Too many games, not enough players: the industry's growing challenge

[Skye Jacobs]

The takeaway: New technology and democratized development tools have supercharged the way games are created and sold. The result? An explosion of creativity like never before. But there's a catch: a marketplace so overcrowded that even the best games struggle to be seen. For players, this is a golden era. For developers and publishers, it's an escalating arms race where only a few titles manage to break through.

The video game industry is in the middle of a turbulent transition. Massive layoffs and corporate restructuring have dominated headlines, but underneath those issues is a more fundamental shift: there are simply too many games, as it was recently highlighted by Jason Schreier.

According to data from SteamDB, 18,626 titles launched on Steam in 2024 alone – a staggering 93% increase from the 9,656 released in 2020. This surge is fueled by global growth in gaming, accessible dev tools like Unity and Unreal, and the near-total shift to digital distribution, which eliminated the old gatekeepers of retail shelf space.

According to data from SteamDB, 18,626 titles launched on Steam in 2024 alone – a staggering 93% increase from the 9,656 released in 2020.

The effects of this flood were on full display in September 2025. After seven years in development, Team Cherry's Hollow Knight: Silksong finally launched to critical acclaim, instantly hailed as one of the year's best games. Just weeks later, Supergiant Games dropped the full version of Hades II, another indie sequel with equally glowing reviews.

Hollow Knight: Silksong is the sequel to one of the most critically acclaimed metroidvanias of all time, and it's finally available, but are enough people taking notice?

And those weren't isolated hits. In between came a remake of The Legend of Heroes: Trails in the Sky, a new entry in the Borderlands franchise, a cooperative Lego puzzle game, and a new installment in the long-running Silent Hill series – all within the same month.

Unlike the infamous 1983 video game crash, this modern glut isn't driven by bad games. In fact, many are excellent. Of the thousands of titles released last year, 1,431 received at least 500 user reviews on Steam – a sign they were played by thousands of people. Nearly 260 earned positive ratings from over 90% of players, and 800 scored above 80%.

But in today's fragmented attention economy, quality alone isn't enough. Live-service giants like Counter-Strike, Dota 2, and PUBG: Battlegrounds dominate Steam's most-played charts year after year. Meanwhile, off-platform heavyweights such as League of Legends and Roblox command millions of daily users.

Hades 2 is one of those games that perfectly encapsulates the best traits of the roguelike action genre

That leaves newcomers competing not only with each other but also with games designed to keep players hooked indefinitely. Even the most celebrated new releases often sink without a trace.

In 2025, more than 120 games scored above 80 on Metacritic, but only a handful crossed the 90 threshold – the level where buzz translates into widespread sales.

Dreamhaven's Wildgate and Sunderfolk are prime examples: both earned glowing reviews yet struggled to gain traction. Their fate underscores a harsh truth – critical praise doesn't pay the bills if a game gets buried in an endless release calendar.

For studios investing hundreds of millions into blockbuster productions, the stakes are higher than ever. Players have more choice than at any point in history, but for developers, the challenge isn't just making a great game. It's making one that people notice.

Permalink to story:

Too many games, not enough players: the industry's growing challenge

 

[3ogdy]

I am perfectly sure that games being sold for $100 a pop, and GPUs being sold at incredible prices have nothing to do with it.

 

[yRaz]

I am perfectly sure that games being sold for $100 a pop, and GPUs being sold at incredible prices have nothing to do with it.

$100? That's generous, they are actually being sold for far more than that. They sell the base game for $100 and then sell the rest of the game back to you as DLC or break it up into something where they can sell it as micro transactions to get even more money out of players. Games are going for a lot more than $100 these days, the just obfuscate it so we don't know we are paying more. After DLC, MTX and subscriptions for single player games we end up paying a lot more.

It's why I put things on my steam wishlist and get notified when they go on sale.

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

I am perfectly sure that games being sold for $100 a pop, and GPUs being sold at incredible prices have nothing to do with it.

The vast majority of those new games are smaller indie titles, and their price is no where near $100 a pop. Most are more like $20-$30.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Here's an idea: stop pumping out slop. Slow down, get some good ideas going, and make actual good games. People wouldn't mind $100 games if they were on par with, or better than, the PS2 era.

I went and played Timesplitters for the first time this weekend, and that game is great! Nothing in the last five years comes close to that level of writing.

 

[gamerk2]

There is for sure a glut in the market. If I'm not working at a major AAA studio, I'm not betting on a title that needs 100k sales just to break even; its just too hard to stand out and gain traction, regardless of quality.

 

[BobHome]

$100? That's generous, they are actually being sold for far more than that. They sell the base game for $100 and then sell the rest of the game back to you as DLC or break it up into something where they can sell it as micro transactions to get even more money out of players. Games are going for a lot more than $100 these days, the just obfuscate it so we don't know we are paying more. After DLC, MTX and subscriptions for single player games we end up paying a lot more.

It's why I put things on my steam wishlist and get notified when they go on sale.

Steam | My Account | External Funds Used can show how much one spent in total, but how about Per Game including DLCs?
I realize microtransactions that go directly to the publisher won't be in this total so it sounds pretty messy, to me, to know how much a game is really costing you.
(I don't do online stores or AAA gaming, just offline single player stuff)

 

[yRaz]

Steam | My Account | External Funds Used can show how much one spent in total, but how about Per Game including DLCs?
I realize microtransactions that go directly to the publisher won't be in this total so it sounds pretty messy, to me, to know how much a game is really costing you.
(I don't do online stores or AAA gaming, just offline single player stuff)

I wish I didn't know that. That's used car money... A drug habit would have been cheaper....

 

[GeoffreyA]

When I was a teenager, games were fewer, and many were rubbish. Licensing an engine or writing one, assembling a team of people, and getting funding were barriers. Game development was rarely taught at universities. One had to study computer science and try to distill the elements of design from the masterpieces. I tried but failed to get into the field. Nowadays, it has become accessible and democratised.

In my 20s, I lost my love of gaming and stopped playing. Exceptions were Oblivion and Skyrim; but I always read about game design, applying what I learnt to my personal work. 2025 is special: for some reason, I played Doom 2016; it flicked some switch in my brain; the passion returned; I felt young again. After that, Expedition 33, which I consider my favourite, and this month, Silent Hill 2 Remake, which was particularly moving, the ending weighing on one's mind.

 

[Warrior247]

"For studios investing hundreds of millions into blockbuster productions, the stakes are higher than ever."

That's part of the problem right there. Huge budgets, development teams, development costs, etc. Why? Why should it costs hundreds of millions of dollars to make a video game? Now you see why game develpoers use the tactics that they do to recoup their costs and make a profit.

 

[amstech]

Most games are available dirt cheap (Thanks Steam) and you only need a $1000 GPU to play at ultra settings.
Creativity and quality is severely lacking in this generation of entitled brats and its been like this for years. HL2 is still better then just about any triple A shooter in the past 15 years. Wokeness, reliance on social media and the victim mentality has destroyed the art of creation and new ideas.

 

[yRaz]

Most games are available dirt cheap (Thanks Steam) and you only need a $1000 GPU to play at ultra settings.
Creativity and quality is severely lacking in this generation of entitled brats and its been like this for years. HL2 is still better then just about any triple A shooter in the past 15 years. Wokeness, reliance on social media and the victim mentality has destroyed the art of creation and new ideas.

I went for a walk on Saturday and found a pop-up rave on a sidewalk. Dancing for several hours to bass music was far more fun(and cheaper) than any game I've played that came out in the last few years. I download the MechWarrior games and have been playing them recently. The graphics got better but the games got worse. I think that's the major issue with gaming today, developers are focused on profits, not fun. Make a GAME that's FUN and people will hand over their money enmasse

 

[arrowflash]

The vast majority of these 18626 games are shovelware not even worth trying for free, and I'd say they don't even compete with serious developers (by that I mean any serious developer, even if it's just a one-person studio). Steam and ready-to-use engines have lowered the bar too much, and also have sparked too much greed, with lots of amateur creators releasing baby's first Unreal/Unity/Godot/RPGMaker/Renpy asset flip on Steam and expecting people to pay money for these.

So, saying the glut isn't driven by bad games isn't fully correct, even if there is a vast number of good games that actually compete. The main problem is all the noise this staggering amount of shovelware adds, and hurts especially small indie developers.

 

[NumberNine]

No, I'd say the challenge is still in making a great game, the bar has just been extensively lowered by releasing slop to kids who don't know any better. The most important part of releasing a game is that you release a good game that is fun to play. No amount of business finesse can keep you afloat if the games suck.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

I wish I didn't know that. That's used car money... A drug habit would have been cheaper....

My Steam External Funds Used total was higher than I would have guessed...

But after checking my "years of service" badge, I found I've spent less than a dollar a day. And that's with 553 titles still in my backlog.

Gaming is cheap.

 

[ScottSoapbox]

Like most storefronts you have to do more than make a (good) product and put it on the shelf to get sales.

That's not gloom and doom as Skye implies, it's just how selling things works.

 

[Shaitan]

For me, it's simple: does the game sell you skins and DLC for single player? Oh, Ok, not buying. Does the game ask you for microtransactions? Oh, Ok, not buying.
Case in question? SW: Outlaws. Not only do they chose to "uglify" the main character, but they refused to listen to the fan's demands. "Toxic male gaze"? Oh, Ok, it's my money, therefore I may choose to see beautiful women on screen, for the amount of money I'm paying. Not happy with that? Oh, Ok then, you will NOT have my money. The same happened to Diablo II: they made the amazon ugly AF. The same they did to Dead Space remake; oldify and uglify the female doctor.
Sure, you may call me a toxic incel or whatever, but... the money stays IN MY WALLET.
I've paid Tempest Rising, RoboCop Rogue City, Space Marine 2, and the excellent RTS remake of Dawn of War, and I outright REFUSE to pay "AAAAAAAAA" prices for mediocre games. My hard-earned money won't go to companies that slap me over the head with the righteousness, ugly characters or mediocre gameplay.
Yes, it's a decline all over the board, and I'm playing (and paying) less and less.

 

[TheBigFatClown]

@Shaitan

I'm playing the prequel (?) to Jedi: Survivor, the Fallen Order, and I agree, fugly is a proper word for a couple of the main "female" characters in this story driven game. The game is incredibly beautiful on Unreal Engine and helluva fun game, some very creative stuff, like I've never seen for a long time.
But wish I could swap out this fugly for my own non-repulsive actors. Hopefully, somebody will release a mod that can swap them out someday with more aesthetically pleasing ones.
They should add a graphics settings for characters with selections: "Beautiful" or "Politically Correct".
Please keep politics out of games! It can ruin them.

Oh, and with regards to mtx, Jedi:Fallen Order (and probably Survivor) have mtx. But that hasn't taken any joy away from the base game I'm playing. It's still an incredible experience and I haven't spent 1 extra dime on mtx. So, this is just an example of mtx being present isn't a guarantee that the game is not good. Or that you shouldn't play it's base, simply just don't feed the "monster" in the same room.

 

[Subset6]

Didn't Steam try to tackle this issue over a decade ago? I recall them collaborating with Totalbiscuit in an effort to personalize the home storefront screen to achieve this goal—bringing more games to gamers' attention.

 

[lonetac]

@Shaitan

I'm playing the prequel (?) to Jedi: Survivor, the Fallen Order, and I agree, fugly is a proper word for a couple of the main "female" characters in this story driven game. The game is incredibly beautiful on Unreal Engine and helluva fun game, some very creative stuff, like I've never seen for a long time.
But wish I could swap out this fugly for my own non-repulsive actors. Hopefully, somebody will release a mod that can swap them out someday with more aesthetically pleasing ones.
They should add a graphics settings for characters with selections: "Beautiful" or "Politically Correct".
Please keep politics out of games! It can ruin them.

Oh, and with regards to mtx, Jedi:Fallen Order (and probably Survivor) have mtx. But that hasn't taken any joy away from the base game I'm playing. It's still an incredible experience and I haven't spent 1 extra dime on mtx. So, this is just an example of mtx being present isn't a guarantee that the game is not good. Or that you shouldn't play it's base, simply just don't feed the "monster" in the same room.

I didnt know beauty was a political agenda topic, cmon man... seriously... Ugly women isnt politically correct ffs. I actually get tired of every game having some perfect looking big breasted child as the protagonist while all the guys pretend they are not child predators googling at them.

On a different note, games are cheaper than they have ever been. Complaining about the cost always makes me head scratch. With indie developers popping out games for under $20, and there are literally 1000s if not 10s of 1000s of them to choose from, games have never been cheaper.

The one or two AAA games coming out at $70-80 is still not bad considering we had SNES games around the $70 mark, and that was 30 years ago. NES and SNES games were EXPENSIVE and most of them sucked. There were no mods, patches to fix broken things, game mechanic changes, the game was just *** and you just blew your money on the one game that came out that month. Just wait for the next big release I guess. Unlike now where the sheer quantity is overwhelming. Most gamers have a serious backlog.

When adjusted to cost of inflation, its never been cheaper.

That being said again, Im busy playing openxcom "The Files" mod on my 4k gaming PC and losing track of time like its 1994 again.

 

[Liranan]

When I was a teenager, games were fewer, and many were rubbish. Licensing an engine or writing one, assembling a team of people, and getting funding were barriers. Game development was rarely taught at universities. One had to study computer science and try to distill the elements of design from the masterpieces. I tried but failed to get into the field. Nowadays, it has become accessible and democratised.

In my 20s, I lost my love of gaming and stopped playing. Exceptions were Oblivion and Skyrim; but I always read about game design, applying what I learnt to my personal work. 2025 is special: for some reason, I played Doom 2016; it flicked some switch in my brain; the passion returned; I felt young again. After that, Expedition 33, which I consider my favourite, and this month, Silent Hill 2 Remake, which was particularly moving, the ending weighing on one's mind.

The difference between then and now is that rubbish is called AAA and sold for ridiculous prices.

 

[Liranan]

I didnt know beauty was a political agenda topic, cmon man... seriously... Ugly women isnt politically correct ffs. I actually get tired of every game having some perfect looking big breasted child as the protagonist while all the guys pretend they are not child predators googling at them.

On a different note, games are cheaper than they have ever been. Complaining about the cost always makes me head scratch. With indie developers popping out games for under $20, and there are literally 1000s if not 10s of 1000s of them to choose from, games have never been cheaper.

The one or two AAA games coming out at $70-80 is still not bad considering we had SNES games around the $70 mark, and that was 30 years ago. NES and SNES games were EXPENSIVE and most of them sucked. There were no mods, patches to fix broken things, game mechanic changes, the game was just *** and you just blew your money on the one game that came out that month. Just wait for the next big release I guess. Unlike now where the sheer quantity is overwhelming. Most gamers have a serious backlog.

When adjusted to cost of inflation, its never been cheaper.

That being said again, Im busy playing openxcom "The Files" mod on my 4k gaming PC and losing track of time like its 1994 again.

Looking at the concurrent player counts of these bankrupt companies it's clear that you, as the target audience, either don't buy the slop you advocate for or don't buy enough of them.

You want fugly female characters, while the men look great and hate white men, who are all the bad guys? Buy millions of copies to compensate for the rest of us who refuse to buy propaganda that hates us.

 

[lonetac]

Looking at the concurrent player counts of these bankrupt companies it's clear that you, as the target audience, either don't buy the slop you advocate for or don't buy enough of them.

You want fugly female characters, while the men look great and hate white men, who are all the bad guys? Buy millions of copies to compensate for the rest of us who refuse to buy propaganda that hates us.

Nah man, nobody cares about culture war nonsense. Take it somewhere else.

I play games to have fun, I dont care about how good a char in the game looks. I play for fun. Its not porn, it has no bearing.

I can imagine the comment "women in game, game is woke" and its nonsense.

Keep the fake manufactured culture war nonsense out of this discussion.

Also, buy millions of copies? Are you suffering from anything? You ok over there? I ask because its nonsensical, illogical and completely irrelevant as a strawman.

 

[BobHome]

When I was a teenager, games were fewer, and many were rubbish. Licensing an engine or writing one, assembling a team of people, and getting funding were barriers. Game development was rarely taught at universities. One had to study computer science and try to distill the elements of design from the masterpieces. I tried but failed to get into the field. Nowadays, it has become accessible and democratised.

In my 20s, I lost my love of gaming and stopped playing. Exceptions were Oblivion and Skyrim; but I always read about game design, applying what I learnt to my personal work. 2025 is special: for some reason, I played Doom 2016; it flicked some switch in my brain; the passion returned; I felt young again. After that, Expedition 33, which I consider my favourite, and this month, Silent Hill 2 Remake, which was particularly moving, the ending weighing on one's mind.

When I was a teenager, games were board or card games. But we usually played sports and stuff outside.
Yeah, back in the days when kids went outside. A lot. With No Screen in their hands.

 

[GeoffreyA]

When I was a teenager, games were board or card games. But we usually played sports and stuff outside.
Yeah, back in the days when kids went outside. A lot. With No Screen in their hands.

That's right. The screen did a lot of damage. Well, we also played outside, cricket, the beach, and whatnot; but yes, the computer increasingly kept us indoors.