Your Complete Guide to the PBA Schedule for the Upcoming Season

As I sit down to map out my gaming calendar for the upcoming season, one title keeps resurfacing in my conversations with fellow enthusiasts: Hell is Us. Having spent considerable time exploring its mechanics and pacing, I’ve come to appreciate both its ambitious design and its frustrating limitations. The game’s approach to combat and enemy variety offers a fascinating case study in balancing player engagement with escalating difficulty, though it doesn’t always stick the landing. If you’re like me, someone who craves depth and innovation but also values polished execution, you’ll find Hell is Us both compelling and, at times, deeply irritating. Let’s dive into what makes this game a noteworthy entry in your seasonal lineup, especially if you enjoy dissecting how developers handle enemy design and difficulty curves.

Right off the bat, I noticed that Hell is Us relies on a somewhat restricted roster of enemy abilities and types. Instead of introducing a wide array of foes, the developers opted to ramp up damage numbers and introduce new attacks at higher levels to keep players on their toes. In my first 10 hours with the game, I encountered roughly five core enemy archetypes, which initially felt sparse. But here’s where things get interesting: the inclusion of "husks" adds a clever twist. These brightly colored adversaries are tethered to other enemies, acting as shields that must be taken down before you can damage their hosts. I vividly recall one mid-game encounter in a rain-soaked fortress where a single husk was linked to three different attackers. It forced me to think strategically—dispatch the husk once, chip away at one host, then repeat the process as the husk respawned. Moments like these had me fully immersed, appreciating the tactical depth that husks bring to otherwise straightforward skirmishes.

However, as I progressed into the latter stages, the game’s reliance on enemy count over evolved challenges started to wear thin. Around the 15-hour mark, I found myself in those dark, gloomy underground corridors, swarmed by waves of foes that seemed designed to overwhelm rather than outsmart me. The lock-on system, which had been serviceable earlier, began to falter badly. On three separate occasions, my targeting reticle jumped erratically between enemies, leading to cheap deaths that felt more like system failures than player errors. It’s a shame because the camera work in open areas is generally solid, but in tight spaces, it struggles to keep up. I clocked at least five frustrating encounters where I died not because I misjudged a dodge, but because the camera got stuck on geometry or the lock-on prioritized a distant enemy over the one swinging a blade in my face. These issues highlight a broader trend I’ve seen in action games lately: ambition outpacing polish.

From a design perspective, I admire how Hell is Us attempts to compensate for its limited enemy pool with mechanics like the husk system. It reminds me of older titles that used modular enemy traits to create variety without bloating the roster. But in practice, the execution falters when the game leans too heavily on throwing more bodies at the player. In one late-game sequence, I faced a gauntlet of eight consecutive waves in a single arena, which dragged on for nearly 20 minutes. By the end, my initial excitement had turned to fatigue. I couldn’t help but think how much more engaging it would have been if the developers had introduced hybrid enemies or environmental hazards to mix things up. That said, I’d estimate that about 60% of the combat encounters are well-tuned and enjoyable, especially those that force you to manage multiple husk connections simultaneously.

As someone who values both challenge and fairness, I found myself torn. On one hand, Hell is Us delivers some genuinely memorable fights that require quick thinking and adaptability. On the other, its technical shortcomings and repetitive difficulty spikes can undermine those highs. If you’re planning your PBA (Personal Gaming Backlog Agenda) for the season, I’d recommend giving this game a try, but maybe wait for a patch or two. Based on my playthrough, which spanned roughly 25 hours, I’d rate it a solid 7 out of 10—flawed but inventive, and worth experiencing for its standout moments. Just be prepared to grit your teeth through those camera issues and occasional unfair deaths. After all, isn’t that part of the charm—and frustration—of diving into hellish new worlds?