How to be a Major Roguelike?

[Krice]

All of the Major Roguelikes is games that, when someone calls it a Major RL

Exactly. The players will decide. Not some funny rules or interpretations that were decided by some developers.

[Darren Grey]

I suppose part of the problem is the forums here, which have separate threads for "Major Roguelikes" and "Not Yet Major Roguelikes".  Why is there not just one "Roguelikes" discussion?  The "Not Yet" is especially silly, since games like Powder, Brogue, etc are clearly never aiming to be like Crawl or Nethack.  Coffeebreaks and 7DRLs are similar.  Why are we forced to think about the genre in these irrelevant terms?

If anything the only distinction should be between core roguelikes and roguelike-likes (or games with some roguelike features).  And even that distinction just leads to silly debates.

[getter77]

Another option is WIP/Active ones versus Settled or inherently static like the various handheld and console fare.  This way all the taxonomical nomencalture is swept aside, as I've generally ranted it should be most of the time, and it comes down Liveliness and Milestones/Plateauing off.

[Pteriforever]

I'm sure, if I wanted to, I could come up with a heap of stringent criteria to decide what is and what isn't a major roguelike, but in my opinion there's not much of a point. The players should decide.

[Fenrir]

I propose we adopt a dog-Latin taxonomy to assure that all Roguelikes—or, rather, all members of the family Roguelia—are given their due recognition. Doom RL would be Roguelia Scifius Shootemupium, Nethack would be Roguelia Fantasium Kickin'downadoorious, and so on.

I nominate myself for the committee devoted to its implementation.

[guest509]

  Nomination seconded...shall we vote?

Aye!

[guest509]

  So if one were to make an attempt to create a major roguelike? I think the focus should be on tons of content, interactivity and longevity/fun.
  Good luck focusing on that last one.