Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - kraflab

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 31
Other Announcements / Re: Roguelike Radio podcast
« on: April 27, 2013, 04:38:29 PM »
Personally I didn't feel there was any learning curve in df.  If you can read english the interface gives you everything you need.

Off-topic (Locked) / Re: Looking for an RL for me
« on: April 25, 2013, 11:15:17 AM »
I challenge you to play brogue and still consider ascii to be an eye-sore!

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Dwarf fortress
« on: April 25, 2013, 10:36:38 AM »
There is no denying that dwarf fortress shares in the meta-genre of roguelikeness.  It's design is clearly guided in the same direction as most roguelikes, but here applied to a different starting point genre.  This is in the same way as spelunky represents roguelikeness as applied to a platformer.  In other words, there is no doubt that dwarf fortress exhibits roguelikeness, but the base genre is different (and thus the resulting genre is different).

I think you want to talk about roguelike games in the same way someone might say "casual games" and sweep a bunch of games that exhibit similar properties but have different genres into one group.  It is perhaps unfortunate that the term roguelike refers to a specific sub-genre of roguelikeness, but that's just the way it is.  Of course, the number of games discussed on this forum that are part of this meta-genre and not part of the sub-genre indicate to me that no harm has been done in this distinction.

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Dwarf fortress
« on: April 24, 2013, 09:30:45 PM »
Edit: duplicate of above

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Dwarf fortress
« on: April 24, 2013, 09:41:43 AM »
So who's excited for df2013!?

New complex stealth system, the world becomes alive, armies pathing about on the overworld, the ability to start insurrections, non-lethal combat, movement and attack speed decoupled, creature tracking, tree climbing, fortress retiring...

Here's a fan maintained list of expected updates:

Traditional Roguelikes (Turn Based) / Re: Infra Arcana v14.0
« on: April 23, 2013, 08:41:03 PM »
Awesome, I need to get back into this :)

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Dwarf fortress
« on: April 22, 2013, 09:55:06 AM »
That said, by any sane definition Dwarf Fortress is roguelike -- it's fantasy roleplaying, with turn based play if the player wants it in terminal graphics. If your fortress goes to hell, there's no recovering it. Adams has moved the ball so far forward with Dwarf Fortress, people are still in denial about it. Developers are talking about building the successor to ADOM or the next iteration of the zangband legacy. They should be thinking about how to incorporate aspects of Dwarf Fortress into more middle of the road roguelikes and how to improve on what Tarn's accomplished with his game, by, yes, straight up stealing mechanics from his game and chewing on them. There's a lot there to be chewed.

Dwarf fortress adventurer mode is clearly a roguelike, but to say the fortress mode is a roguelike is a bit crazy.  It's a real-time city simulator!  That's like saying the new sim city has moved the roguelike genre forward.  I mean, it is also a role playing real-time city simulator, right?  Dwarf fortress is honestly in a genre all its own, world simulation, in every aspect and at every level.

I think (based on various posts you've made) that you are hopelessly out of the loop when it comes to roguelike developments.  There are a LOT of projects recently that are messing about with Tarn's mechanics (in the sense of open worlds, very complex/realistic combat mechanics, etc).  Another large development is bringing the survival/crafting mechanics from minecraft into roguelikes.  Most likely the reason these projects don't often pan out into full games (and perhaps why you don't know about them) is the shear amount of development time required.  I've seen many conversations in the roguelike irc channel about this subject material (in fact, for a time the majority of the talkative folks were working on df/mc-likes).

The problem with looking at gripes, as Jo mentioned, is that they are very situational and strongly dependent on bad experiences in the past.  When people say they don't like mechanic X they are merely saying they don't like implementation Y of mechanic X.  There are no bad mechanics, only misguided implementations.

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Any Non-perma death Rlikes?
« on: April 18, 2013, 11:02:21 PM »
I think this deserves some discussion.

Let's say that I play one game for 6 hours and then die, or I play another game and die after 2 hours three times in a row.  The shorter lives have less meaning, since you didn't play the character as long (and you can get back to your location faster).  This both lessens the blow of death and also limits the immersion I think (in the sense that the character is just one of many you can burn through in one sitting).  In the long game, death feels much sharper but this is perhaps a response to genuinely feeling the loss of that character.  For me, I think feeling the real loss is more important to my experience, in terms of the type of feeling I want to get from roguelikes.  Shorter lives can certainly be enjoyable too, although I think having large variability on the short experience becomes much more important in such cases.  It is also important in both cases that the game maintains a quality experience, i.e. no one wants to play 4 hours of boring dungeons and then get 1-shot killed by a megabeast you didn't know existed.

There are of course other important factors, such as real life time constraints, but I'm curious what the reasons are for everyone's preferences on short or long character lives.

Temple of the Roguelike / Re: Main page error
« on: April 14, 2013, 01:24:57 AM »
Me too on chrome.

Temple of the Roguelike / Re: Spammers...
« on: April 11, 2013, 07:41:17 PM »
I would love to have the power to delete spam, but I generally just check the forum once a day, so I wouldn't be a good watchdog

Traditional Roguelikes (Turn-based) / Re: Multiplayer online roguelike
« on: April 10, 2013, 09:47:21 PM »
You're making a lot of strange assumptions here.  I love all genres of games pretty much (maybe not social games :P), so to say that I choose the definition of roguelike based on my personal tastes for how hardcore something is is absurd.  I love turn-based rpgs as well as roguelikes.  I'm guessing most people on here do as well, or at least enjoy some other genres.  It seems to me that you don't really understand what permadeath means to a game if you can think it is in any way cursory or a matter of convention.  Item identification is a convention.  Classes are conventions.  Hit points, magic, equipment are conventions.  All these things are swapped in and out depending on the developer but there is a reason permadeath, by contrast, is so vital to the experience.

I also think most people would say that a game that has a way around permadeath is still a roguelike, so you're again off-base with that.  I.E. in my roguelike there are ways to get extra lives, and in tome4 you can donate to remove permadeath and no one is going to tell you either game isn't a roguelike (except maybe krice ;)).  Jo has made a good point here and there about it being the meta-experience of learning from death that makes a roguelike, not permadeath.  But it turns out I've only seen this done as well with permadeath itself.

I'm just not sure how this classification can cause any harm to you.  I mean what do you care if the fruit you have is an orange or an apple.  It is what it is and it tastes just the same.  But at the same time you shouldn't sell apples at an orange stand, or at least you should make note that you are selling some "orange-like" products.

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Any Non-perma death Rlikes?
« on: April 10, 2013, 09:24:23 PM »
In all honesty, I think Jo has said the main feature of a roguelike in the past. Permadeath isn't important, it's the fact that you have to learn from your mistakes, and that the player them self must learn new skills to beat the game. If you can beat the game first try, it isn't a very good roguelike. If it takes them a couple dozen tries, and the game has the content to make it continue being fun, that would be a good roguelike.

I don't disagree with this, but I personally haven't played a game without permadeath where I felt the same effect as a typical roguelike with permadeath.  Take Dark Souls, which I thoroughly enjoyed, where death carries a heavy punishment and the need to learn is strongly enforced (similar to your death in a dungeon returning you to town idea).  I'd say it just doesn't have the same impact as permadeath in a roguelike.

Also, I still laugh whenever people say Rogue isn't roguelike... That's like saying Diablo isn't diablolike, or Linux isn't *nix.

The idea isn't that rogue is not a roguelike, but that the definition of a roguelike does not mean "like rogue".  The roguelike genre is defined by the first games that someone would point to and call roguelikes, such as angband and nethack (or whatever their predecessors were).  I.E. a lot of factors that people might list that give roguelike points are things that weren't even in rogue.

Temple of the Roguelike / Re: Spammers...
« on: April 09, 2013, 09:39:33 PM »
Your skill while unarmed has increased by 1!

Programming / Re: Angband graphical port launchpad
« on: April 09, 2013, 11:34:09 AM »
Have you tried pming Hajo?  He is apparently not active any more, but a pm may ping his email and allow you to get in touch with him directly.  Here are reference threads on the project for anyone who wants to avoid google

I cannot offer you any real help since I've never touched the Angband source, but it sounds like a fun project, so good luck :)

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 31