Like millions of players, I was convinced Marvel Rivals felt like an overnight success when it launched back in December. I queued into matches, argued over team-ups, and watched the hero shooter explode across Twitch and Discord. But after reading the latest Bloomberg investigation, I have to admit that the story behind NetEase’s blockbuster is far messier than any of us realized. According to a source speaking to Bloomberg, Marvel Rivals was almost cancelled before it ever reached our screens because NetEase’s CEO, William Ding, did not want to pay Disney for the rights to use Marvel characters.
Would we have ever seen this version of the game if Ding had gotten his way? The report suggests we came dangerously close to losing it entirely. The same source claims Ding asked the game’s artists to swap licensed Marvel characters for original creations. That might sound like a reasonable cost-cutting idea in a boardroom, but for a project built around Spider-Man, Wolverine, and the wider Marvel universe, it was practically a death sentence. The original character plan was eventually scrapped, but not before allegedly costing NetEase millions of dollars in wasted work.
As a player, I find that detail staggering. Millions of dollars were apparently spent chasing a pivot that never made it into the final product, all because of licensing concerns. NetEase has officially denied the reporting, stating that it has been in a partnership with Marvel since 2017. I am not surprised the company pushed back, but the broader picture painted by Bloomberg’s sources is hard to ignore. The report describes a company and a CEO who make abrupt changes in the pursuit of profit and constant growth. If that sounds familiar, it should. We have already seen the consequences ripple through the games industry, including inside NetEase’s own studios.
NetEase has not only been cutting projects, it has also been cutting people. Over the past year, Ding has reportedly eliminated hundreds of jobs as part of an ongoing restructuring effort. The company has struggled to grow in recent quarters, even as Marvel Rivals became a breakout success. I found the contrast especially jarring because NetEase targeted its gaming division despite the game’s popularity. The entire US-based Marvel Rivals team was hit with layoffs, including director Thaddeus Sasser. Shortly afterward, NetEase-backed studio Liquid Swords also revealed that it was facing layoffs.
How can a game be so successful and still lose its own director? That is the question I kept asking while reading the report. Bloomberg’s sources suggest Ding has little interest in any game that cannot generate hundreds of millions of dollars per year. Marvel Rivals is a hit, but is it that kind of hit? If not, the live-service future that players are already invested in could face more turbulence. It is unsettling to think that the game’s longevity may depend less on season pass sales and more on whether it clears an extremely high internal profit bar.
The report also details claims of crunch at NetEase, with staff having to take naps at work. NetEase denies all of these allegations. Still, the image of developers sleeping at their desks while one of the year’s biggest multiplayer games continues running is not easy to shake. For players, it raises uncomfortable questions about the human cost behind our daily matches.
I still enjoy Marvel Rivals. The roster, the art style, and the fast-paced hero combat are genuinely fun. But I can no longer separate that fun from the business decisions swirling around it. A game that was nearly cancelled, reportedly reshaped by licensing fears, and then stripped of key staff after a successful launch feels like a warning sign for the entire live-service model. If a hit like Marvel Rivals is not safe from layoffs, what game is?
As we move through 2026, I hope NetEase proves the skeptics wrong. I hope Marvel Rivals receives the support it needs to grow without burning out the people who make it. And I hope players remember that behind every hero on screen, there are developers making impossible choices in an industry that increasingly demands everything while promising very little.