Avatar: Fire and Ash has become the third film in the franchise to surpass $1 billion at the global box office, but questions remain on whether it will end up matching Avatar 1 or 2 by the end of its theatrical run — or convince Disney to green light Avatar 4 and 5.

On weekend three, James Cameron’s Fire and Ash made another $40 million domestically, marking a 37% drop week on week. It’s now up to $306 million domestically. Fire and Ash is proving a bigger hit internationally — particularly in China — with $777.1 million so far from theaters. That makes for a grand total of $1.083 billion. Disney said Fire and Ash pushes the Avatar franchise total past $6.35 billion globally.

The special effects-heavy Avatar films cost a huge amount of money to produce, but they have historically made billions of dollars at the box office. Avatar 1 remains the highest-grossing movie of all time (not adjusted for inflation), and has earned a staggering $2.9 billion across several theatrical runs. Avatar: The Way of Water has earned $2.3 billion, meanwhile, cementing it as the third-highest grossing film of all time — just ahead of Cameron's own Titanic.

Will Fire and Ash end up matching the box office hauls of its predecessors? Fire and Ash is slower to $1 billion than both Avatar 1 and 2, but not by much. The Way of Water, released in 2022, hit $1 billion 14 days after launch, and Avatar, released in 2009, reached $1 billion after 17 days. Fire and Ash managed $1 billion 18 days after release.

The Avatar films typically show impressive staying power at the global box office, particularly internationally, so the coming weeks will be crucial. Adding a helping hand, Disney is drip-feeding Avengers: Doomsday teaser trailers ahead of Fire and Ash in theaters in a bid to encourage repeat viewings (the X-Men trailer is set to be replaced by a fourth next week).

Perhaps the pertinent question is, will Avatar 3 end up making enough money theatrically to convince Disney to greenlight Avatar 4 and 5? Disney has given both sequels release dates already: Avatar 4 currently has a December 21, 2029 release date, with Avatar 5 due out December 19, 2031. Cameron, now 71, would be close to 80 years old by the time it all wraps up.

But will he get the chance? In the run up to Fire and Ash’s release, Cameron admitted he was feeling nervous about the film’s box office performance and expressed concern about the “forces” working against theatrical releases in 2025.

Speaking on The Town with Matthew Belloni podcast, Cameron said there was potential for “sequelitis.” He added: "people tend to dismiss sequels unless it’s the third Lord of the Rings film and you want to see what happens to everybody, which in my mind this is — this is the culmination of a story arc, but that may not be how the public sees it.” And there’s the “one-two punch” of streaming and Covid, which means fewer people are going to the movies — 75% of the number in 2019, Cameron suggested.

When pressed on how much Avatar: Fire and Ash cost to make, Cameron wouldn’t be drawn into divulging a figure, only suggesting it was a lot of money, and so the movie will have to make a lot of money to turn a profit.

“It is one metric f**k ton of money, which means we have to make two metric f**k tons of money to make a profit,” he said. “I have no doubt in my mind that this movie will make money. The question is, does it make enough money to justify doing it again?”

One of the lingering questions Stranger Things fans having coming out of the Season 5 finale relates to the series’ famous monsters, the demogorgons. Or, perhaps put more accurately, the lack of them.

In the final battle (Season 5 Episode 8, The Rightside Up), which Stranger Things has built up to for nine years and five seasons, our heroes battle against Vecna and the Mind Flayer, but not the demogorgons, the demodogs, or the bats we’ve seen previously. Where were they? Surely Vecna and the Mind Flayer would have had a better time of things if they’d had their pals help them out against Eleven, Steve, and the others. Were they sleeping on the job? A revolt, perhaps?

In an interview with TheWrap, Stranger Things co-creators Matt and Ross Duffer offered a detailed explanation, which involves a few factors. One, Vecna was caught unawares. He did not expect a sneak attack in The Abyss, so was not prepared for what was coming. Related, he had the Mind Flayer helping him out, so why would he need any more help? (This was, obviously, a bad decision.)

Meanwhile, all those demo monsters aren’t just hanging around Vecna at any given moment, the Duffer brothers said. There are not a lot of them in The Abyss.

And then we get to what I think is probably the most important reason, which has to do with what Stranger Things had done earlier in the season. The Duffers were mindful of what they called “demo fatigue,” having had a dramatic fight against the demogorgons at the end of Season 5, Volume 1, when Will’s powers awaken and he kills a handful of the things with his mind.

“Mainly it’s just that Vecna was not expecting this sneak attack on his home turf,” Matt Duffer explained. “Never in a million years could he even imagine that. They’re there somewhere. We obviously discussed having a demo battle on top of the Mind Flayer battle, but it felt more right to us that why does he need the demos when the Mind Flayer is this giant thing and can attack them? He doesn’t need his little ant army to attack, he’s going to take care of this himself.

“It’s a giant, desolate planet. If you recall, you see Henry wandering the planet back in Season 4 and at some point in his journey, he does see a demo far in the distance, but it’s not like they’re hanging out in little huts. There’s not like a giant civilization of demos up there.”

Matt Duffer continued: “one of the other things we talked about was just demo fatigue. I felt like we did everything we wanted to do with them in Sorcerer, and wanting to keep the focus on Vecna and the Mind Flayer, who’s been absent this season.”

So there you have it. Vecna’s confidence was his undoing, it seems — and a touch of “demo fatigue.”

According to Matt Duffer, there was an idea to have the heroes encounter a giant field of demo eggs in The Abyss in a scene reminiscent of Aliens, “but you can’t get all your ideas in there.” Apparently the demos were going to come out of the eggs and everything.

Some fans have suggested the fight against the Mind Flayer would have been made all the more epic by the addition of demogorgons. Having Will control them and turn them against the Mind Flayer and Vecna is a popular fan suggestion, too. But there’s no going back now. With the Upside Down destroyed, the demogorgons are stranded in The Abyss — hopefully forever.

We've got plenty more on Stranger Things, including the Duffer brothers explaining what they were going for with the Season 5 finale and Eleven's ending, and first details on the live-action spinoff.

Image credit: Netflix.

Wesley is Director, News at IGN. Find him on Twitter at @wyp100. You can reach Wesley at wesley_yinpoole@ign.com or confidentially at wyp100@proton.me.

Arc Raiders developer Embark Studios has confirmed one of the community’s biggest questions since the game came out: it does indeed feature ‘aggression-based matchmaking.’

This means that if you’re big into PvP, you’ll be matched up with players who are like-minded. Similarly, if you prefer PvE, you’ll be matchmade with players who tend to avoid conflict with other players.

Arc Raiders’ player versus environment versus player gameplay has resulted in a number of viral clips showing how friendly encounters can quickly devolve into a fight to the last. Yes, you can play solo or in parties up to three, working as a team to progress through the game. However, other players are a constant threat. This has sparked a vociferous debate within the community about the etiquette that has formed in-game, with a retired pro gamer going viral for relentlessly killing casual Arc Raiders players.

It turns out that Arc Raiders will lean on your playstyle when it comes to matchmaking. This ‘aggression-based matchmaking,’ however, is not an exact science, Patrick Söderlund, CEO of Embark Studios told Games Beat in a recent interview / video playthrough of the game.

“Obviously first it's skill-based of course,” Söderlund said of Arc Raiders matchmaking. “Then you have solos, duos, and trios. And then we also, since a week ago or so, we introduced a system where we also matchmake based on how prone you are to PvP or PvE. So if your preference is to do PvE and you have less conflict with players… you'll get more matched up [with similar players]. Obviously it's not a full science.”

Söderlund said the term ‘aggression-based matchmaking’ is “exactly” the system Arc Raiders currently uses. That puts to bed high-level questions about how Arc Raiders matchmaking works for the community, which had wondered about it in recent months. “I can finally stop arguing on Reddit, thank you for the vindication,” said one player.

However, it’s worth noting that Söderlund confirmed Arc Raiders prioritizes "skill" when it comes to matchmaking, then groupings. Aggression-based matchmaking is a factor, but we don’t know how much influence it has on your lobbies compared to other factors. And even Söderlund admitted it doesn’t always works as you’d think.

And how, exactly, does Arc Raiders determine if you’re “prone” to PvE or PvP? If you’re a kill on sight player, sure, you’re probably prone to PvP. But what if you only shoot back at those who shoot at you first? Does that make your lobbies more aggressive? If so, is that fair?

So, one big question answered, but many more remain. As for Embark Studios, it always hoped Arc Raiders would have a tension between both playstyles. Arc Raiders is a multiplayer extraction adventure in which players scavenge the remnants of a devastated world, but the main threats are Arc’s machines and, as Embark Studios puts it, “the unpredictable choices of fellow survivors.”

Wesley is Director, News at IGN. Find him on Twitter at @wyp100. You can reach Wesley at wesley_yinpoole@ign.com or confidentially at wyp100@proton.me.

The future of cinemagoing is top of mind as 2026 kicks off, with Netflix, which is buying Warner Bros. for $72 billion, reportedly interested in a 17-day window for theatrical releases before they hit the streaming platform. Meanwhile, box office revenue is struggling, with even Marvel movies — previously guaranteed hits — having trouble getting fans into theaters. The big question right now is, are we witnessing the beginning of the end of going to the cinema?

Hollywood legend Leonardo DiCaprio has expressed concern about the future of cinemagoing, wondering whether it will become a niche pursuit. In an interview with The Sunday Times, the Titanic, Inception, and The Wolf of Wall Street star wondered whether “people still have the appetite” for theaters, and, if not, whether they might “become silos — like jazz bars.”

“It’s changing at a lightning speed,” DiCaprio said. “We’re looking at a huge transition. First, documentaries disappeared from cinemas. Now, dramas only get finite time and people wait to see it on streamers. I don’t know.”

Then: "Do people still have the appetite? Or will cinemas become silos — like jazz bars?" While expressing this concern, DiCaprio said he hoped “real visionaries” continue to make unique movies that are seen in theaters, "But that remains to be seen.”

DiCaprio, who starred in 2025’s critically acclaimed One Battle After Another, isn’t alone in worrying for the future of cinemagoing. But some have gone even further. Last year, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos said the theatrical experience is “an outmoded idea for most people,” and claimed Netflix is “saving Hollywood.”

One Battle After Another ended its theatrical run making $205 million globally. According to Variety, Warner Bros. needed it to make roughly $300 million to break even on the film, which means it’s looking at a $100 million loss, give or take.

And while James Cameron’s Avatar: Fire and Ash has crossed the $1 billion mark at the global box office, it’s not going to get anywhere near the money the previous two Avatar movies made in theaters. In the run up to Fire and Ash’s release, Cameron admitted he was feeling nervous about the film’s box office performance and expressed concern about the “forces” working against theatrical releases in 2025.

Speaking on The Town with Matthew Belloni podcast, Cameron said there was potential for “sequelitis.” He added: "people tend to dismiss sequels unless it’s the third Lord of the Rings film and you want to see what happens to everybody, which in my mind this is — this is the culmination of a story arc, but that may not be how the public sees it.” And there’s the “one-two punch” of streaming and Covid, which means fewer people are going to the movies — 75% of the number in 2019, Cameron suggested. In the same interview, Cameron said Netflix buying Warner Bros. would be a “disaster.”

One report has claimed Netflix is particularly keen to obtain Warner Bros.' vast content library as the streamer ramps up its potential to offer AI-generation tools and content in the future.

Photo by Stuart C. Wilson/Getty Images for Warner Bros.

Wesley is Director, News at IGN. Find him on Twitter at @wyp100. You can reach Wesley at wesley_yinpoole@ign.com or confidentially at wyp100@proton.me.