Bandai Namco’s 3 Key Mistakes Lead to Missed Opportunity
Elden Ring Nightreign (2025) recently released, and has sold well, but not as well as Elden Ring (2022) did. I don’t think the issue is that Nightreign is a worse game; I think it was marketed much worse. Positioning strategy marketing failures led to poor reviews and sales. Questionable marketing earned bad review scores, not fundamental failures in game design or execution. An apple marketed as a crowbar will be reviewed poorly, even if, as an apple, it’s fresh, tasty, and healthy.
I’ll show how the publisher of Nightreign, Bandai Namco made three key mistakes that directly hurt the sales and reputation of Nightreign. I’ll also share how to rectify these mistakes. Nightreign is a good example of bad marketing limiting a product’s success.
The Sales Numbers Created By This Positioning Strategy Marketing
Nightreign has sold well, but less well than Elden Ring did before it. Less than a week after its launch, Elden Ring Nightreign (2025) (hereafter, Nightreign) sold 3.5 million copies, which would be an astonishing success for most AAA games. Compared to the game it takes its title and direct inspiration from, Elden Ring (2022), Nightreign (2025) is a far humbler success. Elden Ring (2022) sold over 12 million units three weeks after its release.
Similarly, Nightreign has been reviewed ok, but also far less well than Elden Ring. Elden Ring (2022) released to almost universal acclaim according to metacritic. In contrast, Nightreign (2025) proved the worst reviewed game on Steam ever released by FromSoft shortly after its release, with similarly mixed and lower scores on metacritic. Nightreign is selling at a slower rate than Elden Ring, no doubt because it’s been reviewed much worse than Elden Ring.
As I said earlier though, I think the issue is more a matter of marketing than of game design. Bad positioning is arguably behind much of the bad reviews. FromSoft is the developer behind Elden Ring (2022) and Nightreign (2025), and it looks like their publisher, Bandai Namco, didn’t understand how to market Nightreign relative to Elden Ring. Indeed, I think it’s no exaggeration to say Nightreign was set up to fail, and disappoint, because of its marketing.
Is It Just More Elden Ring? A Positioning Strategy Marketing Failure
I was lucky enough to play Nightreign, without knowing much of anything about it initially, with two of my friends, in person, at a computer cafe. I had no expectations other than that Nightreign would reuse art assets from Elden Ring, and probably have similar strengths and weaknesses. The official marketing language for the game on Steam certainly indicated this was exactly what I should expect.
So, Nightreign was marketed as more Elden Ring, but never explained what was different. Yes, if you scroll down on the Steam page, you can get details, but your first impression excludes them. All you can tell based on this language is that “if you liked smash hit Elden Ring, then maybe you too will like Nightreign, but also … maybe not.” There’s no reason to believe these claims offered. There’s no language about gameplay systems, or genre, all is left to your imagination: it’s one vague promise. Strategic ambiguity defines this positioning strategy marketing.
You see, Nightreign and Elden Ring are similar, in the way different members of a family are. You’re not going to confuse a favorite aunt for an aloof uncle, even if they grew up as siblings. Maybe somebody that isn’t family and isn’t paying any attention might confuse them. But you never would. There’s a resemblance for sure, but far more essential points of contrast. Here are just a few obvious points of contrast minutes of playing both games reveal.
- Elden Ring is a ginormous game that takes easily dozens or hundreds of hours to beat.
- Nightreign is three, 15-minute sequences: it is designed to be played in quick sprints.
- Elden Ring rewards you for taking your time and carefully exploring your surroundings.
- Nightreign punishes you if you linger too long. It rewards split, last second choices.
- Elden Ring rewards you for repeatedly killing weak enemies to prepare for the bosses.
- Nightreign punishes you for prioritizing weak enemies. It rewards serial killing bosses.
- Elden Ring is optimized for a single player experience, though it has a multiplayer mode.
- Nightreign is optimized for three player cooperative play, though it has singleplayer too.
The difference between these games is an apples and oranges situation. Yet the official marketing doesn’t reflect any of these fundamental differences in gameplay. If anything, it tries to conceal them. So, Bandai Namco’s marketing poorly set expectations: they sold me “Elden Ring, but somehow different” without articulating the differences, leaving me to imagine I would just get more Elden Ring. In my case, this was a happy accident, as I didn’t really want more Elden Ring, but I suspect I am a little unusual. It seems far more likely most people trying this game out did so precisely because they liked smash hit Elden Ring. Again, the game’s title is Elden Ring Nightreign, and it’s marketed on the basis that it’s like Elden Ring.
This is the first mistake Bandai Namco made. They tried to sell a product very different from its predecessor by just emphasizing it was similar. Rather than focus on drivers unique to their product, they tried to sell the ante Nightreign was like Elden Ring.
If I was being generous, I would say that this probably reflected a disconnect between the developers and the publisher, that the developer struggled to communicate what made the game different to the publisher. It’s also possible the publisher struggled to understand relevant points of difference, too. It’s just as plausible that miscommunication between both parties is to blame.
If I was being less generous, I’d speculate Bandai Namco focused on similarities to Elden Ring in an effort to capture the large audience of millions who bought Elden Ring to buy Nightreign, even if it would risk dissatisfying loyal consumers and eroding long term brand trust.
Whatever exactly happened here, whoever is responsible, the end result is that consumers’ expectations were set in the wrong place and Nightreign has suffered from many withering comparisons to Elden Ring. Reviewers complained that Nightreign’s single player experience wasn’t optimized well enough compared to prior Souls games. Others complained that Nightreign was a cash grab copy paste of assets from Elden Ring. Some even complained that it lacked enough content, explicitly judging it by the standard of Elden Ring. The very things that made the game so different were being singled out by many as points for criticism.
So, rather than seeing what made Nightreign uniquely fun, it was received in the way it was sold and marketed, as a remix of Elden Ring, to be judged by those standards.
I think this isn’t so much the fault of reviewers and players. I think the issue is the official marketing primed players to judge Nightreign in this way. Bandai Namco failed to set expectations for consumers aligning with Nightreigns’ unique qualities. This was not a problem with Nightreign, or its game design, but rather, a problem created by ambiguous marketing.
What Genre Is Nightreign? A Positioning Strategy Marketing Misfire
The next mistake that Bandai Namco made in marketing Nightreign was in the language it used to specify the kind of genre of game it was. Official marketing language doesn’t specify what genre the game fits, and where it does, it tends to use descriptions that are vague and ultimately nonspecific. The reveal and release trailers for the game are much the same. Again, examine the Steam capsule, the first written impression most players on PC will see:
There is nothing about the genre of game communicated in this language. Which is a problem, because Nightreign was designed to be different from Elden Ring. Elden Ring is designed as an open world action RPG defined by exploration and hard boss fights. Nightreign is interested in being a far, far, leaner action RPG. It’s no open world game– it’s essentially a Boss Rush and Rogue Like.
I realize I just used a few terms of art, and referenced a few genres, and so I’ll spend two paragraphs briefly clarifying what I mean before proceeding. An action RPG is a roleplaying game, where the player’s ability to perform some skill with a controller or keyboard influences the gameplay. As opposed to an RPG simpliciter, where the player character’s in-game skills define all the gameplay. To oversimplify, this is the difference between an RPG where I have a numerical skill or dice determining accuracy with a bow, and an RPG where I aim the bow to determine how accurate I am with my arrows. Having a high-dexterity stat might help in an RPG, but your dexterity in real life is key in action RPGs. Elden Ring and Nightreign are action RPGs: there are certain in-game skills you need to level up to succeed, but your personal ability to time dodges and strikes is always more critical to your success. This action RPG combat system is arguably the most fundamental genre similarity between the games: it’s their shared D.N.A.
From a genre perspective, the key point of difference is Elden Ring’s focus on exploring an open world, and Nightreign’s focus on being a Boss Rush and Rogue Like. As I said earlier, Elden Ring is designed to reward you patiently exploring all it has to offer over dozens or hundreds of hours. While Nightreign wants you to focus on trying to kill as many bosses as you can in three 15-minute runs. Nightreign obviously falls into the Boss Rush genre; it’s all about serial killing bosses efficiently. It also falls into the Rogue Like genre; it’s about attempting, short, procedurally-generated runs. It’s no wonder it didn’t take long for fans to start calling Nightreign a Boss Rush and Rogue Like game. If you are trying to communicate what makes it so different from Elden Ring, this is the easiest way to do it.
Interestingly, this isn’t how Bandai Namco marketed the game. Indeed, in the official marketing leading up to the release of the game, Bandai positioned Nightreign as “a Standalone Co-Op Action Survival Game.” Let’s consider this marketing language carefully, piece by piece.
-Standalone
Positioning Nightreign as a “Standalone” presumably is their way of saying, this is not DLC or a sequel to Elden Ring (2022). Even though Nightreign is sold under the title Elden Ring Nightreign. A title, which in the parlance of contemporary video game titles, implies it is DLC or a sequel to Elden Ring. So, we’re starting on some odd ground with an unforced error. Bandai Namco wanted the brand recognition of “Elden Ring” with Nightreign, even if that meant they would immediately need to awkwardly clarify the game was neither DLC or a sequel. But, there’s a reason why I simply write “Nightreign” in this article, not “Elden Ring Nightreign.” It’s just less confusing. A less awkward title would have avoided this issue entirely. You don’t have to waste valuable marketing words correcting a likely misinterpretation based on your title, if you select a title for your product that doesn’t mislead consumers about what the product is!
-Co-Op
Meanwhile, the reference to “Co-Op,” while somewhat more tangible in referring to the gameplay, bizarrely doesn’t say for how many players, two, or three, or four, or many more, etc. So, little was done to define player expectations in line with the game. There are huge differences between two player co-op games, three player, etc., and not all games which support one version of co-op (such as three player) support others (like two player.) Bandai Namco being evasive here led to avoidable reputational issues I’ll cover momentarily.
-Action
As you might have guessed, I’m also not particularly fond of Bandai Namco’s choice to sell Nightreign as an “Action” game. FromSoft already has a well-known reputation for making Action RPGs, so consumers would already expect them to make an “Action” game. So while I freely admit, it isn’t necessarily bad to note Nightreign is an “Action” game,” it’s also not evocative, and doesn’t tell us that much about Nightreign in particular. It’s almost certainly language that should be somewhere, but it just isn’t what makes the game unique. To use some marketing lingo, this is a mere ante, it’s not a driver that makes consumers purchase the game.
-Survival
Marketing Nightreign as a “Survival” is the greatest head scratcher to me here. I struggle to identify what is core to this genre, other than gameplay mechanics which threaten the player and require resource management, which is, if you think for a few seconds, a cliche description true of many games. Technically, I suppose it’s therefore accurate to call Nightreign a “Survival” game. But only in the way that is technically accurate to call a Lamborghini, Toyota, and toy truck a “car.” But there is a reason that toy trucks are not marketed like Toyotas, while Toyotas are not positioned like Lamborghinis. Cliches and ambiguity are not how you convince a consumer they’ll get the value they desire out of purchase.
This is the second mistake Bandai Namco made. Nightreign’s positioning tried to appeal to as many people as possible with evasive genre promises. Rather than zeroing in on specific genres that would accurately inform consumers who the game was or wasn’t for.
The end result is that Nightreign suffered needlessly in reviews, as marketing set expectations in the wrong place, which misled consumers and reviewers, causing them to leave review scores that reflected their righteous frustration. Misleading consumers hurts a brand.
Still, it’s no surprise players who do like the game frequently call it a Boss Rush & Souls Like. Because it just is one. That is the genre language that defines what makes the game unique, and also what it arguably does well. And it is precisely the kind of language that Bandai Namco should consider embracing in their marketing. Evasive language is not a prudent or wise choice.
Multiplayer? How Many? Positioning Strategy Marketing Ambiguity
I remember that I was surprised to discover many mixed or negative reviews of Nightreign highlighted the fact the game wasn’t optimized for single player gameplay, and also lacked two player co-op on release. I was baffled by this response. Uncharitably, I felt that this was a wildly unfair criticism of my newly-beloved game. Like someone saying, the Odyssey is a longer story than it needs to be. You seem to be missing the point if you say that about the Odyssey, or critique Nightreign for being optimized around three person co-operative gameplay.
But as I looked into Bandai Namco’s positioning strategy marketing, I stopped feeling people were missing the point. I realized the official marketing misled them. The criticisms being made of the game reflected the mealymouthed language of Bandai Namco.
Nightreign flips Elden Ring on its head. While Elden Ring was optimized for a single player experience, with multiplayer sort of tacked on, Nightreign was optimized for three person cooperative play, with a single player experience sort of tacked on. I can’t overstate how key this difference is– it’s perhaps the greatest difference between the games. Because, before Nightreign, FromSoft was known for making games like Elden Ring, that is games optimized for the single player, rather than for multiplayer, cooperative, or competitive. So, it’s fair to say anyone with any knowledge of the developer’s catalogue would expect Nightreign to be optimized for single player, unless they were directly informed otherwise.
Yet, the official marketing language for the game didn’t set expectations here either. While some press releases started to talk about “multiplayer,” precious few details were offered.
This is the third mistake Bandai Namco made. Nightreign’s positioning mentioned it included “co-op” and “multiplayer.” But Bandai Namco chose to obscure that Nightreign was always optimized for three person co-operative play, would not include two person co-op on release, and only included single player play as a secondary, more difficult mode.
I can’t overemphasize how backwards this choice was by Bandai Namco. If you’ve ever played a board game with more or fewer players than it was designed for, you will instantly get how much the presence of a certain number of players impacts a game. It was foolish to not specify that Nightreign was optimized for a three player experience, given that most would expect the game to be optimized primarily for a single player. And it was just as questionable to not set expectations around how many players the co-op was designed for. Imagine a co-op board game that didn’t make glaringly obvious how many players it was for in its marketing. This would be unthinkable with a board game, and yet this is the mistake we see with Nightreign.
In response to criticism, FromSoft has publicly committed to optimize Nightreign for single players and for two person cooperative play. That’s smart. But it’s a shame it’s happening this way. Imagine a world where this was marketed as the three person co-op game it truly was. It would have received better reviews, and I find it hard to imagine that FromSoft wouldn’t have also eventually worked towards optimizing the game for single player and two person co-op. This would be the obvious way to balance expanding the appeal of the game after its release, while minimizing the developers’ workload to get a viable product to market initially. In this imaginary scenario, presumably the game would have got better reviews and sales. But, instead of celebrating a victory lap with offers of new functionality, FromSoft has promised optimized single player and two player co-op as a condolence to an understandably frustrated playerbase. The narrative around the game is now that it needs to prove its right to exist, and that’s a shame.
Suffice it to say, that Nightreign ended up suffering from much criticism; it need not have had Bandai Namco not been strategically ambiguous about the experience this game offered. I’m not trying to suggest I think the game is perfect. Frankly, I have a list of issues I think hold it back. My point is that Nightreign was set up to be reviewed poorly by imprudent marketing choices. To return to my original analogy, the game was like an apple that was marketed as a crowbar.
Nightreign: What Would Be Better Positioning Strategy Marketing?
Here’s how Bandai Namco could have positioned Nightreign to set expectations correctly and avoid the needless frustrations, which have harmed the game’s success. They should have said:
“Elden Ring Nightreign is a Three Person Cooperative Roguelike BossRush using the Action RPG combat and setting of Elden Ring. Take down old and new FromSoft bosses with two friends or strangers, or go it alone for insane, unfair difficulty.”
Language more like the above communicates the genre, gameplay, and intended audience. It also simply states how Nightreign is similar to and different from Elden Ring, which is key. Having Elden Ring in the title of this game doesn’t need to create confusion now– it could help sell the game. And it sets the expectation that the game will reuse assets from Elden Ring and other FromSoft games, while communicating that it is optimized for three person co-op, not single player.
It would probably also be wise to emphasize how Nightreign is smaller than Elden Ring, and revolves around three roughly 15-minute long playsessions, but gameplay details like this one, while important, would probably be better spelled out further on a game’s store page. This is important supporting information, but it is inside baseball levels of detail. Stuff like this isn’t as important as succinctly highlighting upfront the genre and gameplay defining Nightreign.
Ultimately, as long as Bandai Namco’s positioning strategy marketing for Nightreign reflects what the game is and isn’t, and who it is and isn’t for, the exact language is irrelevant. Poorly marketed, even a solid product will struggle: innovation and high quality aren’t enough. Precise, high-quality marketing isn’t an option if you want massive sales; it’s simply required.
At Insight To Action, helping companies and brands develop a positioning strategy is one of our key drivers. And if you’re looking to learn more, you can read more examples in our Positioning Strategy Resources, or contact us to get to know our experts.
