The demographic reach of games even wider, as 36% of the Silent Generation (ages 80 to 90) is now playing video games weekly.

In 2025, it’s very difficult not to see gambling advertised everywhere. It’s on billboards and sports broadcasts. It’s on podcasts and printed on the turnbuckle of AEW’s pay-per-view shows. And it’s on app stores, where you can find the FanDuel and DraftKings sportsbooks, alongside glitzy digital slot machines. These apps all have the highest age ratings possible on Apple’s App Store and Google Play. But earlier this year, a different kind of app nearly disappeared from the Play Store entirely.Luck Be A Landlord is a roguelite deckbuilder from solo developer Dan DiIorio. DiIorio got word from Google in January 2025 that Luck Be A Landlord was about to be pulled, globally, because DiIorio had not disclosed the game’s “gambling themes” in its rating.In Luck Be a Landlord, the player takes spins on a pixel art slot machine to earn coins to pay their ever-increasing rent — a nightmare gamification of our day-to-day grind to remain housed. On app stores, it’s a one-time purchase of $4.99, and it’s $9.99 on Steam. On the Play Store page, developer Dan DiIorio notes, “This game does not contain any real-world currency gambling or microtransactions.”And it doesn’t. But for Google, that didn’t matter. First, the game was removed from the storefront in a slew of countries that have strict gambling laws. Then, at the beginning of 2025, Google told Dilorio that Luck Be A Landlord would be pulled globally because of its rating discrepancy, as it “does not take into account references to gambling (including real or simulated gambling)”.DiIorio had gone through this song and dance before — previously, when the game was blocked, he would send back a message saying “hey, the game doesn’t have gambling,” and then Google would send back a screenshot of the game and assert that, in fact, it had.DiIorio didn’t agree, but this time they decided that the risk of Landlord getting taken down permanently was too great. They’re a solo developer, and Luck Be a Landlord had just had its highest 30-day revenue since release. So, they filled out the form confirming that Luck Be A Landlord has “gambling themes,” and are currently hoping that this will be the end of it.This is a situation that sucks for an indie dev to be in, and over email DiIorio told Polygon it was “very frustrating.”“I think it can negatively affect indie developers if they fall outside the norm, which indies often do,” they wrote. “It also makes me afraid to explore mechanics like this further. It stifles creativity, and that’s really upsetting.”In late 2024, the hit game Balatro was in a similar position. It had won numerous awards, and made $1,000,000 in its first week on mobile platforms. And then overnight, the PEGI ratings board declared that the game deserved an adult rating.The ESRB had already rated it E10+ in the US, noting it has gambling themes. And the game was already out in Europe, making its overnight ratings change a surprise. Publisher PlayStack said the rating was given because Balatro has “prominent gambling imagery and material that instructs about gambling.”Balatro is basically Luck Be A Landlord’s little cousin. Developer LocalThunk was inspired by watching streams of Luck Be A Landlord, and seeing the way DiIorio had implemented deck-building into his slot machine. And like Luck Be A Landlord, Balatro is a one-time purchase, with no microtransactions.But the PEGI board noted that because the game uses poker hands, the skills the player learns in Balatro could translate to real-world poker.In its write-up, GameSpot noted that the same thing happened to a game called Sunshine Shuffle. It was temporarily banned from the Nintendo eShop, and also from the entire country of South Korea. Unlike Balatro, Sunshine Shuffle actually is a poker game, except you’re playing Texas Hold ‘Em — again for no real money — with cute animals (who are bank robbers).It’s common sense that children shouldn’t be able to access apps that allow them to gamble. But none of these games contain actual gambling — or do they?Where do we draw the line? Is it gambling to play any game that is also played in casinos, like poker or blackjack? Is it gambling to play a game that evokes the aesthetics of a casino, like cards, chips, dice, or slot machines? Is it gambling to wager or earn fictional money?Gaming has always been a lightning rod for controversy. Sex, violence, misogyny, addiction — you name it, video games have been accused of perpetrating or encouraging it. But gambling is gaming’s original sin. And it’s the one we still can’t get a grip on.The original link between gambling and gamingGetty ImagesThe association between video games and gambling all goes back to pinball. Back in the ’30s and ’40s, politicians targeted pinball machines for promoting gambling. Early pinball machines were less skill-based (they didn’t have flippers), and some gave cash payouts, so the comparison wasn’t unfair. Famously, mob-hating New York City mayor Fiorello LaGuardia banned pinball in the city, and appeared in a newsreel dumping pinball and slot machines into the Long Island Sound. Pinball machines spent some time relegated to the back rooms of sex shops and dive bars. But after some lobbying, the laws relaxed.By the 1970s, pinball manufacturers were also making video games, and the machines were side-by-side in arcades. Arcade machines, like pinball, took small coin payments, repeatedly, for short rounds of play. The disreputable funk of pinball basically rubbed off onto video games.Ever since video games rocked onto the scene, concerned and sometimes uneducated parties have been asking if they’re dangerous. And in general, studies have shown that they’re not. The same can’t be said about gambling — the practice of putting real money down to bet on an outcome.It’s a golden age for gambling2025 in the USA is a great time for gambling, which has been really profitable for gambling companies — to the tune of $66.5 billion dollars of revenue in 2023.To put this number in perspective, the American Gaming Association, which is the casino industry’s trade group and has nothing to do with video games, reports that 2022’s gambling revenue was $60.5 billion. It went up $6 billion in a year.And this increase isn’t just because of sportsbooks, although sports betting is a huge part of it. Online casinos and brick-and-mortar casinos are both earning more, and as a lot of people have pointed out, gambling is being normalized to a pretty disturbing degree.Much like with alcohol, for a small percentage of people, gambling can tip from occasional leisure activity into addiction. The people who are most at risk are, by and large, already vulnerable: researchers at the Yale School of Medicine found that 96% of problem gamblers are also wrestling with other disorders, such as “substance use, impulse-control disorders, mood disorders, and anxiety disorders.”Even if you’re not in that group, there are still good reasons to be wary of gambling. People tend to underestimate their own vulnerability to things they know are dangerous for others. Someone else might bet beyond their means. But I would simply know when to stop.Maybe you do! But being blithely confident about it can make it hard to notice if you do develop a problem. Or if you already have one.Addiction changes the way your brain works. When you’re addicted to something, your participation in it becomes compulsive, at the expense of other interests and responsibilities. Someone might turn to their addiction to self-soothe when depressed or anxious. And speaking of those feelings, people who are depressed and anxious are already more vulnerable to addiction. Given the entire state of the world right now, this predisposition shines an ugly light on the numbers touted by the AGA. Is it good that the industry is reporting $6 billion in additional earnings, when the economy feels so frail, when the stock market is ping ponging through highs and lows daily, when daily expenses are rising? It doesn’t feel good. In 2024, the YouTuber Drew Gooden turned his critical eye to online gambling. One of the main points he makes in his excellent video is that gambling is more accessible than ever. It’s on all our phones, and betting companies are using decades of well-honed app design and behavioral studies to manipulate users to spend and spend.Meanwhile, advertising on podcasts, billboards, TV, radio, and websites – it’s literally everywhere — tells you that this is fun, and you don’t even need to know what you’re doing, and you’re probably one bet away from winning back those losses.Where does Luck Be a Landlord come into this?So, are there gambling themes in Luck Be A Landlord? The game’s slot machine is represented in simple pixel art. You pay one coin to use it, and among the more traditional slot machine symbols are silly ones like a snail that only pays out after 4 spins.When I started playing it, my primary emotion wasn’t necessarily elation at winning coins — it was stress and disbelief when, in the third round of the game, the landlord increased my rent by 100%. What the hell.I don’t doubt that getting better at it would produce dopamine thrills akin to gambling — or playing any video game. But it’s supposed to be difficult, because that’s the joke. If you beat the game you unlock more difficulty modes where, as you keep paying rent, your landlord gets furious, and starts throwing made-up rules at you: previously rare symbols will give you less of a payout, and the very mechanics of the slot machine change.It’s a manifestation of the golden rule of casinos, and all of capitalism writ large: the odds are stacked against you. The house always wins. There is luck involved, to be sure, but because Luck Be A Landlord is a deck-builder, knowing the different ways you can design your slot machine to maximize payouts is a skill! You have some influence over it, unlike a real slot machine. The synergies that I’ve seen high-level players create are completely nuts, and obviously based on a deep understanding of the strategies the game allows.IMAGE: TrampolineTales via PolygonBalatro and Luck Be a Landlord both distance themselves from casino gambling again in the way they treat money. In Landlord, the money you earn is gold coins, not any currency we recognize. And the payouts aren’t actually that big. By the end of the core game, the rent money you’re struggling and scraping to earn… is 777 coins. In the post-game endless mode, payouts can get massive. But the thing is, to get this far, you can’t rely on chance. You have to be very good at Luck Be a Landlord.And in Balatro, the numbers that get big are your points. The actual dollar payments in a round of Balatro are small. These aren’t games about earning wads and wads of cash. So, do these count as “gambling themes”?We’ll come back to that question later. First, I want to talk about a closer analog to what we colloquially consider gambling: loot boxes and gacha games.Random rewards: from Overwatch to the rise of gachaRecently, I did something that I haven’t done in a really long time: I thought about Overwatch. I used to play Overwatch with my friends, and I absolutely made a habit of dropping 20 bucks here or there for a bunch of seasonal loot boxes. This was never a problem behavior for me, but in hindsight, it does sting that over a couple of years, I dropped maybe $150 on cosmetics for a game that now I primarily associate with squandered potential.Loot boxes grew out of free-to-play mobile games, where they’re the primary method of monetization. In something like Overwatch, they functioned as a way to earn additional revenue in an ongoing game, once the player had already dropped 40 bucks to buy it.More often than not, loot boxes are a random selection of skins and other cosmetics, but games like Star Wars: Battlefront 2 were famously criticized for launching with loot crates that essentially made it pay-to-win – if you bought enough of them and got lucky.It’s not unprecedented to associate loot boxes with gambling. A 2021 study published in Addictive Behaviors showed that players who self-reported as problem gamblers also tended to spend more on loot boxes, and another study done in the UK found a similar correlation with young adults.While Overwatch certainly wasn’t the first game to feature cosmetic loot boxes or microtransactions, it’s a reference point for me, and it also got attention worldwide. In 2018, Overwatch was investigated by the Belgian Gaming Commission, which found it “in violation of gambling legislation” alongside FIFA 18 and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. Belgium’s response was to ban the sale of loot boxes without a gambling license. Having a paid random rewards mechanic in a game is a criminal offense there. But not really. A 2023 study showed that 82% of iPhone games sold on the App Store in Belgium still use random paid monetization, as do around 80% of games that are rated 12+. The ban wasn’t effectively enforced, if at all, and the study recommends that a blanket ban wouldn’t actually be a practical solution anyway.Overwatch was rated T for Teen by the ESRB, and 12 by PEGI. When it first came out, its loot boxes were divisive. Since the mechanic came from F2P mobile games, which are often seen as predatory, people balked at seeing it in a big action game from a multi-million dollar publisher.At the time, the rebuttal was, “Well, at least it’s just cosmetics.” Nobody needs to buy loot boxes to be good at Overwatch.A lot has changed since 2016. Now we have a deeper understanding of how these mechanics are designed to manipulate players, even if they don’t affect gameplay. But also, they’ve been normalized. While there will always be people expressing disappointment when a AAA game has a paid random loot mechanic, it is no longer shocking.And if anything, these mechanics have only become more prevalent, thanks to the growth of gacha games. Gacha is short for “gachapon,” the Japanese capsule machines where you pay to receive one of a selection of random toys. Getty ImagesIn gacha games, players pay — not necessarily real money, but we’ll get to that — for a chance to get something. Maybe it’s a character, or a special weapon, or some gear — it depends on the game. Whatever it is, within that context, it’s desirable — and unlike the cosmetics of Overwatch, gacha pulls often do impact the gameplay.For example, in Infinity Nikki, you can pull for clothing items in these limited-time events. You have a chance to get pieces of a five-star outfit. But you also might pull one of a set of four-star items, or a permanent three-star piece. Of course, if you want all ten pieces of the five-star outfit, you have to do multiple pulls, each costing a handful of limited resources that you can earn in-game or purchase with money.Gacha was a fixture of mobile gaming for a long time, but in recent years, we’ve seen it go AAA, and global. MiHoYo’s Genshin Impact did a lot of that work when it came out worldwide on consoles and PC alongside its mobile release. Genshin and its successors are massive AAA games of a scale that, for your Nintendos and Ubisofts, would necessitate selling a bajillion copies to be a success. And they’re free.Genshin is an action game, whose playstyle changes depending on what character you’re playing — characters you get from gacha pulls, of course. In Zenless Zone Zero, the characters you can pull have different combo patterns, do different kinds of damage, and just feel different to play. And whereas in an early mobile gacha game like Love Nikki Dress UP! Queen the world was rudimentary, its modern descendant Infinity Nikki is, like Genshin, Breath of the Wild-esque. It is a massive open world, with collectibles and physics puzzles, platforming challenges, and a surprisingly involved storyline. Genshin Impact was the subject of an interesting study where researchers asked young adults in Hong Kong to self-report on their gacha spending habits. They found that, like with gambling, players who are not feeling good tend to spend more. “Young adult gacha gamers experiencing greater stress and anxiety tend to spend more on gacha purchases, have more motives for gacha purchases, and participate in more gambling activities,” they wrote. “This group is at a particularly higher risk of becoming problem gamblers.”One thing that is important to note is that Genshin Impact came out in 2020. The study was self-reported, and it was done during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was a time when people were experiencing a lot of stress, and also fewer options to relieve that stress. We were all stuck inside gaming.But the fact that stress can make people more likely to spend money on gacha shows that while the gacha model isn’t necessarily harmful to everyone, it is exploitative to everyone. Since I started writing this story, another self-reported study came out in Japan, where 18.8% of people in their 20s say they’ve spent money on gacha rather than on things like food or rent.Following Genshin Impact’s release, MiHoYo put out Honkai: Star Rail and Zenless Zone Zero. All are shiny, big-budget games that are free to play, but dangle the lure of making just one purchase in front of the player. Maybe you could drop five bucks on a handful of in-game currency to get one more pull. Or maybe just this month you’ll get the second tier of rewards on the game’s equivalent of a Battle Pass. The game is free, after all — but haven’t you enjoyed at least ten dollars’ worth of gameplay? Image: HoyoverseI spent most of my December throwing myself into Infinity Nikki. I had been so stressed, and the game was so soothing. I logged in daily to fulfill my daily wishes and earn my XP, diamonds, Threads of Purity, and bling. I accumulated massive amounts of resources. I haven’t spent money on the game. I’m trying not to, and so far, it’s been pretty easy. I’ve been super happy with how much stuff I can get for free, and how much I can do! I actually feel really good about that — which is what I said to my boyfriend, and he replied, “Yeah, that’s the point. That’s how they get you.”And he’s right. Currently, Infinity Nikki players are embroiled in a war with developer Infold, after Infold introduced yet another currency type with deep ties to Nikki’s gacha system. Every one of these gacha games has its own tangled system of overlapping currencies. Some can only be used on gacha pulls. Some can only be used to upgrade items. Many of them can be purchased with human money.Image: InFold Games/Papergames via PolygonAll of this adds up. According to Sensor Towers’ data, Genshin Impact earned over 36 million dollars on mobile alone in a single month of 2024. I don’t know what Dan DiIorio’s peak monthly revenue for Luck Be A Landlord was, but I’m pretty sure it wasn’t that.A lot of the spending guardrails we see in games like these are actually the result of regulations in other territories, especially China, where gacha has been a big deal for a lot longer. For example, gacha games have a daily limit on loot boxes, with the number clearly displayed, and a system collectively called “pity,” where getting the banner item is guaranteed after a certain number of pulls. Lastly, developers have to be clear about what the odds are. When I log in to spend the Revelation Crystals I’ve spent weeks hoarding in my F2P Infinity Nikki experience, I know that I have a 1.5% chance of pulling a 5-star piece, and that the odds can go up to 6.06%, and that I am guaranteed to get one within 20 pulls, because of the pity system.So, these odds are awful. But it is not as merciless as sitting down at a Vegas slot machine, an experience best described as “oh… that’s it?”There’s not a huge philosophical difference between buying a pack of loot boxes in Overwatch, a pull in Genshin Impact, or even a booster of Pokémon cards. You put in money, you get back randomized stuff that may or may not be what you want. In the dictionary definition, it’s a gamble. But unlike the slot machine, it’s not like you’re trying to win money by doing it, unless you’re selling those Pokémon cards, which is a topic for another time.But since even a game where you don’t get anything, like Balatro or Luck Be A Landlord, can come under fire for promoting gambling to kids, it would seem appropriate for app stores and ratings boards to take a similarly hardline stance with gacha.Instead, all these games are rated T for Teen by the ESRB, and PEGI 12 in the EU.The ESRB ratings for these games note that they contain in-game purchases, including random items. Honkai: Star Rail’s rating specifically calls out a slot machine mechanic, where players spend tokens to win a prize. But other than calling out Honkai’s slot machine, app stores are not slapping Genshin or Nikki with an 18+ rating. Meanwhile, Balatro had a PEGI rating of 18 until a successful appeal in February 2025, and Luck Be a Landlord is still 17+ on Apple’s App Store.Nobody knows what they’re doingWhen I started researching this piece, I felt very strongly that it was absurd that Luck Be A Landlord and Balatro had age ratings this high.I still believe that the way both devs have been treated by ratings boards is bad. Threatening an indie dev with a significant loss of income by pulling their game is bad, not giving them a way to defend themself or help them understand why it’s happening is even worse. It’s an extension of the general way that too-big-to-fail companies like Google treat all their customers.DiIorio told me that while it felt like a human being had at least looked at Luck Be A Landlord to make the determination that it contained gambling themes, the emails he was getting were automatic, and he doesn’t have a contact at Google to ask why this happened or how he can avoid it in the future — an experience that will be familiar to anyone who has ever needed Google support. But what’s changed for me is that I’m not actually sure anymore that games that don’t have gambling should be completely let off the hook for evoking gambling.Exposing teens to simulated gambling without financial stakes could spark an interest in the real thing later on, according to a study in the International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. It’s the same reason you can’t mosey down to the drug store to buy candy cigarettes. Multiple studies were done that showed kids who ate candy cigarettes were more likely to take up smoking (of course, the candy is still available — just without the “cigarette” branding.)So while I still think rating something like Balatro 18+ is nuts, I also think that describing it appropriately might be reasonable. As a game, it’s completely divorced from literally any kind of play you would find in a casino — but I can see the concern that the thrill of flashy numbers and the shiny cards might encourage young players to try their hand at poker in a real casino, where a real house can take their money.Maybe what’s more important than doling out high age ratings is helping people think about how media can affect us. In the same way that, when I was 12 and obsessed with The Matrix, my parents gently made sure that I knew that none of the violence was real and you can’t actually cartwheel through a hail of bullets in real life. Thanks, mom and dad!But that’s an answer that’s a lot more abstract and difficult to implement than a big red 18+ banner. When it comes to gacha, I think we’re even less equipped to talk about these game mechanics, and I’m certain they’re not being age-rated appropriately. On the one hand, like I said earlier, gacha exploits the player’s desire for stuff that they are heavily manipulated to buy with real money. On the other hand, I think it’s worth acknowledging that there is a difference between gacha and casino gambling.Problem gamblers aren’t satisfied by winning — the thing they’re addicted to is playing, and the risk that comes with it. In gacha games, players do report satisfaction when they achieve the prize they set out to get. And yes, in the game’s next season, the developer will be dangling a shiny new prize in front of them with the goal of starting the cycle over. But I think it’s fair to make the distinction, while still being highly critical of the model.And right now, there is close to no incentive for app stores to crack down on gacha in any way. They get a cut of in-app purchases. Back in 2023, miHoYo tried a couple of times to set up payment systems that circumvented Apple’s 30% cut of in-app spending. Both times, it was thwarted by Apple, whose App Store generated $1.1 trillion in developer billings and sales in 2022.According to Apple itself, 90% of that money did not include any commission to Apple. Fortunately for Apple, ten percent of a trillion dollars is still one hundred billion dollars, which I would also like to have in my bank account. Apple has zero reason to curb spending on games that have been earning millions of dollars every month for years.And despite the popularity of Luck Be A Landlord and Balatro’s massive App Store success, these games will never be as lucrative. They’re one-time purchases, and they don’t have microtransactions. To add insult to injury, like most popular games, Luck Be A Landlord has a lot of clones. And from what I can tell, it doesn’t look like any of them have been made to indicate that their games contain the dreaded “gambling themes” that Google was so worried about in Landlord.In particular, a game called SpinCraft: Roguelike from Sneaky Panda Games raised $6 million in seed funding for “inventing the Luck-Puzzler genre,” which it introduced in 2022, while Luck Be A Landlord went into early access in 2021.It’s free-to-play, has ads and in-app purchases, looks like Fisher Price made a slot machine, and it’s rated E for everyone, with no mention of gambling imagery in its rating. I reached out to the developers to ask if they had also been contacted by the Play Store to disclose that their game has gambling themes, but I haven’t heard back.Borrowing mechanics in games is as old as time, and it’s something I in no way want to imply shouldn’t happen because copyright is the killer of invention — but I think we can all agree that the system is broken.There is no consistency in how games with random chance are treated. We still do not know how to talk about gambling, or gambling themes, and at the end of the day, the results of this are the same: the house always wins.See More:

If you’ve ever wondered whether the food on your plate could shape your brain’s future, the science is starting to say: yes, it might. While healthy eating has long been linked to better brain health, new research is getting more specific about which diets help, and when you should start following them.At this year’s annual Nutrition conference in Orlando, Florida, researchers presented findings that add weight to the growing link between diet and dementia. According to a news release, study author Song-Yi Park of the University of Hawaii at Manoa said, “Our study findings confirm that healthy dietary patterns in mid to late life and their improvement over time may prevent Alzheimer’s and related dementias. This suggests that it is never too late to adopt a healthy diet to prevent dementia.”The research focused on nearly 93,000 U.S. adults from the long-running Multiethnic Cohort Study. Participants were between 45 years and 75 years old when they entered the study in the 1990s. Over time, more than 21,000 developed Alzheimer’s disease or related dementias — but those who closely followed a specific eating plan, the MIND diet, were significantly less likely to be among them.Combining the Mediterranean Diet and DASH DietThe MIND diet (short for Mediterranean-DASH Intervention for Neurodegenerative Delay) blends the best elements of two established eating plans: the Mediterranean diet and the DASH diet.The Mediterranean diet is inspired by the traditional cuisines of countries like Greece, Italy, and Spain. It focuses on plant-based foods (fruits, vegetables, legumes, nuts, seeds, and whole grains), healthy fats like olive oil, and moderate amounts of fish, poultry, and dairy, with red meat eaten sparingly. It’s been linked to a lower risk of heart disease and is also environmentally friendly.The DASH diet, originally designed to lower blood pressure, shares many similarities but puts extra emphasis on limiting sodium and increasing intake of nutrients like potassium, magnesium, and calcium. It includes low-fat dairy and lean protein sources and doesn’t rely on any hard-to-find foods.The MIND diet specifically promotes brain-healthy foods like leafy greens, berries, nuts, and olive oil, combining benefits of both approaches with a focus on protecting cognitive health.Read More: Is the Mediterranean Diet Healthy?The MIND Diet Over TimeAccording to Park and her team, people who scored highest in MIND diet adherence at the study’s start had a 9 percent lower risk of developing dementia. That number was even higher with around 13 percent for African American, Latino, and White participants. Looking at those who improved their adherence to the MIND diet over time, showed a 25 percent reduction in dementia risk compared to those whose dietary habits declined, which was consistent no matter the age or racial background.“We found that the protective relationship between a healthy diet and dementia was more pronounced among African Americans, Latinos, and Whites, while it was not as apparent among Asian Americans and showed a weaker trend in Native Hawaiians,” Park said in the press release. “A tailored approach may be needed when evaluating different subpopulations’ diet quality.”Interestingly, Asian Americans also tend to have lower dementia rates overall, which researchers believe could mean other cultural eating patterns might offer similar protection than the MIND diet for that group.The Best Time to Start Is NowOne of the most encouraging findings was that starting late still helped. Participants who began following the MIND diet more closely over a 10-year period, regardless of how old they were when they began, saw benefits. This suggests that even if you didn’t grow up eating brain-boosting foods, it’s not too late to change course.It’s worth noting that the study is observational, so, by itself, it can’t prove this specific diet causes better brain health. Study author Park notes that the next step is conducting interventional studies to verify these promising results.Still, the evidence is mounting. Whether you're 45 or 75, choosing greens over greasy snacks could make a real difference when it comes to aging with or without dementia.This article is not offering medical advice and should be used for informational purposes only.Article SourcesOur writers at Discovermagazine.com use peer-reviewed studies and high-quality sources for our articles, and our editors review for scientific accuracy and editorial standards. Review the sources used below for this article:National Institute of Aging. What Do We Know About Diet and Prevention of Alzheimer’s Disease?Harvard Health Publishing. A practical guide to the Mediterranean dietNational Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. Following the DASH Eating PlanHaving worked as a biomedical research assistant in labs across three countries, Jenny excels at translating complex scientific concepts – ranging from medical breakthroughs and pharmacological discoveries to the latest in nutrition – into engaging, accessible content. Her interests extend to topics such as human evolution, psychology, and quirky animal stories. When she’s not immersed in a popular science book, you’ll find her catching waves or cruising around Vancouver Island on her longboard.

This article is a sponsored by TetraLogical Neurodivergent needs are often considered as an edge case that doesn’t fit into common user journeys or flows. Neurodiversity tends to get overlooked in the design process. Or it is tackled late in the process, and only if there is enough time. But people aren’t edge cases. Every person is just a different person, performing tasks and navigating the web in a different way. So how can we design better, more inclusive experiences that cater to different needs and, ultimately, benefit everyone? Let’s take a closer look. Neurodiversity Or Neurodivergent? There is quite a bit of confusion about both terms on the web. Different people think and experience the world differently, and neurodiversity sees differences as natural variations, not deficits. It distinguishes between neurotypical and neurodivergent people. Neurotypical people see the world in a “typical” and widely perceived as expected way. Neurodivergent people experience the world differently, for example, people with ADHD, dyslexia, dyscalculia, synesthesia, and hyperlexia. According to various sources, around 15–40% of the population has neurodivergent traits. These traits can be innate (e.g., autism) or acquired (e.g., trauma). But they are always on a spectrum, and vary a lot. A person with autism is not neurodiverse — they are neurodivergent. One of the main strengths of neurodivergent people is how imaginative and creative they are, coming up with out-of-the-box ideas quickly. With exceptional levels of attention, strong long-term memory, a unique perspective, unbeatable accuracy, and a strong sense of justice and fairness. Being different in a world that, to some degree, still doesn’t accept these differences is exhausting. So unsurprisingly, neurodivergent people often bring along determination, resilience, and high levels of empathy. Design With People, Not For Them As a designer, I often see myself as a path-maker. I’m designing reliable paths for people to navigate to their goals comfortably. Without being blocked. Or confused. Or locked out. That means respecting the simple fact that people’s needs, tasks, and user journeys are all different, and that they evolve over time. And: most importantly, it means considering them very early in the process. Better accessibility is better for everyone. Instead of making decisions that need to be reverted or refined to be compliant, we can bring a diverse group of people — with accessibility needs, with neurodiversity, frequent and infrequent users, experts, newcomers — in the process, and design with them, rather than for them. Neurodiversity & Inclusive Design Resources A wonderful resource that helps us design for cognitive accessibility is Stéphanie Walter’s Neurodiversity and UX toolkit. It includes practical guidelines, tools, and resources to better understand and design for dyslexia, dyscalculia, autism, and ADHD. Another fantastic resource is Will Soward’s Neurodiversity Design System. It combines neurodiversity and user experience design into a set of design standards and principles that you can use to design accessible learning interfaces. Last but not least, I’ve been putting together a few summaries about neurodiversity and inclusive design over the last few years, so you might find them helpful, too: ADHD Autism Children Colorblindness Deafness Dyscalculia Dyslexia Legibility Left-Handed Users Mental Health Motivation Older Adults Screen Readers Teenagers A huge thank-you to everyone who has been writing, speaking, and sharing articles, resources, and toolkits on designing for diversity. The topic is often forgotten and overlooked, but it has an incredible impact. 👏🏼👏🏽👏🏾

If you wanted to get a COVID vaccine during pregnancy, to protect yourself and your future baby from the virus, that may soon be difficult to impossible. According to a short video posted on X, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr, who is also a noted anti-vaccine activist, said that the COVID-19 vaccine “has been removed” from the list of vaccines recommended in pregnancy, as well as the list of vaccines recommended for healthy children. This announcement sidesteps the usual regulatory process, and it’s not clear exactly what will happen next—but here’s what we know. The announcement may not be entirely validRFK, Jr made the announcement in a video where he stood alongside the NIH director Jay Bhattacharya and FDA commissioner Marty Makary. Notably, nobody from the CDC was present. The FDA approves vaccines, but it’s the CDC that is in charge of recommendations. (It is not clear who the CDC’s acting director actually is, or whether there is one.) Normally, the CDC has an advisory panel called ACIP (the Advisory Committee for Immunization Practices) that reviews scientific evidence to make recommendations for vaccines. They’ll vote on whether a given vaccine should be recommended for everybody in a group of people. Their decisions are then passed to CDC leadership, who make the final call as to whether the vaccine gets officially recommended for that group. Vaccines are not usually added or removed to the recommended list by the CDC without consulting with ACIP, and they definitely aren’t usually added or removed by tweeting a video. Dorit Reiss, a law professor who specializes in vaccine policy, posted on LinkedIn that the announcement may not be legally valid if it’s not immediately followed by supporting documentation. She says: “Under administrative law, to avoid being found arbitrary and capricious, an agency's decision has to meet certain criteria, including explaining the agency's fact finding, a connection between the facts and the decisions, etc. A one minute video on Twitter doesn't quite get you there.” So far, the CDC’s web page on vaccines recommended in pregnancy still says that “A pregnant woman should get vaccinated against whooping cough, flu, COVID-19, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV).” The adult and child vaccine schedules still include COVID vaccines.Strangely, this move on behalf of the CDC contradicts the one we reported about recently from the FDA. The FDA plans to require extra steps (possibly unethical and/or impractical ones) to approve new COVID vaccines for healthy children and adults. But these steps don’t apply to people who are at high risk for complications of COVID. The FDA’s policy announcement included a list of those high risk health conditions—which includes pregnancy.Why it matters which vaccines are “recommended”Recommending a vaccine doesn’t just mean expressing an opinion; the Affordable Care Act requires that vaccines recommended by ACIP must be covered by most private insurance and Medicaid expansion plans without any cost sharing. That means no deductible and no copay—so these vaccines must be free to you out of pocket if you fall into a group of people for whom they are recommended. The recommended vaccines include all the standard childhood vaccines, plus your seasonal flu shot, and other vaccines that are recommended for adults, for people who are pregnant, and so on. The full schedules are here. If you’ve gotten a COVID shot, a flu shot, a tetanus shot, a shingles shot—the shot’s inclusion on this list is why you were able to (probably) get it for free.So taking a vaccine off the recommended list means that it could be prohibitively expensive. GoodRX, which keeps tabs on pharmacy prices, reports that COVID shots may cost $200 or more out of pocket, plus any applicable administration fee that the provider might charge.Taking a vaccine off the recommended list may also mean it won’t be covered by the Vaccines for Children program, which provides free vaccines to children who don’t have coverage for them through health insurance.Whether or not the vaccine actually gets taken off the list, the recent HHS announcement has another impact: The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists said in a statement that “Following this announcement, we are worried about our patients in the future, who may be less likely to choose vaccination during pregnancy despite the clear and definitive evidence demonstrating its benefit.” The ACOG statement also pointed out a few ways in which removing the vaccines from the recommended list is not “common sense and good science,” as the HHS announcement claimed. ACOG writes: “As ob-gyns who treat patients every day, we have seen firsthand how dangerous COVID infection can be during pregnancy and for newborns who depend on maternal antibodies from the vaccine for protection. We also understand that despite the change in recommendations from HHS, the science has not changed. It is very clear that COVID infection during pregnancy can be catastrophic and lead to major disability, and it can cause devastating consequences for families.”

Given their abundance in American backyards, gardens and highway corridors these days, it may be surprising to learn that white-tailed deer were nearly extinct about a century ago. While they currently number somewhere in the range of 30 million to 35 million, at the turn of the 20th century, there were as few as 300,000 whitetails across the entire continent: just 1% of the current population. This near-disappearance of deer was much discussed at the time. In 1854, Henry David Thoreau had written that no deer had been hunted near Concord, Massachusetts, for a generation. In his famous “Walden,” he reported: “One man still preserves the horns of the last deer that was killed in this vicinity, and another has told me the particulars of the hunt in which his uncle was engaged. The hunters were formerly a numerous and merry crew here.” But what happened to white-tailed deer? What drove them nearly to extinction, and then what brought them back from the brink? As a historical ecologist and environmental archaeologist, I have made it my job to answer these questions. Over the past decade, I’ve studied white-tailed deer bones from archaeological sites across the eastern United States, as well as historical records and ecological data, to help piece together the story of this species. Precolonial rise of deer populations White-tailed deer have been hunted from the earliest migrations of people into North America, more than 15,000 years ago. The species was far from the most important food resource at that time, though. Archaeological evidence suggests that white-tailed deer abundance only began to increase after the extinction of megafauna species like mammoths and mastodons opened up ecological niches for deer to fill. Deer bones become very common in archaeological sites from about 6,000 years ago onward, reflecting the economic and cultural importance of the species for Indigenous peoples. Despite being so frequently hunted, deer populations do not seem to have appreciably declined due to Indigenous hunting prior to AD 1600. Unlike elk or sturgeon, whose numbers were reduced by Indigenous hunters and fishers, white-tailed deer seem to have been resilient to human predation. While archaeologists have found some evidence for human-caused declines in certain parts of North America, other cases are more ambiguous, and deer certainly remained abundant throughout the past several millennia. Human use of fire could partly explain why white-tailed deer may have been resilient to hunting. Indigenous peoples across North America have long used controlled burning to promote ecosystem health, disturbing old vegetation to promote new growth. Deer love this sort of successional vegetation for food and cover, and thus thrive in previously burned habitats. Indigenous people may have therefore facilitated deer population growth, counteracting any harmful hunting pressure. More research is needed, but even though some hunting pressure is evident, the general picture from the precolonial era is that deer seem to have been doing just fine for thousands of years. Ecologists estimate that there were roughly 30 million white-tailed deer in North America on the eve of European colonization—about the same number as today. A 16th-century engraving depicts Indigenous Floridians hunting deer while disguised in deerskins. [Photo: Theodor de Bry/DEA Picture Library/De Agostini/Getty Images] Colonial-era fall of deer numbers To better understand how deer populations changed in the colonial era, I recently analyzed deer bones from two archaeological sites in what is now Connecticut. My analysis suggests that hunting pressure on white-tailed deer increased almost as soon as European colonists arrived. At one site dated to the 11th to 14th centuries (before European colonization) I found that only about 7% to 10% of the deer killed were juveniles. Hunters generally don’t take juvenile deer if they’re frequently encountering adults, since adult deer tend to be larger, offering more meat and bigger hides. Additionally, hunting increases mortality on a deer herd but doesn’t directly affect fertility, so deer populations experiencing hunting pressure end up with juvenile-skewed age structures. For these reasons, this low percentage of juvenile deer prior to European colonization indicates minimal hunting pressure on local herds. However, at a nearby site occupied during the 17th century—just after European colonization—between 22% and 31% of the deer hunted were juveniles, suggesting a substantial increase in hunting pressure. This elevated hunting pressure likely resulted from the transformation of deer into a commodity for the first time. Venison, antlers and deerskins may have long been exchanged within Indigenous trade networks, but things changed drastically in the 17th century. European colonists integrated North America into a trans-Atlantic mercantile capitalist economic system with no precedent in Indigenous society. This applied new pressures to the continent’s natural resources. Deer—particularly their skins—were commodified and sold in markets in the colonies initially and, by the 18th century, in Europe as well. Deer were now being exploited by traders, merchants and manufacturers desiring profit, not simply hunters desiring meat or leather. It was the resulting hunting pressure that drove the species toward its extinction. 20th-century rebound of white-tailed deer Thanks to the rise of the conservation movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, white-tailed deer survived their brush with extinction. Concerned citizens and outdoorsmen feared for the fate of deer and other wildlife, and pushed for new legislative protections. The Lacey Act of 1900, for example, banned interstate transport of poached game and—in combination with state-level protections—helped end commercial deer hunting by effectively de-commodifying the species. Aided by conservation-oriented hunting practices and reintroductions of deer from surviving populations to areas where they had been extirpated, white-tailed deer rebounded. The story of white-tailed deer underscores an important fact: Humans are not inherently damaging to the environment. Hunting from the 17th through 19th centuries threatened the existence of white-tailed deer, but precolonial Indigenous hunting and environmental management appear to have been relatively sustainable, and modern regulatory governance in the 20th century forestalled and reversed their looming extinction. Elic Weitzel, Peter Buck Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Smithsonian Institution This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Just Dodge Elden Ring Nightreign update offers solo players a helping hand not even 24-hours after launch because cowards cried too loud What happened to the game that I loved, to the spirit of persevering through adversity? Image credit: Bandai Namco News by Connor Makar Staff Writer Published on May 30, 2025 Elden Ring Nightreign hasn't even been out for 24 hours, and already the game has been made easier for solo players. Those tackling solo runs will get one free revive during the Nightlord fight that's part of the run, and will get increased rune aquisition the entire time. A solo run, which is already scaled so that bosses have less health and offers a purchasable revive before the Nightlord fight for a measly 10,000 runes, was added for those who enjoy the challenge of taking on a game intended for group play on their lonesome. Fair play, y'know. It's not how I best enjoyed the game but godspeed captain, take the wheel. For those who were actually excited to take on the game this way with all its struggle and in the name of fufilment through overcoming adversity, however, their dreams have been hampered by the wails and moans of wittle babies who want the solo experience to be easier. To see this content please enable targeting cookies. They want their warm bottle, a little bib, and for the process of actually overcoming the challenge present in Nightreign to be lowered so they don't have to work as hard to succeed. Was I able to solo every boss during the review period? No. I did like four of 'em. Was I looking forward to improving and doing so over the next few weeks? Absolutely. This journey has been stolen from me and likeminded adults by the feeble among us. "But Connor, what if these people are struggling to beat bosses on their own and need help?", you may ask. Here's a hot tip. Go and ask your dad if you can use the internet, shake the gent's hand, then take the on the boss online. Once you've cracked that with the help of other people, and are better at the game, then try it solo. You'll find that it's easier than before. Wow! It's almost as though that playing the game more and with other people (the way the game is intended to be played) helps make these challenges less daunting. It's almost as though that's a major theme of the game itself. You are meant to ride a bike with your hands on the handle bars. You can ride without doing so, but it's harder. If you try riding a bike without touching the handle bars and wipe out on the pavement, you don't ask for stabilizers to be put on, right? You practice riding your bike normally until you can crack it. The worst part isn't even the revive - you can just take your hands off the controller on your first death and welcome the game over if you want a real "deathless run" - it's the rune aquisition boost. In my opinion it taints the whole thing. There are relics that give rune aquisition boosts but you have to earn them. The game gets easier as you play, as in all games like this. I do understand why this change has happened from From Software's perspective - the company wants all the people playing it to have a good time and not bail out after a few too many frustrating losses. Totally get it. But why not leave it a week so the sickos can claim their laurels? Then, provide this olive branch for everyone else. Maybe I'm an jaded 27 year old but I remember a From Software community that would cheer and pop bottles upon hearing that a new game was really hard as a solo player, and would smash their heads against it like rabid animals until they managed to beat it. These people still exist I'm sure, they are likely as disapointed as I am that the game has already had part of it neutered, but it's too late now. At least with Elden Ring: Shadow of the Erdtree regular players had a few days to soldier on before the early hours of it were made easier. Whatever, enjoy your pram. Elden Ring Nightreign is out now, and is doing really well on Steam at the moment. So, there's a solid chance a lot of you playing it right now are having a good time, which is swell.

Age verification is coming to app stores in Texas, meaning that users could soon be required to provide some form of identification in order to download anything from the Google Play and Apple App stores, regardless of the app's content. Earlier this week, Gov. Greg Abbott signed the Texas App Store Accountability Act, which is set to take effect at the beginning of next year. The new law, which purports to be about keeping children safer online, has significant implications for user privacy and data security. What will be required for app store age verification in Texas?The Texas law will require Google and Apple to verify the age of all users before they download any app through their app stores, even if the app has no sensitive or age-specific content. Parents will have to provide consent for minors to download apps or make purchases, and app stores will have to confirm that parents or guardians have the legal authority to make those decisions for their children. App stores will also have to share which age categories users fall into (child, young teen, older teen, or adult) with app developers. While the specifics are yet to be determined, that means Google and Apple will have to collect some form of user identification, whether that's a driver's license, passport, or other government-issued ID, or biometric data, such as a facial scan, for anyone using their app stores in Texas. Even more documentation will be required for parents proving legal guardianship of minor users. Utah passed a similar bill earlier this year making app stores responsible for centralizing age verification, and while its requirements are slightly less onerous, they're not much better when it comes to your privacy. How age verification compromises your privacyPrivacy experts—as well as both Apple and Google—have raised alarms about the implications of age verification, noting that requiring all users to turn over sensitive personal information included in data-rich documents that can prove your age is a form of digital surveillance. It creates an identifiable record of online activity and increases the risk that the data will be used, shared, or sold (unlike physical ID checks, which are momentary and impermanent). Age verification also presents security concerns with how sensitive user data is collected and stored. Data breaches are a fact of life in 2025, and individuals may have very little (if any) knowledge about whether and how their information is used and stored without their consent, and without recourse if it is compromised. Aaron Mackey, free speech and transparency litigation director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF), notes that the Texas law doesn't have any built-in protections for user data, such as minimizing what is collected and transmitted and for how long it is retained. Plus, there are risks present in the likelihood that app stores will utilize third-party verification services to comply with the requirements, meaning data is available to multiple parties. The EFF and the ACLU also argue that online age verification requirements violate users' First Amendment rights, as they may make protected free speech inaccessible—if adults don't have a valid form of identification, or facial recognition inaccurately estimates age, or minors can't get parental consent—or force people to choose between shielding their privacy and being online. "If I have to provide this level of personal information because the government mandates it just to download an app from an app store, I'm going to be significantly worried about what happens to my data, and I might just decide to not actually download the app or even use this app store," Mackey says.

OK, I know you just read that headline, but let me admit first off that I don’t actually think Elden Ring is that hard — not if you take it slow and steady, which the game’s design not only allows but encourages. At every step of the way in Elden Ring, you can decide exactly how you want to play it. It’s very customizable and it rewards patience. Elden Ring Nightreign is the complete opposite, and that’s why I don’t think it’s for me. And it might not be for most other FromSoftware game fans, either, which is pretty shocking.It wouldn’t be a FromSoftware game launch without at least a few debates about difficulty and certain players hurling “git gud” at each other like it was ever even remotely cool to say that and not just performatively tryhard at best and antisocial at worst. I try to exist instead in the sector of the FromSoftware fandom that is prosocial rather than antisocial — think Let Me Solo Her, for example, or even consider the real-life story that inspired longtime FromSoftware game director Hidetaka Miyazaki to design Demon’s Souls’ multiplayer elements with prosocial thinking in mind (via an old 2010 Eurogamer interview):“The origin of that idea is actually due to a personal experience where a car suddenly stopped on a hillside after some heavy snow and started to slip,” says Miyazaki. “The car following me also got stuck, and then the one behind it spontaneously bumped into it and started pushing it up the hill... That’s it! That’s how everyone can get home! Then it was my turn and everyone started pushing my car up the hill, and I managed to get home safely.”“But I couldn’t stop the car to say thanks to the people who gave me a shove. I’d have just got stuck again if I’d stopped. On the way back home I wondered whether the last person in the line had made it home, and thought that I would probably never meet the people who had helped me. I thought that maybe if we’d met in another place we’d become friends, or maybe we’d just fight...””You could probably call it a connection of mutual assistance between transient people. Oddly, that incident will probably linger in my heart for a long time.”The multiplayer experiences that I’ve had in Dark Souls and Elden Ring definitely do linger in my heart. I’ve also absolutely loved the moments in FromSoftware games in which I’ve personally conquered a difficult section all by myself. But I look back with equal appreciation on the times when I summoned a complete stranger to help me with something — “a connection of mutual assistance between transient people,” as Miyazaki put it. It is how these games are meant to be played, not as brutal solo journeys but as shared experiences.Here’s a screenshot I took of my Elden Ring character at the beginning of the game, before I knew I was going to spend 360 hours playing it Image: FromSoftware via PolygonThis brings us back to Elden Ring Nightreign, a game not directed by Miyazaki but by Junya Ishizaki. The difference in its multiplayer ethos is stark. This is a game designed with three-player squads in mind; it’s currently very punishing for solo players (although an upcoming patch aims to fix some of that), and the designers are still working on a duos mode. Because it’s three-player by default, I assumed that the game would be designed around teamwork and would actively reward prosocial behaviors, like base Elden Ring. I would argue that it’s not, and that’s why it’s very hard to have a good time in the game — especially if you’re playing with complete strangers.Problem number one: There’s no in-game communication system besides pinging certain locations on the map. Lack of chat options is a FromSoftware classic, and in most of these games, you don’t really need communication to understand what to do. Usually, you’re just summoned to help with a boss battle, and after it’s over, you’re done and you go back to your game. But in Nightreign, it’s three-player for the entire game, obviously, and it’s a match-based game, not a hundreds-of-hours RPG. Matches last 45 minutes and every second counts, which means you and your teammates need to be extremely organized throughout. The lack of communication hurts. But that’s not the only problem. Far from it.Problem number two: The ring of fire. This game is a combination of Elden Ring’s open world areas (which encourage slow, methodical exploration) and a Fortnite-esque ring of fire that closes in on you constantly (which means you absolutely shouldn’t be doing any slow, methodical exploration). There’s also a Diablo-esque loot system, but you better read those loot descriptions fast, because the fire is coming for you. There are randomized boss fights all over the map, but oops, you might not be able to complete them in time to collect runes from them, because that fire is closing in. There are also special upgrades that you can only get if you defeat these mid-game bosses all over the map, but you might barely even have time to read those descriptions of the special abilities and select one in time for… you guessed it… the fire rushing towards you.This second problem becomes even more stressful when you have two other people on your team alongside you. This game has not one but two different sprint buttons in it — a regular sprint, and a super-fast sprint that uses up stamina faster. That’s because, of course, you need to be running from that fire. But that means your teammates, and you, need to constantly be doing the equivalent of screaming “move, move, move” like a drill sergeant in an army movie. You will be unwittingly getting annoyed at your teammate who is spending too damn long looking at loot on the ground or at an upgrade tree. The fire is coming! Hurry the fuck up! Again, this is not a game design choice that rewards prosocial behaviors and instead makes you feel dragged down by the two teammates that you also desperately need to survive the bosses in this game. Even the “revive” process involves you inflicting damage on your teammate to bring them back to life (rather than a revive button or item), which is darkly hilarious, because you might also grow to desire hitting them due to how annoyed you might feel that they died during a super difficult fight. Which brings us to the third and final problem.Image: FromSoftwareThird problem: The randomization of the bosses and of the items. The thing about base Elden Ring is that you can figure out a boss and how it works (is it weak to fire? Holy damage? And so on) and then patiently build up a character who can deal with that problem. You can memorize that boss’ attack patterns. You can find a save point nearest to that boss and run it back over and over again until you get past it. These are all of the wonderful and rewarding parts of playing FromSoftware video games; these are also the moments when you might do all of those preparations and then think, “Actually, I want to also summon a complete stranger to help me with this boss because it’s still too freaking hard.” And then you can do that, too. None of that is the case in Nightreign, because everything is completely fucking random.The bosses, except for the very last boss in each area, are random. The loot is random. Do you have the right loot to fight the boss you’re facing right this second? You may very well not. Do your teammates have it? You might not even know; you don’t have a way to communicate with them, after all. Is the boss in this area way overleveled for you and your team? It won’t be obvious until you start hitting it, and once you do that, good luck escaping. And if your team does a complete wipe and everyone dies to that boss together, you don’t get to run back together from the nearest save point, having seen its attack patterns, ready to try again with teamwork in mind. Nope, instead you get to start all over again, except now with new randomized bosses and new randomized loot.In other games with randomized loot, like Diablo, or other roguelikes with random elements like Hades, the game is designed with down time in mind. When you’ve completed a fight in Diablo or Hades, you have infinite time to stand around and make decisions. There is no encroaching circle of fire forcing you to read item descriptions and ability trees quickly. There’s a reason for that; the decision-making is the most fun part of a game with randomized elements. Why would Nightreign take that away?All of these aspects of the game do feel less bad if you’re playing with two good friends on voice chat. But even in that scenario, the game is still really punishing, and again, not in a way that other FromSoftware games are punishing. It’s punishing because you need to spend the entire game running, looking at randomized loot as fast as you possibly can before making a snap (possibly bad) decision, running more, desperately encouraging your teammates to keep on running to keep up, warning your teammates about the encroaching flames about to kill them, and did I mention running? Is this a fun way to spend your weekly gamer night with two other adults who just worked a full-time job all day and maybe just wanted to have a nice time playing a video game together?Image: FromSoftware/Bandai NamcoI’ve had a review code for Nightreign for a while now, so I already was worried about these problems before the game launched, but now that it’s launched and I’m seeing early mixed reviews on Steam, I’m ready to commiserate and validate: Yes, this game really doesn’t feel like Elden Ring, and even after some of this stuff gets patched, it’s still fundamentally super different. And that’s not only because it’s multiplayer, but because the multiplayer just doesn’t feel like other multiplayer FromSoftware experiences. It feels like it’s designed not only for people who have two best friends with whom they play competitive games on a regular basis, but also specifically for people who live for thrills and speed — not the methodical, calculated experiences of other FromSoftware games.For all of those reasons, I’m really not sure how this is going to go for FromSoftware over time. Is this game going to eventually encourage some prosocial behaviors amongst players, against all odds? Will people slowly learn the best ways to get through different areas? Will there be a “meta” for working together that emerges over time?It seems possible, and since it’s only been one day, it’s way too early to tell. Various social norms will emerge in the player community, and hopefully they won’t be toxic ones. But I can tell from having already played the game that this is going to be an uphill climb for FromSoftware fans. It’s a very different game — and its specific form of difficulty is going to be a whole new variety for those fans to get used to. And like me, they might just decide they don’t really care for it.See More:

News Science & Society Students’ mental health imperiled by $1 billion cuts to school funding Cutting mental health services will harm students over the long term, educators say The Parent Empowerment Program, or PEP, at La Mesa–Springs Valley School District in San Diego helps caregivers and their children work through various challenges. Here, mother Janet Walton leads a group activity aimed at helping children share. That includes Walton’s son, Elijah, who is passing a toy to a peer. LMSVSD PEP By Sujata Gupta May 29, 2025 at 11:00 am Four-year-old Elijah’s task was to draw a penguin, his favorite animal, and then rip up the paper so the scraps could be used for another project. The adults leading the project hoped that making Elijah uncomfortable would help the preschooler navigate similar tricky situations in his daily life. “He was not having it,” recalls Elijah’s mother, Janet Walton. “He freaked out.” For most toddlers, ripping up a beloved drawing would be a challenging ask. But Elijah’s struggles went beyond the norm. After a particularly bad tantrum at public preschool last year, a mental health expert with the La Mesa–Spring Valley School District in San Diego referred Walton to the Parent Empowerment Program, or PEP. Sign up for our newsletter We summarize the week's scientific breakthroughs every Thursday.