i'm really, really digging Nightreign, and also agree with most of Russ's assessment, in that it doesn't deliver most of what i crave from Fromsoft's solo-focused experiences. and i think that's ok!
this is a weird one because i suspect if this game wasn't coming from From, and didn't have Elden Ring on the tin, but was otherwise exactly the same, people would be going wild for it, but a lot of the early adopters are coming in with their own sets of expectations of what they want out of the studio and the "franchise" and this doesn't meet it.
but it's doing the thing that all of their games do to me, which is to say that to start it is obtuse and difficult and makes me feel like i am bad at it and by extension all video games, but as i pry apart its depths and secrets it becomes more and more enjoyable and rewarding. and that's playing with randos - the couple of rounds i've been able to play with friends have really sung. i think you've got to meet it where it is, instead of wanting it to be More Elden Ring.
i think it's also cool to watch a big studio be given the space to experiment on something like this without (as far as we know) a publisher mandate, and for them to give a first-time director the reins for a smaller-scale project like this. the impression Miyazaki and From have given is that they're a studio that fosters talent, and if something like Nightreign gives them a chance to do that while still plugging away at whatever their Next Big Thing is, i'm all for it.
I come at it like I do other roguelites/roguelikes - I immediately start looking for the replay value. Run-based games need good replay value, which means every run needs to feel fresh, unpredictable, challenging. Once you complete a few runs of Nightreign, every run feels too similar.
If you ignore the Souls-like combat/mechanics, it's just a roguelite and it's not a very good one.
respectfully, i disagree! or, rather, my experience has lined up with what you're demanding out of a roguelike. switching between Nightfarers alone can make runs feel vastly different, before you get into the menagerie of bosses (trying to think if there's another roguelike out that matches Nightreign's sheer number of different bosses? maybe Isaac?) and the challenge of the Nightlords themselves. and i can't ignore the "Souls-like combat/mechanics" because, well, that's the heart of the game, and part of why i keep coming back to it and finding new nuances that keep it fresh.
that said, i can see myself being done with this once i've beaten all the Nightlords once, and that's ok? i love a roguelike, but i don't need them all to be 300+ hour timesinks. i'm with you in that i think the game could stand to have more variety in stuff like the map layout and in-match events, but those are also the kind of things i could see them messing with more and more post-launch.
and hey, i might feel differently after another 20 hours or so, but i can pretty easily see myself putting in at least that much more time.
That's fair. I can't argue with the sheer number of different enemies, and some of the bosses got some decent updates (e.g. Morgott); maybe it just all feels too similar because I've fought most of these enemies countless times before in the other games. Runs quickly became destroying everything until the Nightlord, where there was a good challenge, and dying to the Nightlord felt even worse because the rest of the run felt boring.
I'm probably not being totally fair because I'm frustrated, personally feeling like I didn't get $40 worth of fun-hours out of the game. I'm glad you and many others are enjoying it! Purchasing games is such a weird thing.
oof yeah, the value-for-money thing with games is always tough math. sorry you didn't feel like you got your bag's worth. i wonder how much it'll evolve in the next few months, maybe it turns into something that clicks for you more down the road.
i think you make a good point, that the variety doesn't hit the same way when you've already spent hundreds of hours fighting these bosses, and that runs can feel long, considering the Nightlords are the most engaging part of 'em. one of the things i'm getting out of it the more i play is in finding ways to optimize the run and dig as much out of the map as possible. still haven't had a run where i've hit the level cap, but the better i get at routing and knowing what to prioritize, the closer i inch.
For uh... for a podcast where the concept is that y'all game together I genuinely cannot fathom why you guys didn't do a 3-person squad-up for Nightreign and instead chose to tackle it as individual experiences (and ended up hating it).
Y'all maligned the heck out of the game and you seemingly never actually tried to play it the way that the dev intended; with two actual other friends. The solo and match-making are there to pick up the slack, but the intended experience is that YOU put your squad together and have a fun time.
Idk man, listening to y'all reminded me of the early reviews for Demon's Souls in 2009, where nobody understood how the game was a departure from established practices and it was poo-poo'd by many publications as a result. I normally am in lock-step with y'all, but seriously ya gotta actually try to play Nightreign with your buds before you declare the game to be "Everything you don't want from an Elden Ring game"
Fair feedback. I think the point we made largely is that simply getting three people together for the long sessions required to enjoy this game make it distinctly niche. And for us, that doesn't mesh with how we play games.
I don't think we all maligned it because most of us weren't able to play it.
All that said, I totally get why people who can get the people together to play it regularly would enjoy it!
I think it sort of speaks to the core problem with a game like that for a player like me- even if I had two other people I consistently wanted to play games with, there’s no way we’d all simultaneously have 45 uninterrupted minutes with any reliability at all. I’m sure there’s lots of people for whom that wouldn’t be a problem at all, but I’m certainly not one of them.
Although the co-op perspective would have been valuable, the solo perspective does not go unappreciated because that simply is the way many people will play the game.
It's also very debatable whether developer intent is more important than the way the audience will actually engage with the game. In my opinion, it needs to be a balance if you want it to sell well, be received well, and have lasting player retention. It's true that players don't know what they want, but they simply will play the game a particular way even if the devs didn't intend it. But that aside, the unfortunate thing is that if you do play it as intended, you quickly run into even bigger issues with the game as a whole. (I say "bigger issues" because the game in its current state can be completed solo by anyone experienced with Souls-likes. It's hard, but its not even as hard as Lies of P.)
Runs become very repetitive very quickly. There is ONE map with just a few possible "shifting earth" variations that change one quadrant of the map, leaving the rest essentially untouched. With a rare few exceptions, the same enemies are always in the same places with the same gimmicks. Despite a massive pool of enemies and bosses to pull from in the Souls series and Elden Ring, the enemy variety feels surprisingly shallow. The DS1 and DS2 bosses also feel far too easy. All of the Souls bosses probably should have gotten something new or been made generally more dangerous to fit with the rest of the game. And only two from each game? Why? Once you know the map, runs basically become demolishing everything in sight until you reach the main boss where the actual challenge lies. This makes for a very boring, 40-minute 'runback' any time you fail to beat a main boss.
Team composition has the same problem team composition has always had in action games like Monster Hunter and Dark Souls - the devs want you to have a "balanced" team with support, tank, DPS, etc, but if you understand how the game is played even a little you'll understand that you essentially always want DPS. The faster you can kill a boss, the safer you are. The less attacks you need to block/dodge/parry, the easier the fight will be. The less damage you have, the longer the fight will last, the more 'boss-fight fatigue' will set in, and the more you will make mistakes. The more damage you have, the faster it goes and the less you will even have opportunity to make mistakes. Big damage make game easy. Does the same obvious statement need to be said a thousand different ways before people understand this?
In Souls-likes you can usually build any character for DPS and in Monster Hunter you can make DPS builds for any weapon. This is not the case in Nightreign. You are locked into certain stats based on the character you choose - which is good in itself for this type of game, but presents issues in implementation. Guardian does far too little damage to keep up with the team and its 'aggro-drawing' and 'tank' mechanics aren't nearly strong enough to allow the rest of the team to have large damage windows (the purpose of a tank in something like this) to make up for its lack of damage. The best way to keep the boss off of your teammates is to use a class that can stagger or posture break enemies easily - Guardian's mechanics (aggro, HP, defense, etc.) would need to be buffed enormously to even come close. Revenant has a similar problem, but on the 'healer' side. Revenant could potentially dish out plenty of damage with Incantations because her Faith scaling is good, but she has no innate way to generate FP. If you play Revenant and you actually want to contribute meaningfully to the team, you'll be constantly asking your buddies to drop Starlight Shards for you because they're the only things that will get you through a boss fight without running out of FP. This can be slightly mitigated with some items or upgrades you might get during a run, but not to anywhere near a sufficient level and those are obviously not guaranteed.
Don't get me wrong - you can have runs where Guardian or Revenant abilities come in clutch when fighting the boss, but you'd have been much safer in the first place with a Wylder or a Raider on your team instead. Not every class needs to dish out massive amounts of damage like Recluse or Ironeye, but they should at least be able to contribute to the team's DPS in a meaningful way (even indirectly). Otherwise they are simply a burden to the rest of the team and make a run much harder to complete.
The game has the bones of a good co-op roguelite, but falls drastically short in some crucial areas that, if better executed, could elevate the game to something actually worth the $40 price tag. Remember the rule: $1 for every hour of fun (although as game prices are rising throughout the industry by as much as 20%, that probably should as well). As it is, I wouldn't recommend paying any more than $15 for this one. You can spend your $40 on 4 or more separate indie roguelites that will be far better made and provide you with hundreds more fun-hours.
Ironic that the opening bit was Griffon destroying his switch with a katana when all he really needed to do was staple his receipt to the box and it would puncture the console. Should have sharpened your stapler instead Griff.
I took a break from Blue Prince to dive into South of Midnight. Great story, gorgeous environments, stellar music... But the combat isn't working for me.
Fortunately, there's very granular difficulty sliders. I'll probably polish it off this weekend.
And I'll second Russ's Murderbot recommendation. Fun show. I really like the cast, too.
Oh! And I enjoyed the Nightrein network test, but didn't get the full game because I was concerned about the single-player experience.
But my eldest snagged it and has been having a blast. The final(?) boss has an INCREDIBLE battle with one of the coolest cinematic moments I've ever seen in a FromSoft game.
I'll probably drop in a game or two this summer and give it a go.
Saw card game and thought my beloved 9 Kings would get a mention. Y'all should check it out when you get a chance, early access but more than worth the price in it's current state.
Good luck with your butt, thoughts and prayers for Chris’s butt everyone
Speaking of deck builders, check out Lonestar! It’s got big FTL vibes, but you have a very basic deck of numbered cards, and you play them into different parts of your ship that you collect and arrange on a grid. It’s really neat and feels like a fresh take at a very crowded genre
Everybody's Live with John Mulaney is worth the price of admission just to hear Richard Kind yell out "HE WAS IN THE ORDER OF THE GASH" when describing Butterball, and having that statement wash over Pete Davidson and break him entirely
i think it’s true that elden ring nightreign doesn’t feel like playing elden ring but what it DOES feel like is playing elden ring multiplayer (on speed). my friends don’t play fromsoft games so have been playing with random matchmaking and while it’s obviously a mixed bag, it’s so fun when you mind meld with a team and have a really good run. really baffling to me that people complain about no in-game voice chat in this game when the extremely limited communication system was a lot of the charm of elden ring multiplayer for me. why would i want a vc when i have a weird little head that says thank you and a fancy spin emote!
On Kuubs: I was in the Boy Scouts for like 20 years into early adulthood. We played the absolute hell out of Kuubs. Every chance we got. It’s the weird kids Cornhole and it’s 10x better. Can’t stress enough. Check it out.
Love from the UK Besties! Have you guys had a chance to check out Void War? Its basically a FTL clone with a Warhammer 40k skin, but if you have wanted more FTL content like I have for 13 years, it scratches the itch. Slightly more punishing and less user friendly, but greater variety of content.
As a Monster Train sicko myself, I do understand why it can be easy to bounce off of for a first brush. I only got into Monster Train when Hoops recommended it years ago, I super wish that I could hear his thoughts on it (maybe next week!).
I do want to mount a minor defense for Monster Train, as I'm someone for whom Slay the Spire is difficult to really sink my teeth into. I really appreciate that Monster Train runs only last for 8 levels, by third battle you are either barely hanging on, or you've found a killer combo that will take you all the way. Like Slay the Spire, you have to kind of flail around with a clan before you understand what its strengths are, but when you do, you can craft the most satisfying deadly combos imaginable. That, for me, is where the true strength of Monster Train lies, the feeling that you have created an unstoppable juggernaut. The triggers for each clan are designed to be exploited in play (nowhere is that more obvious than the Underlegion with their Propagate mechanic). Being able to mix 2 clans means that there's always some new combination that I haven't tried before, so there's always something fresh to take on.
I understand it's not for everyone, and I'm glad to hear your honest opinions. Just wanted to make sure it gets the attention it deserves!
i’m really curious about Griffin’s take on Devil’s Plan after the end, particularly the last two episodes— i just finished it today. Will refrain from saying more but under the circumstances of this season the game going from 5 to 3 was a tough watch for me.
i'm really, really digging Nightreign, and also agree with most of Russ's assessment, in that it doesn't deliver most of what i crave from Fromsoft's solo-focused experiences. and i think that's ok!
this is a weird one because i suspect if this game wasn't coming from From, and didn't have Elden Ring on the tin, but was otherwise exactly the same, people would be going wild for it, but a lot of the early adopters are coming in with their own sets of expectations of what they want out of the studio and the "franchise" and this doesn't meet it.
but it's doing the thing that all of their games do to me, which is to say that to start it is obtuse and difficult and makes me feel like i am bad at it and by extension all video games, but as i pry apart its depths and secrets it becomes more and more enjoyable and rewarding. and that's playing with randos - the couple of rounds i've been able to play with friends have really sung. i think you've got to meet it where it is, instead of wanting it to be More Elden Ring.
i think it's also cool to watch a big studio be given the space to experiment on something like this without (as far as we know) a publisher mandate, and for them to give a first-time director the reins for a smaller-scale project like this. the impression Miyazaki and From have given is that they're a studio that fosters talent, and if something like Nightreign gives them a chance to do that while still plugging away at whatever their Next Big Thing is, i'm all for it.
I come at it like I do other roguelites/roguelikes - I immediately start looking for the replay value. Run-based games need good replay value, which means every run needs to feel fresh, unpredictable, challenging. Once you complete a few runs of Nightreign, every run feels too similar.
If you ignore the Souls-like combat/mechanics, it's just a roguelite and it's not a very good one.
respectfully, i disagree! or, rather, my experience has lined up with what you're demanding out of a roguelike. switching between Nightfarers alone can make runs feel vastly different, before you get into the menagerie of bosses (trying to think if there's another roguelike out that matches Nightreign's sheer number of different bosses? maybe Isaac?) and the challenge of the Nightlords themselves. and i can't ignore the "Souls-like combat/mechanics" because, well, that's the heart of the game, and part of why i keep coming back to it and finding new nuances that keep it fresh.
that said, i can see myself being done with this once i've beaten all the Nightlords once, and that's ok? i love a roguelike, but i don't need them all to be 300+ hour timesinks. i'm with you in that i think the game could stand to have more variety in stuff like the map layout and in-match events, but those are also the kind of things i could see them messing with more and more post-launch.
and hey, i might feel differently after another 20 hours or so, but i can pretty easily see myself putting in at least that much more time.
That's fair. I can't argue with the sheer number of different enemies, and some of the bosses got some decent updates (e.g. Morgott); maybe it just all feels too similar because I've fought most of these enemies countless times before in the other games. Runs quickly became destroying everything until the Nightlord, where there was a good challenge, and dying to the Nightlord felt even worse because the rest of the run felt boring.
I'm probably not being totally fair because I'm frustrated, personally feeling like I didn't get $40 worth of fun-hours out of the game. I'm glad you and many others are enjoying it! Purchasing games is such a weird thing.
oof yeah, the value-for-money thing with games is always tough math. sorry you didn't feel like you got your bag's worth. i wonder how much it'll evolve in the next few months, maybe it turns into something that clicks for you more down the road.
i think you make a good point, that the variety doesn't hit the same way when you've already spent hundreds of hours fighting these bosses, and that runs can feel long, considering the Nightlords are the most engaging part of 'em. one of the things i'm getting out of it the more i play is in finding ways to optimize the run and dig as much out of the map as possible. still haven't had a run where i've hit the level cap, but the better i get at routing and knowing what to prioritize, the closer i inch.
For uh... for a podcast where the concept is that y'all game together I genuinely cannot fathom why you guys didn't do a 3-person squad-up for Nightreign and instead chose to tackle it as individual experiences (and ended up hating it).
Y'all maligned the heck out of the game and you seemingly never actually tried to play it the way that the dev intended; with two actual other friends. The solo and match-making are there to pick up the slack, but the intended experience is that YOU put your squad together and have a fun time.
Idk man, listening to y'all reminded me of the early reviews for Demon's Souls in 2009, where nobody understood how the game was a departure from established practices and it was poo-poo'd by many publications as a result. I normally am in lock-step with y'all, but seriously ya gotta actually try to play Nightreign with your buds before you declare the game to be "Everything you don't want from an Elden Ring game"
Fair feedback. I think the point we made largely is that simply getting three people together for the long sessions required to enjoy this game make it distinctly niche. And for us, that doesn't mesh with how we play games.
I don't think we all maligned it because most of us weren't able to play it.
All that said, I totally get why people who can get the people together to play it regularly would enjoy it!
I think it sort of speaks to the core problem with a game like that for a player like me- even if I had two other people I consistently wanted to play games with, there’s no way we’d all simultaneously have 45 uninterrupted minutes with any reliability at all. I’m sure there’s lots of people for whom that wouldn’t be a problem at all, but I’m certainly not one of them.
Although the co-op perspective would have been valuable, the solo perspective does not go unappreciated because that simply is the way many people will play the game.
It's also very debatable whether developer intent is more important than the way the audience will actually engage with the game. In my opinion, it needs to be a balance if you want it to sell well, be received well, and have lasting player retention. It's true that players don't know what they want, but they simply will play the game a particular way even if the devs didn't intend it. But that aside, the unfortunate thing is that if you do play it as intended, you quickly run into even bigger issues with the game as a whole. (I say "bigger issues" because the game in its current state can be completed solo by anyone experienced with Souls-likes. It's hard, but its not even as hard as Lies of P.)
Runs become very repetitive very quickly. There is ONE map with just a few possible "shifting earth" variations that change one quadrant of the map, leaving the rest essentially untouched. With a rare few exceptions, the same enemies are always in the same places with the same gimmicks. Despite a massive pool of enemies and bosses to pull from in the Souls series and Elden Ring, the enemy variety feels surprisingly shallow. The DS1 and DS2 bosses also feel far too easy. All of the Souls bosses probably should have gotten something new or been made generally more dangerous to fit with the rest of the game. And only two from each game? Why? Once you know the map, runs basically become demolishing everything in sight until you reach the main boss where the actual challenge lies. This makes for a very boring, 40-minute 'runback' any time you fail to beat a main boss.
Team composition has the same problem team composition has always had in action games like Monster Hunter and Dark Souls - the devs want you to have a "balanced" team with support, tank, DPS, etc, but if you understand how the game is played even a little you'll understand that you essentially always want DPS. The faster you can kill a boss, the safer you are. The less attacks you need to block/dodge/parry, the easier the fight will be. The less damage you have, the longer the fight will last, the more 'boss-fight fatigue' will set in, and the more you will make mistakes. The more damage you have, the faster it goes and the less you will even have opportunity to make mistakes. Big damage make game easy. Does the same obvious statement need to be said a thousand different ways before people understand this?
In Souls-likes you can usually build any character for DPS and in Monster Hunter you can make DPS builds for any weapon. This is not the case in Nightreign. You are locked into certain stats based on the character you choose - which is good in itself for this type of game, but presents issues in implementation. Guardian does far too little damage to keep up with the team and its 'aggro-drawing' and 'tank' mechanics aren't nearly strong enough to allow the rest of the team to have large damage windows (the purpose of a tank in something like this) to make up for its lack of damage. The best way to keep the boss off of your teammates is to use a class that can stagger or posture break enemies easily - Guardian's mechanics (aggro, HP, defense, etc.) would need to be buffed enormously to even come close. Revenant has a similar problem, but on the 'healer' side. Revenant could potentially dish out plenty of damage with Incantations because her Faith scaling is good, but she has no innate way to generate FP. If you play Revenant and you actually want to contribute meaningfully to the team, you'll be constantly asking your buddies to drop Starlight Shards for you because they're the only things that will get you through a boss fight without running out of FP. This can be slightly mitigated with some items or upgrades you might get during a run, but not to anywhere near a sufficient level and those are obviously not guaranteed.
Don't get me wrong - you can have runs where Guardian or Revenant abilities come in clutch when fighting the boss, but you'd have been much safer in the first place with a Wylder or a Raider on your team instead. Not every class needs to dish out massive amounts of damage like Recluse or Ironeye, but they should at least be able to contribute to the team's DPS in a meaningful way (even indirectly). Otherwise they are simply a burden to the rest of the team and make a run much harder to complete.
The game has the bones of a good co-op roguelite, but falls drastically short in some crucial areas that, if better executed, could elevate the game to something actually worth the $40 price tag. Remember the rule: $1 for every hour of fun (although as game prices are rising throughout the industry by as much as 20%, that probably should as well). As it is, I wouldn't recommend paying any more than $15 for this one. You can spend your $40 on 4 or more separate indie roguelites that will be far better made and provide you with hundreds more fun-hours.
Ironic that the opening bit was Griffon destroying his switch with a katana when all he really needed to do was staple his receipt to the box and it would puncture the console. Should have sharpened your stapler instead Griff.
You didn’t mention Cauldron in the briefing.
OFF WITH THEIR HEADS
I took a break from Blue Prince to dive into South of Midnight. Great story, gorgeous environments, stellar music... But the combat isn't working for me.
Fortunately, there's very granular difficulty sliders. I'll probably polish it off this weekend.
And I'll second Russ's Murderbot recommendation. Fun show. I really like the cast, too.
Oh! And I enjoyed the Nightrein network test, but didn't get the full game because I was concerned about the single-player experience.
But my eldest snagged it and has been having a blast. The final(?) boss has an INCREDIBLE battle with one of the coolest cinematic moments I've ever seen in a FromSoft game.
I'll probably drop in a game or two this summer and give it a go.
Saw card game and thought my beloved 9 Kings would get a mention. Y'all should check it out when you get a chance, early access but more than worth the price in it's current state.
It makes an appearance on Tuesday's Resties!
Good luck with your butt, thoughts and prayers for Chris’s butt everyone
Speaking of deck builders, check out Lonestar! It’s got big FTL vibes, but you have a very basic deck of numbered cards, and you play them into different parts of your ship that you collect and arrange on a grid. It’s really neat and feels like a fresh take at a very crowded genre
Everybody's Live with John Mulaney is worth the price of admission just to hear Richard Kind yell out "HE WAS IN THE ORDER OF THE GASH" when describing Butterball, and having that statement wash over Pete Davidson and break him entirely
i think it’s true that elden ring nightreign doesn’t feel like playing elden ring but what it DOES feel like is playing elden ring multiplayer (on speed). my friends don’t play fromsoft games so have been playing with random matchmaking and while it’s obviously a mixed bag, it’s so fun when you mind meld with a team and have a really good run. really baffling to me that people complain about no in-game voice chat in this game when the extremely limited communication system was a lot of the charm of elden ring multiplayer for me. why would i want a vc when i have a weird little head that says thank you and a fancy spin emote!
Not to stand on Chris’ grave, but excited to hear from Chris Grant next week.
On Kuubs: I was in the Boy Scouts for like 20 years into early adulthood. We played the absolute hell out of Kuubs. Every chance we got. It’s the weird kids Cornhole and it’s 10x better. Can’t stress enough. Check it out.
Can someone link to the idle game they mentioned?
https://store.steampowered.com/app/2619650/Cauldron/
it is taking all of my willpower not to add this to cart
Thanks!
I accept this poison chalice
Thank you for saving and maybe destroying my life, time will tell!
Yeah I can't believe they didn't mention it in the newsletter
I’m just looking… for a friend….
Love from the UK Besties! Have you guys had a chance to check out Void War? Its basically a FTL clone with a Warhammer 40k skin, but if you have wanted more FTL content like I have for 13 years, it scratches the itch. Slightly more punishing and less user friendly, but greater variety of content.
Keep up the good work sweet kings
As a Monster Train sicko myself, I do understand why it can be easy to bounce off of for a first brush. I only got into Monster Train when Hoops recommended it years ago, I super wish that I could hear his thoughts on it (maybe next week!).
I do want to mount a minor defense for Monster Train, as I'm someone for whom Slay the Spire is difficult to really sink my teeth into. I really appreciate that Monster Train runs only last for 8 levels, by third battle you are either barely hanging on, or you've found a killer combo that will take you all the way. Like Slay the Spire, you have to kind of flail around with a clan before you understand what its strengths are, but when you do, you can craft the most satisfying deadly combos imaginable. That, for me, is where the true strength of Monster Train lies, the feeling that you have created an unstoppable juggernaut. The triggers for each clan are designed to be exploited in play (nowhere is that more obvious than the Underlegion with their Propagate mechanic). Being able to mix 2 clans means that there's always some new combination that I haven't tried before, so there's always something fresh to take on.
I understand it's not for everyone, and I'm glad to hear your honest opinions. Just wanted to make sure it gets the attention it deserves!
i’m really curious about Griffin’s take on Devil’s Plan after the end, particularly the last two episodes— i just finished it today. Will refrain from saying more but under the circumstances of this season the game going from 5 to 3 was a tough watch for me.
If you wanted a Mega Man Battle Network roguelike, then Once Step From Eden is exactly that
But also that game is bonkers hard imo as a warning