Games are everywhere, and we have more choices than ever. The real issue is whether or not we have the time or money to play the ones that we want.
Game Pressure met with the one and only Josh Sawyer at Digital Dragons and chatted about RPGs, Pentiment, Pillars of Eternity, the state of the industry, and the genre.
Microsoft has announced a partnership with AMD to power the next generation of Xbox, including its first-party future Xbox consoles.
This thing is gonna be *expensive* and extremely powerful!
It might easily break the $1000 price point for a console for the first time ever.
So what's going on here?
I think two things: Windows faces an existential threat from SteamOS if it ever goes mainstream. So Microsoft wants to build an Xbox PC complete with streamlined Windows OS that will be able to be more attractive than any SteamDeck home console.
Microsoft wants every gamer including PlayStation gamers to move to PC, then it wants to market Game Pass to ALL PC players. Even if it only captures 5% of the worldwide market that would likely be enough to bring in enough revenue to make the subscription service a financial success.
Note how much emphasis they keep putting on "you can play your games across any device"... as in, no exclusives. This thing will flop hard, again, if it even launches. They already pumped the brakes on the handheld.
If it's going to do that, it will flop hard. Their best selling console is the cheapest one on the market, not the more expensive one. And they can't sell that to keep up with the more expensive PS5.
Edit: Also, AMD is easily not going to sign away anything that limits what they can do with Sony. They make more money the more consoles manufactured, not the one that sells the least out there but for more.
@Christopher
"If it's going to do that, it will flop hard. Their best selling console is the cheapest one on the market, not the more expensive one. And they can't sell that to keep up with the more expensive PS5."
I don´t think they care if it will sell like hot cakes or not based on their upcoming handhelds. I heard rumors that the "entry" model will cost around $500. The *cheaper* one! In case they price the premium model at $700-$800, what´s will stop/prevent them from charging $1000 or more on a premium next gen console?
Bear in mind that Sony priced the PS5 Pro which has barely noticeable improvements over the base PS5 at $700
Besides, this console will not be targeting the next Playstation console or any other console in the market. The console wars is over and Xbox will continue and release their games for every gaming platform in the market.
"AMD is easily not going to sign away anything that limits what they can do with Sony. They make more money the more consoles manufactured, not the one that sells the least out there but for more."
Nonsense. Take Steam Deck (AMD Zen 2) vs ROG Xbox Ally X (AMD Ryzen AI Z2 Extreme) for example.
Same rules applies to home consoles which literally means that AMD will build whatever custom silicon MS is *paying* them to build. Same goes for Sony. AMD is not helping any company out of the kindness of its heart.
Oh look who Came…….running after hearing that Xbox news notification tone🤣👇.
.
@obscured: “ It might easily break the $1000 price point for a console for the first time ever.”
Anything over $699.99 is DOA 🤔
***I don´t think they care if it will sell like hot cakes or not based on their upcoming handhelds.***
You mean ASUS handhelds with Xbox logo thrown on them? And, yeah, sounds like a great business plan, build a huge deal with AMD for an expensive device so it won't sell much. My #1 goal as a business is to, of course, build something that won't sell.
*** Nonsense. Take Steam Deck (AMD Zen 2) vs ROG Xbox Ally X (AMD Ryzen AI Z2 Extreme) for example. ***
You literally are proving what I was saying. Did you read what I said? The whole point is that this 'deal' with AMD isn't going to give them any advantage as AMD will make similar deals with others. They're especially going to make a deal with the better selling company who has given them more money to-date than Xbox.
@Christopher
"You mean ASUS handhelds with Xbox logo thrown on them? And, yeah, sounds like a great business plan, build a huge deal with AMD for an expensive device so it won't sell much. My #1 goal as a business is to, of course, build something that won't sell."
Unlike Sony, not a single device is MS priority anymore. So if they want and decide to sell their next gen console at profit, they´ll just go ahead and charge 1K for it.
Now, with that said, in case they want most Xbox gamers to migrate to next gen while keeping their Gamepass Ultimate subscription active they´ll have no other choice but subsidize and charge $700-$800 which still expensive.
"They're especially going to make a deal with the better selling company who has given them more money to-date than Xbox."
And they´ll do exactly what each company wants! That´s the point! We don´t know what "advantages" or features one will get over another if any at all!
If Sony paid AMD for its more advanced SOC, that´s what they´ll gonna get! Same applies to MS. It´s the same company making silicon for both MS and Sony, but silicon are *custom*, so chances are they might not be the same! That´s my point.
Xbox doesn’t have someone like Mark Cerny— let’s not pretend that’s a small thing. Sony's domination really began when Cerny became the lead architect. What most people don’t realize is how much of a developer-first mindset he brought to PlayStation hardware.
For example, during PS4 development, Cerny made the call to increase RAM from 4GB to 8GB of GDDR5—a huge and expensive decision at the time—specifically because developers told him they needed more memory. That change had a massive impact on the PS4's long-term success, making it much easier to develop for and future-proofing it in ways Xbox One simply wasn’t.
And he doesn’t just sit in an office and make guesses—he visits every major first-party, second-party, and even third-party studio every two years. He talks directly with the people making the games and collects detailed feedback on what works and what doesn’t. Studios trust him because he’s not just a hardware guy—he’s been a game developer, a producer, and a creative lead. He understands game development from the ground level all the way to the top, and that’s why studios feel comfortable being honest with him. That’s how features like the ultra-fast SSD and the dedicated 3D audio chip made it into the PS5—they weren’t just specs on paper, they were answers to real-world studio needs.
So while Xbox is doing great things with AMD (and that’s a strong move on its own), they don’t have a Cerny—a bridge between engineering and creative. That matters.
And for those claiming Xbox might gain an advantage by launching early—this isn’t 2005 anymore. Back then, launching the Xbox 360 a year early gave Microsoft a real edge. But now? People are invested:
They’ve built massive digital libraries
Their friends and social systems are tied into Xbox Live or PSN
And cross-play means you don’t have to switch consoles just to play with others
You can’t “win” the generation early just by releasing first anymore.
If Xbox wants to win the next generation, they should aim squarely at core gamers. Release a powerhouse, even if it costs $800–$1000. The hardcore market would embrace it. But the real danger is that they’ll also release a $350–$400 console, like they did with Series S—and that console will hold the whole generation back again. Series S was the bottleneck of this generation. Developers had to build to its limitations, and it’s part of the reason why PS4 is still being supported with new releases in 2025.
Power is only one part of the equation. Vision matters. Studio trust matters. Execution matters. And that’s where Mark Cerny and PlayStation’s approach continue to set the bar
I think they could put in a low effort iteration that doesn't pack in a lot of innovation (same dashboard, copy some ideas on the controller) on refreshed silicon, benefitting from AMDs newer architecture. They don't need an Uber engineer for mediocrity.
If they would have doubled down on exclusives after buying up the universe they could have done just that
But they've done nothing short of sabotaging their consoles for the last several years - why would they try for another baby after clubbing their eldest son? It's madness
Crazy
Microsoft has made major moves in the gaming industry, investing over $75 billion—possibly closer to $80–85 billion—acquiring publishers like ZeniMax and Activision Blizzard, along with renowned studios such as Obsidian, Ninja Theory, and Playground Games. Once that level of investment came into play, Xbox could no longer remain a side project—it had to become a serious, profit-driven business.
One of the major shifts we’re seeing is how Microsoft is adapting its strategy. While Game Pass is a fantastic service—especially for Xbox and PC players—it simply isn’t a sustainable model on its own to fund the rising costs of AAA blockbuster game development. Most Xbox players enjoy their games through subscriptions rather than purchasing them outright, which limits revenue per title.
That’s why we’re now seeing Microsoft embrace a hybrid model: keeping Game Pass as a core service on Xbox and PC, while also releasing major titles on other platforms like PlayStation and the upcoming Nintendo Switch 2.
The results speak for themselves:
Forza Horizon 5, a flagship Xbox title, has become one of the best-selling games on PlayStation.
Gears of War: E-Day (Reloaded) is already charting as one of the top pre-ordered games on PSN.
The newly released Indiana Jones and the Great Circle has performed well.
And there are strong rumors that Microsoft is working to bring even more iconic Xbox titles—including Halo—to PlayStation.
Why? Because the PlayStation 5 install base is on track to hit 100 million within the next year. That’s simply too large a market to ignore, especially when trying to recoup the costs of massive development and acquisition budgets. The days of treating Xbox like a vanity project are over. This is now about business fundamentals: revenue, growth, and profit.
While exclusives still matter in some strategic cases, Microsoft is clearly evolving with the market. It’s no longer about pleasing a small group of fans demanding exclusivity—it’s about adapting to a new reality where cross-platform availability increases revenue, reach, and long-term sustainability.
In short, Microsoft is playing smart: keeping players happy on Game Pass while also capturing full-price sales from the largest gaming audiences worldwide. They’ve chosen growth over pride—and the numbers are backing that up
I think that stance really downplays what Ken kutaragi brought to the table with the ps1 and its development pipeline which was far easier to work with than any other system at the time including the jag, n64, 3d0
Because let's be honest Sony dominated hard with both the ps1 and ps2.
Ps1 dominated so did 2 but that was harder to dev for with the emotion engine but highly capable.
Its with the ps3 that Sony lost it and really its their only console they failed to get developers on board with and the reason that Ken stepped aside.
But really modern consoles mirroring pc hardware was inevitable consoles were originally made because pc hardware wasbt capable of things like smooth scrolling and as everything evolved consoles slowly morphed into PC's which is basically where we are at now but there's beauty in a consoles simplicity so I dont know what ms will do but making a windows console seems like a bad move many gamers dont want to play with settings they want plug and play and if you push pc to be a console you lose that simplicity and that will hurt
Cerny has nothing to do with Playstation success. Playstations's success comes from the ps1 and ps2 days.
I hope there's no focus on 8K. Current gen consoles aren't exactly setting the world alight with rock-solid 4K60 titles, nevermind 4K120. Focusing on 8K would be a waste.
UDNA is on track to be revealed Q2 2026, so the Xbox rumors from the Activision trail, might be true about them launching their console first to market with a holiday 2026 release date.
That being said UDNA will be a big improvement over the current Series Consoles, but I don’t think UDNA 1st-gen is going to be a huge upgrade over the RX 9000 performance wise. RX 9000 is on 4nm, and UDNA 1st-gen is supposed to be on 3nm (basically 4nm+).
The question I have is are they going to stick with a 2 console future. Are they dropping the high-end since Series S sold better? Are they making a higher-end platform and using the ASUS Xbox handheld PCs as the new Series S option, or are they making a middle ground that’s “affordable” and balances price:performance. Also, are they sticking with the Xbox-PC mentality we see with the ASUS handheld.
"... Xbox consoles" ~ they're again gonna pull a Series S-v2 and handicap the next-gen's 2nd phase.
@RaidenBlack
Series S was a handicap primarily due to the RAM (it needed at least 12GB), but with Switch 2 and more handheld PCs it’s going to become a porting point for those platforms. So while it hurt development early on for Xbox, it’s now helping every other mobile platform…..which is great for everything else even if it doesn’t directly benefit MS, outside of their ASUS Xbox Handheld PC.
That being said, if they did do a Series SV2 I would hope they learned from their mistakes (they clearly didn’t learn from the PS3 or the GTX970 about split memory being awful for GPUs).
RAM
16GB is the will still be the minimum for the next 5+ years (12GB is starting to hit its limit), so that problem would be solved.
GPU
RDNA4 and/or UDNA are big improvements over RDNA2. Even staying at 20CUs like the Series S, the jump to RDNA 4 + clock speed would be around a 60% - 70% boost over the Series S, putting it around a RTX 2060 - RX 6600 performance, which is a much better result, even if it’s still below PS5/SX natively. However, the Switch 2 is showing was a superior upscaled can do, and having FSR4 would be a SIGNIFICANT upgrade over the PS5/SX, and would allow the SSV2to run PS5/SX games at native 1080p same High-Medium settings and FPS as those consoles in most games, but upscaled to 4K with better image quality than both of those consoles.
Price
Considering they raised all their console prices here’s where the issue comes into play. The above hardware would be fine, but if they can’t get it to $349 - $399 (the Series S is now $379 -_-), then why not get a digital PS5 starts to become the question for anything above $399. But if the global economy steady and back to normal what could anyone say bad about this platform at $349…?
@ABizzel1
I think their lower version will do less damage to industry next time because even less people will be buying xbox.
HELL YEAH!!!!
HERE WE GO AGAIN!!!!
ALREADY GOT MY MONEY SAVED THANKS TO GAMEPASS!!!
First to market with the weakest console of the new generation, half-baked and rushed. Then Sony comes around and shows them how it's done for the fifth time in a row.
You said they weren't making another console? What happened? You types are wrong about everything all the time it's quite fascinating to watch actually.
I still say that... talking about releasing a console and actually releasing a console are 2 totally different things. The fact that they are only just now securing a partnership to manufacture the chips shows just how behind they are. Sony already had a deal with AMD worked out nearly a year ago ( https://www.theverge.com/20... MS already canceled plans to release their handheld ( https://www.laptopmag.com/g... , and instead are relying on other hardware manufacturers to make it for them. The same could be true with the console... MS taking the 3DO route and licensing the Xbox brand to other hardware manufacturers to make consoles for them, while also releasing their games on all the competing consoles, turning them into little more than a third party developer. Besides, that's quite rich coming from the folks who said MS games wouldn't be on PS5. You were also dead wrong about Xbox Series S holding back the generation and making multiplatform games worse on all platforms, developer after developer kept coming out proving you wrong, and you still wouldn't admit it. Just kept trying to move the goal posts...
"I still say that... talking about releasing a console and actually releasing a console are 2 totally different things."
Reality is hitting you hard also I see.
MS is always behind when it comes to this stuff. They were behind in making the X1 back then, nothing new.
"and instead are relying on other hardware manufacturers to make it for them. The same could be true with the console..."
I'm sorry what? So you didn't watch the video where she literally said they're making their own hardware? That's the whole point of the freakin video. Lol you can't make this up. As usual your off to a horrible Start and it's only gonna get worse it always does. I just laugh.
Xbox going third party is something nobody could of predicted even hardcore fanboys like yourself if we're talking beginning of then gen. No don't sit there and lie and say "you knew all along" because you didn't nobody did 5 years ago.
"You were also dead wrong about Xbox Series S holding back the generation and making multiplatform games worse on all platforms, developer after developer kept coming out proving you wrong, and you still wouldn't admit it."
This again? Ok if that's the case then list me all the games that got held back from the S. Sense it's all prevalent and out there. Don't make excuse just list the games. I always ask and you dodge and make excuses. Show me digital foundry footage I wanna proof evidence and details. Now go, no excuses list the games now.
"You said they weren't making another console? What happened? You types are wrong about everything all the time it's quite fascinating to watch actually."
The fact f the matter is Microsoft dragged their feet big time on committing to their next gen console. They signed their deal with AMD two years later than Sony did.
It's clear that there was discussion within Microsoft about how they want to continue with Xbox and Satya at least on some level wanting to reign in or stop Xbox. We heard as much from the ABK case and other rumors.
No one looking at Xbox as a console can look at it and say it's doing good. And the only reason why there is another Xbox is because Microsoft can keep throwing money at it. I doubt they even expect this console to be a profitable venture as they move towards publishing.
@light: “ Reality is hitting you hard also I see.”
Reality is no one expected Xbox to go out of the console market next generation but everyone expects it to be their last IF they perform equal or worse than this generation or Xbone
I like the all caps and multiple exclamation points but I feel like you could have pumped up the current gen more. 6/10, good effort.
"Watch it be DOA."
Forgive me to be skeptical and not trust your predictions after your dumb claims that a new Xbox console wouldn´t even exist.
Now it not only got confirmed, but also confirmed that it will play games from both PC and Playstation games.
So at the moment I don´t have reasons to buy a PC or a Playstation console at all. The next gen Xbox will be a day one buy for me and many many others. Just deal with it.
Those playstation games are pc games though.....
You already have access to them though don't you?
And what they described isn't a console, it's a pc.....
Its gonna flop.
"Now it not only got confirmed, but also confirmed that it will play games from both PC and Playstation games."
I wounld.t be so sure that this Xbox is going to play PC games. Her talking about multiple store fronts which everyone seems to think means the console is going to support Windows comes after the splash for "Xbox play anywhere" which is part of the "This is an Xbox" marketing campaign. What she is actually saying is that Microsoft will continue it's "play anywhere" meaning they will continue to sell their games on storefronts other than Xbox/Windows Store.
https://youtu.be/VOCtRanwXr...
Every gen since the first gen everyone says that the next Xbox is going to play PC games, then it doesn't. Heck even when the One X was still rumors before it released people said that was going to play PC games and it wasn't even it's own thing...
@obscure
You talking about dumb comments is ironic. Besides, ive never said that, I think you are just making things up, Ive always said MS will make a placeholder “console”, while they switch more and more toward monthly subscription services.
Secondly, is this really an xbox if MS ends up putting its logo on a device created by someone else? Looks to me that MS may have already exited consoles and this is to save face while they push their monthly service plan business model.
I think next xbox will follow the same trend of selling even less than this generation. So yes DOA in my opinion.
@raiden kind of but if they didn't rush rrod may not have happened and they could have turned a profit that generation
Also ps3 dropped the ball massively so the generation would of been theirs by default but rrod abd mattricks casual push killed them and gave Sony a opportunity to claw it back
@prof, don't underestimate how much developers finally getting a grasp on coding for the Cell processor also helped PS3 take the crown in the end.
Classic move if you're losing just start the next gen early look how that worked for dreamcast
At least the Dreamcast was an amazing system (still is!), the last two Xbox generations have been shameful.
Except Dreamcast was a generational leap, majority of games looked just as good if not better than some PS2 titles. More than what can be said of Nintendo since the Wii.. plus an early launch worked well for the 360.
Sony confirmed their partnership with AMD for PS6 ages ago.
With Xbox taking time, everybody was hoping they might try something new & different by going Nvidia route but guess they went with the boring AMD route again.
Well Sony recently said that PS6 was top of their mind and are hard at work on it.
Next gen talk already we're 4 in a half years in the gen. 9th gen is easily the worse gen by far.
Almost 5 years in for PS and XB entries... Nintendo kicked off 9th gen back in 2017. MS and Sony were late because of the release of the Pro/One X consoles to extend their 8th gen presence. And in doing that is why the adoption rate for their 9th gen has been slower than the previous. Its also why crossgen is still a thing.
But like you said, 9th gen has been the worst, even in my 40+ years of gaming.
From Horse Armor to Mass Layoffs: The Price of Greed in Gaming. Inside the decades-long war on game workers and the players who defend them.
maybe a real enemy is people who use terms like "the real enemy"
there can be more than 1 bad thing, t's not like a kids show with 1 big bad
This is very much a “dummy who volunteers themselves to the middle” comment.
The real enemy is a common phrase, people use it all the time.
Calm down.
You don't seem calm at all. Don't take this so seriously, you seem desperate responding to others defending your opinion that lacks any value or critical thought.
stop projecting
i'm not desperately dong anything, i'm tapping at keys on my keyboard bud
DEI was never the problem and it was an ignorant take to begin with.
DEI is why games like Kena Bridge of Spirits, South of Midnight, and Ghost of Tsushima exist.
DEI is why we have a huge resurgence in Japanese, Chineses, and Korean developers producing games like Stellar Blade, Black Myth, and why Nintendo & Sony exist.
DEI is why more and more games have HUGE accessibility options with both Sony and MS fully behind this.
DEI was never a bad thing, the entire purpose of DEI is representation of all people, genders, disabilities, etc…
The problem was people used DEI as a default derogatory term to describe what they believed was forced representation, which allowed colorist, racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and xenophobic fools to run away with the negative DEI narrative.
Executives seem to often have an obsession with perpetual revenue growth. There is always a finite amount of consumers for a product regardless of growth. Additionally, over investment is another serious issue in gaming.
The fact that they also rarely have any real expertise in game development compounds things. They'll look at what's been successful elsewhere, lack the knowledge to properly understand why they have been successful and then force a team to 'reproduce' their badly interpreted idea of that success.
We see it so often with sequels to games that were successful too. The team are left well alone, they have a break through hit and all of sudden the money men descend on the IP and completely railroad the dev team's ideas. Usually winds up being 'make the same game but MORE'
This is true throughout all of the corporate and public sector organisations to be honest. CEO's generally move amongst the corporate world without any need to have experience of a particular industry, they simply need to rely on their senior leadership credentials. A CEO of a retail giant will just as easily transition to a CEO role in the energy sector for example.
Not defending CEOs here to be clear, I think it's a huge part of the reason the western world is so fucked up. CEOs don't need to care about the sector they work in, in fact it's better if they don't care if they want to screw everyone to make profits.
Companies don’t hire executives to break even. If the goal is breaking even then why start the company in the first place.
That's understood; it's getting record profits and expecting to always beat those record profits, and seeing anything less as a total failure. Then they lay people off and raise prices to reach those record profit levels again, just to sate shareholders. It's setting expectations way too high just to spike share prices, then inevitably falling short. It's feeling entitled to being more successful than everyone else. It's the CEOs doing all this to boost their own bonuses.
Growth benefits the company’s profits and therefore the company’s stock if publicly traded, which pleases the shareholders making them more and more rich, which is why Growth is always at the forefront of the vast majority of any publicly traded company.
More growth = More Money and the people at the top want all the money they can get. I can’t really blame them anyone would love to see their profits go from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands, to multi-millions it’s almost like a gambling addiction.
But it also goes to show someone how morals can go out the window for a lot of these people, and how amazing some CEOs are when they catch this early and provide a balance solution that takes complete care of their employees across the board while keeping the business sustainable IE: Insomniac Games ALWAYS on the best places to work list. The rest of the industry could learn.
honestly, the "real" enemy of gaming, is ourselves
if nobody bought horse armor, shitty dlc would have died almost overnight
if we stood firm and nobody bought games from companies that were bad with layoffs, it would be solved
we're the idiots supporting awful business practices, we are the ones enouraging it
I think the reality that we don't want to convince ourselves of is that without the rise of "horse armor" and DLC, game budgets would have essentially stagnated (smaller teams/smaller games), or game prices would have risen much more dramatically than they have. There was an incessant drive for bigger worlds, infinite detail, and hundreds of hours of "gameplay" over the last two decades, that while perhaps a natural evolution of things, needed a suitable funding stream to accomplish.
What...CEOs make tens of millions and that doesnt include SLT etc etc...we now have multiple editions of games, in game currency, MT's, battle passes.....and what do we get..worse game than what was coming out 20 years ago....dont drink the cool aid, its this nickel and dime crap that is absolutely leading us to gaming destruction.
This is the worst possible answer to this conundrum. Blaming the masses is blaming the only people who are constantly “told” to buy.
Consumers are the only ones not to blame here. People make their own choices all the time. Disney movies are bombing and DEInis being blamed. Has that been enough to put Disney out of business? No and it never will.
Disagree. Businesses are able to do what they do because people are bad consumers and don't think critically about purchases. Disney got away with doing shit stuff for years and it's just the last year where people got tired of it. It's not like it didn't work for 5 years or so for Disney to do the things they've done. They'll just move onto another way to get people to see movies and it will be just as bad but more profitable until people wake up and realize it.
Consumerism drives business behavior. It's not so much "blaming" as it is observing behavior. The point I'm making is that the direction that games have gone are driven by the spending. Consumers are spending on DLC and they are driving the expectation of more glitz and padded out (lengthier) games. If they continue to pay, they will continue to drive that direction until a threshold is reached that forces a change in behavior.
Corporate advertising is the most powerful force on the planet.
This is N4G for god sake, every day there are arguments between people who are Team Xbox and Team PlayStation because they’ve been convinced that having an identity built on paying money to Sony and Microsoft matters more than having one as individual gamers who can play whatever they want.
And THEN we get to the corporate advertising part: to play whatever you want is to sink MORE into the advertising pits, making it so that you can more than one specific product.
ah you're right
they were told to buy it, it's clearly impossible to avoid that
if enough people stopped supporting, it would stop
disney not stopping would only be because enough people didn't stop
Agreed. I’ve been saying for years, announce you won’t be buying the upcoming game because of the practices of the previous game, then you only have to stick to your guns once, see how quickly things change for the better.
We have to unite in what we shouldn’t purchase.
just imagine a world, fifa came out worse, nobody buys the next one until they see proof it's better and stick to it
or games being forced online for single player and nobody buys it
things would change so fast
Greed and greedy people have and always will be the main issue for everything wrong in the world. Everything is a product to be exploited for monetary gain. Even when there are things that could help progress us along for the sake of making our lives easier that thing must be exploited for monetary gains. Anything that tells you otherwise is propaganda to make you complicit.
I've never thought "DEI" (although the way most people use it doesn't match it's real definition) is the problem with games. Good games have continued to be good when they have a diverse cast, and likewise, bad games have continued to be bad. There isn't a credible example I've seen where a diverse cast has been the direct cause of a game being bad.
