Review RPG Codex Review: Dungeon Rats

[vivec]

RPG Codex - We debate the nature of words concerning games.

 

[Darth Roxor]

I think this is pure snobbery of some purists here, who are too eager to talk about their egocentric preferences at the expense of ITS reputation or the quality of Dungeon Rats. Darth Roxor, aweigh, not every game in the industry should be tailor made to satisfy your arrogant egos. In fact, most people here don’t give a fuck about your arbitrary preferences and your arrogant attitude will just make people even more dismissive about the the nature of dungeon crawlers. In case you haven't notice, there is not much consensus about anything in cRPGs.

someone give this guy a safe space tag

but it's okay, i understand

i take it you Typically Don't Like Dungeon Crawlers But Dungeon Rats Is Very Cool (tm)

 

[Cadmus]

Cadmus

My critique is not one regarding the game's quality; it pertains to a game developer's surprising lack of knowledge on a subject. A flaw which is all too human.

As for your assertion (or summation?) that simplistic design equals dungeon crawling... I'll just say I completely disagree. We can argue furiously over this later if you wish, I don't mind, but I don't want to post too much in a DR thread until I actually play the game.

(In This Thread): There are far too many people, most surprisingly of all apparently VD himself included, that think simplistic or to be more generous "stripped down or combat focused" design interpretation for some reason = dungeon crawling. I will never understand this viewpoint.

Hell, combat isn't even a required ingredient for a dungeon crawler. The clue lies in the sub-genre's titling.

And when I play it I will do so knowing, as I have from the beginning, that I am going to be playing an SRPG (or TRPG for bigots who hate japanese RPG nomenclature); and that I have always known this game would not actually be a dungeon crawler.

EDIT: VD, just because a game takes place inside a place doesn't mean it's "(THE PLACE): RPG"... anyway, like i said, i'll refrain from further posting ITT until I actually play DR so I can actually discuss the game instead of simply blathering about inconsequential semantics.

I didn't really mean to say that simplistic=dungeon crawler. I really only meant to say it's a simple little game where you literally crawl through a dungeon, has a party TB combat with RPG systems to it, therefore I surmised that it could be called a simple dungeon crawler. Now, I fully concede that I have played maybe 2-4 games that are officially recognized as dungeon crawlers, maybe less, I really don't remember, so if you can tell me what are the important features missing from this formula so that it ceases to be a dungeon crawler and becomes a tactical RPG combat crawl or whatever the fuck you want to call it, go ahead, I'm happy to learn.

However I think this will end like "what is an RPG"-lite.

Saying anything to the effect that VD might be (even unintentionally) falsely advertising the game is retarded as shit though. I and I think almost everybody else here, knew exactly what we were getting. My only disappointment comes from the fact that VD didn't lie...there really was no social element to the game like AoD - I also hoped he might surprise us a little bit.

 

[Vault Dweller]

My only disappointment comes from the fact that VD didn't lie...there really was no social element to the game like AoD - I also hoped he might surprise us a little bit.

Not with a 10-month development schedule while in pre-production for the CSG.

We delivered exactly what we promised and priced it accordingly.

 

[Cadmus]

My only disappointment comes from the fact that VD didn't lie...there really was no social element to the game like AoD - I also hoped he might surprise us a little bit.

Not with a 10-month development schedule while in pre-production for the CSG.

I know that now and I knew that perfectly well back when I bought the game, but a girl can dream...

 

[Whisper]

My only disappointment comes from the fact that VD didn't lie...there really was no social element to the game like AoD - I also hoped he might surprise us a little bit.

Not with a 10-month development schedule while in pre-production for the CSG.

We delivered exactly what we promised and priced it accordingly.

When is update is planned? I am waiting so i can test new builds (which are impossible atm).

 

[aweigh]

well you need a dungeon first. I'm not trying to be "funny" or to "flame" you, Cadmus, i'm being 100% serious.

non-linear maps are not equivalent to what a "dungeon" is in a dungeon crawler. I'm not smart enough to type this explanation right now in a concise way so I'll try to use a short list, as I always tend to:

- a dungeon crawler RPG's "dungeon(s)" do not, and never have been required to be actual dungeons.
- an RPG map (or level, or whatever term you wish) that features multiple paths that complete its flowchart is not equivalent to what an atypical "dungeon floor" in a 'crawler.
- combat, whether it be real-time or turn-based and regardless of its complexity (ranks, ranges, etc), is an element that is part and parcel of the "RPG template" as a whole, and is not something unique to a 'crawler RPG; therefore combat is not an essential ingredient of a 'crawler it is merely one of an RPG and that is, of course, also very much arguable.

i think the best I can do right now without gathering my thoughts further is to simply state that a non-linear floor map is not equivalent to a 'crawler dungeon floor simply because:

- a 'crawler's greatest expectation of quality lies in the game's ability to so immerse the player's avatar(s) inside a many-layered and inter-connected "entity" (i.e. the total bio-map of the dungeon) so as to suspend the player's disbelief and thus ensure that they are playing through the dungeon, against the dungeon and eventually with the dungeon even though all of the other meta-elements of the game itself are (usually) "stripped down", "bare-bones", and other statements.

Another point of contention lies in modern parlance within RPGs and accurate ones, and for this example I'll use "resource management":

- managing mushrooms, while most certainly qualifies as resource management, is not in any way, shape or form somehow distinct as a gameplay element than having to manage spell castings, managing character hit points and other such things. "Modern" rpg gamers don't usually think about this sort of thing.

EDIT: since I don't really have anything well thought out to end this post with i'll simply sum it up with the statement that fighting through a long corridor that branches 5 ways, with 3 of those being dead ends and 2 leading to seperate parts of the this hypothetical corridor's flowchart , all the while battling monsters and building up your party in whatever way the game allows you to do so and also picking up rare items and mundane ones and managing their use can describe both:

- a final fantasy game
- wizardry
- dungeon rats
- one of the party-based diablo games
- one of the many party-based Zelda games

etc. You get my (badly typed/worded) point I'm trying to make? reducing a game's main way of presenting the player with its gameplay systems to broadstrokes, like above, completely eliminates any depth to discussing this sort of thing.

to me, and to many others, the type of way DR plays out is much more similar to an SRPG than to anything resembling a dungeon crawl. Some argue that since both sub-genres (generally) have a concentration in nominally complex battle and/or party-building mechanics then thus both "share commonality".

I'm positing that no, such type of reasoning is deeply flawed.

EDIT: I'd also like to add, furthermore, that I think the "real reason (TM)" that any of this bullshit has even taken hold of this thread is simply because there is a deep, desperate lack of atypical dungeon crawlers of worth coming out and this has been the case for many, many years.

any mention of the word "dungeon" will bring out the thirsty fucks (like me) out of the woodwork. I would love a real dungeon crawler from ITS but i never expected nor do i ever expect ITS to make one since they have never, ever given anyone any reason to think their interests lie towards such things.

and from a personal perspective, considering VD's description of Daggerfall's woefully bad dungeoneering (perfect example of quanity over any sort of quality) as some sort of prime example of the dungeon crawler genre then I 100% am happy that they never make one, but that is purely a personal viewpoint as I know a very large portion of the Codex enjoys Daggerfall and considers it a great RPG.

 

[Cadmus]

Yes, I get it. It sounds reasonable to me.

 

[Blaine]

I would've thought that Dungeon Rats would be the perfect game for Darth Roxor, since he doesn't enjoy games that require the player to walk around or do things.

In any case, it's clear that this game is a "combat crawler" and not a dungeon crawler, because there aren't any proper dungeons. I now have a handy post to refer back to whenever the topic of dungeons arises:

A proper (game) dungeon, in my opinion, has three qualities:

It must have a complex and challenging layout. I refer to this as "environmental challenge." Multiple floors/levels interconnected at various points, portions of some floors accessible only from certain sections of another floor (and optionally, individual levels/floors sharing various elevations as opposed to being completely flat), dead ends, branching forks and intersections, switchbacks, one-way exits, single exits that can lead to multiple destinations, pitfalls and trap doors, portcullises or portholes allowing vision but not immediate passage, secret doors, ladders, teleporters, et cetera.

It must also have rewarding and challenging interaction. I refer to this as "not being designed for retards because they 'just want to relax after work'." Cryptic messages and clues, various kinds of environmental or self-contained puzzles, needful key items to uncover, levers to pull, hidden buttons to push, pressure plates, traps to avoid (and maybe disarm), hard-to-spot reward items or equipment, and observational mysteries (i.e., observe some creature or character's behavior to figure something out; just for example, following a mouse back to a crack in the wall).

Finally, interesting monsters or creatures with varied traits, behaviors, dialogue if applicable, and needful loot implemented in the dungeon via thoughtful encounter design can't hurt.

 

[Sceptic]

I can understand being disappointed that the game isn't a complex dungeon crawler (I know I was) but going all the way into accusation of deceptiveness is a bit much IMO. VD has slightly idiosyncratic definitions of CRPG sub-genres (arguing with him about what makes an action-RPG was bizarre) but once you understand those then the game is exactly as advertised. I still think Roxor did well in pointing this out, especially since it's easy to just read "dungeon crawler" and not see the details, but if you do read the details VD was pretty forthcoming about what he means by dungeon crawler, and while it may not match the general definition (certainly doesn't match mine) it does match the game. Actually I find it funny that the game's description matches VD's definition of action-RPG from a few years ago :D

Anyway the review is spot on, and while I don't think the game is anything great it is a fun "combat RPG", and the price point is exactly right. Anyone still on the fence should ignore the whole dungeon crawler thing (in a way I think that's what Roxor was trying to say in the review; just ignore those expectations when deciding if you want to play the game) and make up their mind based on the rest of the review.

 

[FUDU]

well you need a dungeon first. I'm not trying to be "funny" or to "flame" you, Cadmus, i'm being 100% serious.

non-linear maps are not equivalent to what a "dungeon" is in a dungeon crawler. I'm not smart enough to type this explanation right now in a concise way so I'll try to use a short list, as I always tend to:

- a dungeon crawler RPG's "dungeon(s)" do not, and never have been required to be actual dungeons.
- an RPG map (or level, or whatever term you wish) that features multiple paths that complete its flowchart is not equivalent to what an atypical "dungeon floor" in a 'crawler.
- combat, whether it be real-time or turn-based and regardless of its complexity (ranks, ranges, etc), is an element that is part and parcel of the "RPG template" as a whole, and is not something unique to a 'crawler RPG; therefore combat is not an essential ingredient of a 'crawler it is merely one of an RPG and that is, of course, also very much arguable.

i think the best I can do right now without gathering my thoughts further is to simply state that a non-linear floor map is not equivalent to a 'crawler dungeon floor simply because:

- a 'crawler's greatest expectation of quality lies in the game's ability to so immerse the player's avatar(s) inside a many-layered and inter-connected "entity" (i.e. the total bio-map of the dungeon) so as to suspend the player's disbelief and thus ensure that they are playing through the dungeon, against the dungeon and eventually with the dungeon even though all of the other meta-elements of the game itself are (usually) "stripped down", "bare-bones", and other statements.

Another point of contention lies in modern parlance within RPGs and accurate ones, and for this example I'll use "resource management":

- managing mushrooms, while most certainly qualifies as resource management, is not in any way, shape or form somehow distinct as a gameplay element than having to manage spell castings, managing character hit points and other such things. "Modern" rpg gamers don't usually think about this sort of thing.

EDIT: since I don't really have anything well thought out to end this post with i'll simply sum it up with the statement that fighting through a long corridor that branches 5 ways, with 3 of those being dead ends and 2 leading to seperate parts of the this hypothetical corridor's flowchart , all the while battling monsters and building up your party in whatever way the game allows you to do so and also picking up rare items and mundane ones and managing their use can describe both:

- a final fantasy game
- wizardry
- dungeon rats
- one of the party-based diablo games
- one of the many party-based Zelda games

etc. You get my (badly typed/worded) point I'm trying to make? reducing a game's main way of presenting the player with its gameplay systems to broadstrokes, like above, completely eliminates any depth to discussing this sort of thing.

to me, and to many others, the type of way DR plays out is much more similar to an SRPG than to anything resembling a dungeon crawl. Some argue that since both sub-genres (generally) have a concentration in nominally complex battle and/or party-building mechanics then thus both "share commonality".

I'm positing that no, such type of reasoning is deeply flawed.

EDIT: I'd also like to add, furthermore, that I think the "real reason (TM)" that any of this bullshit has even taken hold of this thread is simply because there is a deep, desperate lack of atypical dungeon crawlers of worth coming out and this has been the case for many, many years.

any mention of the word "dungeon" will bring out the thirsty fucks (like me) out of the woodwork. I would love a real dungeon crawler from ITS but i never expected nor do i ever expect ITS to make one since they have never, ever given anyone any reason to think their interests lie towards such things.

and from a personal perspective, considering VD's description of Daggerfall's woefully bad dungeoneering (perfect example of quanity over any sort of quality) as some sort of prime example of the dungeon crawler genre then I 100% am happy that they never make one, but that is purely a personal viewpoint as I know a very large portion of the Codex enjoys Daggerfall and considers it a great RPG.

Jesus Christ.

 

[Vault Dweller]

...and from a personal perspective, considering VD's description of Daggerfall's woefully bad dungeoneering (perfect example of quanity over any sort of quality) as some sort of prime example of the dungeon crawler genre then I 100% am happy that they never make one, but that is purely a personal viewpoint as I know a very large portion of the Codex enjoys Daggerfall and considers it a great RPG.

I thought I said that Daggerfall is NOT a dungeon crawler despite having tons of dungeons.

 

[zool]

Lots of drama going on here around a 10$ game. The game wasn't falsely advertised, except maybe for people who find it too hard to read five fucking bullet points.

My only regret (and not complaint as I wrote earlier) with the game is that with a couple of hours of additional work on companions (i.e adding some life to the different companions you can recruit) and a slightly better level design, the game could have been a fully combat-based game where you try to escape from prison with the help of memorable companions instead of it simply being a combat game where you can recruit some lifeless meatshields to help you.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

From the pre-release information about Dungeon Rats posted on the Codex, and from my playing of Age of Decadence, I expected Dungeon Rats to be exactly what it turned out to be: a squad-based tactics game with character customization/progression, often referred to as SRPGs.

The phrase "dungeon crawler" is less than useful as a concept to define RPG subgenres as it includes games from a number of distinct subgenres with differing mechanics even limiting the meaning of "dungeon crawlers" to include only games with substantial exploration, and without that limitation means nothing more than any game focused on dungeons. Anyone who had played Age of Decadence or paid attention to the pre-release information posted on the Codex would have known that exploration would be virtually absent from Dungeon Rats.

 

[Mozg]

9 bucks price point = if I find anything I like I'm cool.

 

[Trumpenreich]

Well, I am kind of shocked this is out already. I thought we would be in for another 10 years of waiting and drama. Good job guys, the game sounds great (more my cup of tea than the last one) and the review is one of the best codex reviews that's been written as well (though some are not that great to be honest).

I can't wait to give this a shot sometime when I have a good chunk of free time.

 

[aweigh]

Zed Duke of Banville

But even "exploration" is very much open to interpretation, as for example: to someone like Roqua clearing a dungeon floor in a Wizardry game does not constitute "RPG exploration", while it is obviously very much so RPG exploration.

Some people think story constitutes dialog, and that exploration constitutes visiting different locales and other such notions that have absolutely nothing to do with RPG gameplay mechanics and are things present (or not present) in any game.

So, there is theoretically an amount of people who did not immediately assume Dungeon Rats would not feature much "exploration", as for them visiting copy/paste locations and talking to wiki-dumps does qualify as exploration, just as much as clearing a floor and making progress within a dungeon.

(A hypothetical example as DR does not feature dungeon "floors" to clear and AoD does not feature copy/paste anything).

My god even I'm tired of discussing such minutiae: trying to pigeon-hole what makes or breaks an RPG is fucking exhausting.

 

[agris]

My god even I'm tired of discussing such minutiae: trying to pigeon-hole what makes or breaks an RPG is fucking exhausting.

I HOPE YOU'RE ALL HAPPY NOW. YOU'VE BROKEN AWEIGH!

 

[pakoito]

Well, I am kind of shocked this is out already. I thought we would be in for another 10 years of waiting and drama. Good job guys, the game sounds great (more my cup of tea than the last one) and the review is one of the best codex reviews that's been written as well (though some are not that great to be honest).

I can't wait to give this a shot sometime when I have a good chunk of free time.

New account, who dis?

 

[Goral]

Bubbles.

 

[FeelTheRads]

VD has slightly idiosyncratic definitions of CRPG sub-genres

That's putting it mildly.

At some point he was trying to sell AoD as a rogue-like.

 

[Vault Dweller]

The exact quote:

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...ou-think-about-aod.73356/page-12#post-2150188

I've always liked roguelikes. They are very different from most RPGs because dying is easy and part of the game. If you play a roguelike once or twice, you won't get far. That's a fact. You're expected to play one many times, slowly learning what kills you and what doesn't. AoD's overall design is very similar. That's why we have teleporting and no filler. You create a character, distribute skill points as you get them, run him/her through the game, see what happens. Sure, the first time you have no idea what to expect (much like in roguelikes), so you'll probably die fast. Fortunately, replaying won't take much time and you won't be forced to do fedex quests and run all over the town. Dialogue check 'synergies' in R2 make failing due to missing a couple of points all but impossible.

 

[Cadmus]

CNN:
"Vault Dweller Literally Says: Age of Decadence is the best Dungeon Crawler Rogue-Like Ever Made"

 

[TigerKnee]

I agree with most of the points stated in the review.

The Tower of Doom comparison is just a strange non-sequiter though. Hell, ignoring the fact that it's a Beat-Em-Up, I think ToD probably has more actual path branches in the mid game.

Whether intentional or not, DR ends up being more similar to "Japanese SRPGs" in terms of structure, notably Shining Force 1 and 2 with how it does very minor exploration elements in between the chain of combats.

 

[Carnarium]

Cool I guess but where the hell is Final Fantasy 15 review?