How you guys feel about the new wave of rougelike games?

[Avagart]

Let me think... Wilderness, vary endings, side quests, runes, herbs... Are these features present in NH? Nope.

It's true that ADOM is based on NetHack, and in additional borrows a lot of elements from NetHack, sometimes mades them simpler - Big Room for example. But I can not say that "ADOM is Nethack clone without any original ideas". Unneccessarily bloated? You mean these features which I mention earlier? These ideas makes ADOM very different from NetHack and it's harsh to say that they are 'unnecessarily'.

In that way, NH is more clone of Rogue than ADOM is clone of NH. If it means that ADOM sucks, it means that NH sucks much more

Without hate, I very like NH, but your arguemnts are... controversial and questionable.

[Krice]

You mean these features which I mention earlier? These ideas makes ADOM very different from NetHack and

The reasons I don't like ADOM are incomprehensible to you. I can understand it, because lot of the players and developers too are only regular people. The way I see games like Nethack and ADOM today is that they are extremely simple games. I can still play Nethack, because 5% of it is still playable in my mind. Most games are 0%, that's why I don't usually play games. It's similar to what I experienced with books. When I was younger I was reading a lot, but then I started to see patterns beyond normal understanding and it was no longer needed for me to read more.

[jcd748]

What new wave? I haven't seen roguelik.. oh, wait, Nethack 3.6.0 was released. So that's one. What else? ADOM of course, but.. it sucks.

I'm glad we can always count on you to push the quality of the conversation forward.  How's Kaduria coming along?

[jcd748]

ADOM sucks? Hell no. Maybe development (and background of dev process) of ADOM sucks, but game 'as it'?

As 'new wave of roguelike games' I understand 'this lots of new games called roguelikes because is more roguelike-like than roguelike like^n'.

That's how I understand it as well - the large number of games that takes "roguelike" to mean "some procedural content" while ignoring most of the rest of what the term means/implies.

[awake]

I can still play Nethack, because 5% of it is still playable in my mind. Most games are 0%, that's why I don't usually play games. It's similar to what I experienced with books.

I am consistently impressed by how much people on this forum hate roguelikes.

[Krice]

I am consistently impressed by how much people on this forum hate roguelikes.

It's different when you are a developer. You know, some actors don't watch movies, at least their own movies. Writers don't read books etc. For example I don't play computer games these days. Two main reasons are that I grew up to be an adult and also because I feel game development has possibly even degenerated and the best we saw was in 1990's when money was not the most important thing in gaming industry as it is today.

[jim]

You know, some actors don't watch movies, at least their own movies. Writers don't read books etc.

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm pleased to announce that just a few days into January we've already got a contender for Stupidest Thing Said in 2016! Knocking "What happens if I stick my dick into an electrical outlet" and "I drive better when I'm drunk" off the scoreboard is Krice from the Rogue Temple! Give him a hand, everyone!

[jcd748]

I can still play Nethack, because 5% of it is still playable in my mind. Most games are 0%, that's why I don't usually play games. It's similar to what I experienced with books.

I am consistently impressed by how much people on this forum hate roguelikes.

You need to understand that Krice is not representative of anyone on this board.

[Krice]

Ladies and gentlemen, I'm pleased to announce that just a few days into January we've already got a contender for Stupidest Thing Said in 2016!

It's you who don't understand what I'm trying to tell. I can understand why people like and play even crappy roguelikes (or games). I've been there when I was younger, I did like games and was an enthusiastic player myself. If you are younger than let's say 30 there is a big chance that you don't have a clue what I'm talking about. Don't worry. You'll get there when it's your time.

[AgingMinotaur]

Ah, the good old «if only you were wise and old like me» routine You're wrong about writers not reading, though. It's my own field of work, and I've never met an accomplished writer who wasn't also an avid reader. Some may abstain from reading for short periods, and a few perhaps dismiss reading altogether (but they are probably borderline paranoid). Not that there's anything wrong with not playing computer games. I hardly do so myself, but when I do, it's often precisely to get inspiration for my own game project(s). If I was a professional rather than a hobbyist developer, I'd be playing a lot more games, certainly not less.

As always,
Minotauros

[Holsety]

I can partially understand where Krice is coming from. Once you've had the best, why settle for the rest? Ie. if a certain game in a series reaches a zenith of gameplay perfection (and gameplay is what you care most about), why would you ever play earlier/newer games or games from other series? [disclaimer: not how I feel]

I'm also somewhat sympathetic regarding the quality/type of games that got made in ye olden days, but that's both partly off-topic and I don't think that money was any less important back then. Rather I think older games had to work around their technical limitations, allowing more room for player imagination to provide immersion, rather than the modern approach of throwing millions at game development in order to try and force immersion through cutting edge realistic graphics (which isn't helped at all by the garbage design of simplistic map design etc etc etc etc) If anything modern game devs have more access to money than ever before, it's just that instead of the golden age of rockstars-of-design we are now in the poop age of design-by-focusgroup.

[akeley]

I can partially understand where Krice is coming from. Once you've had the best, why settle for the rest? Ie. if a certain game in a series reaches a zenith of gameplay perfection (and gameplay is what you care most about), why would you ever play earlier/newer games or games from other series? [disclaimer: not how I feel]

While this might or might not be true - up for unrelated discussion - I don`t believe this is what Krice`s message is. Straight from the horse`s - sorry, developer`s mouth:

The reasons I don't like ADOM are incomprehensible to you. I can understand it, because lot of the players and developers too are only regular people. The way I see games like Nethack and ADOM today is that they are extremely simple games. I can still play Nethack, because 5% of it is still playable in my mind. Most games are 0%, that's why I don't usually play games. It's similar to what I experienced with books. When I was younger I was reading a lot, but then I started to see patterns beyond normal understanding and it was no longer needed for me to read more.

So basically, our proto-brains are unable to comprehend the advanced patterns that would show us why Adom/Nethack/other majors are in fact basic bitches of roguelike world. What are the good ones, with more than "5%" gameplay? That`s left unsaid, perhaps they don`t exist yet and we`ll just have to sit and wait for Kaduria - the true next-gen RL - to arrive.

As AM pointed out above this is one of the oldest -and very dangerous - fallacies our poor brains sometimes steer us toward. The "I`ve seen the light while y`all are still groping in the dark" is cute but quite sad...very easy to fall for if you`ve been around for a bit, read this and that about pattern recognition and such  and start fancying yourself a unique snowflake. I had a similar brief period of delusion a decade ago when I thought I read it all and what`s the point, luckily my in-built neutral defences are quite strong and I got over this BS...turned out I wasn`t just looking hard enough (there`s always some brilliant stuff out there, it just gets more difficult to find)

TL; DR; it`s not ADOM - it`s the player. Play one game for a decade or so and of course you will perhaps start getting bored of it a bit, see all its tricks and gambits and if you lack perspective and have propensity for delusion, as our Uncle K here, you might start thinking it sucked from the beginning.

And re: that "people on this forum hate roguelikes." adage - no, not at all. There`s nothing wrong with slaying some sacred cows, disliking some styles, genres and/or particular roguelikes  and discussing it to hell and back, It`s just, as a wise man once said; " If you come at the King, you best not miss". Aka, bring your AAA arguments if you want to tell me why Crawl sucks. This is why I miss old regulars like Jo, mushroom patch, Vanguard & Co - could disagree a lot, but at least their delivery was thought out and compelling, not this weaksauce Molotovs Krice`s lobbing around.

[Krice]

and start fancying yourself a unique snowflake.

You should think the possibility that I am unique. That happens sometimes.

[Kyzrati]

Everyone is unique. Krice most of all.

[jim]

Ah, the good old «if only you were wise and old like me» routine You're wrong about writers not reading, though. It's my own field of work, and I've never met an accomplished writer who wasn't also an avid reader. Some may abstain from reading for short periods, and a few perhaps dismiss reading altogether (but they are probably borderline paranoid). Not that there's anything wrong with not playing computer games. I hardly do so myself, but when I do, it's often precisely to get inspiration for my own game project(s). If I was a professional rather than a hobbyist developer, I'd be playing a lot more games, certainly not less.

As always,
Minotauros

Precisely.  We've all met writers who don't read (usually in creative writing classes), and their writing is horrible. I just thought it was cute because the "writer who doesn't read and produces shitty writing as a result" is a well-known trope among anyone who has even a passing interest in the craft of writing. They're a bit of an inside joke.

That's not to say that a deeper understanding of a thing's inner mechanisms doesn't affect one's perception and enjoyment of the thing. That's completely true; it's like Christmas as a child versus Christmas as an adult.

But to claim that one's own brilliant perception - allowing for an inspired visualization of the platonic ideal of a video game - has turned the flavor of every imperfect roguelike into ash... well... speaking of age, let me just say that it's a bit melodramatic and immature.