Cheap co-op games are topping Steam's charts
Small teams, low prices, social play, built to be watched. The clearest prototype of what comes next.
Trends · updated 20 October 2026
Current trends influencing the future of video games, from the emergent to the perennial.
Cheap co-op games are topping Steam's charts
Small teams, low prices, social play, built to be watched. The clearest prototype of what comes next.
Trends defining gaming in 2026
In 2026 the ten biggest companies take more than half of all publishing revenue, but the culture is happening somewhere else: Friendslop games top Steam's charts, while players decompile games and rebuild them or simply type new ones into existence. Meanwhile the corporations who bet on what the culture should be keep losing. Live service, subscriptions and the metaverse have all stalled, and 83% of players say they don't want AI-written dialogue.
None of that means the old model is gone. Studios are still cutting jobs, investors have pulled out, and fewer people play in the countries that used to drive the growth. But it's no longer where the new ideas come from.
This page maps 49 gaming trends across three horizons. Each trend links to the sources behind it, and the data we use is freely available on the site. We revise trends as things move. Think we've got one wrong? Send us a source.
Updated 20 October 202649 trends6 categories4 stagesData CC BY 4.0
All 49 trends
Hover a dot to read it. Click to jump to its entry.
Tap a horizon to see its trends.
Bigger budgets, rich-market growth and games as a service. These trends are its symptoms.
The clearest symptom of the pandemic-era model unwinding.
Open full trendThe Western growth engine this system was built on has stalled.
Open full trendThe growth moved to a market Western publishers can barely reach.
Open full trendThe flagship bet of this system, now failing more often than it hits.
Open full trendCapital is leaving the old model before a new one is proven.
Open full trendPaying to acquire players is hitting diminishing returns.
Open full trendThe hardware half of that squeeze, priced by a market games do not control.
Open full trendThe premium console bundle is squeezed from both sides.
Open full trendThe old coverage and discovery layer is hollowing out.
Open full trendThe Three Horizons depict a picture of change in video games as an interplay of three horizons. Horizon 1 (H1) is the currently dominant but failing system that declines over time as it loses its fit with a changing environment. Horizon 3 (H3) is a possible future state that is aligned to the changing environment. Horizon 2 (H2) is the current and turbulent intermediate space of innovations, some of which are 'captured' by H1 to prop it up and extend its lifespan, and some of which are genuinely disruptive and create space for a radically different kind of system to emerge.
The horizon placements are an editorial reading using Bill Sharpe's Three Horizons framework.
Bigger budgets, rich-market growth and games as a service. These trends are its symptoms.
The clearest symptom of the pandemic-era model unwinding.
The Western growth engine this system was built on has stalled.
The growth moved to a market Western publishers can barely reach.
The flagship bet of this system, now failing more often than it hits.
Capital is leaving the old model before a new one is proven.
Paying to acquire players is hitting diminishing returns.
The hardware half of that squeeze, priced by a market games do not control.
The premium console bundle is squeezed from both sides.
The old coverage and discovery layer is hollowing out.
Where the old model is being fought over. Courts, regulators and unions are rewriting the rules, and it is not yet clear who that favors. More of these moves buy the old model time, while some of the industry's big bets have already stalled.
Shifts that already favor smaller, social, creator-made play.
Discovery follows creators, wherever they are.
Abundance shifts power from making games to getting them found.
Grants reach new teams, while credits mostly reward the biggest productions.
Acclaim and margins without a blockbuster budget. The sales charts still belong to the franchises.
Courts, regulators, unions and store policies changing the terms. Who gains is still open.
Six years of lawsuits have cut the platform tax by a few points. So far Apple and Google are containing the rest.
Contracts now set terms for layoffs and AI inside big studios. Small teams and creators are outside them.
Writes the rules any AI-native future will have to follow.
Contested. It slows careless adoption and steers AI toward consented, disclosed uses.
Forces identity and safety infrastructure onto open, player-built platforms.
A natural experiment: regulation can delete a whole category overnight.
This is consumer law that reaches past the store's cut of the sale to address the value of in-game currencies themselves. Nothing is compelled yet.
Incumbents and new money keeping the big-budget, live-service model going.
The largest firms pulling ahead, mostly by growing rather than buying.
Patron capital extends the old model rather than changing it, and the debt makes it more fragile.
Risk minimization: familiar names in place of new bets.
Familiar characters earning again on screen. Incumbents getting more from what they already own.
Platform holders reaching back for an old lever.
Optimizing the existing model, not inventing a new one.
Tested inside Fortnite and PUBG, where it fills a team. Nothing is a permanent feature yet.
New studios betting on the big-budget model, and meeting its costs.
Betting money propping up teams, streamers and platforms, until regulators step in.
The same publishers keep the same games and more of each sale.
Transitions the industry bet on that plateaued or faded.
A transition that stalled, kept alive by a patron.
The one-fee-for-everything bet. Subscribers stalled well short of plan, and prices rose instead.
The transition that never delivered. Worth keeping as a cautionary pattern.
A real form factor that plateaued. SteamOS may still carry the idea forward.
Featured at the top of the page.
Small teams, low prices, social play, built to be watched. The clearest prototype of what comes next.
Players as producers. Volatile, but pointing the right way.
Cheap, social games that need no store. China shows the scale, the West the start.
Players as producers, remaking games that already exist. The rights stay with the publishers.
Players as producers with no craft barrier. A new place games come from, not a feature inside the old ones.
Pressures that never go away. They sit under the curves because every horizon has to answer them.
The structural fact the current system fights and the next one designs around.
The biggest overlooked audience. They still pay full price for single-player games, and most play alone.
A standing habit. Young people meet their friends in games, so every rule about chat reaches their friendships.
Ownership pressure on live service, and a value the next model can adopt.
Players' standing veto, and it applies across every horizon.
A recurring regulatory cycle that follows monetization wherever it goes.
Comes back every time a new worry about children and screens arrives.
The paradox that keeps returning: less data about children means more checks on everyone.
A long-running debate whose unit of measure is finally changing.
A standing lever the state turns up and down.