Despite all of the hardships it presented, 2020 ended up being a pretty special year for gamers. Against all odds, developers everywhere turned in an incredible lineup of titles that will surely make this year’s game of the year awards a challenge to figure out.

Yet, there are a few titles I see that keep popping up as candidates for those awards that just make me wince. They’re not necessarily bad games but they are, for one reason or another, games that are just getting a little too much love.

These are the most overrated games of 2020.

Assassin’s Creed Valhalla

Assassin’s Creed Origins was a fascinating, but flawed, attempt to softly reboot the complacent Assassin’s Creed franchise. Assassin’s Creed Odyssey did a brilliant job of fixing many of those flaws, solidifying the franchise’s new direction, and setting us up for something potentially special.

Valhalla is occasionally that something special, but it’s mostly another incremental improvement that received a little too much praise for being another largely familiar entry in an increasingly familiar franchise. Not every AC game needs to reinvent the wheel, but we should also temper our praise for amounts to a better version of an already good game.

Call of Duty: Warzone

It didn’t take long for Call of Duty: Warzone to become the darling of the battle royale scene. The popularity of the Call of Duty franchise made Warzone immediately notable while the title’s free-to-play status got it into the hands of more people than may have otherwise given it a chance. On top of that, it’s a fun game in its own right.

Yet, at a time of constant updates, Warzone‘s general complacency has been frustrating to watch. The one advantage of live service games is that they typically stay fresh enough to become the only game you need for months at a time. Aside from a couple of fun events, Warzone‘s updates have largely focused on balancing the existing game.

Ghost of Tsushima

This one is tough. I actually think Ghost of Tsushima is a really good game. It’s got a great open-world, fun combat, a ton of style, and a fairly good story. There’s not a lot wrong with it from a purely critical standpoint.

Yet, at a time when Ghost of Tsushima is clearly becoming an award season darling, I feel that it’s necessary to be realistic about this game’s accomplishments. It’s a very well done version of a kind of game that we’ve seen before. Much like Valhalla, Ghost of Tsushima executes a formula to near perfection, but it perhaps plays it a bit too safe to be considered truly great.

Marvel’s Avengers

Granted, there aren’t a lot of people hyping up Marvel’s Avengers these days, but this feels like a fairly well-deserved case of “We told you so.”

After listening to everyone who wanted to defend this game for months despite an ever-growing pile of red flags surrounding it there’s an admittedly dark pleasure that comes from seeing this title turn out to be exactly what many others suspected it would be. Aside from its fairly good campaign, this is a soulless cash grab that tries and fails to cash in on a license with an unlimited amount of potential.

Star Wars: Squadrons

Squadrons is another game I actually like quite a bit. At a time of increasingly lowered expectations for Star Wars games, Squadrons offers a fun take on this universe that is often fairly clever.

However, Squadrons was hyped as a return to the glory days of Star Wars spaceship games, which it simply isn’t. It lacks the pure arcade action of the Rogue series, and it fails to replicate the simulator brilliance of the PC Star Wars space fighter titles of the ’90s. It’s stuck reminding me of better games it simply is not.

Genshin Impact

Genshin Impact caused quite a stir earlier this year with some fans going so far as to call it an improved version of Breath of the Wild that you can even play on mobile devices.

However, a little more time with Genshin Impact reveals its gameplay reliance on a microtransaction system that is too aggressive to be condoned at a time when microtransaction ethics are such a big talking point. To be honest, Genshin Impact feels like the most successful and ambitious mobile knock-off ever.

Resident Evil 3

I loved the original Resident Evil 3 and often wondered what would happen if the game got a chance to shine outside of the shadow of Resident Evil 2. Unfortunately, Capcom decided to release Resident Evil 3‘s remake in the shadow of Resident Evil 2‘s remake.

Similarities to the previous Resident Evil remake aside, one of the most disappointing elements of 2020’s Resident Evil 3 is how little new content it adds to the original game. It tends to cut some of the original game’s more frustrating moments rather than rework them which seems unambitious for a big-budget remake.

Super Mario 3D All-Stars

At the end of the day, Super Mario 3D All-Stars features three classic Mario games. It’s hard to argue with the idea of getting all of these games in one package or the merits of the original games.

Yet, nearly everything else about this collection feels like a mistake. Its ports are little more than glorified emulations that fall short of paying these games the tribute they deserved. Even if you’re willing to overlook this game’s bizarre limited digital release schedule, you’re still left to wonder where Super Mario Galaxy 2 is or why these games aren’t just straight-up available to download on Nintendo Switch.

10. Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved (Xbox 360)

First off, Geometry Wars was, is, and forever will be a great game. We’re in full “come at us” territory if you disagree with that statement.

Yet, the game’s placement on this list has much to do with its historical significance. Not only was Geometry Wars: Retro Evolved a great game, but it was a great game available via a console’s online store at a time when console online stores were a relatively foreign concept.

Geometry Wars encouraged everyone to give Xbox Live Arcade a shot. That means it not only helped kick off the era of digital distribution and DLC but the indie game movement as well.

9. SSX (PlayStation 2)

The PlayStation 2’s best launch feature was its DVD player, but its best launch game will always be SSX.

At a time when Tony Hawk was still king of the world, SSX offered a different kind of extreme sports experience. It was fast, colorful, and unbelievably fun to play. We don’t know if it was better than Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2, but it’s in that conversation.

SSX was the only game every PlayStation 2 owner needed to buy when they went out to get their new console.

8. Soulcalibur (Sega Dreamcast)

We all know the sad story of the Sega Dreamcast. The little console that could ran into a series of problems which ultimately killed it, but the technical innovations of the console and its incredible library of games remain untarnished.

That incredible library kicked off with the launch of Soulcalibur. At a time when the phrase arcade-perfect was still the benchmark for video game technology, Soulcalibur offered an arcade-like experience at home as no other video game had before.

Soulcalibur forever changed the way we judged video game graphics and 3D fighting titles.

7. Super Mario World (Super Nintendo)

Spoilers: This isn’t the first Super Mario game you’ll see on this list. There are several good reasons Mario quickly became synonymous with the Nintendo brand.

Super Mario World may not have been as “revolutionary” as other Super Mario launch games, but it’s still arguably one of the best games ever made. Essentially an evolution of the brilliant Super Mario Bros. 3, Super Mario World boasts some of the best level and overworld design in franchise history.

And to think that Super Mario World was included with every Super Nintendo. What a time.

6. The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild (Nintendo Switch)

This is a bit of a controversial pick considering that Breath of the Wild was also released as one of the Wii U’s last major games. Nevertheless, we think it counts.

Besides, most people think of Breath of the Wild as a Switch game. In fact, the beauty, scope, and brilliant open-world gameplay of Breath of the Wild is a big part of the reason why so many people own a Switch.

This could go down as the best Zelda game ever made, so you know it has to make this list.

5. Wii Sports (Nintendo Wii)

It’s impossible to imagine that the Nintendo Wii would have become one of the best-selling consoles of all-time if it wasn’t for the success of Wii Sports.

Wii Sports perfectly conveyed the purpose and potential of the Wii’s motion control system and proved to be one of the most enjoyable party games ever made. There’s a good chance people only associate the Wii with Wii Sports, and we honestly can’t blame them.

If this was a list of the most important launch games ever, you could expect Wii Sports to be even higher than it is.

4. Super Mario 64 (Nintendo 64)

Super Mario 64‘s status as one of the best Mario games of all-time and arguably one of the best games of all-time is certainly enough to enter it into this conversation.

Yet, the game’s most impressive legacy is arguably how it was designed to sell the Nintendo 64. Mario 64 not only took advantage of the N64’s technology like no other launch game, but it showcased how the console’s controller would make 3D navigation easier than ever.

Super Mario 64 is just a complete example of game design as art and technological evolution.

3. Tetris (Game Boy)

Do you know what the most impressive thing about Tetris is? It’s never really aged. You can still play the original version today and enjoy it as much as ever.

So imagine taking a chance on buying a Game Boy and losing hours of your life to this simple puzzle game. Tetris wasn’t necessarily a technological marvel in and of itself, but its addictive nature stands as one of the best justifications for buying an entirely new device just to play it.

Plus, just think of the value you’ve gotten from a copy of Tetris over the years.

2. Halo: Combat Evolved (Xbox)

Let’s just get this out of the way now: Halo: CE is a straight-up incredible piece of game design that rightfully blew the minds of console gamers everywhere in 2001.

What really elevates it for the purposes of this list, though, was its multiplayer. Not only was Halo multiplayer a generational experience, but if you wanted to experience it in its 16-player LAN glory, you needed four Xboxes and four copies of the game to do so.

What we’re saying is that the brilliance of Halo practically demanded you owned an Xbox or at least some Xbox controllers. Its popularity almost single-handedly established the entire Xbox brand.

1. Super Mario Brothers (NES)

At a time when Nintendo was a relative unknown and the very concept of owning a video game console had fallen out of style, Super Mario Brothers changed everything.

Super Mario Brothers alerted millions to the fact that gaming as they knew it had changed dramatically. Its wonderful music, artistic design, involved gameplay, and incredible visuals were leaps ahead of what most people at the time associated with video games.

It’s hard to imagine the world where any of the other games on this list exist without Super Mario Brothers.

GameStop has been making headlines recently due to their controversial coronavirus policies. Among other things, GameStops seem to be dangerously unprepared to meet basic safety precautions tied to the coronavirus outbreak. They’re also reportedly prepared to defy state closure orders as executives seem to be attempting to argue that GameStop offers essential services during these times.

Why is GameStop so desperate to stay open? Well, there are obviously no stores that are excited about having to close, but the situation for GameStop is reportedly especially dire. Analysts were already arguing that GameStop was fighting for its retail life even before the coronavirus spread. If GameStop is forced to close for a few months, there’s a good chance they may never re-open or never be able to fully recover.

To be honest, it’s hard to feel sorry for them even if we feel sorry for those who would lose their jobs as part of a closure, no matter how long it may be. Not only is GameStop ready to force its employees to work in dangerous situations without the promise of adequate compensation, but this is just the latest in a series of controversial GameStop corporate decisions that have been going on for years now. It’s probably time for GameStop to go.

There is one question that remains in such an event, though. If GameStop goes, what happens to the used games market?

Granted, GameStop’s used games policies aren’t always the best (the company infamously offers little money for trade-ins of even newer titles), but they’re still one of the more reliable ways to relatively easily trade in old games and buy used copies of games. These services not only cater to gamers on a budget, but it helps ensure that gamers are never stuck with titles that they really don’t intend to play again.

Used game options do exist outside of GameStop (you can obviously always sell them online) but despite all of our advancements, it’s still usually just easier to buy and sell used games via a store like GameStop. If they close, then the used game market suddenly looks a lot thinner.

The truth is that it’s not easy to imagine that digital stores will adopt straight-up used game policies. Considering that you don’t even own some fo the games that you digitally purchase (although that varies from site to site) it’s kind of tricky to sell them to someone else. Besides, a digital copy of a game is never really “used” in the sense of how we use that word to define the second-hand market.

Alternatives are possible, though. The most reasonable option would be some kind of user-to-user trade system which allows someone to essentially trade a digital key to another user for a digital key to another game. Rules would have to be set-up to regulate this, but it’s not outside of the realm of reason. There’s also a small possibility that services like GOG and Steam could allow someone to receive a small refund for a purchase after a period of time, but that feels like an unlikely policy that doesn’t really create more opportunities to buy titles on the used market.

Honestly, it sounds like one of the best “replacements” for GameStop’s used game system will be streaming services. While services like Game Pass limit you to a roster of available titles, they still let you access a greater variety of games for a reduced price. They’ll likely soon become the preferred way for people to save money and still be able to play various games.

Unless we see a new store (online or otherwise) emerge with the intentions of specifically catering to used games, the increasingly likely possibility is that the death of GameStop could mean the death of the used games market as we’ve known it. While that’s unfortunate, it doesn’t necessarily justify keeping GameStops around nor does it justify impeding the industry’s drive to find solutions to some of the problems that we’ve outlined.

Reports indicate that Sony is struggling to finalize the PS5’s price. The data is unconfirmed at this time, but it sounds like the current costs of manufacturing a PS5 is about $450 a unit. The problem is that Sony seemingly wants to retail each console for around that price (or less, if it were possible).

If this information is accurate, then it means that Sony will either need to sell the PS5 at cost and essentially take a loss, sell it for less than cost and take a huge loss, or sell it for around $500 and maybe entertain the idea of making some kind of profit or at least coming close to breaking even.

Let’s talk about that last possibility and whether or not Sony can find a way to sell people on a $500 next-gen console.

First off, there’s the historical precedent to consider. At the time of their launch, only four consoles (the Neo-Geo, the 3DO, the PlayStation 3, and the Xbox One) retailed for over $450. The first two consoles are historic failures, while the latter two faired slightly better despite disappointing starts and lowered projections which many analysts attribute (in part) to their high initial prices.

However, to really appreciate what this number means, you have to account for inflation. With inflation, 10 consoles have retailed at, near, or over the $450 mark. The most notable of those consoles (for our purposes, at least) has to be the original PlayStation, which retailed for about $475 when you adjust for inflation.

While the original PlayStation was still cheaper than the Sega Saturn (which, it must be said, was a big reason for its early success), it was still more expensive than previous Nintendo consoles and more expensive than the N64. On top of that, Sony was a new player in the video game industry at that time.

So why was the PlayStation a huge success? Well, it certainly benefited from some incredible games, but at least initially, the PS1 attracted millions of buyers because it utilized then-revolutionary CD-ROM technology to sell people on the idea that it was offering something truly new. It’s by far the most successful of the consoles that retailed for more than $450 (again, with inflation), and that’s a big part of the reason why.

Looking at the PS5 solely through that lens, you start to worry about the console’s sales potential. We’ve previously mentioned that next-gen consoles could suffer from a relative lack of recent technological advancements, but even if you believe the situation isn’t really that dire, there is no modern technological advancement that comes close to matching the initial impact of CD-ROM. Simply put, the PS5 likely won’t have a headline technological feature it can just wave in everyone’s faces (beyond, perhaps, an SSD).

Yet, I don’t believe that the PS5 would be an outright failure if it were to retail for $500. Why? Well, it’s because of the PS3.

The PS3 is the worst-selling PS console ever, but it still sold nearly 88 million units. Mind you, it accomplished that despite an outrageous initial price point, some awful launch games, competition from the incredible Xbox 360 and Nintendo Wii, and an arguably weaker overall library of exclusives in comparison to all other PlayStation consoles.

Its situation was similar to the one the Xbox One initially found itself in, but the big difference between the two is the PlayStation name. Despite changes in gaming culture and the industry, there are still millions of people who love having a video game console in their living rooms. Previous generations have indicated that the PlayStation has become the global favorite amongst those who just want to own a new video game console. The PS4 has arguably only strengthened the brand’s appeal in that regard.

Does that mean the PS5 is invincible and can safely launch at $500 no matter what? No, but it does mean that Sony has proven they can recover from initially high price points. There’s little to suggest they can’t do it again.

There are many who feel that sequels are a blight on the entertainment industry. For every Terminator 2 and Godfather 2, you have a seemingly endless supply of uninspired follow-ups that just look to cash-in on the original installment’s legacy. Video games have traditionally fared much better in that regard, but even many of the best video game sequels tend to rely on more of the same.

Part of the problem with the whole sequel industry is that most sequels tend to be based on works that were typically successful and generally pretty good. As such, sequel makers are faced with the daunting task of trying to come up with something that is as good as the original while standing tall on its own.

That’s part of the reason why the recent rumors of a sequel to The Order: 1886 are so fascinating.

See, The Order wasn’t a good game. Actually, it was a pretty bad one. While the title initially turned heads due to its incredible graphics and wonderful presentation style, actually playing the game revealed a largely shallow cover-based shooter that relied on overly-scripted combat sequences occasionally broken up by simple story segments.

Oh, and what a story it was. The Order tells an alternate history story in which a group of highly-trained specialized soldiers must combat mythical forces such as vampires and werewolves as well as other dangerous entities that seek to end the world. It’s a fairly bonkers story that tries to surprise by having you do things like team up with inventor Nikola Tesla and try to figure out if Jack the Ripper was actually a vampire. For the most part, though, it comes across as a collection of many of the things that you thought were cool in high school but may not necessarily love to look back at now.

The Order: 1886 stands as one of the PS4’s most notable failed exclusives. Its sales were modest, but it was critically trashed by just about every outlet and many of those who purchased it. It’s seen as an embarrassment by many, but most people who experienced it in some form do still have some kind of memories of it.

All of that is our way of saying that The Order: 1886 is arguably the most intriguing sequel prospect that we’ve seen in years.

The Order may have been a bust, but it was a fascinating bust that was based on incredible technology, benefited from a fun setting and characters, and occasionally even featured some fascinating gameplay twists such as some over-the-top weapons that added new dimensions to the otherwise standard gameplay.

Granted, we’re a little inclined to shame this whole idea since The Order also featured a cliffhanger ending meant to tease a continuation that many doubted would ever be made, but when you really step back and look at the title, you start to see the ways that the core experience could have been easily improved upon. Actually, with a little more gameplay variety, a few refined story segments, and some more attempts early on to establish an identity of its own, The Order might at least have been seen as a noble experiment.

Well, maybe that can still be the franchise’s legacy. We don’t often get sequels to bad movies and games, but with The Order, Sony and developer Ready at Dawn have the chance to show the industry that something doesn’t have to be a runaway success to be worthy of revisiting.

Actually, if everyone involved plays their cards right, a sequel to The Order could show that sometimes the best use of a sequel is to give a talented group of people a second chance to get something right.

I’ve always supported single-player games, but there was a point in my life when I would actively root against multiplayer titles. There was really no good reason why, but in my mind, at that time, I saw multiplayer games as inferior works that just tried to appeal to more “mainstream” gamers. Yeah, I was that kid.

Over time, though, I not only found myself appreciating multiplayer games more and more but playing them more and more. There were times when I would primarily play one multiplayer game for months (or longer) on end instead of bouncing between multiple single-player titles as I used to do. Truth be told, I still do that more often than not.  Actually, I get the feeling from personal experience and industry revenue reports that there are potentially millions of people who also do just that.

That’s why Sony and Microsoft will likely rely on single-player games more and more to sell the PS5 and Xbox Series X.

Let’s say you or someone you know primarily plays Fortnite or Apex Legends. They own a console, PC, or even a mobile device that is perfectly capable of playing their favorite game. They may even own several such devices that can achieve that feat.

For those gamers, you’ve got to wonder if there’s really any incentive to buy a new console. Titles like Fortnite aren’t exactly going to benefit from a large leap in technology. It’s still going to look like Fortnite on a PS5 or an Xbox Series X, and even more RAM or an SSD isn’t going to improve its performance all that much. There’s always the allure of the new, but for those who usually play one game and maybe dip into a couple of other titles throughout the year, you’ve really got to wonder whether they feel the urge to spend $400+ dollars for minor upgrades to their preferred experiences.

This is the strange position we find ourselves in during what seems to be the height of the games as a service era. It’s also probably part of the reason why you hear more console manufacturers speak of the death of gaming generations. If games are going to be a service meant to last for years (and those games typically don’t push technological boundaries) then what’s the point of pushing constant console upgrades?

That’s where single-player games come into play.

The basic idea is that Sony and Microsoft will have an easier time selling the PS5 and Xbox Series X if they can simply point to a game and say “You can only play this on our new console.” Microsoft is subverting that idea somewhat due to their position on not offering true Series X exclusives for the first year or so, but even that policy is partially based on their desire to sell Game Pass (and the many single-player titles it offers) regardless of which platform you subscribe to it on.

How is that approach different from what we’ve seen at the start of every other gaming generation? It’s not, but the industry is different. Previous console launch lineups were stealth boosted by the addition of the new Madden, the new Call of Duty, and other yearly installments. PS5 and Xbox Series X will almost certainly feature some of those titles, but yearly installments are starting to be slowly replaced by games as a service titles that launch free updates instead. Besides, as we’ve already noted, this upcoming generation may not feature nearly as notable as a technological leap.

With a single-player game, though, it’s all about the experience. They can certainly benefit from new technology, but it’s more about the idea that these titles offer something that you just can’t get anywhere else. Besides, the PS4 and its army of noteworthy exclusives seemingly helped showcase that even in this service era, the right single-player title can move more units than even optimistic analysts would have thought.

There will come a time when new popular multiplayer titles come out on new consoles and inspire that section of gamers to start making upgrades. Until then, though, you’ve got to think that single-player games may start getting time in the spotlight that they haven’t necessarily enjoyed on a large scale in recent years.

Despite the assurances of fanboys everywhere, there is rarely a “winner” of the console wars. Usually, we determine the winner by overall sales (at least if you’re trying to use a somewhat neutral metric), but even that system has its flaws.

For instance, the PlayStation outsold the N64, but the N64 is the home of some of the greatest games ever made and some irreplaceable gaming experiences. The Wii outsold the PS3 and the Xbox 360 by quite a bit, but it didn’t even feature support some of the best third-party games of its generation and lacked the online innovations of the Xbox 360.

The point is that the winner of most console wars almost always ends up being subjective. However, in the case of the PS4, you could honestly argue it might be the first objective console war winner.

To be clear, we’re talking about the PS4’s “war” against the Microsoft Xbox One and Nintendo Wii U. There was some console overlap during that time, but those three systems kicked off a new generation of gaming.

It’s when you compare the PS4 to those platforms that you start to see the extent of its dominance. That’s especially true in the case of the Wii U.

The Wii U was, by almost every tangible estimation, a failure. Reports indicate that it only sold about 14 million units, which means it was only moderately more successful than consoles like the TurboGrafx-16. Sales aside, the Wii U’s central gimmick (a tablet-like controller) was either rarely used by most developers or used in ways that failed to excite users. Like the Nintendo Wii, it also suffered from a lack of notable third party titles that essentially limited its library to the occasional Nintendo release or surprise hit.

The Xbox One featured many of those great third-party games, but it suffered from a list of problems that is “highlighted” by a lack of notable exclusive titles. The Xbox One’s best exclusives include largely uninspiring titles like Gears 5, Sea of Thieves, Forza Motorsport 7, and Halo 5: Guardians. Many of those games aren’t even truly exclusive once you account for their PC ports.

Besides, the Xbox One was pronounced dead on arrival by some who blasted Microsoft for the console’s high price point, controversial initial features, and its early reliance on the now mostly dead Kinect peripheral. Subsequent Xbox One releases later addressed many of those issues, but it proved to be too little, too late in terms of overall console sales.

The PS4, meanwhile, succeeded in most of the ways that its console competition failed.

Unlike the Xbox One, the PS4 launched as a reliable system at a fair price that offered the average gamer pretty much exactly what they wanted. Unlike the Wii U, the PS4 benefited from not only the presence of most notable third-party titles but an array of exclusives not just made by first-party studios. It certainly also bested the Xbox One in terms of both quantity of exclusives (an almost objective argument) and quality (an only slightly more subjective one).

On top of it all, you’ve got the fact that the PS4 has outsold its next closest competitor by nearly 60 million units so far. Sales may not be the only indicator of a console’s success, but you also can’t ignore those numbers.

Appropriately enough, if you’re going to argue that the PS4 wasn’t the undisputed winner of its generation, you’re best off abandoning the traditional metrics used to determine console winners and are better off arguing that its biggest shortcomings have to do with how it failed to innovate as its competitors did.

The Wii U was a  failure in many respects, but all Nintendo had to do was tweak its best ideas in order to deliver the Nintendo Switch: one of the most innovative and exciting consoles ever made. The Switch also allowed us to see that the Wii U actually hosted some incredible games that were just begging to be rescued from the platform.

The Xbox One similarly suffered from an array of problems, but it also furthered the idea of console cross-play, introduced the incredible Xbox Game Pass service, preserved the idea of backward compatibility, and even inspired other companies to give away free games every month in exchange for online subscription fees. The Xbox One stumbled out of the gate but no other console this generation took such confident steps towards the future.

Put it all together, and you’re left with the conclusion that we began this article with: there rarely is a true undisputed winner of console wars. Still, no other console has come quite as close to claiming that title as the PS4.

We’ve said it before, but 2019 was not a great year for gaming.

We’d stop short of saying it was an awful year, but it was a weird one. Some of the biggest (or at least the best) games of the year were also some of the ones that not many people saw coming. Control, for instance, exceeded critical expectations (even as it apparently failed to meet sales expectations), Outer Wilds was a bold experiment in game design, and Star Wars: Jedi Fallen Order managed to overcome everything that is EA in order to be a pretty darn good game.

The year was won by a stellar (if largely underrated) Nintendo Switch lineup, indie titles, solid franchise installments, and some surprise hits. That may sound good, but two players were largely missing from the gaming scene this year: Microsoft and Sony. In fact, we’d go so far as to say that this was the worst year for exclusive title on either console since the start of this gaming generation.

Why was that? Well, there is a variety of contributing factors, but you kind of have to blame the PlayStation 5 and Xbox’s Project Scarlett.

As you probably know, Microsoft and Sony are almost assuredly planning to release their respective next-gen consoles in 2020. Most likely, they’re going to release them fairly close to each other. That means that both companies are (understandably) focused on preparing for the next gaming generation and the pressures and logistics that come with that.

It also means a few other things that aren’t necessarily good for consumers. It means that both companies are less focused on consoles that are currently the gaming centerpieces of millions of homes. It means that what the few remaining big games that are set to appear on both consoles are pushed to 2020 in an effort to maximize “last-gen” sales in a next-gen year (a historically common practice).

Mostly, though, it means that developers everywhere (especially first-party developers) are now more focused on the next generation. That’s how we typically end up with years like 2019 that feature a lot of backwash and leftovers.

Just look at the Switch’s 2019. It wasn’t nearly as impactful as the console’s debut year, but it still offered Switch owners an array of worthwhile exclusives and notable ports. Nintendo and its partners aren’t worried about the next generation; they’re currently living in it.

This cycle of console replacement typically results in years such as 2019 (2012 was a great example of this effect), but that’s kind of the point here. Years like 2019 remind us that it’s time to start thinking beyond console generations.

With new technologies and concepts like subscription services and even cloud gaming on the rise, it’s becoming more and more apparent that the idea of releasing a superior piece of hardware every several years is just an archaic concept. Even phone manufacturers and television manufacturers are starting to suffer from this. Alternatives aren’t quite where they need to be, but they’re advancing towards a sustainable (and believable) future faster than traditional consoles are.

Truthfully, nobody can quite be sure what the future of gaming looks like, but 2019 makes it pretty clear that the future of gaming has no place for more years where major companies are spinning their wheels. It’s bad for gamers, and it’s bad for companies who have to sometimes eat a calendar year as they split their attention between two generations. At a time when Triple-A gaming is becoming more and more generic due to the increased risk of taking risks, it’s becoming more and more absurd to ask studios to have to split their attention to such insane degrees.

At the end of the day, 2019 will prove to be a largely forgettable year in gaming. However, nobody should forget why it was so forgettable.

Sony recently shocked absolutely nobody by confirming their next console will be called the PlayStation 5 and that it will release late in 2020. Now, though, questions regarding the console turn to some of the more interesting specifics.

With the possible exception of price, none of those specifics are more notable than the PS5’s potential launch games. Many consoles are often defined by their launch games, and it’s no coincidence that some of the best consoles ever had notable launch titles.

So which games will the PS5 feature at launch? It may be too soon to say for sure, but here are five of the most likely candidates.

Horizon Zero Dawn 2

In many ways, this feels like the most likely candidate for a major PS5 launch game exclusive to Sony’s new console.

Let’s look at a few facts that seem to support that claim. First, Horizon Zero Dawn was released early in 2017. That means that a 2020 release date for a sequel would certainly be in-line with the typical release window for major open-world sequels.

Second, we know that the Horizon Zero Dawn team has been working on something new that they don’t seem to be able to talk about. It’s most likely a sequel to Horizon, and it seems pretty clear at this point that sequel won’t be coming to PS4.

Finally, Horizon Zero Dawn sold around 10 million copies, which is incredible for an IP. Sony has to believe that a sequel to that experience would be a huge draw for the PS5.

Gran Turismo 7

This guess is a little less likely than Horizon Zero Dawn 2, but it still feels like a relatively safe bet.

The last Gran Turismo game (Gran Turismo Sport) was relatively well-received but was perhaps not quite as much of a game-changer as some fans thought it might be. You may also notice the distinctive lack of a 7 in the game’s title, which could suggest the team didn’t entirely see it as the next full installment in the series.

While a 2020 release date for the next Gran Turismo would be a little ahead of schedule, we’ve seen installments in the Gran Turismo series evolve past their launch. That means that GT 7 could launch in a relatively simple form but grow as the PS5 does.

A Ratchet and Clank Sequel

Fun fact: this spot was originally going to go to Spider-Man 2, but that game is most likely at least a couple of years away. That said, it’s still a possibility.

This possibility feels much more likely, though. Sony recently acquired developer Insomniac Games, and we’re betting they didn’t do it just so Insomniac could make a new Spider-Man game. We’re also willing to bet that Sony would prefer for Insomniac to release a new game for the PS5’s launch.

A new Ratchet and Clank feels like the most likely option for that PS5 launch game. Insomniac has pretty much mastered this series’ formula by this point, so they wouldn’t exactly have to reinvent the wheel to get this done. More importantly, Ratchet and Clank has the kind of name-value that is important for major launch games.

Cyberpunk 2077

This is an obvious choice, but that doesn’t make it any less likely of a candidate.

Developer CD Projekt Red has spoken in the past about their interest in bringing Cyberpunk 2077 to next-gen consoles. While they stopped short of confirming its next-gen release, it seems all but guaranteed that the game is going to come to PS5 and the next Xbox at some point.

It may be optimistic to suggest that Cyberpunk 2077 is going to be released for PS5 as early as the console’s launch, but it feels like a distinct possibility.

Assassin’s Creed: Kingdom

The Assassin’s Creed franchise is poised to return in 2020 with a new installment that most fans have already figured out will involve Vikings. Actually, the sheer number of hints which suggest a Viking setting seemingly confirms that “rumor.”

What’s also just shy of being confirmed is the next Assassin’s Creed‘s status as a PS5 launch game. Every generation, we see games like this get released for previous-gen console and next-gen consoles roughly simultaneously. They’re not always the most exciting next-gen releases, but they’re certainly welcome for early adopters looking for something to sink their teeth into.

You can probably set your watch by the idea that the next Assassin’s Creed will be available on PS5 at launch.

Following today’s presentation, we know much more about Google Stadia than we did before.

For instance, we know that the service will cost $9.99 a month, which grants you access to a free collection of games as well as the ability to buy standalone titles at a reduced rate. That effectively means that you’d have to be a Google Stadia subscriber for about three years before you pay as much as you will likely pay for a next-gen console. That’s a good thing.

We also learned that Google Stadia will at least be playable at internet speeds as low as 10 MBPS. There’s some debate concerning just how reliable the service will be at that speed, but that’s still a good thing.

However, Google Stadia can be a reliable, affordable, and relatively burden-free service, and it might not matter if Google isn’t able to secure the right exclusives.

Google revealed a lot about Stadia during their recent presentation, but the word “exclusives” was surprisingly absent from the conversation. That may not sound like too big of a deal, but it potentially is.

Let’s put it another way. Right now, it makes more financial sense for a person who mostly only plays third-party Triple-A games to go with Google Stadia. As long as their internet is fast enough, they’ll be able to arguably outperform next-gen consoles and not pay next-gen console prices for at least a few years. They even get a free library of games as a nice bonus.

You can certainly argue that the large number of gamers who only purchase games like Madden, FIFA, and Call of Duty each year would be better off with Stadia, but we’re not sure it’s that simple. For one thing, Google Stadia doesn’t currently support crossplay with PS4 (and likely PS5). If that feature doesn’t get worked out, then the gamers who support Sony consoles might stick with them to play games with PlayStation friends.

It goes beyond that, though. The Xbox One was a fantastic platform for third-party games (and the Xbox One enjoyed many price drops), but it failed largely due to its lack of exclusives. You can play FIFA and Call of Duty on just about any platform, but it turns out that quite a few gamers at least want the option to play God of War, Spider-Man, and Uncharted as well.

This puts Google and Stadia in a bit of an awkward position. Right now, Stadia’s best feature is its power and affordability. We’ve talked before about how power doesn’t really matter all that much, and affordability is only really important if you’re giving people a discount on what they perceive to be a premium product. Well, exclusive games tend to make any game platform a premium product.

We have no doubt that streaming services like Stadia are the future of gaming, but Stadia won’t let you play Halo Infinite, Gears of War, The Last of Us, and Death Stranding. That would be the Xbox and PlayStation. Without such notable exclusives, will Google be able to stay in the game long enough before Xbox and PlayStation introduce (and expand) their own streaming services?

Sony has announced a slimmer, lighter PlayStation Vita bundled with Borderlands 2 will hit stores in North America this Spring. The Wi-Fi model (PCH-2000 series) will be available in black as part of the Borderlands 2 Limited Edition PlayStation Vita Bundle, that includes six DLC packs and an 8GB PS Vita memory card. The PS Vita will be moderately priced at $199.99 (a decent improvement from the $249 launch price of the Vita), and will come with a 1GB internal memory card.

The new PS Vita will come with a 4 core ARM Cortex-A9 processor, a SGX543MP4+ graphics processor, and 512MB for the main memory. The design is about 20 percent slimmer and 15 percent lighter than the original PS Vita, with more rounded edges than its predecessor.

Sony says battery life has been extended from three- to five-hours to four- to six-hours of game play, and for video play battery life has been improved from about five hours to approximately seven hours.

The PS Vita has in a way been given a second life with the launch of the PlayStation 4, given functions such as “Remote Play” that allows most PS4 games to be streamed on the PS Vita system over a Wi-Fi connection. The PS Vita system will also support PlayStation Now (PS Now), SCE’s streaming game service that utilizes cloud-based technology.