just a nostalgic rework with plenty of new features to look forward to, it's a chance to attract both fresh faces and longtime fans, too… the same way a World of Warcraft 2 would, except perhaps a bit better at grabbing the attention of the former.

I, for one, can't wait to dive into World of Warcraft: Forever come its November release – and, much like I'm not inclined to wish for a Minecraft 2, I'm not bothered about potentially never seeing a World of Warcraft 2 arrive.

World of Warcraft: Forever devs have "no plans" to implement Tokens or level boosts, confirms Blizzard, as "the journey is so important."

During BlizzCon 2026, we got confirmation that two massive games are coming to Battle.Net: The Witcher 3 Remastered and Cyberpunk 2077. As you well know, these are CD Projekt Red releases, and they join a number of games from Bethesda and other publishers that have been added to Blizzard's platform post-Microsoft acquisition. Despite this, don't expect their respective deals to be harbingers for some grand expansion.

"We're obviously not out there trying to do the Steam or Epic Game Store thing," Andrew Guerrero, vice president of product management and global insight at Blizzard, told Polygon. "We have our audience. We have a passionate core of people that play Blizzard games and games similar to Blizzard, and if something makes sense for them, we'll get after it."

Sure enough, Cyberpunk 2077 and The Witcher 3 have clear overlap with the Blizzard fanbase, being large RPGs you can pour hundreds of hours into. The likes of Doom: The Dark Ages, The Outer Worlds 2 and Destiny 2 all fit, too.

The Activision merger brought a selection of games with less obvious ties, like Crash Bandicoot and Call of Duty, but you can understand the publishing mandate. Taking on projects from a whole other publisher could be seen as testing the waters for opening the storefront, but Guerrero maintains curation is key.

"It's a much more focused approach, I'd say, of 'What do we think our players would absolutely love? What are the top-tier quality experiences out there that we might be able to get some more exposure to, and does it make sense?'" he explains.

Of course, there are enormous drawbacks to even humoring becoming the kind of market Steam and the Epic Games Store offer. You have large-scale moderation, a huge increase in labor behind-the-scenes, and the uphill battle of trying to compete in a space with clear market leaders.

All of which is to say, I don't think we should expect Battle.Net to become a hive of indie development just yet. The Witcher 4 is probably a safe bet by now, however.

Blizzard's new StarCraft shooter is "not a seasonal game," says lead: "The story has a beginning, a middle, and an end"

Blizzard finally lifted the veil on World of Warcraft: Forever this past weekend at BlizzCon 2026, giving fans a taste of the official Classic+ (so to speak, anyway) that we're getting – one that apparently thankfully won't feature real-money currency like Tokens.

Clayton Stone, associate production director on WoW Classic, confirms as much in a recent interview on Forever with content creator Destin Legarie (below). The lead also says that there won't be any purchasable experience boosts, either.

He describes how Blizzard has "no plans for anything like a WoW token or a boost" in any online shop – and, even though I'm thankful myself, I do wonder why… but Stone says it's all about the "journey" to the top.

"The journey really is what the game is," he says. "I mean, the endgame is amazing… the endgame is epic. It's awesome. And, all the stuff we've done with the endgame is amazing, but the journey is so important and you play the game or you get better at the game by playing the game and it's all about that level 1 to 60 journey and the people you meet along the way."

That's why Blizzard is staying away from quick boosts.

"We've implemented these systems to really reinforce that because there's some players who just love that journey."

Honestly, I do get it, and while I'm thrilled at the prospect of less microtransactions (if you can call Tokens that, I guess), I am a bit worried that this decision won't, well, last forever.

I'm not alone in my concerns, either, as folks over on Twitter discuss World of Warcraft: Forever's lack of Tokens and what it might mean.

"'No plans' doesn't seem too convincing or permanent to me," reads one comment. "I'm still pretty sure they will be in the game sooner or later." Another speculates, "No plans is basically 'next year,'" while various replies similarly ponder whether Blizzard's choice of words here could pave the way for such real-money purchases later down the line.

There are also some worries about bots and the like, which are more than understandable.

So, how will this all play out? There's no way to really tell until World of Warcraft: Forever releases this November, but I've got my fingers crossed that Blizzard is indeed making the right move… and will stick with it, too.

World of Warcraft: The Last Titan launches 2027 and Blizzard says it's the "culmination of over two decades" of MMO storytelling.

It's been over a decade since the last proper new entry in the StarCraft series, but hopes for a new game have intensified alongside a new report suggesting that Blizzard is finalizing a deal to hand off the long-awaited next entry in the series to Nexon. While that report hasn't been officially confirmed, somebody at Blizzard is clearly keen to get StarCraft fans breathing a little faster. A mysterious new teaser has hit the game's official site just days before BlizzCon.

If you head to the official StarCraft site right now, it displays the normal marketing copy for StarCraft Remastered – except it's not actually normal at all. All over the page, various bits of it are glitching out. The glitches aren't normal web display errors, either – they're clearly designed as visually arresting displays of static.

There's no clear indication of what any of this means, but the timing couldn't be more conspicuous. Rumors of a new StarCraft game have persisted for years, with word of a StarCraft shooter (not the long-dead Ghost) in development at Blizzard dating back to 2024. This year, reports began to circulate of an entirely separate StarCraft project in development at Nexon.

Now we've got a follow-up report suggesting that Blizzard and Nexon are close to finalizing a deal for that mysterious StarCraft game, and a vague-but-unmistakable teaser on the official site. All this comes just before BlizzCon on September 12, an annual convention that always serves as host for the publisher's biggest announcements.

While the reports suggest that this project is in development at a Nexon subsidiary known for free-to-play shooters, surely – surely – at least one of these games has to be a proper StarCraft 3, right? I can only hope we're not about to have another Diablo Immortal situation on our hands.

There's a reason StarCraft tops our list of the best RTS games of all time.

Earlier this year, PS4 and PS5 got native ports of Call of Duty: Black Ops 1 and 2. Now, Microsoft and Activision are turning these beloved FPS titles into billboards for Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4, with a big ol' pre-order button for the upcoming game stuck right there in the main multiplayer menu.

These new "pre-order MW4" options appeared after recent updates to the PlayStation versions of both Black Ops 1 and 2. Call of Duty news account CharlieIntel tweets images of both the updated menus, which gives the Modern Warfare 4 pre-orders equal billing with such features as "play online" and "options."

Of course, it's not unusual for modern online games to include regularly updated "news" feeds that often include what are basically ads for new DLC or upcoming sequels. But ports of the OG Black Ops games were well-received, in part, because a big chunk of the COD fandom is frustrated with the state of the modern games. Those same players are, at their most polite, giving a big "yeah, no thanks" to these ads.

Clearly, Microsoft wants every eye it can get on Modern Warfare 4. While Black Ops 7 sales are monstrous compared to almost every other game in the industry, it failed to beat Battlefield 6 on the US sales charts last year. That's the first time in the long rivalry between the two series that EA's FPS has come out on top. Certainly, not the outcome that Xbox was looking for after its $68.7 billion acquisition of Activision Blizzard.

The price of Xbox Game Pass Ultimate is falling, and all it cost was day one access to new Call of Duty games.

World of Warcraft players enjoying Blizzard's Classic edition have been plagued by one very infamous PvP legend for a good couple of years now – but it turns out that banning him on Twitch wasn't the way to go, frustrations be damned.

If you've not heard of Redridgeguy, he might just stand as the most notorious PvP player on World of Warcraft Classic in all of Europe.

Why, you might ask?

Well, he absolutely destroys other folks – we're talking hundreds per day – by reaching hard (near-impossible) to access spots and sending his pet in to tear through unsuspecting Alliance players. He's been discussed over on Reddit and other online forums time and time again.

Heck, just two weeks ago, a fan asked if he was "allowed" to play the way he does, saying it felt unfair. It's safe to say that "infamous" is a bit of an understatement – and now, players have retaliated… or so they thought.

As a new post over on X outlines, Redridgeguy actually got banned on Twitch following various reports from disgruntled WoW fans. This "backfired," though, as Redridgeguy's streams were the only reliable way to tell where he was in-game.

How come? Redridgeguy's streams were the only reliable way to tell where he was in-game, basically. "With his stream no longer up it became an all-out bloodbath and even other Horde members joined in on the fight to camp the Alliance even harder," as Jerome puts it – and it's quite amusing all around.

As it stands now, Redridgeguy appears to still be banned over on Twitch, too. His YouTube channel is up, however.

It appears that players want him gone gone, though, with one comment writing, "People that do unhinged stuff like this guy deserve to be banned from the game entirely." I'm not sure I agree myself – but then again, I'm not a PvP enjoyer regardless.

The capacity to be downright annihilated (as Redridgeguy evidently does to just about anyone who crosses his path) is far too big, and I've got grinding to do elsewhere without fearing constantly my death.

I do wonder if Redridgeguy will reappear on Twitch someday, although part of me wonders if it'd be more amusing if he doesn't… Considering how he's known for obliterating hundreds while streaming, how many will he take down while completely concealed?

Blizzard takes rare World of Warcraft mount from players as the MMO's latest crackdown on real-money transactions continues

World of Warcraft is unsurprisingly no stranger to account boosting and other no-no forms of real-money transactions, with Blizzard cracking down every now and then on guilty players.

This month is no exception, as the developer has sent out another wave of bans against folks it believes are responsible for engaging in real-money transactions – namely in the EU.

You can find countless streams (some mid-raid and all) of entire guilds being wiped out by game mods over on Twitch and the like, seeing players pulled from the game unexpectedly. It's not the first time that Blizzard has taken action, and it certainly won't be the last.

One of the biggest talking points with this round of bans, however, is the removal of players that supposedly weren't participating in real-money transactions but were in guilds that have other people who are – and, you know, reports that Blizzard is also ripping a very rare mount from fans' accounts in the process: the Mythic L'ura mount, to be precise.

You'll find such discussions over on Reddit, where players post the message they got from the dev.

"During a recent review, we found one or more rewards gained on this account were connected to activity that violates our in-game policies," the supposed prompt from Blizzard reads. "As a result, we have removed these rewards from your account."

Comments also mention other allegedly affected players, with some describing how they lost the Mythic mount even though they didn't violate the Terms of Service.

"A LOT of people in my guild (including myself) lost it because people were in our group who paid for a boost without any of us knowing," as one reply puts it. "Kind of fucking sucks."

There are various other threads on the forum (and elsewhere online) claiming the same scenario. It's a tough one, for sure, because Blizzard technically isn't doing anything wrong by cracking down on real-money transactions.

On the other hand, though, it'd be nice to see a better system of detection that snapshots individuals rather than entire guilds – and, evidently, I'm not alone in thinking so.

Blizzard fires World of Warcraft dev after using "development-only spells on a live realm" to help a friend breeze through bosses

If the Overwatch battle pass already made your eyes glaze over with its multilayered doodads and rewards, cover your eyes now, because Blizzard is about to make it substantially more complicated – but also better, if Blizzard plays its cards right.

The Overwatch "battle mass revamp" will arrive tomorrow, August 11, as producer director Chris McCabe explains in a newly minted blog post. You can also see a bit of the new BP in action in the new Season 4 trailer (below).

With it, Blizzard is splitting today's 80-tier battle pass system into five shorter "tracks" which players can choose from at the start of each season. Each track leads to different rewards, letting players select what goodies they want to unlock first.

As McCabe explains, "if you’re a Support player, you may want to unlock a Brigitte skin as soon as possible. By selecting the track that features Brigitte’s skin first, you’ll now earn a new skin for our cat-loving engineer far faster than if her skin was placed in, say, tier 70 of the previous Battle Pass design."

Importantly, you can still unlock and clear all five tracks to obtain absolutely everything. "Play through one last track and you’ll finish the 80-tier pass; you’ll then start earning the usual prestige titles after that," McCabe adds.

I've progressed more battle passes than modern medicine would advise, and in my mind this proposition immediately raises two red flags: how long do these new tracks take compared to the old system, and how can I tee up all five tracks?

Blizzard is quick to address these points. "It’s important to call out that the number of tiers in the Battle Pass isn’t changing and you won’t have to work harder to complete your Battle Pass," McCabe tells Overwatch fans. So, the total reward count and the amount of time (or pass XP) it takes to unlock those rewards should stay the same.

Additionally, McCabe says "you can also change which track is active at any time, giving you total control over which rewards you want to progress toward."

The cherry on top is what Blizzard is calling a "Tier Hack" system. Uncover your battle pass-fearing eyes, because this bit sounds like a meaningful upgrade.

The buyable premium version of the Overwatch battle pass will now come with one Tier Hack that can be used to replace "any skin at the end of a track" with "a different Legendary skin of your choice from a curated list of past Overwatch Shop and Loot Box skins."

The selection of skins available to be hacked in will change each season. "This pool will always include skins for Heroes in all 3 roles, and it’s our goal to also represent Heroes that may not show up in seasonal Battle Passes as often," McCabe explains. "Season 4 is launching with 12 Legendary skins in the curated 'Tier Hack' pool, pulling from some fan-favorite skin collections of the past."

If everything works as described – and McCabe says the BP revamp will be shown in an incoming livestream alongside improved UI – this could be a nice change for Overwatch. Ideally, players get the new skins they want faster and have another way to acquire old skins they've missed.

"We also have other exciting BP updates coming in the not-so-distant future as well, including our Legacy Battle Pass Unvault system, arriving at the Season 4 midseason in September," McCabe concludes.

Overwatch escapes "Mostly Negative" Steam reviews 3 years after becoming the worst-rated game on Valve's store: "In 2026, we finally got back to just Overwatch."

Treyarch's original Spider-Man game lacked something. It was solidly made, and enjoyable enough to play, but failed to replicate the visceral thrill of hurtling through New York as a web-slinging superhero. It didn't capture the freedom, speed and fluidity of movement that makes Spider-Man so compelling.

Jamie Fristrom, one of Treyarch's first employees and a key member of the development team, had been away on his honeymoon when work started on Spider-Man, which was based around the first instalment of the Sam Raimi trilogy. Fristrom returned to the office to find that his colleagues had embarked down a different path to the one he envisaged.

Webs were essentially cosmetic and players could swing continuously from one to another, regardless of whether they attached to anything or not. They didn't respond to your momentum either, carrying you along at the same steady pace regardless of circumstance.

Fristrom felt that the web-swinging experience wasn't anywhere near dynamic or immersive enough. It also made Spider-Man too easy, depriving the game of the necessary speed and peril. "I was pretty disappointed by that, but I also knew that doing something more 'realistic', with physics and grappling hooks, where you actually attach to stuff, was probably not going to fly," he says. "But, during the development of that game, I did work late to cobble together my own ideas. About six months into production, I'd got something that I liked and I showed it around the team. They thought it was interesting and had potential."

That initial discussion with team members gave Fristrom the confidence to push his idea further. "I talked to the owners of Treyarch – my college buddies – and said, 'Here, look what I did.' They were like, 'Come on, Jamie, be reasonable. You can't change the core game mechanic halfway through!' It also wasn't quite there yet. You'd swing and you'd stick to a wall automatically, because Spider-Man was pretty sticky back then. That wasn't fun."

Treyarch decided to continue with the initial plan and put Fristrom's ideas to one side, at least temporarily. After the game was released in 2002, the development team went to watch Spider-Man in the cinema for the first time, an experience which changed everything. Spellbound by the film's sheer dynamism, they recognised that a more ambitious approach would be needed to ensure the sequel lived up to heightened expectations.

"Maybe we still didn't know what to do next, but we knew exactly where we were heading. Now we could do iteration after iteration. If you feel it strongly enough, getting there is just a matter of work. And we were excited enough that we didn't care how much work it would take," says Tomo Moriwaki, the game's creative director.

Soon after Spider-Man shipped, the next game was underway. Treyarch had two years to deliver Spider-Man 2 and spent the first six months of that in preproduction, refining Fristrom's prototype. "We had this period where we had one team working on gameplay and controls and character and how the camera would work, and then another team working on the tech," he explains.

"In today's world, with the kind of budgets that would be in place for a game like that now, it's unreasonable. Our bosses would have stopped us," says Moriwaki. "But, at the time, there was more distance between publisher and developer, and even the leaders of the development company. We were given a wider berth."

There was no guarantee that all this experimentation would deliver the results they wanted, causing a lot of anxiety. "There were several months of us telling our bosses, like, 'Don't look at it yet! Don't look at it yet!' That moment came where we couldn't hold them off anymore," recalls Fristrom. "That was a great day for us because they were all very impressed. They ran it all the way up the chain to the chief operating officer of Activision to show everybody what we'd done."

The new fluid style of web-swinging, in which Spider-Man would latch onto a building, lamppost, tree or other structure and pivot like a pendulum, was given resounding approval. The more attachment points that were added, the smoother the experience became. You could suddenly cover large distances much more quickly than before, in a way that felt liberating and much truer to the film. "Spider-Man becomes more like a ball that just moves through space and is influenced by the choices we make with the controller," says Moriwaki. "That shifted our thinking towards uninterrupted movement. We were on the hunt for animation transitions that took account of player velocity. If you were swinging at like 70 miles an hour, if you let go, you'd fly at that speed before starting to slow down."

This one fundamental change served as the catalyst for so many others that came together to make Spider-Man 2 far more engaging and memorable than its predecessor. Building a large open-world environment – a faithful recreation of Spider-Man's version of Manhattan that players could freely explore outside of missions – was one of the most significant, drawing inevitable comparisons with Grand Theft Auto.

Programmer Greg Taylor led the city's construction, which was a huge task. "It took longer than we expected. Greg definitely did get pretty stressed out," says Fristrom. "One of the things we had that GTA 3 didn't have was the verticality. On GTA, you're usually down on the road so you can't see that far. If you haven't loaded in distant neighbourhoods because you don't have the memory, or whatever, then it didn't matter that much.

"With Spider-Man, you could go up to the top of the Empire State Building and look around so we needed something. You couldn't just have a fog plane, like so many games did back then. Somebody came up with the idea of loading in these low-detail neighbourhoods that were basically just boxes. Always having those things in memory was pretty key, and then just having the nearby stuff loaded in high detail."

Eric Pavone and other designers populated Manhattan with activity to keep players occupied between missions. You can make deliveries for the pizzeria and take photographs for the Daily Bugle. There are various races to complete, hidden tokens to collect and crimes to stop, each earning you Hero Points that are used to buy upgrades like new attack moves or increased swing speed.

The most common type of challenges in Spider-Man 2, where you have to stop a crime or help a member of the public, were referred to as 'shenanigans' by the Treyarch team. Some had to be initiated by players, while others occurred at random, leaving you to choose whether or not to intervene. Time limits occasionally applied, like when a ship was sinking or a construction worker was about to fall from a ledge.

The lack of variety in shenanigan scenarios is one of the game's biggest drawbacks, forcing players to stop an armed carjacking, rescue a kid's lost balloon or retrieve a stolen purse from a mugger many times over. This was a by-product of the approach the team had taken and the scale of what they were trying to achieve. "Part of the problem is that, in hindsight, we were a prototype game long enough that we had to use whatever the results were," says Moriwaki. "We were just diligently going on, building all kinds of complex infrastructure for a system that we didn't know would work. Because of the way we were doing it, it had to work.

"Some of that stuff, like the armoured car robbery, was really complicated. It was already a huge logical difference to the way we scripted gameplay. It meant we were going to have to be responsible for itemising what we pulled into the scene, and also when we dumped it out. That required a difficult and complex memory management and streaming logic model."

Screen to controller

Matthew B Rhoades adapted the Spider-Man 2 screenplay to create the story. It covers the main plotline, the rise of Doctor Octopus and his fusion experiment that threatens to destroy New York, but other Marvel villains like Rhino, Mysterio and Shocker are drafted in to extend the gameplay. A highly sexualised Black Cat competes with Mary Jane Watson for Spider-Man's attentions as he struggles to reconcile his superhero responsibilities with his normal life as Peter Parker.

"We had to get approval and that wasn't automatic for us. We did a first round of just asking for a lot of different characters and a bunch of them came back 'no'. All the stuff that they said 'yes' to, we basically came up with a rationale for it," says Moriwaki. "We broke up the overall story into half a dozen pieces and then plopped the movie script's key points across that timeframe. We just found a place for it to fit in."

There was lots of extra content that the team wanted to include. Too much, as it turned out. "We were definitely behind schedule near the end. If the movie had come out when they originally said it was going to, I don't know what we would have done," says Jamie. "We got a three-month reprieve. That gave us time to bring more polish. Even with that, we had plans to do this whole sewer system with the Lizard boss, which ended up making it into the third game eventually."

Looking back, Moriwaki believes that the team were simply too close to the project, and too passionate about it, to recognise that their bold plans were getting out of hand. Eventually, Activision had to intervene, requesting that Treyarch narrow the scope of the game considerably to ensure that everything could be finished in time. Some painful sacrifices had to be made. "Spider-Man 2 must have more cut content than any game that had come out until that point," says Moriwaki. "The amount that was cut is staggering. There were some people on the project who had almost their entire work removed from the shipped game and that's terrible."

The control system used in Spider-Man was completely overhauled to make the sequel's gameplay as fluid and fast-paced as Treyarch wanted it to be. Amid all the excitement about what they'd created, there was an underlying concern that players might find the new controls too complex, potentially alienating a significant chunk of their audience.

Feedback from playtests was inconclusive. The team estimated that 10% of players might struggle but worried that the true figure could end up being even higher. "It's probably one of the most difficult core game mechanics that you can dump in somebody's lap and say, 'Here, learn this!'" says Jamie. "I was nervous as we were shipping the final thing. It was like, 'Will people just buy this and not be willing to figure out how to play it?' Most games with 3D swinging do fail, but I have a theory that the lure of Spider-Man means people are willing to get over that learning curve."

The new control system was much less intuitive than the previous one, but with the time and space to practise, which the open-world setting offered in abundance, its intricacies would gradually become second nature to most players, making Spider-Man 2 a far more rewarding experience. Treyarch's leap of faith paid off spectacularly. With the success of the film, which was the third-highest grossing of 2004, Spider-Man 2 was always destined to sell in huge numbers. Perhaps more significant was the overwhelmingly positive reception from players and critics, who praised the game for its vast scale, daring style and sheer fun factor. Sprinting, swinging, climbing and leaping around Manhattan was an absolute joy.

The developers reflect fondly on the process that led them there too. "I had an extremely good time and a ton of those people are still basically like family to me," says Tomo. "What we were able to discover, and accomplish, together was super-satisfying. It was a lot of work and, I think in hindsight, it was maybe at a somewhat unreasonable pace, but even that over-commitment just felt like mad science and experimentation.

"We developed a control scheme and a locomotion experience that could sustain an almost unlimited amount of exploration. We had no precedent for what we did and the way we did it gives me this clear example of why we take chances."

"In a lot of ways, I still feel like it was the peak of my career. Even over 20 years later, that's the coolest thing I've ever done, other than having kids!" laughs Jamie. "There's just something about Spider-Man 2 that's special and enduring.

"The fact that Spider-Man games keep coming out, and they keep paying homage to that swinging mechanic we developed, really makes me happy and proud still to this day. We changed gaming history in our own tiny way, right?"

Take a look at the best Spider-Man games for more web-head adventures!