A few weeks ago, Microsoft unveiled pretty huge limits on Xbox Cloud Gaming, which up until now has been unlimited for Xbox Game Pass Ultimate users.

Starting in November, Xbox Cloud Gaming via Xbox Game Pass Ultimate will be limited to 15 hours, with Premium users getting 10, and basic users getting 5. The breakdown of the limitations can be seen below.

However, Microsoft just revealed that users will be able to move beyond these limits with new cloud playtime passes — which don't require Xbox Game Pass at all.

Xbox Cloud Gaming access via playtime passes

In a blog post, Microsoft says, "Cloud playtime packs provide an ad-free cloud gaming experience, including shorter wait times, high-quality streaming, and playtime that remains available until it's used."

Unlike some other providers, these playtime passes don't expire until they're actually fully used. You could buy the 50-hour pass and just keep it rolling throughout the year, for example, using it when needed. Some other services put a limit on when the passes can be used, i.e., they expire within the month.

For those on Xbox Game Pass, these are the current limits you get with Xbox Cloud Gaming.

Microsoft says that these new passes will go live for Xbox Insider Program members today, as well as a new free ad-supported tier. I'm told it comes with a 30-minute session limit for the Xbox Insider Program test run.

After 30 minutes, an ad will play, and then users will have to re-queue to resume their session. The ad-based option is, indeed, an option, and probably designed to on-ramp players to a more premium offering.

Is this all in preparation for Grand Theft Auto 6?

Recently, Tom Warren at The Verge reported that Microsoft has landed Xbox Cloud Gaming rights for Grand Theft Auto 6, although it led to a very curiously worded denial from Xbox. Microsoft said specifically that they won't be streaming GTA 6 on PC, nor exclusively ... but left the door open for console streaming. Perhaps Microsoft has landed some form of access for streaming GTA 6 via Xbox Cloud Gaming, specifically to Xbox consoles.

The Xbox One console range can stream Xbox Cloud titles, and there are still hundreds of thousands of users on the previous-gen console platform, given that games like Fortnite, Roblox, Minecraft, and others are still fully updated on PS4 and Xbox One.

RELATED: Best Xbox Cloud Gaming controllers

It's entirely possible that Microsoft has landed some form of cloud streaming deal specifically for Xbox consoles, offering Xbox One players a chance to join in on the GTA 6 fun without having to upgrade to one of the more expensive modern systems. Microsoft also has a few PC games on Xbox Cloud Gaming too ... perhaps World of Warcraft: Forever could jump on this bandwagon as well, given that WoW:F won't be native on consoles for now.

This is speculation for the time being, though. I'm also curious how well received the pricing tiers will be for users who are active on Xbox Cloud Gaming. As an Ultimate subscriber, 15 hours is already way more than I use cloud these days (since getting an Xbox Ally ... which will get even better with FSR 4.1 soon).

But Xbox consoles have become prohibitively expensive in some regions. Xbox Cloud Gaming has been a useful bridge for some, but perhaps not at these new prices. I'm curious what you think?

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Xbox Ally and Xbox Series X|S consoles are about to get a big AMD-shaped boost.

Yesterday, AMD and Microsoft revealed that FSR 4.1 is coming to the entire suite of current-gen Xbox devices. That includes Xbox Ally (base model), Xbox Ally X, and Xbox Series X|S consoles.

FSR 4.1 is an upscaling technology that allows games to render images at a lower resolution, passing overhead to performance. Then, FSR 4.1 upscales the image to create a sharper image, granting the appearance of higher native resolution. Technologies like FSR and DLSS have been boosting the lifespan of older and less-powerful hardware for some time now, and given the on-going RAMpocalypse and component crisis, anything that extends the usability of more affordable hardware is a win in my book.

But, when can we expect to get our hands (and eyes) on it? Here's what our sources are telling us so far.

FSR 4.1 will become available to Xbox Series X|S game developers in the next couple of weeks. Some partner developers have already had early access in preview builds, and will enable FSR 4.1 earlier than others. In the AMD video above, the firm used Blood of Dawnwalker to demonstrates FSR 4.1 boosts on Xbox Ally devices, so you can probably expect that to be among the first batch.

For Xbox Ally X and the Xbox Ally base model, AMD and ASUS will ship updated drives to the Armoury Crate's new "Preview Update" segment by Friday, Oct 23. The new preview segment which lets users test out early builds if they don't mind risking some bugs and polish, similar to the Xbox and Windows Insider programs.

Developers that have enabled FSR 4.1 on existing PC games will automatically get enhanced when the drivers go live on Xbox Ally devices.

On Xbox Series X|S console, FSR 4.1 won't be retroactively injected into existing games. Developers will have to implement it into their existing games via updates, or support it out of the box in future games.

Sources tell me that there is a "handful" of FSR 4.1-enhanced titles slated for the holiday season on Xbox Series X|S, with a steady feed of new games gaining FSR 4.1 throughout 2027 and beyond.

FSR 4.1 should provide a meaningful quality bump for all sorts of games across Xbox Series X|S and Xbox Ally X and the base model, but perhaps more so on the lower-end devices. The Xbox Series S has been notorious for performance trade offs, with developers struggling with the irregular RAM allocation.

Games on Xbox Series X|S that presently trade resolution down for frame rates should get noticeably sharper even in performance mode when implemented.

People have been using apps like Optiscaler on Github to inject FSR 4 on devices like the Steam Deck, and the results have been impressive, but setting it up can be a chore. Native, official support should bring a ton of performance benefits for the Xbox range across the board without the headaches of using workarounds.

As soon as it's available, I'll be demonstrating how it all works in practice right here on Windows Central.

The big question is ... will GTA 6 support it? Time will tell.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Over the past couple of weeks, I've been investigating an apparent wave of undeserved bans across the Forza Horizon community on Xbox, particularly in Japan.

Japan has a strong and unique car culture, and Playground Games acknowledged that Japan has been the most-requested setting for their popular Forza Horizon franchise. Forza Horizon is now in its 6th installment, which is currently available exclusively on Xbox Series X|S and PC.

Indeed, general Xbox adoption in Japan has generally been anemic at best. Microsoft has historically struggled to compete against PlayStation and Nintendo in the region for a variety of reasons. Microsoft's U.S.-centricity has long prevented it from achieving reasonable penetration outside of its traditional English-first markets.

Forza Horizon set in Japan should've been a chance to change Xbox's fortunes in at least one region, but the RAMpocalypse has put a stop to that. But even beyond simply maintaining Xbox Series X|S stock levels, Microsoft has drawn the ire of some Japanese Forza Horizon players, who have once again put a spotlight on its haphazard community management systems.

Ban waves have been hitting some Forza Horizon 6 players in Japan and beyond over anime-styled skins

Japanese "Itasha (痛車)" user-generated liveries seem to be at the center of the ban waves Playground Games has been handing out for Forza Horizon 6 players.

Itasha is a car subculture, literally meaning "painful car," ironically celebrating overly flashy or "cringy" car liveries. The culture represents a nexus of sorts between car culture and anime culture, going all the way back to the 1980s.

As vinyl printing got more sophisticated and affordable, full-blown car skins became prevalent in Japan and even in the West, with otakus with more money than perhaps good taste (or armed with a strong sense of irony) jumping on board. Even major brands have been on the trend in recent years, too.

Naturally, since Forza Horizon 6 allows users to generate their own custom designs, Itasha car culture has proliferated within the game as well. However, sometimes the designs have fallen afoul of Forza Horizon's "E for Everyone" rating. Or at least, on paper.

Some of the skins that have caught bans are pretty clearly in violation of the policies like the above, but others seem relatively innocuous, making users wonder if Microsoft is being a bit heavy-handed.

One user told me that they had been banned for a month, potentially for the above livery, which they had designed and then kept in storage. I say potentially, because Forza doesn't exactly tell you why you've been banned or for which livery.

"This game has a forum for appealing penalties, and although I submitted a post there, I haven't received a reply in over a month," he said. "Consequently, I have no idea which livery caused my ban."

"Furthermore, there are people who received harsher penalties than I did—such as permanent bans or device bans—despite creating vinyls featuring female characters that were clearly less revealing than mine."

Other livery creators have seen their entire Xbox accounts permanently banned without so much of an explanation. If you live in the U.S. or UK and have ever had to deal with Microsoft's Kafka-esque AI-powered support systems, imagine how much worse they are outside of Microsoft's core markets. There's little viable recourse to appeal bans, seemingly, and Microsoft's systems aren't transparent enough about the reasons as to why a user might catch a ban, permanent or temporary.

Some users have speculated that Forza Horizon is using some form of auto-banning system, AI-powered or otherwise, handing out false bans. There are also conspiracy theories of mass reporting to trigger the automated ban systems. Forza Horizon's Code of Conduct claims that all reports are reviewed by a human moderator and now contains a segment regarding "Itasha-style" designs.

"Itasha-style designs are permitted; however, explicit sexual content and sexually suggestive content are forbidden. While we cannot show specific examples of suggestive imagery in this article, designs that depict provocative poses, associated gestures and facial expressions, and attention to specific body parts can be examples of suggestive imagery."

The problem here could pertain to a lack of "specific examples" more than likely. When it comes to art, what could be deemed "sexually suggestive" is subjective across cultures and demographics. But it also continues a general trend of Microsoft's opaque systems for enforcement across its platforms.

A former Xbox staffer told me that the teams that handle moderation within Forza and other games had effectively been gutted by Microsoft's layoffs, leaving a big gap for community management in general across Microsoft's platforms.

Indeed, even beyond the Itasha ban waves, I've been investigating hacked Xbox users being locked out of their accounts due to the way Microsoft handles account support for Xbox as well, and the above could just be symptomatic of overstretched staff unable to handle the workload placed upon them.

The situation underpins Microsoft's struggles in Japan, but also account management systems in general

Microsoft has struggled to get Xbox stock to its main markets, let alone some of its smaller markets like Europe, the Middle East, and indeed, Japan itself. But there's a cultural issue too. Microsoft generally doesn't make or publish games that have strong appeal outside of its U.S.-centric markets, and Japanese publishers have historically arrived on Xbox last.

The situation has improved over time with companies like Square Enix, Capcom, and Konami pledging greater support, but I would argue things still aren't where they should be.

Forza Horizon 6 is currently Xbox exclusive, and if the RAMpocalypse wasn't destroying stock levels, it might've been a good source of progress for the brand in Japan. Regardless, the situation with the Itasha liveries highlights, again, Microsoft's opaque systems for enforcement and account management.

Over the summer, a Brazilian user who was locked out of his account by a hacker actually sued Microsoft and won after the big M admitted he was hacked but claimed they couldn't do anything about it. Since then, Xbox has been working through a backlog to help users locked out of their accounts to regain access, but it shouldn't be this hard.

As more of our content goes digital, and with AI-powered mods and user-generated art becoming more commonplace, the systems that govern access to our digital platforms need to improve a ton. Losing access to years of content and hundreds or thousands of dollars of investment shouldn't come without a clear explanation of why you lost access. Nor should appealing those bans be so slow and difficult.

It'll probably end with some form of legislation, but that won't help today's users.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Surprise! Hot on the heels of PlayStation's own upscaling tech announcements, Microsoft and AMD just revealed that the firm's flagship FSR 4.1 tech is coming to the Xbox platform.

FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution) is a technology from AMD that renders games at a lower resolution, and then uses machine learning to generate a sharper image. Since the hardware isn't working as hard, that overhead can be used for performance.

FSR 4.1 is a big leap over previous versions, and Microsoft has partnered with AMD to bring it not only to Xbox Series X, but also Xbox Ally X, Xbox Ally S and Xbox Series S — the latter two of which should benefit from very, very big performance boosts as a result.

"At Xbox, we're building a gaming platform designed to meet players where they are, and make it easier for creators to reach them," Xbox CTO Scott Van Vilet explained. "AMD has been an important partner in that journey for more than two decades. Together our teams have been pushing gaming forward, across Xbox and Windows. From the silicon at the heart of our consoles and handhelds, to technologies like DirectX, Advanced Shader Delivery, and AutoSR that helps developers get more from the hardware and deliver better experiences for our players."

"Today, we're excited to take another step forward together. With FSR 4.1 coming to Xbox. Now, we've worked very closely with AMD to optimize this technology, giving developers another powerful tool for great performance and visual quality for players. Now, whether you're playing on an Xbox Ally handheld, as well as coming soon to Xbox Series X and Series S consoles. And this is just the beginning. Our teams are continuing to work together across hardware and software, and there's even more ahead with Project Helix, leveraging FSR Diamond to power what comes next."

It's unclear exactly when these technologies will roll out to Xbox devices. It sounds as though FSR 4.1 will hit Xbox Ally X before the year end, but Xbox Series X|S are listed as "coming soon," with no exact window offered.

Sadly, it seems the Xbox Ally base model is fully incompatible with FSR 4.1, which is a bit of a shame, but it should prove transformative for those with the Xbox Ally X and the just-released Xbox Ally X20, as well as the Xbox Series S.

The Xbox Series S has historically been difficult for developers owing to its irregular RAM allocation, but if FSR 4.1 can do some of the heavy lifting, it should ease the pressure on developers to deliver a native 1080p image.

We're reaching out to Microsoft for some clarification on timelines for Xbox Ally and Xbox Series X|S consoles, and will get back to you if we hear from them.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

The console industry continues to reel from the RAMpocalypse, and Xbox is certainly feeling it.

Circana analysis suggested a few weeks ago that Xbox hardware sales are at their lowest level ever, with PlayStation also suffering their lowest hardware sell-through situation since 2013. Without a doubt, the so-called RAMpocalypse is to blame, with companies like Google, Anthropic, OpenAI, and indeed, Microsoft itself buying up all the RAM for their AI-tinted ambitions.

That leaves little left over for "niche" consumer electronics scenarios, such as video game consoles ... ballooning Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendo console prices to their highest levels ever in some cases.

The timing couldn't be worse really. Grand Theft Auto 6 launches in a month from now, and its mainstream appeal would've driven huge amounts of users to upgrade older consoles or perhaps enter the hobby for the first time. With global stock levels battered and prices otherwise impossible for most to consider, Microsoft is turning towards a novel approach to try to increase stock availability.

Spotted by users on X (cheers H!) and covered first by PowerUP, Microsoft is actually sending out emails to users who have dormant Xbox Series X|S hardware, recommending that they trade them in, offering links and advice on how to do so. The email specifically cites Best Buy, which has a trade-in system here you can explore for Xbox hardware.

It seems the emails are going out specifically to users who have hardware that they aren't actively using, including users who own multiple consoles potentially.

Indeed, the economics on console hardware is so bad right now that any user sitting on a dormant PS5, Xbox Series X|S, or Nintendo Switch potentially represents a big net loss for the big three. The margins are so bad, and the stock availability so low, that trying to convince users to move their consoles to others who might actually become more active players (and spenders) is more than preferable.

Ahead of Grand Theft Auto 6's launch, Microsoft and its competitors are working around the clock to source components for their hardware provisions. Call of Duty has also stopped shipping on past-gen consoles, and it seems fairly likely given how popular Modern Warfare 4 has been so far that many users would want to upgrade for that as well ... if indeed there was stock available.

Stock availability of new (and very pricy) Xbox Series X|S hardware has generally remains stable in Microsoft core markets like the U.S., UK, Canada, Australia, and so on. In Asia, mainland Europe, the Middle East, and South America Xbox console stock has been almost non-existent. Tariffs, the RAMpocalypse, and general global economic instability has left the console market in a precarious state ... despite an unprecedented density of high-quality games.

Some analysts expect the "RAMpocalypse" to last through to 2028, maybe even 2029, with consumer electronics expected to take a battering between now and then. Smartphone, PC, laptop, and of course, game console shipments are all down as a direct result of the AI build out. It doesn't look like things will change any time soon.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Last week, I demonstrated the new Xbox PC app which ended up being uploaded prematurely to some users' devices (including mine, apparently!) but, some of you were asking how it works on an Xbox Ally. The answer is: pretty damn great.

The Xbox PC app has improved leaps and bounds over the past couple of years as Microsoft turned its attention more seriously to Windows and PC gaming in general. Steam OS has been giving Microsoft a well-deserved kick up the backside both in the usability and performance space for gaming, and the competition has led to improvements for those in the Xbox ecosystem on PC, both via Xbox Play Anywhere and Xbox / PC Game Pass.

The Xbox PC app is undergoing a big revamp later this year, and here's a video detailing a very early build you can expect to see (in a far more polished form) in the coming weeks.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

The primary gain here is raw performance. The Xbox Ally paired with the Xbox PC app offers very middling navigational responsiveness, with this weird "rubber banding" quirk where the cursor gets stuck, and you have to wait for it to become unstuck for a couple of seconds. If you get frustrated and spam buttons, as I often do, the inputs will queue up and then all play out instantly, leading to the highlighted object flipping all over the place.

In the new Xbox PC app, the rubber banding is completely gone I'm happy to report, even on this early build. Navigating through even massive lists of games is smooth and pleasant, and the loading speed is vastly improved across every panel. Whether it's your own library, the Xbox Game Pass library, the store page, individual game pages, and beyond. Navigation also now feels a lot more "d-pad" native. On the existing app, sometimes the cursor moves in a diagonal direction unexpectedly, adding to the sense that it isn't truly native for console-style use.

RELATED: Hands-on unboxing with the new Xbox Ally X20

The new Xbox PC app doesn't offer much by way of new features yet, but I am told that there are plans to add new stuff before it all goes live. Indeed, this is an early, unfinished build as mentioned, and some of the things I saw people dislike from the video I put out last week have already been addressed on internal builds I'm told.

It's unclear exactly when this will ship. I'm expecting it to go out to Xbox Insiders on PC at least towards the end of the year, by which time it should be a lot more polished and refined over what I've been messing around with now. It's unclear if the Xbox Game Bar guide will get similar treatment, but I would hope so, since now it has a very different visual style to the Xbox PC app itself.

Xbox is getting serious about PC gaming

I would like to see more customization, with custom backgrounds to give us a greater sense of "ownership" in our increasingly-digital investment in the hobby. I'd like to see more data surface more quickly when navigating the store too. I shouldn't have to enter a store page to see screenshots of a game or try to figure out what it is from its thumbnail in my view. Also, I think Xbox could still improve the search tool a bit, although some of this is on the developer's side with regards to tagging their games properly and so on.

For sure, some of Xbox's issues on PC move beyond the app itself, and emerge on the developer ecosystem side. Tainted Grail: Fall of Avalon for example shipped with two builds simultaneously when it hit Xbox Play Anywhere a couple of weeks ago, allowing users to download the Xbox console version to their PC (which naturally wouldn't run). It's small issues like this which simply shouldn't be possible, and wouldn't be possible on Steam. Xbox needs to look towards fixing a litany of small things with its PC gaming ecosystem overall, and address things like native modding ecosystem support, systems for developer interactions with the community, social features potentially, and beyond. Perhaps the new Xbox Labs team will have some interesting things for Xbox PC up its sleeve in the future too.

In any case, it's great to see Microsoft double down on all of its endpoints. Xbox console has had a ton of new features lately, with Mythic Achievements, 1440p remote play streaming, and voice clipping in the Game DVR. Xbox Cloud Gaming is also getting a new interface that looks very close to the new PC app, and we should be seeing a new Xbox Elite Series 3 controller emerge soon.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It's no secret that Microsoft's gaming division has struggled to keep pace with PlayStation and Nintendo for active console users, and this Xbox survey suggests the firm might be considering the nuclear option to fix things.

Yesterday, a new survey appeared for a subset of Xbox users on the Insider Program, presumably among those who Microsoft tracks as having multiple devices. A user sent us the below survey screens, which Windows Central has verified as real.

Microsoft's problematic Xbox multiplatform strategy has left many users who own multiple devices with fewer reasons to actually turn their consoles on. In that universe, it reduces Microsoft's chances to earn users in it's own ecosystem considerably, impacting both first party revenue and third party port viability. Microsoft sells mountains of games on PlayStation, but it has to pay a 30% cut for the privilege. Many PlayStation users already own an Xbox too, so Microsoft is potentially handing away potential users for no real reason.

These new surveys suggest Microsoft may be considering some drastic moves to change the situation.

The survey asks a variety of questions of users across multiple ecosystems, asking how likely they would be to invest in the Xbox platform if various games went timed, or even fully console exclusive.

Microsoft asks if users would switch to Xbox on a per game basis, including pitches of exclusivity for games like Fallout, The Elder Scrolls, DOOM, Hideo Kojima's PHYSINT, Diablo, and even Minecraft itself. The survey even stresses that existing titles wouldn't be removed from other platforms, but would no longer receive new content.

There's even a nuclear option question, asking users how they'd change their habits if every single Xbox game (except Call of Duty, likely owing to acquisition requirements) went fully console exclusive.

It asks users to consider the hypothetical scenario, offering multiple choice responses below it.

"Imagine it was announced that all future title releases from every XBOX-developed gaming franchise except Call of Duty will be console-exclusive to XBOX," the final survey question reads. "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. However, there is no impact to any of the existing titles or content you already own. Nothing changes on PC in this announcement."

It asks users if they would move to an existing Xbox console they already own, buy a new one, switch to PC, or skip it entirely in this scenario.

Going multiplatform didn't work, would going maximum exclusivity work instead?

In the near term, even if Microsoft did create massive desire for its platform and was somehow able to make even GTA6 magically exclusive, the RAMpocalypse has driven hardware sales to historic lows. Even if there was Xbox stock available globally, they've become prohibitively expensive for many. But, that situation (hopefully) won't last forever.

If games like Fallout 5, The Elder Scrolls 6, and Diablo 5 were Xbox Helix exclusive, it would undoubtedly drive masses of sales for Xbox hardware. But would the stock even be available? Microsoft has historically struggled with global distribution even before the component crisis. As much as I think Xbox desperately needs exclusive content, the risks are undeniable on paper.

But sacrificing the entire platform is just as risky potentially. PlayStation itself just massively clawed back from Steam and Windows PC gaming too.

There's little point in maintaining Xbox as an entity if it was to become a simple publisher. Microsoft is more of a hardware company than it has ever been arguably, powered by data centers and increasingly home grown silicon, like its new Maia chips which has driven the stock to new highs recently. Microsoft has already sacrificed mobile as a platform endpoint, greatly limiting its ability to distribute and train its AI platforms. I can't imagine they'll seek to make the same mistake with Xbox.

Surveys are just surveys, and it all might amount to nothing. It could also be a hint around Xbox's thought processes. Perhaps there's math that exists that proves that the juice just isn't worth the squeeze. Halo Campaign Evolved on PlayStation likely did irreparable brand damage to Xbox as a hardware entity, even though the game itself wasn't spectacularly well-received.

The future of Xbox could end up being more interesting than expected.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

World of Warcraft has been my main gaming love for over two decades; I have multiple tattoos dedicated to the game. I built my career on top of it, and met my partner of 14 years because of it. So believe me when I say it HURTS to be feeling this way about the game.

World of Warcraft has never boasted the most amazing writing at a granular level, but at least it was often steeped in satisfying spectacle, leading with the "rule of cool" for better or worse. The setting was always what made it stand out, atop genuinely immersive background lore and major story beats that feel like the product of something greater. Or at least, should be the product of something greater.

I feel like since the disaster that was Shadowlands in back in 2020, Blizzard hasn't been able to find its narrative voice with World of Warcraft retail. I've written more than a few articles on the topic, but this week's major story resolution as part of Patch 12.1.5 is already seeing significant backlash.

Has Blizzard completely lost the plot here? SPOILERS AHEAD.

World of Warcraft *has* to be an episodic soap opera to function, but the payoff almost never materializes

As I sit to write this, I'm wondering to myself if eventually I'll eat some crow. There's always a flicker of curiosity in my mind about the way the game has moved forward since its most hated story arc, which demystified Death itself, reducing the universal stakes to almost nothing. Shadowlands effectively rendered death and dying as relatively inconsequential in the Warcraft universe, and the inconsistent behavior of some of its major characters, namely Sylvanas, single-handedly undid decades of character development and expectation.

Blizzard doesn't seem to have learned any lessons about stakes, and it's increasingly maddening given how well Diablo 4: Lord of Hatred, and even the recent Warcraft III: Forsaken Kingdom expansions prove that Blizzard can still write good shit. Why can't we have this in WoW retail?

In World of Warcraft: Midnight Patch 12.1.5, which launched today in Europe, Lady Liadrin, matriarch of the Horde Blood Elven paladins, dies. Her death is perhaps among the most anticlimactic, unceremonious, and understated deaths for a major character I've seen in video game history.

Blizzard has long held a strange joy for killing off Horde figures in unsatisfying and frankly wasteful ways. Whether it's Garrosh, Saurfang, Vol'jin, Cairne Bloodhoof ... at least some of these figures got meaningful deaths as part of an epic cutscene or CGI sequence. Liandrin simply passes out on a cavern floor, in a death that felt wholly unearned narratively and undeserved figuratively.

Throughout WoW: Midnight, Lady Liadrin has basically followed the player about, giving them quests and standing around while you did most of the busywork. Blizzard has rushed through troll and elf reunification, pushing aside thousands of years of baggage in a few relatively underwhelming quest segments that often feel pretty disconnected from the central battle against Xal'atath. That sense of disconnect extends to Liadrin in general, who hasn't really enjoyed enough build-up in my view to warrant what ultimately happened next.

In Patch 12.1.5, she channels her faith in the Light to deal a decisive blow to returning Old God general Kith'ix, who represents this patch's mid-season boss. The power seemingly overwhelms her, leading to her pretty unexpected demise on the cavern floor. I felt sadly bemused and mildly irritated. But not exactly shocked ... this has been par for the course as a Horde player for some time.

I saw the cutscene without any exposure to reactions online, and wondered if my immediate and overwhelming sense of dissatisfaction was simply a me problem. Apparently not. The backlash so far seems pretty palpable.

I feel as if Blizzard has tried to cram far too many characters in all at once in recent years, leaving them without meaningful story arcs. Mountains of supporting characters appeared as quickly as they then disappeared from the central narrative, robbing deaths like Liadrin's of any real sense of build-up, and therefore, no sense of payoff. It just feels awful, man. It's wild I find myself not even vaguely caring about the death of a character that has been in the game for almost 20 years ... what another miserable, maddening waste.

At least 12.1.5 has a new raid, a new "Mega Delve" to explore (which looks awesome), and other new content ... but man. For me, it has always started with caring about the setting, the roleplay, and feeling immersed in the world. Blizzard has been stripping that away with reckless abandon in recent years.

We have World of Warcraft: Forever coming up thankfully ... but game director Ion Hazzikostas promised me at BlizzCon that WoW: Retail wouldn't be left on the shelf as a result. That might not be his intention ... but it seems to be happening anyway.

Why is World of Warcraft: Retail's writing such a mess right now?

I'm still trying to speak to sources to get to the bottom of what's going on with World of Warcraft's writing so far. This isn't a matter of taste or sour grapes; I'm certainly not alone in thinking that WoW's writing has completely fallen off a cliff in recent years.

There are tons upon tons of issues with World of Warcraft's story delivery right now. I've theorized it's the self-imposed 8-week patch cadence, preventing quality and iteration from reaching the live client. I've huffed copium thinking that maybe, maybe there's going to be a payoff at the end of all this ... and that stuff like Liadrin's death will lead to something more interesting later, somehow?!

I've clung to hopium that Blizzard's appointment of franchise architect Chris Metzen might lead to somehow fixing the disaster that is Shadowlands in the wider narrative. I still have Vol'jin's urn in my inventory ...

Yeah ... I'm most likely just deluding myself at this point. And make no mistake, if Blizzard does somehow manage to pull off a gallery of major pay offs from all of this weirdness come The Last Titan, I'll be the first in line to apologize for my lack of faith. But, right now, I can't see it. After so many disappointments, cringeworthy story beats, and years upon years of unresolved plot threads — perhaps it's time for me to accept that WoW's retail writing team just isn't capable of delivering anything I find to be vaguely engaging.

The South Park team previously talked up a writing rule they follow, by which if your story beats can be linked by "and then" statements instead of "but" and "therefore" connections to denote consequences ... you've created something boring. I can't think of something more relatable to the current WoW writing style.

Things just keep happening for no real reason; "and then," it leads to no real consequences. There are too many plot threads going nowhere. Too many characters are half-baked and then sidelined, leading to various instances of "and then" instead of "therefore." Major lore points keep getting glossed over. Villains who vaguepost and scheme and tease and spend years leading us on to nowhere. Sylvanas showed up in Midnight for literally no reason. So many things keep happening for no reason.

RELATED: An ode to the Horde, and its weird erasure

Arator who? Turaylon when? Thrall where? There's not a single character left in WoW that isn't constantly wracked with self-doubting introspection, suffering from a terminal lack of conviction. Everything in WoW retail has become homogeneous sludge, and it's driving me crazy.

And perhaps worst of all, it's all just getting so, so boring.

World of Warcraft players deserve better.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It's time to finally wrap up this Gears of War: E-Day review, having now been able to grab a significant chunk of time in the multiplayer Siege mode.

For the review build, Gears of War: E-Day's new PvE multiplayer Siege mode was disabled. It felt odd to me to score a game I hadn't fully experienced as I and many others likely intended to play it. As such, this had previously been a review in progress. But now I'm ready to put a final say on proceedings.

Gears of War: E-Day is something of an important game for Xbox. It carries the flag for Microsoft's return to exclusive Xbox Series X|S games, and likely has some oversized pressure upon it to deliver. We're not here to review that aspect of the product, though — only what is here sitting in front of me.

Even upon reflection, my feelings on the campaign are a bit mixed. Thankfully, Gears of War: E-Day is a multi-faceted game, and Siege mode is an undeniably fun and genuinely well-considered evolution on the Horde-style gameplay, vastly elevating the overall package.

Gears of War: E-Day has some of the most stunning visuals I've ever seen committed to the medium, with absolutely immaculate lighting treatment, immense and meticulous city detailing, and gorgeous character work. The gunplay is also fantastic, smoothing off some of the series' rough edges with boosted mobility, without sacrificing the Gears feel.

But the overall campaign gameplay structure does the overall game a pretty sizeable disservice in my view, preventing it from reaching its full potential. Thankfully, Siege provides a satisfying canvas for future play, and the problems are by no means unfixable. Let's get into it.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Story, Art, and Tech

Gears of War: E-Day takes place over a decade before Gears of War 1, offering us a front-row seat to the brutal and genocidal opening to the Locust's attack on humanity.

The city of Kalona serves as ground zero for that invasion. Kalona is known as a city of science and technological progress, and was instrumental in developing the COG's weapons tech and industrial war economy during the civil war against the UIR. E-Day takes place six weeks after the UIR surrenders, and Dominic Santiago and Marcus Fenix are picking up the pieces and mourning lost friends and family.

The character work on offer in E-Day is absolutely top-shelf. The trauma of loss and the shock of the Locust invasion comes through incredibly well in every single aspect of the game's delivery. The cityscape is immaculately detailed, with interiors fully rendered with a lived-in feel, complemented by some of the best lighting I've ever seen in a video game.

I wish Gears of War: E-Day ran better on my Xbox Ally X, but it's hard to expect such a visually rich game to perform well on every potentially niche device. On its main platforms, namely Xbox Series X|S and compatible desktop PCs, Gears: E-Day absolutely sings. Make no mistake, Gears of War: E-Day is at the absolute apex of Unreal Engine technological prowess, and the game deserves awards on that basis alone, most likely.

Rendering the city in so much detail really helps serve the story. Gears of War's more recent games take place in a ruined world, where the Locust have effectively already won and decimated humanity and most of its cities. For E-Day, The Coalition had to show a city that was still thriving and populated, and the horrors therein.

From the very first cutscene, The Coalition pulls no punches: this is a horror story, a war story, and a tale of survival and desperation. The COG army is decimated and blindsided, besieged by an unknown threat that they immediately underestimate as monsters without a plan, only to discover later just how smart and organized the Locust actually are.

Civilian NPCs litter the city, sometimes fleeing, sometimes in dismembered puddles on the ground. The reactions from the characters and their development throughout the game really help to elevate that sense of loss and fear — they're not the battle-hardened survivors of the original Gears trilogy. They're young, war-weary from fighting the UIR, and in some cases wholly traumatized already.

I don't want to give too much away about the story, but this very much felt like the first game in a new planned trilogy ... there were aspects of the delivery that suffered as a result. Some plot threads felt designed to be resolved in future games (or DLC?), leaving me wanting somewhat. But the fact that I am eager to learn more about this Emergence Day story arc is probably a plus. It would be far worse if I didn't care, and I find myself caring a lot about the new characters, their struggles, their past lives, and what will ultimately end up happening to them ... given that some clearly aren't present in future installments.

Gears of War: E-Day's setting, visuals, and story delivery represent its best aspects. The game's performance on Xbox Series X is top-tier, with slowdown only occurring during some particularly heavy sequences towards the end. I didn't experience a single crash, and it's great to see a modern game offer split-screen co-op in the modern age as an option.

The new characters are interesting and engaging, and finding out new layers of existing characters is also rewarding as a long-time fan. I think Gears of War: E-Day could've benefitted from leaning more into civilian-oriented side stories potentially ... but as I'm going to explain in the gameplay section, Gears of War: E-Day's campaign is let down a fair bit by its gameplay structure all up.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Campaign Gameplay

Let's get the good stuff out of the way first: this is still very much Gears of War. Everything you've loved previously about Gears is still here, and in most cases, elevated to the 11th degree.

E-Day boosts the player character's mobility by a huge amount. Sprint is now more instantaneous and on the left stick like a standard modern shooter. Cover is far more dynamic than it was previously, with the ability to take cover in lower spaces than before, making environments feel more varied and natural. You can now also climb and vault, allowing The Coalition to build on the game's verticality. Given that Kalona is a city-state with large buildings and urban environments, having these features serves the game incredibly well.

The gunplay is also very polished. Chainsaw-ing dudes in half is more rewarding than ever, with almost embarrassingly satisfying sound treatment and chunky gore physics. Watching a severed torso flip onto the floor never gets old.

There's a variety of new weapons which are also instant classics. The Locust have been scavenging the battlefields of the Pendulum wars, adapting old UIR guns with horrifyingly inhumane enhancements. As such, that satisfying M1 Garand "ping" returns from the UIR Markza, repurposed into the axe-hilted Locust Breechshot rifle, for example.

The gunplay lets itself down a bit when it comes to fighting some of the game's bigger enemies, though. Drones, wretches, and some of the earlier enemies are by far the most satisfying to fight, reacting to your bullets and even having destructible armor that makes combat feel more dynamic and modern. I'm not sure why The Coalition didn't extend this gameplay style to some of its bigger enemies, which is where I would argue it'd be far more crucial.

Indeed, in Act 1, Gears of War: E-Day starts so strongly, and I was sitting there wondering if this was going to end up being the best game Xbox ever shipped, but over time, that feeling began to unravel.

Reavers, Brumaks, and other larger enemies barely react at all to gunfire, making them feel like robots or bullet sponges — something Gears 4 was heavily criticized for. You end up just watching the enemy's health bar in some cases for at least some semblance of reactivity, instead of the visuals The Coalition's art team painstakingly worked towards. Towards the end of the game, these types of enemies become more common too, robbing the game of some of its dynamism.

Another irritating aspect of Gears of War: E-Day pertains to its open-but-not-actually-open world design, which to me smacks of rushed or changing game design priorities throughout development.

Kalona is a fully realized 3D city, with a huge variety of urban exterior and interior locations. It's a great canvas that The Coalition can build upon when designing future content, potentially both for Siege and Versus mode. The problem is, it doesn't lend itself particularly well to the campaign mode.

Gears of War: E-Day starts incredibly strongly, with a linear cinematic segment that really sets the tone for the game. Then, it opens up into this odd semi-open world structure that seemed interesting in previews, but in practice, it doesn't really reach further than the glimpses we got over the summer.

There's a map that offers the illusion of large explorable spaces, but in practice, all the segments are very linear. Even the side objectives take place in a structured way, undermining the need or desire to really explore. It felt like The Coalition tried to shoehorn in more reasons to explore by spreading weapon mods and collectibles around, but I just found this aspect of the game to be irritating and pace-breaking.

There's dozens upon dozens of weapon mods to find in the field, but half the time it'll be for weapons you don't really want to use. The game pings you with an annoying pop-up every few seconds saying "hardcase nearby," which just served as a distraction given that the reward was mostly just junk items. Even the collectibles were annoying to find, given that you had to jump through several menus then go manually searching for the item you just found from a huge list. There were more mods to find than there was gameplay canvas upon which to place them ... E-Day really would've benefitted from some kind of vendor system instead here, allowing you to buy mods at your leisure, rather than feeling forced into boring hide-and-seek gameplay every 3 minutes.

These might seem like minor gripes, but given that there's not much else "new" here on offer across the general Gears formula, they stand out a bit like a sore thumb.

It doesn't help that, as a result of the game's structure, you end up revisiting the same locations multiple times as part of the story, which felt anticlimactic and choring, particularly towards the end of the game.

The campaign does have some incredibly epic, cinematic, and deeply emotional moments — don't get me wrong. There are some fantastic sequences spread throughout the game, showcasing Emergence in all of its reptilian, subterranean horror. I just wish they'd doubled up on these moments instead of trying this odd "open" world experiment, which seems ill-conceived and poorly executed, with features that detract rather than elevate the overall experience.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Siege Mode

Let me preface this by saying I've never been a big fan of Gears' brand of PvP combat, and you might want to look elsewhere for a take on that. Instead, my preference for Gears multiplayer has always fallen to its Horde mode, which has taken on a whole new life in E-Day.

Siege Mode takes twelve players split into teams of four, and drops them into a portion of Kalona's devastated township. Here, you take on the role of one of the Gears during E-Day in progress, tackling side objectives, battling waves of enemies, setting up killzones, and grinding upgrades. This is where some aspects of the campaign's "open world" gameplay really shines through in ways that it didn't when there was a cinematic story to tell on top of it all.

The new mobility gives Siege maps a great deal of verticality and strategical elements. Four character classes offer some soft class roles, with snipers lending cover while medics revive fallen players. As you progress, you can hybridize a bit, equipping your medic with a sniper rifle for example from the outset, while still maintaining access to your "ultimate" ability kit items that can change the tide of battle for your squad.

It's impressive how well Gears of War: E-Day's multiplayer maps work in practice, they're incredibly large and have a lot going on simultaneously across the play space, giving it a sense of frantic urgency. As you're completing your missions, you may cross paths with another squad as is often the case in the campaign, leading to epic and emergent gameplay moments.

Invasion events spawn huge bosses like Brumaks and Corpsers, charging all 12 players to come together to bring them down. My complaint about them feeling a bit "spongey" persists here, but it's far more exciting tackling these towering behemoths in a big multiplayer setting, all while getting swarmed by lesser enemies like wretches and drones.

There's some mild and quite forgiving extraction gameplay here too. Side objectives and invasion events reward you with parts to upgrade your weapons and classes. If your squad fails to complete your mission for whatever reason, you will lose those weapon parts. Siege does give you a lot of leeway to avoid failure, though, even on the higher difficulties, detracting from the sense of urgency a bit.

I think The Coalition could've done a bit more to enhance the "emergent" gameplay moments and social interaction aspects. There are no emotes for example, which feels odd. Siege clearly takes some inspiration from Helldivers 2, but omits some of its more interactive and engaging innovations, which is a shame. But hey, it's all potential things to include in future seasons and updates, maybe?

We're not reviewing the future though, we're reviewing the now. And the now of Siege mode is already fantastic. Getting a capable squad together and putting yourself through the meat grinder is a ton of fun. Setting up batteries of mortar sentries and watching them rain down shells like an explosive hailstorm is endlessly satisfying. The potential here is clear and exciting.

What The Coalition has built here is as technically impressive as it is infectious. If the update cadence is solid, I can see me sticking with Gears of War: E-Day's Siege Mode remaining in my multiplayer rotation for some time.

Gears of War: E-Day review — Conclusion

I thoroughly enjoyed Gears of War: E-Day overall, and am already enjoying my second playthrough on a higher difficulty, but I would be lying if I said the game didn't have large campaign issues — particularly given how easily avoided many of them could've been.

Kalona is an immaculate canvas ripe for telling epic stories. The new, horror-laden tone is absolutely the right direction for Gears of War: E-Day. The existential dread oozes throughout every character delivery, and the city design is among the best the medium has ever seen.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

The gameplay structure placed on top of the campaign becomes the problem. It could've used a lot more iteration and forethought. It felt a bit like E-Day was originally intended to be some form of open-world, but at some point, they retreated, leaving it feeling disjointed. The "open world" aspects work far better in Gears of War: E-Day's siege mode, where side objectives, upgrades, and mission rewards actually feed a far more satisfying upgrade loop. In the campaign, they feel a bit more like irritants and roadbumps.

If I were to score the game based on the campaign alone, I'd probably give it an 8/10 overall — it's still incredibly fun, and the downsides are frustrating but not game-breaking. Siege mode elevates the overall package to a 9/10 for me. What doesn't work as well in the Campaign works incredibly well in Siege, and the potential for its future is quite clear.

The Coalition could probably do a little more to think outside of the box to stave off franchise fatigue and defy expectations, but the consistency of this franchise feels like coming home every time — which certainly has its own merits in today's times.

Long may Gears live.

Gears of War: E-Day launched October 6, 2026, exclusively on Xbox Series X|S on console with Xbox Play Anywhere for PC, it's also on Steam and Xbox Game Pass.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Microsoft has been responsible for some pretty compelling innovations in the gaming space over the years, from everything including DirectX in decades past to more recent stuff like Xbox's disc-to-digital program or Xbox backwards compatibility on console and now Windows PC. Microsoft is now formalizing a team dedicated to exploring these unique and potentially transformative features.

Dubbed "Xbox Labs," Microsoft is formalizing the team that will research and work on new technologies across its gaming stack. The team there will work on new compatibility layers, such as bringing Xbox games to Apple silicon and WebGL, while also exploring the rise of reverse-engineered AI mods and games such as the recent 128-player Halo title that went viral a few weeks ago.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

Microsoft, like many in the gaming industry, are wondering about how to reach more users. Xbox announced "XP" recently, designed to bring more of its franchises into the real world via marketing collabs, merchandising, and even theme parks. Microsoft has also been putting its biggest franchises onto PlayStation as it seeks more users therein, and also pushing Xbox Cloud Gaming as an option for those who don't want the upfront cost of buying a console.

Microsoft has struggled to maintain pace with the growth of the PlayStation 5, Nintendo Switch platform, or Steam on PC, but made a sprint of acquisitions in a bet to at least sell games on those platforms. Titles like Call of Duty, Minecraft, and Forza Horizon are dominant off Xbox, but the decline of Xbox as a platform has been painful for fans to watch.

Incoming Xbox CEO Asha Sharma is charged with reviving Xbox's fortunes in this space. There's been a lot of promises to fans, including returning to exclusive games (starting with Gears of War: E-Day), and doubling down on new updates for Xbox Series X|S consoles, which recently included the addition of Mythic completion achievements. However, it has come at the cost of thousands of Xbox job losses via redundancies and divestitures, leaving a vast trail of disrupted lives in its wake.

Sharma noted in a town hall meeting with Xbox staff last week that it can't rely on past wins as it seeks to shape the future. AI and other technologies are rapidly disrupting what gaming will actually be in the next decade, as attention and access gets disrupted by AI-borne RAMpocalypse. The content cadence is likely to vastly saturate the addressable audience too, leading to a dilution in attention and spend.

In my view, it's pretty clear Sharma is right that technological platform innovation is absolutely necessary to navigate this "new world" being foisted upon us (by, well ... Microsoft itself), but it remains unclear when Xbox Labs' first innovations will materialize for users or developers. For those interested, a bit more "wait and see" is likely on the menu.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

BlizzCon 2026 was an absolute banger this year, with Diablo V, STARCRAFT, Heroes of the Storm revival, and more revealed.

The show ended with World of Warcraft Forever, which is Blizzard's take on the popular "Classic+" request. WoW Classic players prefer the old-school, social-first experience the game delivered in its early years, before retail added matchmaking systems and other "modern" features that arguably decimated the game's sense of community building.

WoW Forever builds on the original classic experience, adding new "old school" zones, raids, dungeons, quests, and new race/class combinations previously unavailable. The game will take place in a separate but adjacent timeline to the current WoW lore, offering alternative "what if" scenarios that won't impact the official timeline.

One example of this is the new race coming to World of Warcraft Forever: the Skyborne elves, available to both Horde and Alliance players when the game goes live in just under two months.

The first bit of controversy is the fact that Skyborne elves aren't simply included as part of WoW Forever. They come as part of a $29.99 pack, which marks the first time Blizzard has ever "sold" a race. If this race has particularly powerful racial abilities, i.e., so powerful that they become "meta," many are wondering if this doesn't effectively constitute a pay-to-win scenario.

I didn't know that aspect of the Skyborne when I went into my interview with Blizzard earlier today at BlizzCon, but I did want to know exactly why they decided to add yet "another" elf race to the game. People on social media have already been mocking the inclusion a bit, given the fact that WoW's narrative and race additions have been effectively dominated by elves for years at this point. Void elves, Nightborne elves, Dracthyr human-form elves — the main storyline is all about elves — and now WoW Forever is adding yet another new elf. I wanted to know why Blizzard leaned further into this, knowing the memes already circling about "World of Elfcraft."

The answer might be exactly what you expect it to be.

"We know that being an elf is extremely popular," Lead Classic Designer Tim Jones tells me, "We know from our own experiences we went through going into Burning Crusade, the ability to have a so-called 'pretty character' on the Horde was a big deal. If you go back to 2004, 2005, the balance of the factions was 60% Alliance, 40% Horde, and we discovered once we added Blood Elves to the Horde, it actually flipped to 60% Horde. Being able to make a very 'attractive' character is important to our players. We knew players were going to enjoy it. We have a really cool story to tell about it ... so why not? They're not the same as the elves we know."

"There are stories that we want to tell here," explains Kris Zierhut, Principal Designer. "One of the places we talked about was Shen'dralas, that space in between Mulgore and Desolace ... where you'll get more of the story about the history of Eldre'thalas, which is what became Dire Maul. Who opposed Prince Tortheldrin when he decided to sap his own people for power to summon demons? We thought it would be a cool opportunity when we're exploring that storyline among many untold stories that we want to finish and expand upon in the Classic space ... we tied that to the Skyborne."

So, there you have it. And its core ... the reason both Horde and the Alliance are getting access to the blood elf model is for faction balance, in essence. It's absolutely true that "elves" are WoW's most popular race according to the data ... although as a long-suffering Ogre enjoyer, I can't deny that I am immensely disappointed in the tastes of my fellow Azerothian brethren. I'm never getting playable Ogres, am I?

It's perhaps "not ideal" that they're admitting here that the reason they're adding elves is due to their popularity, only for the powers that be to paywall them behind a $29.99 package ... at that point, wouldn't it just be better to sell WoW Forever as a boxed product? I'll let the community debate that aspect of it ... clearly a lot of work has gone into WoW Forever. But monetizing races is potentially a slippery slope in my view.

In any case, how are you feeling about WoW Forever and BlizzCon 2026 in general? Hit the comments and let me know.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Blizzard's worst-kept secret of recent times has been revealed. This is World of Warcraft's take on "Classic+".

World of Warcraft's current retail incarnation is fun, but it's an oddly lonely experience. The game's matchmaking systems introduced some years ago, at this point, really damaged the social fabric of the game, reducing player interactions to the bare-bones functional basics for maximum efficiency.

World of Warcraft Classic, complete with retro graphics, was an attempt by Blizzard to recapture the old-style WoW used to provide, in response to pirated servers from players craving the old-school WoW. WoW arguably had far more RPG depth back in the day, even if it was mechanically more simplistic overall (I do not miss one-button damage rotations and effectively useless talent specs).

At BlizzCon 2026, Blizzard revealed "World of Warcraft Forever," which is their take on the community's "Classic+" request. Here's how it works.

Players have long asked Blizzard to offer something that retains the experience of World of Warcraft classic, while also providing new content. Blizzard's "Season of Discovery" was their first attempt at this, but WoW Forever seems far more ambitious.

WoW Forever revamps three classic zones and adds three additional ones on top. It also adds three new raids, a new battleground, and a new race in the Skyborne elves (yes ... more elves). WoW Forever also adds "Thousands" of new quests and new content in existing classic zones.

WoW Forever exists in something of a time bubble. The idea is that Blizzard will continue expanding the level 60 experience in WoW Forever, adding new raids, quests, and content in a horizontal way rather than a vertical way.

It's unclear as of writing if this exists in a separate timeline from the current WoW, giving Blizzard narrative license to diverge from the Retail pipeline.

Skyborne elves aren't mentioned anywhere in the current lore to my knowledge, for example, unless Blizzard is going to figure out some clever way to incorporate them retroactively.

Blizzard also teased the next WoW retail content patch in the form of "Eclipse," where players will take the fight to Xal'atath for one final showdown. Given that we already know the next expansion is called "The Last Titan," it doesn't sound as though we'll be victorious in our battle with Xal'atath here ... Blizzard also offered a small teaser for said expansion, although it sounds as though it'll be further out into 2027.

World of Warcraft Forever launches in just six weeks from now, so you won't have to wait long to try it out for yourself.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Finally, after over a decade of waiting, Blizzard is returning to StarCraft.

Revealed at BlizzCon 2026, Blizzard lifted the lid on one of gaming's biggest rumor mills of recent memory. STARCRAFT is coming in 2030, and here's the first cinematic trailer.

StarCraft has historically been a real-time strategy franchise, often credited with kickstarting the mainstreaming of live esports. The franchise focuses on three main factions: humans of the United Earth Directorate, advanced aliens known as the Protoss, and the Xenomorph-like Zerg swarm.

The classic RTS and its follow-up, StarCraft II, have effectively been on ice since StarCraft II shipped its final expansion, Legacy of the Void, some years ago.

StarCraft has previously attempted a foray into shooters too, with the famously canceled "StarCraft: Ghost." The new STARCRAFT seems like something of a soft reignition of the franchise, particularly given the fact it shares its namesake with the original StarCraft (which is always a tad annoying when discussing games which literally share a name ...). But to me, it feels indicative of a Blizzard intent on reintroducing the franchise to a new, potentially more mainstream audience.

What remains to be seen is whether or not we get a tried-and-true StarCraft 3 RTS, as I'm sure many StarCraft fans will be slighted by the decision to step away from the franchise's traditional roots.

There are rumors that Nexon and other companies have pitched Blizzard to work in the StarCraft franchise, so we'll have to wait and see.

I'm curious why Blizzard decided to announce it so early too, considering we're literally four years away from its stated landing strip. I guess this helps Blizzard ramp up hiring for the game's development; it could also be indicative of the game's potential scope.

From what I've heard and seen, the game has been in development for quite a while already. Blizzard may also have its work cut out differentiating StarCraft from a surging Warhammer 40K, which has truly found mainstream success in recent years. It'll be interesting to see how Blizzard navigates some of that.

In any case, what do you think of StarCraft's pending return? Hit the comments, let us know.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Long-suffering Heroes of the Storm fans got a small reprieve at BlizzCon 2026 with the reveal of a new hero.

Heroes of the Storm is a MOBA in the vein of League of Legends, inspired by the classic Warcraft 3 DOTA mod. It's perhaps ironic that it was a Warcraft 3 mod in the first place, but Blizzard was unfortunately a bit slow to capitalize on the trend. Riot took full advantage, and effectively cornered almost the entire market.

Blizzard's answer was Heroes of the Storm, which is generally seen as more approachable than League of Legends, which ended up being a double-edged sword in some ways. Without an item economy and slower gameplay, Heroes of the Storm failed to draw in interest from League of Legends and other similar games, but remained popular with a dedicated Blizzard audience niche.

Heroes of the Storm is comprised of characters from across the Blizzard mythos, including Overwatch, Warcraft, StarCraft, Diablo, and more. There are still dozens of characters from across the Blizzard metaverse that fans have hoped to see emerge in the game, but unfortunately Blizzard put the game in "maintenance mode" after the launch of Hogger back in December 2020, promising bug fixes and occasional balance patches only. That changed at BlizzCon 2026 this week.

Blizzard revealed that Xal'atath is now coming to Heroes of the Storm, hitting Heroes' public test realm on Monday, with a launch penned in for towards the end of September.

Xal'atath is the current big evil in World of Warcraft, threatening to take over the cosmos itself by taking control of Azeroth's planetary world soul.

She's a bit of an enigma, with her origins shrouded in mystery, but what's less of an enigma is how powerful she is. She has the capability to level entire cities with her void powers, responsible for the destruction of Dalaran itself.

Blizzard has cautioned players not to expect Heroes of the Storm to be fully revived yet, though ... noting to me that future updates will depend on how well-received Xal'atath is.

It's something of an industry trend to revive classic games at the moment, with games like Age of Empires 3, Witcher 3, Diablo 2, and other old-school titles getting updates after decades of dormancy in some cases. Heroes of the Storm has huge potential to be Xbox's answer to Super Smash Bros. in my view, if Blizzard was willing to add heroes from other franchises. I could see characters like Geralt of Rivia given Blizzard's new collab with CD Projekt RED, and other Xbox characters like DOOM Slayer or Master Chief jumping into the Nexus.

Blizzard faithful might find it annoying ... but a dead game is potentially more annoying in my view. Expanding to other franchises (and even putting the game on console) could give Heroes of the Storm the unique hook it needs to exist in a niche dominated by League of Legends.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

In a major coup for Xbox game publishing, Microsoft has landed the contract to publish Physint, Hideo Kojima's long-awaited follow up to Death Stranding.

Despite being announced by PlayStation, somehow, Xbox has managed to acquire the rights to publish Hideo Kojima's return to the "action-espionage" genre. It was all announced just now via Xbox Wire.

Physint in essence sounds like a spiritual successor to Kojima's classic Metal Gear Solid franchise. Metal Gear owner Konami and Hideo Kojima had a high-profile bust-up a few years ago, following the launch of MGSV: The Phantom Pain — which arguably remains unfinished to this day.

Since then, Kojima went independent, developed the award-winning Death Stranding franchise, and later landed a publishing deal with Xbox for horror title OD. Death Stranding 2 is presently a PlayStation exclusive, but the first Death Stranding since launched on Xbox with Xbox Play Anywhere. Later, Kojima re-acquired the rights to Death Stranding from PlayStation itself. It stands to reason Death Stranding 2 will eventually hit Xbox in the future as well.

During the previous announcement two years ago, PlayStation Studios' lead Herman Hulst said that Physint was "part of the PlayStation and Kojima Productions partnership," although that no longer seems to be the path Kojima chose.

“Creators have choices about where and how they bring their ideas to life," Xbox CEO Asha Sharma said in today's blog post. "We’re honored that Kojima-san has chosen XBOX to work with KOJIMA PRODUCTIONS on PHYSINT. His ambition to challenge conventions reflects the kind of creativity we want to support at XBOX."

"This expands our relationship with XBOX beyond OD," said Hideo Kojima. "As we move forward with the development of PHYSINT, we remain committed to redefining the action-espionage genre for players around the world."

Microsoft and Hideo Kojima also said that the two are collaborating across film and television as well, beyond horror title OD. It sounds as though Microsoft is investing a ton into Kojima Productions to bring this partnership to life, although it sounds as though there's some drama that has taken place behind the scenes between Kojima Productions and PlayStation. Physint was announced on the PlayStation stage, so for it to swap hands in such a stark way suggests there's a bigger story at play here.

In response, Sony has released a statement confirming that it has "made the difficult decision to step away from collaborating with KOJIMA PRODUCTIONS on its project PHYSINT."

Either way, it's a fantastic win for Xbox, potentially. Working with such high-profile developers like Hideo Kojima boosts Xbox's visibility with audiences that Microsoft has typically struggled to access. It also feeds into Asha Sharma's strategy of targeting more ambitious AAA projects with trans-media opportunities for TV and movie treatments.

Whether it all lands remains to be seen, but man oh man, this is NOT one I saw coming.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Microsoft's long-rumored disc-to-digital program for Xbox went live in testing last week, and it has grown to supporting hundreds upon hundreds of games since.

So far, there are well over 1,000 games available as part of Xbox's disc-to-digital testing program, which gives you digital rights for disc-based games.

Simply inserting a compatible disc into an Xbox One or Xbox Series X console gives you the ability to attach it digitally to your account, giving you the ability to play, download, stream from the cloud, and access Xbox Play Anywhere support without the disc. You can also console share the license as well to another player.

The disc doesn't become inert after licensing the digital version either. If you sell the disc or give it away, the next user can grab the digital license from your account. You won't lose your cloud save either, so if you re-acquire the disc or buy it outright digitally later on, you'll be able to continue on as normal.

Some users have been disappointed with the initial roll out, however, as some major publishers have so far not opted in.

Some outlets went with headlines today decrying Ubisoft and others for their apparent decision to boycott the system. Ubisoft has long been the target of game preservationists, given that Ubisoft's shuttering of The Crew and other games led to stronger calls for digital rights. Ubisoft denying access to digital versions from disc-based games already sold would seem a bit like their M.O. in that universe. It seems the anger was premature, though.

Microsoft has always stated that this initial testing phase doesn't represent the full scope of content coming to the disc-to-digital program. Indeed, many publishers are still likely going over the contracts and ensuring that the legalese all matches up before going ahead with it. SEGA, Square Enix, Bandai Namco, and Ubisoft were among those apparently not honoring the program.

Today, it seemed that Ubisoft games have now gone live in the system for Xbox Insider testers in the Alpha and Alpha Skip-Ahead, however.

As you can see in the X (Twitter) thread above, Ubisoft games are now fully available on the disc-to-digital program, with titles like Far Cry Primal, Far Cry 4, Trials Fusion, Assassin's Creed titles, and many more going live.

I received a DM about an hour ago informing me of the change, and it seems other titles are now following suit.

It remains to be seen when (or if) other publishers come on board. Given how aggressively Square Enix has supported forward-facing Xbox initiatives like Xbox Play Anywhere and Xbox Cloud Gaming, it's fairly obvious to me that Square Enix will jump on board pretty soon. I'm told other publishers are just going over the detailing before committing, which is standard practice for any big corporation.

Xbox's disc-to-digital program is one of the most impressive innovations we've seen from Microsoft's gaming efforts in recent years, although it was originally pitched in 2013 as part of the Xbox One. It was pretty poorly presented back then, though, and users in 2026 are far more knowledgeable about the potential benefits of digital gaming. Still, there's more Xbox could potentially do here to sweeten the deal. With PlayStation committing to the phase out of discs entirely by 2028, many are wondering (and hoping) on whether Xbox will continue the disc-based torch with the next-gen Xbox Helix.

What publishers are you hoping to see jump on board? Hit the comments, let us know.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

BlizzCon 2026 kicks off in full next weekend, and for the Blizzard faithful, hype is reaching fever pitch already.

Last month, Blizzard President Johanna Faries declared internally that the Warcraft division is now the "top-performing" within Xbox, beating out Bethesda, Call of Duty, and other franchises. It follows a massive year for Blizzard, where Diablo IV's Lord of Hatred expansion landed incredibly well, and a resurgent Overwatch reconnected with its audience and found new players in the process.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

There still exists enormous untapped potential within Blizzard franchises, in my view. World of Warcraft has yet to reclaim the heights of the Wrath of the Lich King days, although I would argue the potential still exists therein. Dormant franchises like StarCraft are waiting in the wings for a big-budget revival, and even classic games like Heroes of the Storm would likely have a new audience with the right business model and investment.

We haven't seen BlizzCon since 2023, as the firm now typically waits for a wider variety of announcements to coalesce before spinning up the event. As such, I'm expecting this year's BlizzCon to be perhaps its biggest and most important yet — in an age where competition for Blizzard's staples is also more aggressive than ever.

RELATED: How to watch BlizzCon 2026

Here are some spoiler-free hopes, dreams, speculations, and information about what to expect from Blizzard Entertainment's big show.

The big one: StarCraft at Blizzcon 2026

StarCraft is coming back this year, after a long period in cryostasis.

StarCraft is Blizzard's flagship sci-fi franchise, although it has been dormant since the conclusion of StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void back in 2015. If we're talking about major tentpole releases, the wait has been even longer.

StarCraft is set in a bleak future where humanity is besieged by futuristic Protoss and Alien-like infesting Zerg. StarCraft and Battle.net were both instrumental in legitimizing esports in general, particularly in Korea, where the game's demanding real-time strategic gameplay won over millions.

In the Activision era, former CEO Bobby Kotick preferred franchises that could reach mass mainstream audiences, and eschewed "niche" genres even if their fans were incredibly engaged. Now under Xbox, which arguably specializes in "niche," there's every chance we could see StarCraft see a bombastic revival.

The big reveal is most likely going to be the StarCraft shooter, first reported on by Bloomberg's Jason Schreier.

Blizzard has been hiring for an "open world shooter" for many years, seeking disciplinary expertise for vehicular gameplay and first- and third-person combat. I've personally seen some early test footage of the project Schreier first reported on, featuring playable Terran marines battling Zerg threats in what appears to be an open-world setting, complete with high-end visuals and cinematic campaign treatment.

It's unclear exactly what the finished product will be like, but I'm expecting and hoping for a full-blown co-op campaign with multiplayer PvE content, akin to Gears of War's new Siege mode, for example, or perhaps something broader like Helldivers 2. Schreier recently said on his podcast not to expect it to be an MMO-lite akin to Destiny, but StarCraft would surely be a ripe option for multiplayer PvE content on the side, or maybe even PvP content, pitting Protoss, human, and Zerg players against each other somehow.

Led by Far Cry alumni Dan Hay, I'm fully expecting StarCraft to lead the biggest announcements at the show, particularly since the StarCraft website mysteriously began "glitching out" recently.

I'm also curious if Blizzard plans to revive some of the StarCraft RTS games as well. Nexon has reportedly pitched to Blizzard to build a game within the StarCraft IP. I've heard rumors that Blackbird Interactive, which was a co-dev on Warcraft Remastered, might also be once again involved in Blizzard's classic RTS efforts — although perhaps that is for Warcraft itself again. Speaking of ...

Warcraft at BlizzCon 2026

Warcraft remains Blizzard's most visible franchise, more than likely, as the industry-leading subscription-based MMORPG enters its third decade.

I'm fully expecting that Blizzard will reveal not only the next major content patch for the current expansion, Midnight, but also give us the full rundown of The Last Titan.

World of Warcraft is in a bit of an odd place in my view, with something of an identity crisis. Warcraft's writing team seems intent on making it more "cozy" and appealing to broader audiences, at the cost of the franchise's historical bite and edge. Horde and Alliance faction war has been edited out of the story, and the game's writing in general has been a lot more "gentle" in recent times.

I've long thought World of Warcraft still has a ton of untapped potential to reach its old-school audience; whether that comes in the form of gameplay or story direction (or a combination of both) remains to be seen, but I'm expecting Blizzard to over-deliver for World of Warcraft in the near future. Why? Blizzard potentially has some serious competition looming on the horizon in the form of the League of Legends MMO, long in development at Riot Games. Final Fantasy 14 has also proven itself to be a viable alternative. Blizzard tends to do best when it has competitors biting at its heels.

Beyond World of Warcraft retail, there are strong rumors of a so-called "Classic+" reveal on the horizon.

Blizzard has been trying to deliver two separate experiences of WoW for some time, with the more RPG-leaning classic rendition of the game re-emerging as a separate experience. Fans of that gameplay style want something more, leading many to think that codename "Camelot" might represent a World of Warcraft Classic "prequel" of sorts, taking place in Azeroth's ancient history.

On top of that, there are also rumors that Blizzard might be exploring Warcraft's RTS roots again. A title, "Warcraft Chronicles," emerged alongside the Camelot codename, and given rumors I've heard about RTS aficionados Blackbird Interactive being on board with Blizzard again, perhaps we could see new expansions for Warcraft 3, or remakes of Warcraft 1 or 2 even.

It does seem like a general industry trend right now to bring new content to older games. Witcher 3 is getting a new expansion, for example, and Microsoft un-canceled expansions for Age of Empires II and III both, as the franchise finds a small but very passionate audience. I think new content for Blizzard's classic RTS games is something I personally highly expect, given what we've heard.

Overwatch, Diablo, and ... Heroes of the Storm?!

Finally, we have Overwatch and Diablo. Overwatch is arguably Blizzard's biggest franchise now, enjoyed by millions across the world. Blizzard's strategy of over-delivering a huge tranche of heroes all at once really helped Overwatch regain popularity, and remains one of the few big service games capable of tapping both Gen-Z and Millennial audiences in equal measure.

I'm expecting Overwatch to continue its upward trajectory with new hero announcements, and perhaps, finally, we'll see some form of transmedia announcement for the franchise. Overwatch's lore and characterization have received a ton of investment in recent months. What better way to top that off than a big-budget Netflix Anime or perhaps even an animated movie?

Speaking of, I'm also expecting Diablo to get the same transmedia treatment. I've been hearing for months that Diablo has a TV show in development. It's unclear whether it's at Netflix or Amazon or whoever else. Perhaps we'll see that revealed in full here at BlizzCon 2026, if it's indeed true.

I expect we'll also hear what's next for Diablo. One thing I've heard is that Blizzard wants the waiting time between tentpole Diablo launches to be shorter, although it's probably still too early for a reveal of Diablo 5 if I had to guess. It's more likely we'll see a big season reveal for Diablo 4, and if we're lucky, maybe more classic content for Diablo 2 like the recent Warlock DLC. This is one area where Blizzard could surprise me, though.

I'm not expecting a new Diablo 4 expansion right now, instead with resources flowing towards Diablo 5. But I could be wrong; I'm excited to find out what they're cooking here.

Beyond that, we'll likely get new content for Hearthstone (perhaps the long-awaited Monk class inclusion?), and I wouldn't be surprised if Blizzard also announces other new mobile game spin-offs from third parties, such as Overwatch Rush.

But what about ... Heroes of the Storm? Blizzard's long-dormant MOBA has been getting an uptick in love recently, with updates filtering through, and it even has some esports tournaments at BlizzCon this year as well. A little birdie has been teasing me that this upcoming weekend could be exciting for Heroes of the Storm fans ... what would it look like if Heroes of the Storm got a similar Overwatch-style multi-hero announcement?! Let me have my hopium ...

What do YOU want to see from BlizzCon 2026?

Blizzard is one of the game industry's most legendary outlets, on par with the likes of Nintendo. Few studios have managed to deliver so consistently for so long, creating so many millions of fans across such a wide variety of genres.

I have my issues with Blizzard's direction at times, particularly with World of Warcraft's writing, and the lack of love for games like StarCraft and Heroes of the Storm. BlizzCon is always an opportunity to see Blizzard addressing feedback, however. And we know that they can do it: Overwatch is proof that awesome games can be revived with the right amount of love and investment. Diablo 4 is proof that Blizzard can still deliver top-shelf story writing, too.

I'd love to see Heroes of the Storm get a console port to Xbox, PlayStation, and even Nintendo Switch. MOBAs absolutely can work on console, and with an eclectic cast of known characters, I think Heroes of the Storm could find a huge new audience, especially if they opened it up to third-party characters. Microsoft-owned characters like The Doom Slayer, Master Chief, and even weirder stuff like Banjo would be a perfect fit for the game in my view, even if some Heroes fans might consider it sacrilegious ... it hardly makes a ton of sense for Tracer to be fighting Deathwing in the first place, no?

Adding new content to Warcraft 3 or remaking classic RTS titles like StarCraft 1 or Warcraft 1 and 2 would also help the genre's resurgence. I'd love to see something surprising and new for Overwatch too, beyond new heroes, and I'm intrigued to see where Blizzard takes Diablo from here.

Either way, there's still so so much potential within Blizzard in my view, despite how big it already is. BlizzCon is becoming an industry event in its own right, now featuring content from third parties like CD Projekt RED for the first time. Could we eventually see it evolve to include even more games and franchises? It's exciting to think about.

Let me know what you want to see from BlizzCon 2026 in the comments. I'll be out there, so say hi if you see me!

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Xbox Cloud Gaming has essentially been put out to pasture, with Microsoft intent on including hourly limits on the service.

From November 2026, Microsoft will impose a 15-hour cap on Xbox Game Pass Ultimate users playing cloud games, as well as a 10-hour cap on Premium, and 5 hours on Essential. It's a huge climbdown from the previous "unlimited" access Xbox Cloud Gaming granted, and an indictment of the business model in general.

Microsoft says that the changes will impact "4%" of Xbox Game Pass subscribers, which in essence still amounts to well over a million players. Microsoft has rolled out Xbox Cloud Gaming to LG, Samsung, and now TCL TVs as of today, which makes for some awkward timing.

The limits have been met with derision both within and without the Xbox fanbase, and have shone a spotlight on where Xbox is falling short here.

NVIDIA GeForce Now will extend its value over Xbox Cloud Gaming

Already the market leader, NVIDIA GeForce Now introduced hourly limits a few months ago in response to some criticism, although the limits GFN offers are far more generous than what Microsoft has proposed here. On GFN's highest tiers, you get 100 hours, with some hours rolling over to the next month too.

Not only that, but NVIDIA GeForce Now also just offers a generally higher-quality experience, with better bitrates, latency, and stability. Xbox Game Pass had it beat before on usability, though, with a more console-like interface and more TV-friendly apps. Game Pass also comes with a larger upfront library of games, whereas NVIDIA GeForce Now, for the most part, is made up of games you've already purchased from Steam.

The issue for me is ... 15 hours just isn't enough to complete the vast majority of decent games these days. Fable is supposedly around 30 hours long for a completionist playthrough. Will Xbox Cloud Gaming users be expected to spread their session across two months to finish the game?

Microsoft is going to offer per-hour passes to boost how much access you have, but we've not really seen the pricing yet. I have a feeling they won't be cheap.

Xbox Remote Play could be a solution ... but it seems to be abandoned

We live in a weird dichotomy right now, driven by the AI component crisis. Microsoft is buying up all the memory for its AI push and leaving Xbox with scraps on the side. That extends to Xbox Cloud Gaming servers too, and while they can be used for AI workloads off-peak, I'm told, they're obviously not specialized for that type of work.

Either way, servers break down and wear out; they need to be replaced regularly. Running servers 24/7 is an expensive business on the component side, even before you start thinking about electricity and water for cooling.

A chap on X (Twitter) sent me a link to an Xbox Player Voice feedback item that laments the quality of Xbox Remote Play.

You can effectively turn a home Xbox Series X|S console into a "personal cloud server" and have it stream your games over a viable Wi-Fi network. The problem is, despite being similar hardware, Xbox Remote Play is inexplicably locked to 1080p. Xbox Cloud Gaming on Xbox Game Pass Ultimate offers 1440p with higher bitrates, too.

There's no real reason why, at least in the case of the Xbox Series X, we shouldn't be able to get a better Xbox Remote Play experience. But that doesn't exactly solve things for users who rely entirely on Xbox Cloud Gaming ...

Cloud-first gamers who bought an Xbox Ally base model or other cloud-first devices like the Logitech G Cloud are pretty much screwed by this change — unless Microsoft does something to improve Xbox Remote Play. That is, of course, presuming they even own an Xbox Series X|S, both of which are now insanely expensive. None of this really makes a lot of sense, does it?

Update: Since writing this piece, it seems Microsoft began testing 1440p on Xbox Remote Play too on the Xbox Insider program's Alpha Ring, which is a huge win. But there's still not a lot of information about whether they're going to respond to the backlash about cloud usage limits. I'll try and get more info later about exactly what we can expect from Xbox Remote Play.

Xbox Cloud Gaming is another victim of the RAMpocalypse

I was recently told by Microsoft figures that, given compute demands for AI, Xbox Cloud Gaming is effectively losing money when used beyond 15 hours per month. When you have Azure server rack space being used for anything other than AI, it seems Microsoft isn't particularly sentimental towards the idea anymore.

Microsoft has been on an economic grind for Xbox over the past few months, "restructuring" the org to ensure that it sends a bigger accountability margin back to the mothership. That's meant mass Xbox layoffs and cancellations of projects, and a more aggressive posture towards easy wins.

Xbox Cloud Gaming clearly isn't an easy win in this new reality. If 15 hours is the cap that prevents the service from being unprofitable ... perhaps the business model was never really viable in the first place.

Xbox Cloud Gaming isn't exactly struggling in a vacuum, though. Other companies that rely entirely on cloud inference seem to be struggling. Whether it's Roblox or Twitch, the era of "cheap cloud" seems to be over — alongside video game consoles themselves, and consumer hardware in general, seemingly.

Either way, I don't see how you can plausibly expect people to use cloud gaming as a primary vehicle with such a strict limit. Microsoft isn't able to get Xbox hardware stock to most of the world either.

Then ... you start wondering why Microsoft is so eager to let a literal billion Windows 11 users burn cash on a pyre for free access to Microsoft Copilot ... but wants to charge out the nose for Xbox Cloud Gaming? It's a pretty clear admission that they don't see much of a future for cloud gaming in general. Or perhaps it's just more AI psychosis.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

I've been following this story for a while, but it seems like Call of Duty fans of at least one of their PC versions have cause to celebrate this week.

Microsoft has been hard at work leveraging its Call of Duty acquisition to boost Xbox's fortunes in recent years, shipping Black Ops 1 and 2 "classic" versions exclusively onto PlayStation to huge fanfare.

Indeed, the "classic" Call of Duty versions have been in the spotlight somewhat lately, as fans clamor for an era of a more grounded, less microtransaction-laden Call of Duty. Modern versions are replete with pop culture bloat and mountains of "features" nobody really asked for, leaving nostalgic millennials and older gen-z players yearning for simpler times.

Of course, you can always play the classic Call of Duty games on PC via Steam or on Xbox Series X|S via backwards compatibility. The downside is that these classic Call of Duty versions are often infested with aimbot hackers at best, and RCE vulnerabilities at worst.

Remote Code Execution (RCE) exploits allow players in multiplayer titles to literally upload malware to your computer. The way some older games work with regard to peer-to-peer networking, if left unpatched, facilitate this malignant type of attack. Modern Warfare 2 on PC has been notorious for these types of vulnerabilities unfortunately, but there may be light at the end of the tunnel.

In a statement to Windows Central, Activision claimed the following: "An update released this week addressed all known vulnerabilities in Modern Warfare 2. The team continues to support our legacy titles, with additional updates coming soon. We encourage anyone aware of additional issues to report them through Activision's Bug Bounty Portal."

There are other reports of aimbots, wall hacks, and even RCE exploits in other classic Call of Duty PC games, but it sounds as though Activision is now actively working through these after realizing the potential goldmine it's sitting on. Indeed, Call of Duty: Black Ops 1 and 2 dominated the PlayStation store over the summer, potentially opening up new revenue streams for the legendary franchise.

What about Call of Duty on Xbox backwards compatibility?

I've also requested for Activision to comment on the Xbox backwards compatible versions of Call of Duty, which are similarly replete with hackers and aimbots and the like.

Xbox backwards compatibility is one of the best features Xbox Series X|S and Xbox One have in my view. It allows hundreds of classic Xbox and Xbox 360 games to carry forward, ensuring that your purchases travel with you.

In the early days, having all of the classic Call of Duty titles in one place is arguably a huge selling point for Xbox as a console ecosystem. However, Microsoft itself offered a huge flaw in the system this summer, when it ported the classic Black Ops 1 and 2 exclusively to PlayStation, complete with modernized security updates and server infrastructure.

Since the classic Call of Duty titles available on Xbox Series X|S today are effectively Xbox 360 versions, the source code of which is likely archived, it seems incredibly unlikely Microsoft and Activision will be willing to patch some of these. The Xbox 360 security layers are easily bypassed these days, with modded consoles opening up old school backwards compatible multiplayer titles to a variety of vulnerabilities.

It's a sad state of affairs for Xbox fans of classic Call of Duty games potentially. Despite Xbox literally owning Call of Duty, Xbox fans are left with the worst experience thanks to the unpatched security vulnerabilities.

I'll update this article if Activision responds to my queries on the topic, but at least for now, PC players of Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 should feel a bit safer for the time being. I'll monitor the situation and let you know of any updates as soon as I'm able.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It was probably inevitable eventually, but Xbox Cloud Gaming is joining NVIDIA and other platforms in putting hourly limits on its streaming service.

Xbox Cloud Gaming is a platform tied to Xbox Game Pass right now, giving you unlimited access to stream games from Game Pass as well as hundreds upon hundreds of digital games you own. In fact, thanks to Xbox's disc-to-digital program, you can now even play disc-based Xbox games you own if they're included in Xbox Cloud Gaming.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

Many users use Xbox Cloud Gaming on Xbox One to play current-gen Xbox Series X|S games that aren't available natively on older systems. It's also great for running games on laptops, tablets, and other devices that aren't powerful enough to run said titles natively.

Up until now, Xbox Cloud Gaming was unlimited, but Microsoft just announced that it will begin introducing limits.

The new hourly cloud gaming limits via Xbox Game Pass

"We recognize that introducing limits is a meaningful change, particularly for players who regularly spend more time gaming through the cloud," Microsoft said on Xbox Wire. "We expect this upcoming change to impact 4% of Game Pass subscribers. Once subscribers use their included hours, they will be able to purchase additional cloud playtime through the XBOX Store."

I'm told that the "additional cloud playtime" bundles will not have a "use by" expiry window once purchased, although Microsoft hasn't listed exactly how much these passes will cost as of yet.

Indeed, you will not need an Xbox Game Pass subscription to use these cloud playtime hours, which will grant you access to your own library of compatible Xbox Play Anywhere cloud games even if you don't fancy owning the Game Pass subscription.

"We’re introducing this model because the cost of providing cloud gaming grows as more people use it and play for longer," Microsoft explained. "Moving to monthly limits allows us to keep offering the service while continuing to invest in its reliability and performance."

"We understand that for some players the practical result is a higher cost. In November, we’ll provide more information about pricing, purchasing additional hours, eligible games, market availability, and how players can check their remaining time. We’ll listen closely to player feedback before and after the change takes effect and share any adjustments we make."

The RAMpocalypse is coming for cloud gaming, too

Microsoft has been long-rumored to be exploring an ad-based tier for Xbox Cloud Gaming and Xbox Game Pass in general. It's also true that the video ads business is incredibly tough, making me wonder if Microsoft decided to opt for this approach instead of trying to compete with Google / YouTube for video ad slots.

Indeed, many recent reports suggest that Twitch, despite being absolutely rammed with ads, is nowhere near profitable. What prayer would an ad-based Xbox Cloud Gaming tier have, given the monstrous amount of bandwidth required for Xbox Cloud Gaming video encoding?

The RAMpocalypse is impacting consumer electronics prices, but also cloud server prices too. Microsoft has reportedly joined NVIDIA and Google in earmarking 70% of Samsung's total DRAM output through to 2031. Unfortunately, I don't think a significant chunk of that memory is going towards gaming.

One advantage Xbox Cloud Gaming probably does have (at least in terms of Microsoft corporate politics) is that it does help keep cloud inference up — which in turn helps Microsoft justify infrastructure capital expenditure to shareholders. Xbox Cloud Gaming servers, while idle (at night, for example), can be used for training AI models potentially, which helps anchor Xbox's future in a corporation dominated by AI hype.

I suspect that introducing these limits now revolves around a plan to begin marketing Xbox Cloud Gaming more aggressively. If Microsoft ever did manage to find some form of mainstream breakthrough with Xbox Cloud Gaming, creating huge server queues (which we've seen in the past) wouldn't exactly represent a positive first-time experience for new players.

If Microsoft's goal is to form habits around Xbox Cloud Gaming in regions where console availability and affordability are low, ensuring a stable experience is obviously within their interests.

It remains to be seen if Xbox Cloud Gaming will ever be anything more than a niche kind of thing. It's useful for testing out games without installing them, but in most scenarios where you might want to use it, i.e., on a plane, on hotel Wi-Fi, or on a long-distance commute ... you're probably not going to have good enough internet speeds.

The laws of physics and the speed of light preclude Xbox Cloud Gaming from seeing any significant improvements from here, probably, but the upcoming direct-to-Wi-Fi Xbox controllers should offer a meaningful latency boost — if they ever actually come out.

It's a hot topic right now. With Xbox Helix and the PS6 threatening to be the most expensive consoles ever, perhaps even cloud gaming will end up too expensive to be worth it.

I'm tired of this AI stuff, mannnnnnnn.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.