Death in Roguelikes

[Retrodice]

I have a confession to make.  I actually like dying in roguelikes.

Seriously, dying is part of the entertainment value of roguelikes.  It actually boils down to a bit of basic logic when you think about it, and I assume several others will be with me on this.  You start a game of a roguelike fully expecting to die.  If I play Mario, or whatever, I really don't expect to be killed in under a minute.  However, if I start playing a new roguelike I fully expect my first death to be around the corner.  If that death doesn't seem to manifest itself I get bored and assume that the game isn't for me.  The manner of the death is often quite contrived in a roguelike and it almost makes a play session worth talking about afterwards on it's own in many games.

I'm not the biggest fan of difficult games.  I recently completed Assassin's Creed on the XBox and enjoyed every second.  I also play games such as Transport Tycoon and remove all of the enemy AIs from the game, enjoying a free sandbox.  However, if I play a roguelike I want to struggle from the start and feel that my player is barely alive after at least the first level.  Perhaps this was brought about by my introduction to roguelikes being Nethack.  A game of Nethack can go on for a long time, but ultimately your next move can instantly finish even a healthy character.

I recently played Triangle Wizard for the first time.  It's a game that didn't immediately gel with me, although I'm very prepared to give it a few more goes.  I think that my viewpoint towards the game was negative before I began and that's for one reason only; the tutorial.  During the tutorial your chances of death are very slim.  This isn't what I ask for in a roguelike but it's the entire purpose of a tutorial.  As I mentioned beforehand I'm not finished with the game and will certainly play some more of it, but this is just my initial reaction.  Could it be possible for a tutorial to feel game-like?  Could the RNG be allowed in a tutorial to make it more entertaining and dangerous?

So, if you're developing a game, how do you feel about tutorials?  Are they boring scenarios that detract from the real game's very purpose?  Or are they necessary learning you hope any gamer will take upon themselves to finish just to grasp the basics, and do they really have to be boring?

[Hi]

They really do have to be that boring.  If you made them more exiting to experienced players, you would make them overwhelming to the new ones.

[corremn]

Death in roguelikes should be a rewarding and sometimes fun experience...

Tutorials should give the games basic mechanics with out giving too much of the game away.  No one expects a tutorial to be exciting.  If they are a problem for you, try skipping the tutorial and play the game.  Only going back to the tutorial to see if you missed any key game points.

I expect it to be boring and lifeless place, static and tiresome. I never judge a game by its tutorial. Look at Spelunky's tutorial, it sucks game-play-wise but it totally essential in learning the game.

I have always though SewerJacks would could do with one, but never got around to it (and never will).

[getter77]

Perhaps the tutorial to Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup would be moreso the style in mind?  IIRC, you can get killed in it plenty quick depending.

Triangle Wizard is freaking awesome though, and can be very difficult alongside the wealth of interesting options at a players disposal.

[corremn]

A tutorial that lets you play a normal game but just gives you hints is probably best.  Many commercial games do this.

That is something that I have already built into my "current" engine but never thought of the "tutorial" aspect of it. 

[AmnEn]

There is one important thing many commercial games tend to ignore though. The tutorial must not slow down the player. There's nothing I hate more in games than having to wait through a Tutorial that forcefeeds me stuff I already know and puts roadblocks ahead of me which I can't get past unless I do exactly as the Tutorial tells me to. I'd even consider "press any key to continue" Info Popups as roadblocks if they're too frequent.

[Vanguard]

I don't really have a problem with tutorials so long as they're always optional.  Commercial games seem to love starting out with forced tutorials these days.

[Etinarg]

optional.  Commercial games seem to love starting out with forced tutorials these days.

I think this was adviced on many game developers sites for a long time ...

[Krice]

I guess this is off topic, but tutorials suck in so many ways. They are just one by-product of commercial game development where the decisions are made by, well, other than game designers.

On topic: I also like dying, but in funny and unpredictable ways. I really must try to add some new ways to die in Teemu, and of course I have big plans for Kaduria.

[corremn]

Funny thing is I remember someone saying that my game sucked because they could not get past level 1 and they kept dying to giant rats.  Just because I stepped away from classic rogue-style combat... even though I added a hint file for combat, some people still didn't get it.   An in game tutorial probably would of fixed that.

[Krice]

Funny thing is I remember someone saying that my game sucked because they could not get past level 1 and they kept dying to giant rats.

Dying in level 1 and killed by giant rat is not my idea of fun.

[Vanguard]

But there's a difference between the game being so merciless that the player isn't even a match for a rat and a game where the player character is perfectly capable of defeating the rat, but fails to do so because they played really badly or didn't read the instructions.

[Krice]

didn't read the instructions.

You would expect that any special attack is for bigger monsters and you could kill rats, even giant ones, just by bashing them with anything you have. If you get killed by a mysterious reason or because you didn't use special attack X right from the beginning it can be boring. I think "special attack X" should be introduced during the gameplay by a clear example. When you absolutely expect players to read the instructions you are already doing bad game design.

[corremn]

Exactly why a tutorial would be needed, you dont rush up to creatures in the game, you let them come to you. It is that simple!  A rule from Roguelikes 101. A rule that is ignored by most experience players because the rely on previous roguelike experience that tells them that a rat is free experience.   I really should turn the rats into snotlings instead, at least that would of made most roguelike players aproach them differently to rats.

"Oh a rat, I'll just bash it with this big weapon... oh crap it took a chunk out of me, where did that second rat come from, oh crap I just lost my arm, oh crap I ...."

Should be, " Oh a rat, lets see what is does, its coming straight at me, oh it has a friend, I'll just stand by this doorway and crack some heads when they come near..."

Of course I have recently read James Herbert's 'Rats' and 'Lair' novels, I will never think of rats as easy prey again.  That man can really write a scene about been devoured alive.

[Krice]

because the rely on previous roguelike experience that tells them that a rat is free experience.

Yes, because you are on level 1 and it's a rat. I think (most?) people expect some kind of learning curve so that you don't get killed the first time you meet a monster. For some people it could be perfectly ok and they like to find out what is happening. I personally like learning curves in games, providing that they are not too long or that the game doesn't give too obvious hints (tutorial-type stuff). Good learning curve means that you can start the game without getting killed immediately, but when you proceed you meet harder monsters that can kill you if you don't have a good strategy to kill them.