Defining Roguelike
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- In this video I ask, "what is a roguelike?". Along the way I also address the Berlin Interpretation and why I don't like it.
Special thanks
Thanks to @MMLCommentaries and @EtraGames for reading my script. Thanks to @DrazGames and @retrohistories for help with the thumbnail. Thanks to @Tehsnakerer and @LambHoot for letting my borrow some Minecraft and Dark Souls footage.
Music Used
Pilgrim's Path - Caves of Qud
Broken Ghost - Downwell
Daddy Long-Leg's Surprise - Noita
Space Cruise - Faster than Light
Risk of Rain - Risk of Rain
Antiquity Row - Into the Breach
Razor Girl - Downwell
Cave - Spelunky Classic
At Doom's Gate - Doom
Turkish Coffee - Spelunky
It turns out the true roguelikes were the friends we made along the way
lol
The problem I have with considering Spelunky et al as roguelikes is that suddenly you can't expect a particular kind of gameplay from them any more!
I feel like you're doing the best job of defeating your own point with the way you summarize the talk about "genres".
Spelunky had, in fact, considered itself to be a "platformer with roguelike elements", not a "roguelike". FTL is "spaceship simulation roguelike-like", not a "roguelike". Pick any of the games you call "neo-roguelikes" and you realize that you always have to add more genres for the description to mean anything.
Were I to interpret your definition freely enough, I could easily arrive at a conclusion that ToME4 is a roguelite while Binding of Isaac is a roguelike.
The same goes for the FPS comparison even if it's flawed.
Yes, exactly, when the games stopped being "DOOM clones" the people stopped using the term. They didn't attempt to redefine "DOOM clones" as something different - they coined a new term - "FPS". You're, meanwhile, metaphorically arguing the point that Portal should be called a "DOOM clone" instead of adopting a broader and less specific genre description.
Honestly, there's a strong "I'm uncomfortable with the games I like being made fun of" vibe coming from this video.
"Roguelike" vs "roguelite" was never supposed to be some sort of war for prestige - even if I have to admit there are plenty of people trying to turn it into that. After all, Rogue Legacy used "rogue-LITE" in their marketing.
It's all about having proper genre definitions that actually mean something.
Boiling down a *genre* to a minuscule set of criteria results in a largely pointless nondescriptive term that does very little to define whatever it tries to cover. Meanwhile, genres are primarily used to help people find "similar things they might enjoy too". I feel like there's a big enough crowd willing to consume almost anything as long as it has permadeath and procedural generation so having a term for that (hence, _roguelites_) is warranted.
If I'm to say, I've played ADOM, DCSS, ToME4, and DoomRL I would find it reasonable to be recommended a game like Caves of Qud. I would find it weird to be recommended Noita or FTL (even though I actually like both of these games).
And while Berlin Interpretation may be dumb and useless, the real reason people aren't willing to accept, say, Spelunky as a roguelike has nothing to do with it, nor does it have anything to do with the "20 years of history". It has to do with the genre in question being very good at describing a thing people want more of and Spelunky isn't that thing.
You'd be surprised but the majority of the modern "actual, real, true, old, legacy, etc." roguelike community considers the Interpretation to be garbage.
Another point that can be argued, is that Rogue didn't really "invent" permadeath nor procedural level generation. There were similar games that had these features in some shape or form, including, most notably, Dungeon Campaign and Beneath Apple Manor.
What Rogue did really invent is the unique way of capitalizing on these - and importantly many others - features to create an interesting dungeon crawling adventure - succeeding at doing so is the reason for its popularity and recognition.
So, when people wanted to play a game like Rogue, they wanted a game like Rogue, and not just any game with random level generation and permadeath, hence "roguelike".
Not to mention, you're overvaluing the importance of permadeath and procedural generation too.
One can argue that ADOM (one of the "canonical" roguelikes) doesn't do much of the meaningful procedural generation as it has a static overworld and many of the most important locations are static too.
ToME4 has a style of gameplay where the random level generation matters very little as the generated level is usually completely traversed in less than a second and all that matters is the encounters you'll have there (with some of the most important being static yet again).
In DoomRL, all the most challenging levels are completely static.
Permadeath is not that special too. Beating the game in one run isn't exactly a new idea - there are merits and demerits in having this approach. Some games benefit more from that if they have other systems to take advantage of it - as in the case of Rogue was the whole identification minigame, which would yes, in fact, be rendered completely pointless was the player given the ability to save and load.
ToME4 by default gives the player multiple lives and has an option to turn permadeath off too. To be completely fair, plenty of people would also argue that ToME is not a roguelike exactly because of that but most would agree that even with its superficial level generation, optional permadeath, lack of the identification minigame, and general focus shift towards the combat, it's still mostly within the boundaries of what someone would expect from a "game that's like Rogue". Why? Because in the end, it's a (simultaneous)turn-based hack 'n' slash with grid-based movement - it plays like Rogue plays. As opposed to, say, Spelunky, which *plays* as a platformer.
I just want to find games like rogue and ADOM when using roguelike
People should just find a new term instead of transforming something niche. I vote 'Procedural Death Game'
The major problem of defining Roguelikes as games with "permadeath with unlockables" and "random elements" is that it's too ambiguous.
Minecraft, most famous example, becomes a Roguelite, after all you've procedural level generations and permadeath, because when you die you lose all your progress (items in your inventory and exp), but you keep the resources that you spent building.
Another very famous Roguelike is Minesweeper: It also has Random Levels and permadeath.
(Also, I don't agree we should call "permadeath" with unlockables that affect future runs. Even if it doesn't make you stronger, it adds progression that you should follow, plus, if I know all the available items, I can focus on the better ones to unlock and left the worse ones, thus making the game easier)
About the Berlim Interpretation, I agree that it seems a lot of random rules without explanation, and it's hard to define what is complex game or Hack & Slash.
Roguelikes are a subgenre of RPG, that's why neither Minesweepers nor Minecraft aren't Roguelikes.
And, fun fact: Spelunky (Classic and HD), in fact, wasn't announced as a Roguelike when it released, although it was inspired by some Roguelikes.
Finally someone who shares my perspective on the difference between rougelikes ad rougelites.
Great video. I've been working on a script for a similar video for the past couple of months and when it comes out I would love to see what you think about it, because my personal interpretation of the difference between roguelikes and roguelites is a little different, for example, I wouldn't consider either Risk of Rain or Spelunky roguelikes. But you have a great analysis of the 'problem' with these classifications for sure. I hope you continue to make these thoughtful videos-- I'm excited to see more.
Validating what you class as roguelikes outside of the Berlin interpretation might just come down to someone being able to figure out a catchy genre name for "procedurally generated permadeath" games, like doom clones became FPS - marketing and PR in the industry just haven't figured it out yet though >_
I'm hoping one day we'll just call them "games" and redefine "reloadsies" as a a niche subgenre.
Your audible distaste for the word ‘numbers’ lmao it’s understandable
While I agree that the Berlin interpretation is flawed, I also would consider myself a Roguelike 'purist', and I would put forth the following requirements:
- Procedural
- Permadeath
- Top Down
- Turn Based.
I don't find the argument for just Procedural and Permadeath very compelling. I feel that when you are stating a genre name, it's most useful when it means something specific. That said, I don't think many genres actually have good names, but I do think there was a time when 'Roguelikes' did, and that has been badly eroded. Permadeath and Procedural do not adequately describe an experience to make for a genre definition. This does not describe how you play the game, but rather, how you play the meta game. I think that distinction is really important.
The whole point of having genres is to be able to use words as an abstraction for ideas and concepts - to be able to find new games and describe them in conversation. Roguelike as a term to describe any game with Procedural Content and Permadeath wouldn't be that dissimilar to using 'Jumping' as the only qualifier for platforming games. It ceases being a useful word where it's too vague.
The solution I would like to see is a richer language for games in general. EDM has done this wonderfully, and while it's a real pain to learn even the subgenres of EDM you are interested in, once you are in the community, it's so easy to talk about this music and find new music you like. The words work! Slapping the 'roguelike' tag on half the games in steam though is not the way to go me thinks.
Finally, I think if you are trying to fit 'Roguelike' into too tight of a space, you'll have problems. To some degree, you're going to have to embrace the Roth test and declare, 'You know it when you see it'.
Isn't the meta game the most defining characteristic? The meta game does in large parts define the experience of playing a roguelike. It's what shapes the mode of play more than anything.
I agree on Procedural, and Permadeath. I would say top down and turn based aren't as important. Whereas RogueLIKES are traditionally RPGs, whereas that is not as important a characteristic for roguelites.
@@BagOfH0lding How isn't turn-based important? It's entirely different experience for player. Sip coffee and plan your next moves vs. Reaction, nimble fingers and quick wit.
Because of this I find Civilization or HOMM being much more similar to traditional roguelikes than Zelda or Castlevania.
Pet peeve: procedural generation doesn't have to be random. It simply means that it's generated by a procedure, i.e. an algorithm.
If you define procedural generation and permadeath as the two essential characteristics, then like everyone else has mentioend, Minecraft in hardcore mode is a roguelike. There are roguelikes that do not have permadeath (Pokemon Mystery Dungeon) anyways, so this is a bad requirement. The games are you showing that you are calling roguelikes play nothing alike. Why would someone that likes Paranautical Activity be more interested in FTL over playing Doom or Serious Sam? Roguelike is a genre and roguelite is a modifier to a game that's of an existing genre. Spelunky is a roguelite platformer and Slay the Spire is a roguelite deckbuilder. Pokemon Mystery Dungeon is simply just a roguelike
You are very brave, wading into this...
I think a big "misconception" is that rogulik isn't a genre but a format. A genre will generally describe mechanics or the type of experience that the player will have, whil a format depicts th canvas in which th experience is framed.
story games are games with a primary emphasis on advancing a plot and telling a story
open world games will have a primary emphasis on free or quasi-free exploration of a digital world
...
roguelike will have a primary emphasis on short unique PVE games, and replayability of these short games.
An example that bugs me is that with the definition of "procedural generation" and "permadeath" should lead to Rimworld being considered a roguelike. Th games are is procedurally generated, and even though you can change it at game creation it's made clear that the intended experience is using permadeath. Yet, almost no ones truly believes this is a roguelike (me included) despite adhering to the broad usual definition. I believe this is because it doesn't have the format of a roguelike, namely th games aren't designed to be short. In fact it's the opposite, it's supposed to be a long sandbox experience in which you build your colony, get involved in th inner organizaiton and maybe some colonists...etc... If Rimworld did set a limit where for example the games ends after 60 days no matter what, or some specific waves of enemies would come at certain times that are harder and harder (and not based on the worth of your colony but arbitrarily made by th game to force the player to evolve at a certain minimum pace), then it would feel much less weird that this game fits in th usual roguelike genre description. Yes these elements that I conceptually added are NOT mentioned in the roguelike genre definition.
Note that I added PVE. Otherwise games like chess or dota or TFT would be considered as roguelikes, yet they are a very different experience altogether. I said PVE instead of single player because I don't see why cooperative roguelikes woulden't exist (I don't know any but I wouldn't be surprised if there were alot of them or if games I know feature some cooperative possibility without my knowledge).
Roguelike is not a genre, it's a format.
Edit: modes like puzzle rush in chess could qualify as roguelikes to me for example. I think thy have the usual characteristics: games are short, random generation since you get different puzzles everytime, th better you are th better you perform...etc... It's like chess in a roguelike format. Would it qualify as a full game, I would say no (because I dislike it :D). It also shows something: I don't think having a way to become overpowered in runs is a necessity for a roguelike. I think roguelikes typically resort to very steep power curves because it makes th games extremely fun and it's one of th only formats in which becoming absolutely overpowered won't ruin future experiences: to the contrary, players will try to achieve similar power levels later, giving thm a drive to keep playing. But I consider that steep powerlevel curve is a choice of the developpers and not a defining characteristic of roguelike.
While I do agree the berlin interpretation is dubious due to the many superficial requirements defining a roguelike as a game with permadeath and procedural generation is very general and would qualify games that definitely do not feel like rogue or the accepted titans of the genre. Xcom and its ilk played ironman would qualify and while having some similarity in game "feel" to a roguelike the base/team management and lack of exploration make it distinctly its own thing.
A third requirement would be having a sense of exploration. Perhaps hard to quantify and define but think of your first time experiencing Zelda for example. Rogue is a procedurally generated adventure game and Nethack, ADOM, Angband, DCSS all express this quality as well and I think this is why roguelike tends to involve dungeon diving. Few ideas express adventure and hunting for loot quite like a good ol dungeon run. Downwell, Into the Breach, Hades, Gungeon, Risk of Rain 1/2 while all high quality titles dont really express this. They are all more platformer/strategy/action game with procedural generation and permanent consequence. Noita however does express this quality to me and therefore I would qualify it as roguelike proper despite being realtime.
I think one of the main things that allow for this adventuring quality come through is how random the devs let the game be. Brogue for example is extremely random with quite extreme variance in the possible outcomes for a seed. Nethack is famously super random, ADOM feels like you never know what to expect around the corner. Caves of Qud is particularly wild with its world generation as well. As a counter example Hades feels much more like a curated experience as you can expect a certain number of boons, the levels are much more predictable etc.
Again not at all saying the "roguelites" (for lack of better term atm) are poor experiences by any means. Just that they offer a significantly different experience to rogue and its kin to the point that I would describe them as a different but related genre.
The berlin interpretation is the best recipe to make a lot of oatmel lol. Like even a game like Cogmind that people hailed has a return to form to true roguelikes is not because it has enemy-enemy interactions.
It's like the distinction between metroidvanias and metroidlikes, and that has declined as well in favor of experimentation, and serve no practical purpose that can't be solved by looking to a screenshot/description of a game.
The Berlin Interpretation itself that you don't need to check everything to be a roguelike so it's not really an issue. It'd be more of an issue that Cogmind isn't really an RPG at all outside the evolution thing.
wow..just surfing by. thanks for adding your point of view to the discussion. really well made video-essay!!! a timestamp to the different games we are seeing would be sooo helpful, since i want to take a look at all of them, you just made me curious :)
Well, I think your comparison with FPS falls flat, since there was a name change. No one would call Portal a Doomclone.
The big development in FPS happend decades earlier, when neo roguelikes appeared the community did not change the name roguelike.
I like to coin the name "restart game" cause that is what you do if you play this genre. :)
Anyway I would opt to start using the term "old school roguelikes", like the "old school rivival" which are like old D&D versions. That would solve this problem :)
Lol, "restart game" is indeed a great name. Ridiculous but very fitting, I'm voting in favor of it!
I agree with you! I define roguelike the same way some people define a sandwich. is there permadeath and procedural generation? That's a roguelike. That's also what I think the average consumer would think of when they picture what a roguelike is. Outside of very stingy blowhards, I don't think you'll find anybody that doesn't think stuff like Spelunky or Slay the Spire are roguelikes. Any of the other shit the Berlin Interpretation said was hella restrictive and dumb as shit. Rogue was a fuckin' bog standard RPG that happened to have 2 really fuckin' cool ideas with permadeath and procedural generation. The shit that made Rogue what it was were those 2 things!! So it follows that anything that has those 2 elements can reasonably be considered a roguelike.
If anything the even more bizarre "rogue-lite" is a needless definition.
"So it follows that anything that has made those 2 elements can reasonably be considered a roguelike"
No, that's like saying being a platformer with linear levels makes you like Mario. Is it technically true because you both share a common trait? Yes, but if you go by that then you get some really dumb stuff like Tumbleseed calling itself a roguelike.
The reason those listed reasons seem so arbitrary is because roguelikes before the word suddenly exploded in usage in popularity were all capturing a specific feel. If you want to get that feel, just look over at roguebasin and download several freeware from there. Most of them have this specific essence and theming, even if they're from wildly different settings (the RL community is VERY derivative).
People meme about r/roguelikes, but a quick check shows that that place existed before the word boomed into public consciousness. So no shit they try to filter out the '-lites,' because that place was quite literally never really made for those games to begin with (and you can't change subreddit names probably bc of how reddit does urls).
It's kind of gate-keepy, but also not really. They're not saying you shouldn't like the games you like, just that they aren't roguelikes- because literally the community (not the reddit, the RL community itself lives across multiple forums and still use IRCs) that made the term exist in the first place.
They just want people to use a different term, ffs 'rogueLITES' isn't that far off from rogueLIKES for a reason.
ruclips.net/video/gYLdLlvrwzc/видео.html
Ik this is literally a year after you commented, but the video I just linked above is legitimately the best breakdown of it.
From 38:15
"I put in so many hours to BOTH these games, but the appeal is in no way similar to that of RogueLIKES.
This is why the division needs so urgently to be protected"
People like the replayability the games provide, but replayability (procedural generation and permadeath go hard into this) isn't all these games are. Saying that blind-sides so much of the culture that spawned them and, If that REALLY was the case in the first place, there would be less stress on what word to use. Like, afaik, no one gives a shit about calling Super Smash Bros a fighting game.
@@milkjug4237 Why doesn't being a platformer with linear levels make you like Mario? I bet up until people came up with the word "platformer" folks would describe a game with platforms and linear levels as a "mario-like". It was only when a broader, more all encompassing definition like "platformer" came about that people stopped comparing Mario and other platformers so directly.
There's a seed of me that agrees with your argument that something Like Rogue is what should necessarily be called a "rogue-like" but honestly, until a more broad term gets as widely circulated, I think games with permadeath and procedural generation will be referred to colloquially as "rogue-likes" if only because we haven't found the language for it like we have with "platformers".
I wait for the future where we can have a broader all encompassing definition that fits both Rogue and Tumbleseed under the same umbrella because of their two unifying elements. After all, a broad genre like, "platformer" is merely any game where there's platforms and your character interfaces with them so why can't "random gen permadeath" games have their own generalization? It only makes the genre more vibrant and all encompassing. And much like "platformer" before it, you can be much more specific once that broader term is adopted! Now people can search for a "Mario-like" platformer and get better results because definitionally, its core elements aren't what are being described anymore but rather the elements wholly unique to Mario.
I want that specificity for Rogue fans but you're arguing for a type of specificity that isn't available yet and until we hack language to make it work, we are at an impasse.
@@superanimenerd13 What some people have settled on is to just focus on differentiating 'traditional RLs' and current ones. I thought of that before too (even before seeing this video bc I used to assume everyone saying X wasnt a RL was being completely unreasonable), but seeing this video multiple times and trying to think about it has just made me realize how pointless it kind of is to care when the famous 'neo-RLs' now have literally millions of views on this site.
Can't change a million people's way of summing up Hades or TBOI in one word, but you can make sure they at least respect the old games' formulas that paved the way for it.
Also like, screw game journalists that start using a new term they find for everything. Not even just for RLs, we've seen this with 'soulslike' too like shut up pls.
Is procedural generation even a required factor? Some RNG, maybe - but plenty of neo-roguelikes don't have procedural generation (FTL, Into the Breach, Risk of Rain2, Slay the Spire - to name a few)@@superanimenerd13
Ohh that’s why they’re called rouge like that makes sense
video was actually more convincing than expected
here's a messy unedited stream of thought lol:
i suppose it may be more apt at this point to just use roguelike as the umbrella term and redesignate the traditional style of roguelikes into a subgenre in of itself. 'Neo-roguelike' and 'Classic roguelike' make a nice enough distinction.
I think the reason folks can get so anal about definitions is because games like adom, cataclysm, caves of qud (but also stuff like stoneshard) and the like have a feel that is quite distinctly different to something like binding of issac, or spelunky.
As such, folks that like one kind, may not like the other, and it's here where we come into the dilemma.
If the genres can be useful at giving people expectations, and helping folks search/filter for a certain type of game, then we don't really want games outside of that box to 'dilute' that. The solution, then, is to either make a new but related label for the games that don't fit the classical roguelike definition, or conversely, to make a label to distinguish the classical roguelikes. Most purists I'd imagine would prefer the former, given that the old games were there first, but I think the latter is more realistic, especially given the modern common conception of the term 'roguelike'. And at the end of the day it's not that big of a deal as either solves that problem.
Myself, while I can enjoy a good 'neo roguelike', there's a character and style of the traditional style that I enjoy in a very different manner, hence why I think some kind of distinction is helpful.
Looking at the example with FPSs and Doomclones to parallel this, I imagine doomclones are still in of themselves a subgenre of FPSs (or maybe this just falls under Boomer Shooter, idk, point still stands)
tangentially, I interestingly find that something like project zomboid, while appearing very not alike 'classic roguelikes', has a much closer feel to them, than to the expected 'neo roguelike'. just a stray thought.
some folk may also wonder, why not just designate neoroguelikes as roguelites, and well, first of all, in the common vernacular, roguelike has already caught on for neoroguelikes. Secondly though, it's worth considering that clumping neoroguelikes and roguelites together may then have the alternative effect of diluting those labels. (but tbf i do feel like the distinction between those is less meaningful, not that I'm invested enough to know lol)
idk, at the end of the day it's just semantics and doesn't matter that much. devs will label their games what they will, and I think if they're going for the traditional or classic roguelike direction they ought to just label them as such so the right audience can find them (and looking around now, looks like there *is* a steam tag for that).
Tbh rouge-likes are a genre I have only really dipped my toes into, but this has me wanting to put a little more time into them. Well done as always man :)
This video does it more justice imo ruclips.net/video/gYLdLlvrwzc/видео.html
Also, *roguelikes
I never hard the term doomclone of my life. When this terminology was still in use, I always heard doomlike. Is this a regional thing? Not in the us so maybe it's that?
halo reach legendary all skulls on is my favo _u_ rite roguelike like my favrite rpg overwatch. the management of juggling plasma pistols is very engaging
no mention of CDDA or CLASSIC GAME (now thats a classic game right there) or Caves of Qud or even Cogmind smdh tbqh familiano.
fun fax: it took over 25 years for "boomer shooter" to become a popular subgenre tag, subsuming the old "retro fps/shooter" and even "arena shooter" marketing terms in the same playbook straight out of the "walking simulator" genre tag replacing the previously used "nongames" and "exploration/narrative games".
hope yuore day/month/year has existing well
So, I didn't mention them by name, but I have played CDDA and Caves of Qud, and I used some footage of Qud in this video. I could have gotten more into the design of classic style roguelikes, but frankly that discussion might work well as its own video. There is a lot to talk about with their design and I felt like a lot of those specifics sort of fell outside of the scope of the video which was mostly talking about old roguelikes and how they came to define what "roguelike" even meant.
Caves of Qud is really good though
I agree with your definition of roguelike/lite. You don't consider soulslikes to be only 3d games, why should roguelikes be stuck in that?
*caves of qud theme plays*
Caves of Qud has a surprisingly good soundtrack. I feel it set the mood quite well for this video
@@Chariot_Rider I think I've also heard some Ascendancy Soundtrack in there. Good choice of music!
You keep mentioning "procedural generation" and "permadeath" as the be all and end all Rogue like core mechanics and nearly ignore "top down" and "turn based" which are equally if not more important game mechanics of Rogue. Rogue or Nethack or Infra Arcana are very similar to chess in some respects and being compared to an action game is just downright ridiculous. Rogue and its many clones have a small yet diehard fan base and the term has been stolen and now wrongly applies to many games that bear little to no similarity to Rogue.
yea but top down and turn based isn't really original to rogue while procedural generation and permadeath are.
There are few genres that are defined by being similar to a specific game. Even if they have those games in the title. "Metroidvanias" aren't just games similar to Metroid and castlevania
@@lordoftheeyes6716 Well I mean, Metroidvania already clashes two separate games and their systems together so that's expected.
But when you get to roguelike and you start saying X that barely plays similarly to rogue is one, then it makes sense the fans will get super pissy about it
@@damiankaleomontero496 Procedural Generation and Permadeath also aren't original to rogue. Those were also used in some arcade style games like Tetris and Asteroids (I view the lives system in Asteroids and similar games as another version of Hitpoints, so I think it fits under the permadeath umbrella). The combination of the 4 Elements "proc gen", "permadeath", "top down" and "turn based" are what make roguelikes feel and play like roguelikes.
What's the game with the digging?
This video is really great and I liked your opinion on things. I just wonder... do you think the subgenre Roguelite is nessecary? After all you said (I think) you think that Roguelikes should be more broad in definition and that we should focus on the core elements of what a Roguelike really is. Maybe if we see it that way many Roguelites could be Roguelikes?
You don't broaden a subgenre to fit a bunch of new games.
You make a separate genre for that. Roguelike is for turn-based rpg dungeon crawlers that are in a decent essence similar to it.
I like the more transformative stuff, but that should be its own different term. Roguelite is MEANT to be that term, but it sounds far too similar so most don't learn there is a real differene
I vote 'Procedural Death Game (PDG)'
@@milkjug4237 of course you broaden a definition to include new examples, if those new examples didn't exist at the time or weren't known about by the original definers, or if the original definition was inaccurate or not useful.
@SNG for me, the"-like" means procgen and permadeath, while the "-lite" means "either permadeath isn't so permanent, like carrying over resources, or the procgen isn't random enough". this is because I don't love roguelites, since you don't know if you're learning the game or just grinding, so that difference is much larger than the difference between ascii or graphics, or the difference between turn-based or real-time.
@@milkjug4237 you can just call your roguelike a "Broguelike", for Berlin Roguelike, while most people will keep calling roguelikes "roguelike".
But procedural generation isn't even a required factor for neo-roguelikes. Risk of Rain 2 doesn't have it. Slay the Spire couldn't even have it. FTL's ships aren't procedurally generated. There's certainly some random elements in all neo-roguelike games, but procedural generation specifically is not a necessary component.@@alexscriabin
wait! Is minecraft hardcore a roguelike now? It has every element of your definition
Fantastic work as always. It's funny how people seem to use labels like this in ways that instead of just categorize it's like they are gate keepers to a genre. Meanwhile in reality the variety of genres a game can be is not some black and white discussion. Like how portal is a fps, a puzzle game and a platformer you need all those to describe it
Portal isn't an FPS. It's first-person and you can shoot a portal gun, but you aren't shooting enemies.
I was birthed by a lambhoot, solid arguement.
Minecraft Hardcore mode is the best rogue like
You answered your own question with “neo roguelike” describing the newer non turn based roguelikes....graphics aside turn based vs not is enough reason for a genre change....which would make spelunky the first neo roguelike 🤷♂️
Edit: I am fine with people 'mis-using' the word, so long as people know the proper history behind it. Too big of an issue to change, like the video said.
Revisitng this video again, I think I've found the root issue based off what you said in the video about dilution: both sides are defining roguelike OPPOSITE of each other.
The original RL fans likely played Rogue itself, or Hack, or NetHack, or ADOM, or Moria, or any of the early versions of it which were based off of each other as they were open-source (the RL community has become very derivative in culture from this).
The veterans from Usenet really were looking for games like Rogue....obviously creating the actual term 'roguelike' for its truest and most original purpose: "I played this game called ROGUE. Do you know any games LIKE it?"
So their usage of the term evolved slowly based on making derivative content off each other and see what was actually required to keep the general theme and spirit of the game. If you want to imagine this, you can imagine Rogue as a house and each new fan-creation based on it was seeing what they could remove or keep without the house collapsing.
New people nowadays aren't being introduced through Rogue itself or close copies/successors like NetHack. They're coming in from games like The Binding of Isaac, FTL, and even Spelunky (Spelunky's actually kind of a special case as it kickstarted the word into the mainstream). If you've actually played Rogue or NetHack, you will see a HUGE difference in them versus TBOI and FTL-but that's not registered to someone whose only experience are from them. So they start defining Roguelikes retroactively, by seeing the common threads in modern games named it.
Also, your point vs the Berlin Interpretations are still off. A lot of people don't follow it that closely anyways, but the whole point of it is to just use common sense with what it defines.
People don't consider Spelunky a roguelike because it's too radically different from the 'canonical ones' listed and also Rogue itself. A platformer will always play way too differently.
"That's because it was just dungeon crawlers for 20 years, but they can be more"
For this point also: it's a sub-genre. It was never meant to stick out in the first place. All the 'true roguelikes' are still just dungeon-crawlers. Their permadeath and procedural generation just added an extra niche that people fell in love with.
Is lambhoot a roguelike?
Music is a bit loud, bit distracting :/
Pretty late to the party on this video too, but I wanted to take a stab at a modern definition that doesn't focus on the original game or the like/lite distinction:
Features Absolutely Required for a Roguelike
- Permadeath
- Short run/completion time (compared to other genres)
- Diverse build options, potential and synergies
- At least some potential for power creep
- Diverse progression potential and/or options
- Knowledge horizon limitations (mechanics to keep rote memorization from being directly rewarded)
Maybe some of these overlap a bit, but I think this covers every game I'd consider a Roguelike/lite. Let me know if you can think of an exception.
Wait, so is Plague Inc. a rogue like according to this definition?
Nailed it on the head!
I 100% agree, I think of roguelike more as an attribute applied to any genre, than a genre onto itself.
...no, that erases history of an entire community
@@milkjug4237 sorry what?! Lol
@@clvr51 Nvm I thought you said something worse about it never being a genre
Now I don't like Roguelikes, at least that is what I thought .
Thanks to your video I found Bad North and I played Rogue for the first time. Its supprisingly good
turn based gameplay & tilebased is a must ..
source : wikipedia.
Roguelike (or rogue-like) is a subgenre of role-playing video games characterized by a dungeon crawl through procedurally generated levels, turn-based gameplay, tile-based graphics, and permanent death of the player character.. while often incorporating other gameplay genres, thematic elements, and graphical styles; common examples of these include Spelunky, FTL: Faster Than Light, and The Binding of Isaac. To distinguish these from traditional roguelikes, such games may be referred to as "rogue-lite"..
Wikipedia also says binding of Isaac is a roguelike...
ROUGELIKE POG
My favorite Roguelike is Fortnite :)
You are very smart
@@lumdakoolkid thanks
Maybe I'm just an old purist but for me if a game doesn't use the American Standard Code for Information Interchange (or at least a mode of it) it just doesn't feel "like" "rogue."
I know I'm late, but this is certainly the funniest comment here by a hefty margin.
You ignored the most important factor that affects the feel and mechanics of a games in general, and I think is as important to roguelike as permadeath and randomness if not more: Turn-based gameplay.
It completely changes the way you play and approach the game: Compare Chess to Arcade games or Pool to Ice Hockey. It's entirely different experience.
I also think top down view is a big factor affecting the feel roguelikes have, but that is certainly to lesser extent than those three.
Another point is graphics. People these days don't seem to understand difference between ASCII or sprite graphics and "realistic" interpretation. The simple symbol graphics (either sprite or Ascii. But Ascii the most) reads like a book: When gamer sees D he doesn't see a letter or symbol but a Dragon, just like if he read a paragraph of dragon approaching.
And everyone who has read a good book knows how much deeper the immersion is than for a movie for instance.
These make so big difference, that I find your two criteria extremely lacking to capture the real feel of a roguelike game.
That's still not enough. If you think about it, minesweeper falls under your definition of a roguelike. Turn based, randomly generated levels, and permadearh. A roguelike has to be a dungeon crawler
@@lunedefroid8817 Good point! Indeed that definition could include Minesweeper, which I didn't really thought of, but I meant it as minimum: "What game defined as roguelike at least has to have". Not that game that fulfills them is roguelike.
I don't think you can define any genre (be it music, movies or games) by strict rules anyway.
Also I'm not quite sold on idea that roguelike necessarily has to be dungeon crawler.
The key is the game design.
1:10 wrong.
Lambhoot sent me
Spelunky is the martin luther of roguelikes hahahahahahahaha. Oh man.
Here is the duck interpretation of roguelikes: Call it whatever you want. Dont get your panties in a bunch over a genre definition. Call it a racing game, who cares.
Spelunky is not a roguelike. When I search online for a roguelike I do not type side-scrolling pixelart action platform game.
Spelunky poorly participates in the idea of a roguelike.
if it is turn based, rpg with a top-down view it is a freakin roguelike. Diablo participates less in the idea of a roguelike, because the creators resigned from turn-based movement, but everything else is there. it is a fantasy role playing, with a birds-eye view you gather experience, level up, gather loot and buy better equipment to kill more monsters, aaand it has procedurally generated maps... a BIG chunk of it is participating in an idea of a roguelike. If Diablo was in my roguelike search results, I would not be mad.
I would say procedural generation is important, but not crucial, for the experience.
Some cars look like boxes, and some like spheroids, but none of them is either, their shape participates more or less in the idea of a box or a spheroid. The word "like" implies vagueness and lack of quantification. Maybe there is a reason why it is not called rogue "clone"?. This is a problem with every genre. Music, Movies, books. The good ones always mix many different genres. The discrimination serves as a compass, it has to show direction. It is not and will never be a map, and we should not treat it as such.
Trying to define roguelike with permadearh and procedural generation is bad, because minesweeper also has permadeath, random generation and is even turn based. Nobody calls it a roguelike tho
@@lunedefroid8817 wow, man, I couldn't say it better.
@@reveninja5252 we should just call them roguelikes(classic), neoroguelikes(new action based games) and roguelites(games with meta-progression that makes it easier, like Hades)
What's wrong with minesweeper falling into the roguelike category?@@lunedefroid8817
For me Rougelikes are 1. RPG. 2. top-down view 3. tile-per-step movement for every entity. Of course it's only personal and nobody has to agree. It would be more accurately if it has random dungeons and permadeath, but if a game doesn't have those, it would still be a Roguelike to me. It's the same argument as "Doomlike", if it doesn't look like one, then it's just a FPS.
Its definitely true that modern FPS games are generally not "like" Doom. I think it would definitely be fair to say that "Doomlikes" are a subgenre of FPS games. I think a similar line of thinking could also apply to the roguelikes. The traditional roguelikes are definitely stylistically different than the neoroguelikes. However, I think they both are part of the same genre. Unfortunately, I don't see anyone trying to come up with that unifying name that describes both style, and instead its more about drawing a line in the sand about what is and is not a part of this unified group of games.
@@Chariot_Rider If only there was some big gaming community that decides these things, like Berlin Convention 2.0.
I disagree
Like, at this point the definition you've decided on encompasses so much more that it should be its own thing (most people just use roguelite for this)
'Roguelike' is a sub-genre (they're all descendants of rpgs) of games with top-down turn-based dungeon crawling.
The modern take of it just focuses of procgen and permadeath most of the time.
That's annoying for people looking for more of the original, which is what the word id meant to be used for.
All for transformative takes on a now known formula, but don't retroactively change the word a community made for themselves.
interested to see how Judas will fit into this picture, as it will have procedural generation, albeit tightly tied into the narrative of the game, and Ken Levine doesnt' consider it a roguelite.
The thing that gets me about the ascii "requirement" is like... at the time the oldest roguelikes were made, ascii graphics were probably the most efficient way to display a game by far, since they didn't need extra files (which wouldn't have been small at the time) etc. Nowadays, graphics made of non-text are the standard and are both easy to produce/distribute and easier for the audience to understand.
I'm all for having "roguelike" as an umbrella term and specifying the specifics. Like, "top down roguelike" and "roguelike platformer" etc, the same way you'd have "military fps" and "puzzle fps" (and "boomer shooter" for 90s-style fps apparently). Subcategories of a larger whole. I know I definitely approach roguelike (okay, roguelite, at this point it's mostly Rogue Legacy) platformers differently from other types of platformer, closer to how I approach like Quest Of Dungeon or w/e than like Mr Bree+ or w/e.
Really, when it comes to genre, I feel like roguelike is more a *mindset* definition (like "puzzle" or "horror") than a definition of the aesthetics and/or camera angle (the way "sidescroller" and "fps" and "top-down" suggest). And I've noticed it seems to be far easier to combine across those categories than within them. (Platformer's in its own weird space, it can kinda fit in both depending on what's emphasised.)
It's not a requirement. It's specifically listed as a 'low-value' point
@@milkjug4237 You're right, it's not a requirement, that's why I used scare quotes. I suppose it would have been more obvious if I'd put the optional second and third sets of quote marks around it, to differentiate scare quotes from the offset quotes.
@@corruleumblue3317 o so it was sarcasm in a diff way.
@@milkjug4237 Yeah, it was sarcasm. I hope that cleared things up /genuine
On your point of permadeath making choices more important, I think that can be true, but it also has the opposite. If I make a choice in a rouglike, I don't have to worry about it effecting the rest of the game too much because it's going to be undone. I actually like this better because it makes you more open to trying dumb and fun things. If I make a choice in hollow knight or undertale for example, that choice is probably gonna influence the game for a lot longer.
This is a great argument against the definition of the genre. The comparison to fps and other non-roguelike dungeon crawlers kinda hits the nail right on the head. Really really great video, really really good essay too 🙌
I think it’s still important to acknowledge that the game needs some sort of dungeon crawling element.
According to your definition, if Minecraft had permadeath it would be a rogue like. Another thing to think about is if Minecraft had permadeath it would have eight elements from the Berlin interpretation.
Even though that would be be more than spelunky I think everyone can agree that Minecraft is not a rogue like.
Procedural generation and permadeath are definitely the biggest elements in a rogue like however I think there is something missing in the definition.
A clear progression path I guess? Minecraft lacks that (like the ender dragon at best) and the actual focus is really building. But to be honest initially some people expected minecraft to become more of an RPG-roguelite hybrid, but the overall casual success overhauled its goals.
I would probably say it has something to do with either the expected play length or the progression (minecraft's crafting systems and plentiful resources prevent repeat runs from being that different from each other from a player capability standpoint)
Good point. I think a third and fourth element would be complexity, and a win condition. You can't "win" Minecraft, you just do more stuff.
"If Minecraft had permadeath"
Hardcore Minecraft is a roguelike now
@TeleportRush
I'd say these factors that are required for modern day roguelikes:
- Permadeath
- Short run/completion time (compared to other genres)
- Diverse build options and potential
- At least some potential for power creep
- Diverse progression potential and/or options
- Knowledge horizon limitations (mechanics to keep rote memorization from being directly rewarded, like RNG, procedural gen or some other method)
If it isn't turn-based, it isn't a roguelike. Roguelikes are methodical.
That's certainly a high value target, but I'd phrase it such that 'the skill a roguelike challenges is tactical thinking', as opposed to dexterity. Roguelikes are separate from, though not complete opposite to, action games. It's a spectrum.
Absolutely false.
Nice video! Well written and edited.
Dope