Josh Bycer on Designing Horror Games: “Horror Can Never Be a Mass Market Genre”

The horror genre in video games is fundamentally incompatible with mass-market appeal, as its core objective—inducing fear—is inherently at odds with the high-engagement, social, and power-fantasy models favored by major publishers. Because true horror relies on the player’s vulnerability and the "fear of the unknown," it is a singular experience that loses its potency once the player understands the mechanics or encounters specific scares. Consequently, horror games are often shorter and less replayable than multiplayer-focused titles, making them less economically attractive for AAA studios that prioritize long-term player retention and monetization.

The evolution of horror games is categorized into four distinct phases: the pre-survival era of the late 1980s, the rise of survival horror in the 1990s and early 2000s, the shift toward action-heavy horror in the mid-2000s, and the modern era dominated by indie developers. While AAA publishers previously pivoted toward action-oriented designs to compete with mainstream shooters, the indie sector has successfully reclaimed the genre by focusing on psychological tension, pacing, and minimalist design. These developers prioritize atmosphere over combat, proving that effective horror can be achieved with limited resources.

To sustain the genre's future, developers must innovate beyond traditional, static designs. Procedural generation is identified as a potential solution to the replayability problem, allowing for unpredictable encounters that prevent players from mastering the game’s threats. While implementing such systems is technically challenging and risks sacrificing the curated pacing of handcrafted experiences, it represents a necessary evolution. Ultimately, the genre’s growth depends on the ability of both indie and AAA creators to experiment with new mechanics that maintain player vulnerability and psychological impact.