I’m sure it needs no recap at this point, but Halo Studios is no more. Well, mostly no more, as the studio has reportedly been left with just 20 or so employees, while Activision has now taken on the mantle of responsibility for Halo.

Regardless of your thoughts on the matter, @Mr_Rebs_, a prominent leaker within the Halo community, has spoken out about what he alleges Halo Studios had planned for the franchise’s future. Despite my grievances with Halo Studios and its poor management of the franchise, one of these plans actually doesn’t sound too bad.

However, given the letdown of Campaign Evolved, I personally have very little faith that Halo Studios could have seen these ideas through. So, without further ado, let’s dive into it.

According to Rebs, Halo Studios was reportedly working on Halo 2 and Halo 3 remakes, as well as Halo 7. However, these projects were apparently still years away.

More interesting to me, though, is the fourth project: a standalone spin-off campaign based on Halo: First Strike, a genuinely great novel by Eric Nylund.

First Strike, for those unaware, fills in the gaps between Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo 2, which genuinely would have been great to see adapted into a game. Apparently, the project was targeting a release next year, although development was still in its early stages.

Given the state Campaign Evolved was in, I really doubt we would have seen it within that timeframe, especially considering the reported plans to include around five campaign missions alongside a Firefight mode.

The Halo 2 and Halo 3 remakes, though, were almost a given and something we’ve reported on before, with Halo 2 even being teased at the end of Campaign Evolved.

Halo 7 was actually in the conceptual stages, with a concept for the game apparently presented to Matt Booty and other Xbox executives shortly before the recent changes at Halo Studios. According to Rebs, the plan was for Halo 7 to launch with Campaign, PvP, PvE, and Forge from day one.

Of the remaining staff at Halo Studios, Pierre Hintze (Studio Head) does remain, a figure of controversy within the community and according to Rebs, Pierre still has a plan, Rebs states:

If this is the case, I do hope Pierre is unsuccessful in these endeavors; the last thing Halo needs right now is AI slop.

As for the future, there are still a lot of unknowns, and I imagine it will be that way for a while; however, one rumor floating around suggests a reboot of sorts might be on the cards now that the IP is under Activision.

I’m personally happy with the changes being made to Halo. While I do have my reservations regarding Activision, there’s no doubt it has the infrastructure to support an IP as big as Halo.

And while my long-dreamed-of wish to see Halo’s books adapted into games is probably dead for the foreseeable future, I’d still much prefer a future where Halo Studios is no longer making Halo. Because yes, things really were that bad.

If you feel differently about everything, do let me know in the comments. I’ll be sure to respond, and as always, don’t forget to take part in our poll!

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It's been a busy week for Microsoft. Despite having a Windows and Surface event scheduled two weeks from now, the company announced two new Surface PCs and revived the Surface Mouse. Microsoft also effectively cut the legs out from under the Copilot+ PC brand by confirming the new Surface Pro 12-inch and Surface Laptop 13-inch are not Copilot+ PCs.

Biggest News of the Week

Microsoft confirmed that its new Surface Pro 12-inch and Surface Laptop 13-inch will not be called Copilot+ PCs. Not because they fail to meet the requirements — both PCs have the specs to otherwise qualify — but because Microsoft is going in a different direction.

I think we may hear more about Microsoft’s plans and rebranding at the Windows and Surface event next month, but for now we just have confirmation the new Surface devices are not called Copilot+ PCs.

The Copilot+ PC brand was doomed to fail. Microsoft failed to make it clear to customers what made Copilot+ PCs special, and the flagship Recall was a disaster.

Many people were confused about the difference between a Copilot+ PC and an AI PC. And several major manufacturers made it clear that labeling a device as a Copilot+ PC was not a priority.

Too many Copilots

Microsoft put too many eggs in the same basket with Copilot. The company has dozens of products with Copilot in their names. Even the Microsoft 365 app had Copilot forced into its name.

By bundling so many different products and services under the Copilot name, Microsoft tied the success (or failure) of a large part of its portfolio together.

Look online for reactions to the Copilot+ PC brand being phased out and you’ll see people discussing the Copilot app, the Copilot key, Microsoft 365 Copilot, and other Copilot-branded products. And who can blame them? It’s natural to assume the end of Copilot+ PCs means the end of at least some parts of Copilot.

But the opposite is true. In the same week it confirmed its Surface PCs are not Copilot+ PCs, Microsoft announced a massive overhaul of the Copilot platform. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella called it a new OS, though I’m not sure what that really means in this case.

Ultimately, Microsoft fell in love with the term Copilot and tried to attach it to too many products and services. We’ve seen similar mistakes, such as Facebook going all in on the Metaverse.

Copilot+ PCs are gone or being phased out, but Copilot as an “OS” is just beginning. Microsoft will need to do some damage control and get a marketing message out to make it clear those facts aren’t in opposition.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Is it likely? Probably not, but as a Killer Instinct fan, one can hope.

Despite backlash to some aspects of the console, the Xbox One had arguably one of the strongest launch line-ups in the platform's history, with titles like RYSE and Titanfall from first-party, and games like Battlefield 4 and Assassin's Creed: Black Flag from third. For me, the best launch title was Killer Instinct, however, which revived Rare's classic fighting game for a new era.

Killer Instinct is a combo-heavy fighting game that is easy to play, and difficult to master. Breaking enemy combos with a satisying "C-C-C-C-COMBO BREAKER" announcer effect elevated the game to its legendary status, atop its violence and creative character line-up.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

PlayStation cornered the fighting game audience pretty hard in the years to follow, landing exclusivity for Street Fighter for a time, alongside other major fighting games.

Killer Instinct struggled to maintain pace, and ultimately fell into maintenance mode not long after, although it had strong post-launch support bringing in fan-favorite fighters alongside various new ones. It even picked up combatants from other Xbox franchises, such as RAAM from Gears of War and the Arbiter from Halo.

Aside from the occasional update and balance change, Killer Instinct has remained largely dormant over the last few years. There is a small team at Xbox who works on maintaining the game, but the player base is miniscule, likely in the dozens rather than hundreds going from Steam stats.

Could it be revived, though? Mortal Kombat creator Ed Boon has once again polled users on the state of the fighting game industry, and it's not the first time Boon has spoken about interest in picking up Killer Instinct.

He asked users to vote on which recent fighting game should grab a second chance, including Riot's ill-fated 2XKO, Rumbleverse, Warner Bros' cancelled Smash-clone MultiVersus, and Xbox's dormant Killer Instinct.

As of writing, Killer Instinct leads by a sizeable margin with over 50% of the vote.

Microsoft's gaming portfolio is currently undergoing a lot of upheaval, with Obsidian moved to Bethesda to work on Fallout, and Halo Studios practically shuttered, with the franchise handed off to Call of Duty producers at Activision.

There's probably not a ton of bandwidth at Microsoft right now to explore what a new Killer Instinct might look like ... but what if Warner Bros' studio NetherRealm and Ed Boon's Mortal Kombat team picked up the flag?

Killer Instinct always had huge potential in my view, it was always my personal preferred fighting game. There are major influencers who often advocate for its revival, like Maximilian_Dood.

As a Spinal enjoyer, I still had a ton of fun playing it despite how invariably poor I was at PvP. It would be intriguing to see a Mortal Kombat-style cinematic take on Killer Instinct's lore and universe — which is undeniably intriguing. It's unclear whether or not Warner Bros. would have appetite for involvement here too, given its attempts to turn Mortal Kombat into a viable movie franchise.

There's probably a universe where Killer Instinct could be revived as a high-quality fighting game, with a cinematic single player experience, with franchising potential into TV and movies. You could draft characters from Blizzard games, or Fallout, and beyond too ... alas, it's probably unlikely.

Still, it's fun to dream, no? What IF?

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

Rumors about Xbox's deal with Hideo Kojima's upcoming "Action Espionage" title have been swirling recently.

Xbox is undergoing "restructuring" over the past few weeks, leading to thousands of layoffs and staff reductions in the form of divestitures. Microsoft's new gaming CEO Asha Sharma has made no secret of the intent to focus on big-name franchises like Fallout and The Elder Scrolls, and less time on smaller projects like those produced by Double Fine or Compulsion — both of whom are now fully independent teams. Existing studios like Obsidian have been moved to be closer to the Fallout franchise for example, and Halo Studios itself was recently shuttered (in essence) with the franchise handed off to Call of Duty publisher Activision.

DEAL: Get Surfshark VPN 86% OFF with Windows Central 🦈

There have been some questions about the timing of Xbox's announcement in partnership with Hideo Kojima's "PHYSINT," as a result. With some (erroneously) speculating that the closures have been designed to fund Kojima's long-awaited return to the espionage genre. Metal Gear Solid is arguably among the top 5 (or maybe even top 3) most legendary franchises of all time. To get the spiritual successor to that on Xbox is a pretty huge coup, considering it was originally announced by PlayStation.

But uh, is this project going to cost almost half a billion dollars? And did it lay off thousands in order to do it? The answer is "no," trusted and verified sources tell me.

Speaking on his podcast, Chris Dring of The Game Business reported that Xbox's budget for PHYSINT is at $400 million. He has since walked back the claim after Bloomberg's Jason Schreier poured cold water on the figure.

I was told similarly by first-hand sources with direct knowledge of the contracts that the figure for PHYSINT is far lower than what is being reported here. It has been suggested to me that the "$400 million" figure is potentially what Sony and PlayStation might've been on the hook for until they cancelled the deal. Xbox and Kojima are building towards their Xbox projects on a "fraction" of this reported figure.

I'm told Xbox negotiated a deal with Kojima Productions that includes both movie and TV licenses for PHYSINT, and it also included enhanced terms for OD — Kojima's anticipated atmospheric horror game for Xbox.

We're seeing a more thrifty Xbox, and a more thrifty AAA industry in general

There has been a lot of discussion about budgets in recent years. Some estimates suggest Grand Theft Auto 6 has had a budget upwards of a billion dollars, for example. Developers from the likes of Saber Interactive, Remedy, and Bloober Team have all commented on building AAA-grade experiences on budgets in the tens of millions, rather than hundreds of millions.

Game development in the United States has become incredibly expensive. I'm told part of this revolves around salary competition for AI-adjacent software engineering disciplines, that often share cross-over hiring processes and salary scales with gaming companies. The closer you are to an AI development hub (like Microsoft HQ in Redmond, WA), the greater the competition for salaries becomes ... making game development potentially unviable from a purely fiscal perspective in some regions.

Microsoft has been exploring outsourcing in Eastern Europe, the United Kingdom, and other regions where game development is more "affordable" to that end. PHYSINT might have spendy Hollywood actors tied to the project, but Xbox CEO Asha Sharma has quite loudly stated goals around cost-saving and cost-cutting.

Movies and TV shows are also becoming an increasingly crucial tool for both marketing and offsetting costs for gaming projects. Selling the rights to streaming platforms like Netflix and Amazon Prime can feed back into game development budgets, and creates a symbiotic marketing beat (if indeed, the content is actually good). Given Kojima's penchant for cinematic games, PHYSINT should be at least one project that pays dividends if everything is executed well.

... I suspect Xbox will have to give Kojima more flexibility than they may want to if they do want the game to hit that coveted quality bar.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

It's that time of year again. A chill in the air, pumpkin lattes on repeat, and Minecraft Live, of course! Today we got a first look at new Minecraft content, including Minecraft Dungeons 2, launching on September 29.

Here's everything announced at this year's Minecraft Live.

Deep dive into Minecraft Dungeons 2

Ahead of next week's launch, the development team gave us an extensive look at what is coming in Minecraft Dungeons 2. The sequel features a bigger, interconnected world with expanded combat, deeper character customization and better multiplayer.

The segment also spotlighted the Sift, a mysterious new dimension with distinct environments, inhabitants, dangers, and gameplay. Developers shared insights into the creative process of designing and introducing an entirely new dimension to the universe.

The Fourth Dimension: The Sift coming in 2027

The Sift isn't just for Minecraft Dungeons 2 players, it's officially coming to Minecraft Java and Bedrock editions in 2027.

This will be a huge milestone for Minecraft as it's the first new dimension added in over 14 years joining the Overworld, The Nether and The End as places for the player to discover and explore.

Yep, that statement made me feel ancient too, and I felt like the Nether was much more recent, but it was actually added in 2010 and just updated in mid-2020. This is legitimately the first brand new dimension in over a decade!

Ice Caves, new zombies and new combat mechanics

Mojang teased the next upcoming vanilla game drop too, as we were shown around the Ice Caves, an all-new, rare underground extension of cold biomes filled with glowing ice crystals.

The ice crystals can be placed both vertically and horizontally for building and decoration, or even as just a light source.

We also got a whole new mob! The frozen zombie if encountered will apply a stacking freezing affect to the player with melee attacks, and he throws ice balls that deal knockback. Normal zombies can also become Frozen variants if exposed to powder snow.

Ice balls are dropped upon the death of a Frozen Zombie, or can be crafted by players and used as a weapon to deal damage and knockback, or brewed into an ice cold freezing potion!

Minecraft coming to Nintendo Switch 2

Such an absolute no brainer I'm surprised it isn't already there, but Minecraft is officially launching on Nintendo Switch 2 on October 27, 2026 with enhanced performance and visuals.

Merlin Entertainment revealed the Minecraft Hotel and Rollercoaster

I've been excited about the upcoming Minecraft-themed park in the UK since it was announced, but beyond some concept art, we haven't seen much detail, especially given its 2027 opening date.

Well today Minecraft Live showed us something to really get excited about, with these two major additions to the Chessington World of Adventures based park. There's going to be a Minecraft Hotel, and the official name of the resort's new rollercoaster is "Escape the Nether."

I'm planning to be there the minute this place opens, as my son is going to lose his mind, and we missed out on the London Minecraft experiences. I've got high hopes for this theme park; don't let me down, Merlin!

Sound effect packs and new creator platform

During the stream, Jens Bergenström (Chief Creative Officer at Mojang Studios) announced a new initiative to build a richer, more accessible, and more diverse Minecraft experience through an evolving creator platform.

Additionally, Mojang introduced Sound Effects Packs for the Minecraft Marketplace, giving players brand-new tools to customize their worlds and bring their creations to life later this year.

And that's a wrap on Minecraft Live 2026

Minecraft fans should be happy with all of those updates, but if not, let me know what you were hoping for in the comments below!

Don't forget there is an ongoing Wilderness Bound Community Challenge where players can earn exclusive character creator items and Java skins simply by placing cushions and a straw bed in-game; full details are here.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

At this year's annual Snapdragon Summit, I had the opportunity to sit down and talk with Microsoft Surface CVP Brett Ostrum about all things Surface and Windows. One question I was eager to ask was about MacBook Neo, and whether or not Microsoft was interested in competing in that space.

"Let me start this way: we have never shipped a gaming PC," Ostrum opened with. "The reason we've never shipped a gaming PC is because OEMs do just fine in that space. They've done fine; they meet the customer needs; there's not a benefit for Surface to go into that space ... We knew Neo was coming long before it showed up. And so part of the question is, does Surface need to play a role relative to Neo? It wasn't a surprise. We chose to let the OEMs play in that space to deliver lower-priced devices."

His response confirms that Microsoft doesn't think it's necessary to use Surface to compete with MacBook Neo, because Windows OEMs have already stepped up to deliver truly good alternatives. The Dell XPS 13 and ASUS ZenBook 14 are two prime examples of Windows PCs that cost the same as a MacBook Neo, while beating it in a number of key ways.

With that said, Microsoft is aware that customers are wondering why Surface isn't competing in this space. Ostrum tells me, "I've heard the feedback from press, I've heard the feedback from retailers, I've heard the feedback from partners to say Surface should be here. We will take that into consideration; we will certainly consider some options. But I would start with the gaming point. We do not have to play in every field."

That sounds like the door is open for the company to revisit this segment in the future, but for now it's clear that Microsoft isn't interested in building a low-cost Surface PC to compete head-to-head with MacBook Neo. Right now, Surface is more interested in competing at the very high end with devices like the Surface Laptop Ultra, which I tried earlier this year.

In fact, I've heard from sources that Microsoft now identifies its lineup of Surface PCs as three distinct categories of premium: Entry Premium, Premium, and Ultra Premium. Entry Premium are the most affordable Surface PCs, all of which start at above $1,000.

Of course, Surface used to build affordable PCs in the form of the Surface Go and Surface Laptop Go, both of which started at well under $600. But that was back before the component shortage forced price hikes, and under entirely different Surface leadership.

Today, the focus is on its premium Surface PC lineup, and we'll hear more about the company's new Surface Laptop Ultra on October 7.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.

I know, I know. It’s a bold statement, and before you rush to the comments, let me explain myself. You’ve likely all heard the news by now. Halo Studios may be whittled down to as few as 20 employees, with the franchise hoisted under the Activision umbrella and a new team created to take over the mantle of responsibility. It is genuinely devastating that well over 200 people were impacted by this move and are now out of work.

Despite how painful it has been to be a Halo fan over the past 15 years, we should still show compassion and kindness to those impacted by these decisions because, at the end of the day, we’re all human. "Genuinely devastating" is also how I’d describe Halo itself, at least in its current state.

It’s no secret that 343 Industries, and later Halo Studios, struggled to capture what made Halo truly fantastic, with each game suffering from glaring launch issues or missing features. Despite this, I find it a little unfair for 343i/Halo Studios to shoulder all the blame. I imagine Microsoft itself played a heavy role in how poorly the franchise was handled and mismanaged, even going as far back as the Bungie days.

Can it really get any worse?

This begs the question of whether Activision is actually the right choice here. If we look at Call of Duty, it’s fair to be concerned that Halo won’t be treated much better there either. However, I believe the franchise is at such an unbelievable low point that Activision is a better bet for Halo’s future than another game developed under Halo Studios, and I will explain why.

We know Halo Studios relied heavily on contract work to finish Halo: Campaign Evolved, if you could even call it finished. Due to this outsourcing, I'd argue that Halo: Campaign Evolved is among the worst ways to experience the first Halo game, second only to Halo: Combat Evolved Anniversary.

Like Campaign Evolved, the Anniversary edition takes creative liberties that I believe ruin the experience for returning fans and do the original a disservice for first-time Halo players.

Don’t get me wrong, though, Campaign Evolved isn’t awful. It still tells the same story as the original, so it isn’t all bad, and I enjoyed the updated visuals and even some of the changes to levels, but that’s mostly where my positives end.

Campaign Evolved suffers from worse cutscenes, awkward pacing, poorly directed voice-overs, and an experience that feels like it was worked on by 2,000 people who barely communicated with one another. That said, I’d still give the campaign itself a solid 7/10 because, despite my problems with it, I had fun.

Ironically, it feels as though the Helldivers 2 x Halo ODST crossover did more for Halo than a remake of the original game. If you’re at a point where crossovers in other games based on titles that predate your studio are better received than your actual games, then something clearly needs to change.

The prequel missions killed any hope I had

Halo Studios developed three new missions that take place before the events of Halo: Campaign Evolved. However, in almost every way possible, they fail to deliver anything meaningful to Halo’s lore. Instead, they wasted what should have been an opportunity for Halo Studios to show that it understood Halo and could carry the franchise forward.

What we got instead turned into an experience I can only describe as possibly the worst story told within a Halo game, right up there next to Halo 5. Allow me to paint a better picture of what we could have had.

Instead of Master Chief and Sgt. Johnson meandering around a Covenant ship, imagine three missions spliced throughout the campaign following Thel 'Vadam, the Arbiter, as he desperately tries and ultimately fails to stop Master Chief from destroying Halo.

Not only would that have given us a far more interesting perspective on the events of the first game, but it could have perfectly led into Halo 2. Instead, we got a barely memorable experience that feels like a huge missed opportunity.

That brings me back around to why I believe Activision is a better option than what we were currently looking at for Halo’s future. The franchise is at a point where, despite enjoying Halo since 2001, I would now rather see the publisher responsible for Call of Duty make a Halo game.

I genuinely don’t see how things could get much worse than they already are.

Yes, I am aware Call of Duty’s battle passes are awful, and skill-based matchmaking is also awful. But I will also remind people that Halo Infinite required you to pay $10 to color your Spartan white and already has skill-based matchmaking as strict as Call of Duty, except with a player base not even a fraction of the size.

Why Activision might actually make sense

Seeing the word Activision rightfully invokes a sense of doom. However, the company has also consistently managed to ship enormous Call of Duty games on an annual basis, with the franchise regularly sitting among the best-selling games each year.

Despite yearly Call of Duty releases becoming stale, it’s fair to say that Activision operates a well-oiled machine with seemingly no signs of letting up. Unlike 343i/Halo Studios, which often struggled to get games out of the door, Activision has repeatedly demonstrated that it can coordinate enormous titles across multiple studios and actually ship them.

We’re talking about an operation capable of juggling huge campaigns, multiplayer, progression systems, live-service content, PC support, console support, backend infrastructure, and multiple studios all working alongside one another.

Somehow, it still gets a Call of Duty game out of the door every single year. Whether every single one of those games is good is another question entirely. Again, there’s no denying that Activision knows how to organize and ship enormous FPS projects.

That’s the biggest thing that gives me hope here, especially when Halo has repeatedly struggled to simply have everything ready at launch. Halo Infinite launched without campaign co-op or Forge; Halo 5 also shipped without Forge, and even Halo: The Master Chief Collection famously launched in an absolutely terrible state.

So, having a company that has consistently managed projects of this scale does at least sound appealing on paper. It’s also important not to get caught up in the fact that it’s Activision.

They are reportedly creating a completely new team to head up a Halo project, and I’m hoping we see some old, familiar faces join on board, with the likes of Joe Staten and, of course, Marcus Lehto, who has recently spoken about how he’d love to return to Halo, even posting numerous polls asking fans what they’d like to see from the franchise moving forward.

That new team is probably what gives me the most hope, as it clearly won’t just be Treyarch or Sledgehammer being told to make Halo, or Infinity Ward being pulled away from Call of Duty. Microsoft is effectively building a new Halo team under Activision, which creates an opportunity to bring in people specifically because they want to work on Halo.

A completely new team also means completely new leadership and, hopefully, a clearer creative direction from the very beginning. Activision’s existing technology, production pipelines, QA teams, and general infrastructure could still sit behind that new team without necessarily dictating what Halo itself has to become.

That’s really the important distinction here because I don’t want Call of Duty wearing a Halo skin. What I want is Halo being given access to the kind of development structure that has allowed Call of Duty to consistently ship enormous games year after year, while still retaining what actually makes Halo, well, Halo.

Halo doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel or itself

This really brings me to what I think Halo actually needs moving forward. At this point, I don’t think the franchise needs yet another grand reinvention, although I wouldn’t necessarily be against them rebooting things and picking the story back up after Halo 3.

Halo 4 tried to take the story in a completely different direction, Halo 5 then shifted things again, and Halo Infinite was supposed to become a platform for Halo for years to come. Then, 343 Industries became Halo Studios with the promise that things would change (Spoiler: they didn't). At some point, you really do just need somebody to make a complete Halo game.

Give me a campaign with scoring and timing, split-screen, campaign co-op, Forge, Firefight, Big Team Battle, social modes, custom games, theater, a proper progression system, and a multiplayer suite that actually feels complete when I boot the game up on day one. These shouldn’t feel like ambitious requests either because, for a franchise like Halo, a lot of these things were once simply expected as far back as 2010.

More than anything, I’d also like to see some consistency with the story again. Halo has spent far too long introducing new ideas, setting up villains, establishing plot threads, and then seemingly deciding by the next game that it would rather move on to something else entirely. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

Join us on Reddit at r/WindowsCentral to share your insights and discuss our latest news, reviews, and more.