Bain & Company has released Gaming Report 2026. One of its clearest findings is that games built for the broadest possible audience may be getting harder to justify. It draws on a June 2026 survey of 5,339 gamers worldwide. Bain also analysed publicly available information for 100 games released since 2023.
The survey found that no single preferred gaming experience attracted more than 26% of respondents. Bain also found that two-thirds of gamers wanted more of what they already know. That included something similar to a current favourite, a franchise sequel, or no new game at all. Only 21% said they were looking for something genuinely different.
Most Gamers Aren't Looking for Something Completely Different
That 21% figure stood out to me because it challenges the idea that every new game needs to reinvent everything. There is clearly an audience for something new. Bain's survey suggests most people are still looking for familiar genres, franchises, or experiences.
The split goes deeper than that. In another part of the survey, no single ideal gaming experience reached more than 26%. Preferences also changed considerably by age and geography, which makes a single mass-market target even harder to define.
Bain's argument is that trying to meet all of those preferences at once creates a difficult middle ground. A game can become too broad for people who want depth in something they already enjoy. At the same time, it may not be different enough for the smaller group actively searching for something new.
That doesn't mean familiar automatically equals successful, or that new ideas are a bad bet. Knowing exactly who a game is being made for matters more in a crowded market. There are simply too many other games competing for the same time and money.
Focused Games Had a Higher Success Rate in Bain's Sample
Bain tried to put numbers behind that argument by reviewing publicly available information for 100 games released since 2023. It classified those games as focused or unfocused, then compared their commercial results.
In Bain's sample, 83% of the games it classified as focused achieved commercial success. That dropped to 50% for games it classified as unfocused. The report is careful about the limitations. Bain says deciding which games belonged in each group required judgment calls. It also says reliable information about commercial failures is harder to find than information about successes.
Bain uses Baldur's Gate 3 and Concord to illustrate the difference it sees. It describes Baldur's Gate 3 as targeting a deep RPG audience already familiar with Baldur's Gate and Divinity. Concord, by comparison, entered an established hero-shooter market against free-to-play games such as Overwatch and Valorant.
The comparison won't explain every success or failure in gaming. It does make Bain's broader point easier to see. A huge budget and a popular genre still don't tell you who the game is actually for.
AI Doesn't Solve an Unclear Audience
AI is part of Bain's report, but I think it's the supporting point here rather than the main story. Bain argues that cheaper and faster development tools won't rescue a game that doesn't have a clear audience. They can just make it faster to build more of the wrong thing.
That runs against the idea that AI could lower development costs and reopen the door for more mid-budget games. Lower costs could change what studios are able to make. Bain's warning is that cheaper production doesn't replace a clear creative direction.
For me, that's the most useful part of the report. The takeaway isn't that every studio should chase the same proven franchise audience. It's almost the opposite. If tastes are as fragmented as Bain's survey suggests, trying to satisfy everyone may be the riskier strategy.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. Please stay respectful and on topic.