Of all genres for games on Steam, I consider the "programming puzzle" to perhaps be one of the most unusual niches. Most games in this genre (such as Human Resource Machine, or TIS-100) define an assembly language the player must use, and the levels consist solely of implementing this-or-that routine, like sorting a list. Another unusual niche is the electronic logic simulator, which either are puzzlers with a similar series of design challenges (like MHRD) or an open sandbox (LogicWorld or Virtual Circuit Board), with little to no direction or assistance in learning how to build complex and useful circuits. In the strange space between "educational tool / toy" and "puzzle game", very few software packages are good at either, much less both. The (perhaps sole) exception is Turing Complete, which manages to be a challenging puzzle game, useful circuit tool, and educational to boot!

Turing Complete (loosely) guides you through building the various components of a CPU by having you build the required components, starting with primitive logic gates. Along the way, it provides players with not one but TWO predefined assembly languages, for two different CPU architectures you must complete. The late-game puzzles are a good dozen assembly programming challenges, with players having freedom to utilize either predefined architecture -- or a circuit of their own creation, built using a sandbox mode. [The community have used this to build such things as a working RISC-V processor!]

While some tools in the game can still use polish, it is fully playable and very enjoyable. Experience with assembly programming, boolean logic, and hardware design are recommended and will trivialize several levels; however, the first levels are a solid introduction to these topics. As with anything else in this genre, Your Mileage May Vary.

Regardless of your level of experience, expect to get stuck; my first run at the game, shortly after initial release, ended in frustration due to being unable to debug a hardware feature the game asked me to add to my CPU. The game withholds "distractions" such as the aforementioned sandbox mode and the leaderboards until late game -- and I have to agree with that decision, but perhaps not for the expected reason. On my second attempt, I found it very helpful to "plug & chug" through the levels, focusing only on getting a working design for each challenge. Without seeing how I would be scored, this let me advance to the limit of my knowledge. When I finally encountered a level I could not personally solve, I instead went back to previous levels, trying to "tidy up" or create variations on the solutions with my new experience. This sort of back and forth on the various puzzles deepened my knowledge just enough so that by the time I got back to where I was stuck, I returned with new insights which allowed a functional solution. To be honest, I wouldn't consider consulting basic outside references (like Wikipedia) to be cheating, just like working out some of the logic on paper wouldn't be cheating. Don't just copy a circuit from someone's guide or screenshot though -- this will prevent developing the understanding which makes the late-game levels possible.