What do you like/dislike about roguelikes

[DakaSha]

As the title says.. Yes I'm sure I will get some very intelligent and original statement like "Rogueliks is teh sux cause no story and ASCII graphix" but if you don't like them it would be cool if you could name a non-generic reason.
I'm asking because I'm currently working on a random dungeon generator (that i'll prob never finish *sigh*) and for the off chance I finish it I may begin design on an actual game (that i'll prob never finish *sigh*) .

So this is basically a faggotry thread that has a relevant topic as an excuse.

Personally I have no problems with ASCII tiles but if I were to make my own RL I would use graphical tiles for multiple reasons (Lighting, pixel ratio etc)

My biggest problem with them is that most are in some retard generic fantasy world with no atmosphere and completely devoid of any game specific mechanics short of some cheap RPG dice rolls. Most of them don't have much character and become boring quite fast despite the promise of unlimited playability.

Balancing is often a problem and the best ones still boil down to checking off milestones "Get paralysis immunity, make sure speed is at X, get X artifact"

Sounds like I dont like them but even though they lack in some places they excel at things I value most in a game. They are like sandbox RPG's with a goal (although the goal is simply to kill alot of monsters and get alot of shit of course)
Also they are pretty damn strategic/tactical as far as non-party based RPG's go.. and im primarily a strategy gamer.

For the record ADoM is my fav so far although Incursion has the potential to dethrone it if the new version is more user friendly and streamlined.

---

Whether you like them or not what are some new or at least unusual things you would like to see in a RL?


edit: I guess a bonus point question would be what is even your definition of a roguelike?

 

[JarlFrank]

Dislike: ASCII, no real story
Like: Infinite replayability, harsh combat, potions and scrolls with lots of different effects that are unknown and have to be identified first - maybe even in the hard way (just using it)

 

[Hobo Elf]

Crawl is pretty much the only ASCII Roguelike I can play. It's more arcade-y than most of the other ones I've played. It also had some of the most fun classes and class diversity.
Things that piss me off in Roguelikes are random shit that can instantly kill me. Or more specifically when there is a lot of random shit that can instantly kill me and it turns into a heavy excersice of trial and error. I also find survival aspects tedious, like having to eat and drink. I don't mind it that much unless you keep gooing hungry every 3 minutes.

One of the few only Roguelikes I can think of that isn't generic fantasy and is atmospheric as fuck is a jappo game called Baroque. However the gameplay is kinda shit and if you want to beat the game then it is a good idea to not stop to kill any monsters but to just run and keep going down stairs. You'll still want to persist because of the story.

 

[Blasterhead]

+ Constantly making tactical decisions based on current circumstances which are unique to each run.

I would like to see: A wound/damage model as detailed as Dwarf Fortress (with a load of balancing) put into a decent dungeon crawl & combined with decent combat mechanics.

 

[zeitgeist]

Like:
- character customization/building/itemization/skills/etc. (when sufficiently complex of course)
- the ability to play a game that isn't exactly the same as the game someone else (or I) played yesterday (randomization, discovery of unique or hidden items, places etc.)
- relatively simple visuals enable the developers to concentrate on unique game mechanics, depth, complexity of mechanics, and generally things they would struggle to implement in a game with animated sprites (potential for greatness)

Dislike:
- overly generic settings, poor writing, lack of unique missions, quests and specific goals
- lack of a party (and related to that: the combat is not nearly as tactical as it could be in most cases)
- when the developers completely ignore that having relatively simple visuals enables them to concentrate on unique game mechanics, depth, complexity of mechanics, etc. (squandered potential)

 

[SCO]

Bad at them, no patience or analysis capability.

 

[DakaSha]

Bad at them, no patience or analysis capability.

At least you dont rationalize like most people ^^

 

[Oesophagus]

I've no problems with the graphics, but I really don't like the arbitrary nitpicking. I mean, ok, I get it that roguelikes are supposed to be realistic and shit, but when on the 5 level of a dungeon in ADOM it turns out that I've been poisoned by some critter and I can't do anything about it, it really stops being a game. The point of games is that you stop being your everyday banal, average self and do something epic.

I've never been able to live more than a few days in a roguelike without saving, and that's mostly on account of the fact that I either starve to death, or get ambushed by some mobs that own me to a minus score.

Nevertheless, I would wholly approve of some studio making a mainstream roguelike with decent graphics and appropriate balancing. There's tons of potential in roguelikes IMO.

bit drunk when writing this

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Like - permadeath, possibility of doing crazy stuff with settings and mechanics without being constrained by graphics budget, randomness, YASD.
Dislike - I have played ADOM for many years and basically, despite all these possibilities of roguelikes I haven't seen a game with such a compelling setting and such a balance between random/unique content.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Nevertheless, I would wholly approve of some studio making a mainstream roguelike with decent graphics and appropriate balancing. There's tons of potential in roguelikes IMO.

Ever heard of.. Diablo?

 

[DakaSha]

Diablo is nothing but a commercial form of a RL.. a pretty good one at that (Of course now will say it isnt one but meh.. id still count it as one)
When it comes to random/unfair deaths in RL they def do happen.. but good players are able to mitigate the toll.
However in many RL a good player is just somebody who has learned to exploit the design flaws :-/

 

[Johannes]

I mean, ok, I get it that roguelikes are supposed to be realistic and shit,

They're supposed to be realistic? That's news to me.

However in many RL a good player is just somebody who has learned to exploit the design flaws :-/

That's just another way of saying that he's learned to play properly.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I've no problems with the graphics, but I really don't like the arbitrary nitpicking. I mean, ok, I get it that roguelikes are supposed to be realistic and shit, but when on the 5 level of a dungeon in ADOM it turns out that I've been poisoned by some critter and I can't do anything about it, it really stops being a game. The point of games is that you stop being your everyday banal, average self and do something epic.

No.

Also, you know what is truly epic? Playing a game for 5 years, often for months every year (having lots of fun all that time) and then having the right combination of skill and luck and finally beating that game.
The sad part is that I don't find ADOM so appealing since I have beat it .

 

[Zomg]

I hate that free games made by volunteers cannot provide me with more than 2 or 3 thousand hours of entertainment before I grow tired of them

 

[DakaSha]

However in many RL a good player is just somebody who has learned to exploit the design flaws :-/

That's just another way of saying that he's learned to play properly.

Thats just another way of saying that rigged sports events are all part of the game

 

[Zomg]

My roguelike experience has basically been getting really into one game, then getting sick of it, and moving to a new one that seems better in every way. I went Moria/Angband -> Nethack -> ADoM -> Crawl. Well, Nethack and ADoM can kinda coexist. In retrospect the design of Angband, Nethack and ADoM seem obviously fucked but I had fun with them at the time. I guess if I play something that blows away Crawl completely I'll be like yeah Crawl was terrible for blah blah reason.

Edit - I am totally disconnected from the RLs that are all about rulesets and builds like Incursion or ToME, I just don't care to learn all that bullshit. Even Crawl isn't transparent enough, and it's pretty damn transparent for an RPG.

 

[Johannes]

However in many RL a good player is just somebody who has learned to exploit the design flaws :-/

That's just another way of saying that he's learned to play properly.

Thats just another way of saying that rigged sports events are all part of the game

And how are you gonna tell what is the right, non-exploitative way, how the game "should be played"? If the game rules allows something then it's legal. Where does design feature stop and design flaw start?
You might say that many roguelikes require too little skill once you know the games basics, but that doesn't mean they're necessarily flawed in any objective way.

Even if a design is flawed in your mind, "exploiting" these flaws is obviously the right way to play, ie. the way a smart player will pick.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

I hate that free games made by volunteers cannot provide me with more than 2 or 3 thousand hours of entertainment before I grow tired of them

Many people go for special endings and for ultimate endings. It's not like I got tired. It just wasn't the same after I have finished it. Like it lost some magic to me.

 

[DakaSha]

And how are you gonna tell what is the right, non-exploitative way, how the game "should be played"? If the game rules allows something then it's legal. Where does design feature stop and design flaw start?

Games are made by conscious entity's who possess a vision of the way a game is mean to be played. That is the correct way.
A design feature is an intended 'rule', a design flaw is an unforeseen consequence of poorly thought out design OR simply a bug.

If a game allows you to get 'unlimited lives' or i the case of rogue likes points through a repetitive but completely safe obviously unintended 'feature' is that correct? according to you it is. If you say it isnt then you are going to have a hard time defining why that is any different then many things one can do in a rogue like or different from anything considered a design flaw in any game.. including bugs. if you think it is fine thats your right of course but i just cant agree with it.

Even if a design is flawed in your mind, "exploiting" these flaws is obviously the right way to play, ie. the way a smart player will pick

The game is a game.. not war.. and Machiavellian principles only apply if you seriously have a dick so small that you need to build up your ego by beating games through exploitation of design flaws.
Personally id feel like a complete moron if i played like that and i avoid it at all costs.

I'm just being a dick of course and I see your point.. but although I agree that in some cases there is a thin line between flaw and feature in rogue likes (one of those would be random dungeon spamming for instance) I still stick to my original comment about players who win often just being people who in my eyes exploit flaws.. which is more of a game criticism then player critisim..

 

[turrican]

Not a big fan of ASCII either, I played Vulture's Eye, which is a GUI for nethack.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20070313215114/nethack/images/8/80/Vultures_eye.png

The biggest pro for me with roguelikes is the generation of new content, no game run plays the same, if the engine is complex enough then exploring unique dungeons with its traps and hidden treasures is great entertainment.

Con is the lack of any meaningful quests.

 

[zeitgeist]

And how are you gonna tell what is the right, non-exploitative way, how the game "should be played"?

Common sense? If you're honest with yourself (and if the developer doesn't have a particularly insane vision of how the game is supposed to be played), you can usually discern whether something is as intended or not.

However, this just reminded me of an issue I forgot to mention in my dislikes: newer roguelikes are almost always in a perpetually unfinished state. Which, related to exploits, means that you can never be quite sure if something is on the developers to-fix list or not. Your best guess is usually good enough, but it's still an issue. But more importantly it means a lack of polish in certain areas, a lack of features in others, some mechanics being implemented as soon as the developer thinks them up, while some wait for them to get enough free time/motivation to finally work on them and so on.

 

[Johannes]

I prefer to think of roguelikes as games rather than try to larp up some restrictions on how to play. Some common sense should be used of course in case of very obvious bugs that would make an otherwise challenging game trivial to win (->boring to play).

ADOM speedrun record
Take this game for example - everything possible is used/"exploited" but it's still very challenging and impressive, much more interesting than a game where you endlessly grind through every available quest in a straight up manner. Though he naturally didn't use the bug available in ADOM where you can reduce your turn count by just performing/canceling a certain action repeatedly, because that would be just pointless and dull.

It's war between man and game, and it's fun to discover and invent new tactics. At least if the game is good.

 

[Zomg]

Whenever it's possible to get a gameplay advantage from doing boring or stupid bullshit, that's bad design. This is absolutely rife in almost every RPG, so I hate to single out Roguelikes for it when they tend to do it less, not more.

 

[ElectricOtter]

Dislike: Usually simplistic/no story and dialogue

Like: Randomness, ACSII (good ones, at least), typically solid skill/class systems, permadeath, good combat

 

[easychord]

+ Lot's of risk/reward decisions such as when exploring especially in new areas.
- New versions adding tons of new sub dungeons and risk/reward decisions meaning that when I get to them I get overwhelmed and get tired of the game before I can clear it once. Why not have an option to scale back complexity and rebalance accordingly.

+ Lots of tactical options.
- Very poor to no tactical options for recruiting and ordering followers.

+ Doing stupid things gets you killed quickly.
- Super nerdy developers add lots of crazy options just to increase the amount of stupid ways to die because of the lulz.

+ Selecting development paths to follow with interesting differentiation.
- Why does it have to be Gods and piety. No atheists in fox holes?

+ Nice weird or different takes on fantasy classes.
- To much fantasy, not enough other, not creative enough. Why not have a detective rouguelike where you explore the city streets at night to find clues then have to fight demons in an opium fuelled dream sequence to solve the case. Uhm, for example.