Author Topic: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...  (Read 46049 times)

mariodonick

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • LambdaRogue .:. roguelike RPG
I'm still on my quest finding answers how to develop a roguelike that does not only appeal to some hundreds anonymous downloaders, but also to the core of roguelike players.

I know that we have already a thread about "How do you like your roguelike", but this one has a slightly different focus.

What is it, that makes Nethack, Angband, Dungeon Crawl SS, Adom, Powder to belong to the major ones?
https://mariodonick.itch.io/lambdarogue-the-book-of-stars
-- LR: The Book of Stars graphical roguelike RPG

Vanguard

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 1112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #1 on: March 27, 2010, 09:51:49 AM »
There are a lot of factors.

All of the games you mentioned except powder have been around for a long time.  With the quantity of roguelikes being much higher nowadays, it's harder to stand out.

But I don't think that's all there is, those games exceed most others in scale or quality.  Most of them are easy to pick up and play, but very difficult to win.

With that said, each game is popular for its own reasons.

Nethack and Adom are chock full of surprises, easter eggs, unique situations, and all of that sort of thing.  I don't believe any other roguelike can compete with them in that area.  Maybe no other game period.

Despite this, the basics are still clear, and most players will be able to at least get past the first little while without too much trouble in Nethack.  Getting past the first few floors of Adom is easy too, but doing so in the most optimal way for your character's future is a lot harder, but that doesn't matter.  My point is a new player can get their bearings easily, and once they're interested in the game they can worry about picking up the more esoteric stuff.

I look at Angband as being sort of the opposite of NH and Adom's complexity.  It's predictable.  Each level is very similar to the last, there aren't really any item functions that will surprise the player.  Most of the game comes down to knowing what you need your speed/hp/resistances at to clear any given area.  Honestly I don't really like Angband, but it's easy to jump into.

Crawl is weird.  I see the convenient interface and character customization as the main selling points.  Most everything can be done with the mouse if you want to.  What I don't understand is why they coupled their super convenient interface with a leveling system that goes out of its way to be inconvenient for no benefit.  Again though, minmaxing your character is something you can worry about later.  For getting started autoexplore and similar functions make it a snap for a new player to get their bearings.

And I haven't played Powder to be able to really say anything about it, so I'll just keep my mouth shut.

Bottom line though: they're all difficult without being hard to get into, they all have their own unique themes, and those themes have a strong presence all throughout the game, and they have the advantage of seniority.

mariodonick

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • LambdaRogue .:. roguelike RPG
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #2 on: March 27, 2010, 12:27:26 PM »
Thanks for this bunch of thoughts.

Quote
Nethack and Adom are chock full of surprises, easter eggs, unique situations, and all of that sort of thing.  I don't believe any other roguelike can compete with them in that area

I wonder how many Nethack players really make use of / find all these surprises and easter eggs. When I still played Nethack in the past, I always felt overwhelmed about all these possibilities and different commands. I was aware that I could do lots of things, but it was too much of work for me to try and figure it out. So I simply tried to get a nice weapon and enough food and to survive, not using any of the more complicated stuff. Thus, I died and died and died.

Quote
My point is a new player can get their bearings easily, and once they're interested in the game they can worry about picking up the more esoteric stuff.

So in these games, players seem to immediately know what they are expected to do and can start doing so?

This is of course a question I also thought in regard of LambdaRogue. (As I'm trying to figure out how to make LR better, I will always come back to this example.)

  • Perhaps one problem with LR is that players think they can simply run down the dungeon, explore it quickly -- and then wonder when they die too soon or not really know where to go.
  • I wonder how many of them actually talk to the priestess (NPC) in the first dungeon level who tells them what to do and what to look out for. I also wonder how many of them care about equipment and magic.
  • Perhaps it would be better to just put them into the first random level and tell them "go down to level 20 and get the book of the stars, then return", without plot twists and the need to carry out quests and go back and forth between dungeon levels. However, the need for travels is a core part of the game, as well as the story.

Quote
I look at Angband as being sort of the opposite of NH and Adom's complexity.  It's predictable.  Each level is very similar to the last, there aren't really any item functions that will surprise the player.  Most of the game comes down to knowing what you need your speed/hp/resistances at to clear any given area.  Honestly I don't really like Angband, but it's easy to jump into.

Angband is a game I like very very much (along with its predecessor Moria). It's a rather straightforward and has a very consistent theme. I also like its big levels, although many people seem to find them (and the constant need of re-exploring) boring. Angband was the game I always had in mind when beginning to code LambdaRogue in 2006 (that's why LR's levels are regenerated every time and items are more important than dungeon interaction, and why the first level is a town level).

Again, thank you. Any other voices?
https://mariodonick.itch.io/lambdarogue-the-book-of-stars
-- LR: The Book of Stars graphical roguelike RPG

ywgdana

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #3 on: March 27, 2010, 02:44:18 PM »
I wonder how many Nethack players really make use of / find all these surprises and easter eggs. When I still played Nethack in the past, I always felt overwhelmed about all these possibilities and different commands. I was aware that I could do lots of things, but it was too much of work for me to try and figure it out. So I simply tried to get a nice weapon and enough food and to survive, not using any of the more complicated stuff. Thus, I died and died and died.

I suspect most nethack players develop a subset of the possible tricks that they use frequently.  What's great is that the game seems to always allow possibility of figuring out new tricks.  The other night I accidentally picked up a lodestone and wasn't carrying any holy water or scrolls of remove curse.  I scratched my head for a while and ran through my inventory and noticed I was carrying a wand of cancellation.  Hmm...may as well give it a try.  I dropped all of my items I thought might be hurt by the wand, stepped to a clear square and zapped myself.  I was hoping the wand would turn the lodestones into regular grey rocks.  It didn't but it did remove its cursed status.  Apparently the wand of cancellation removes blessed/cursed statuses! 

So long story short, the appeal to nethack is multiple sometimes creative ways to solve problems you find yourself in and the possibility of finding some new trick.

Quote
Angband is a game I like very very much (along with its predecessor Moria). It's a rather straightforward and has a very consistent theme. I also like its big levels, although many people seem to find them (and the constant need of re-exploring) boring. Angband was the game I always had in mind when beginning to code LambdaRogue in 2006 (that's why LR's levels are regenerated every time and items are more important than dungeon interaction, and why the first level is a town level).

I think the part of Angband I like is the character development.  It's fun to level up and find new cool items and artifacts.  What I *do* find frustrating is how long it takes my characters to get to the point where they die :P  Angband is the game I'm most tempted to save-scum on because I can play a character for several days before reaching the point where the monsters get too dangerous and I don't know the strategy/tactics to get further and die.  This is usually around dungeon levels 35-40.  So I'm more invested in these characters that day than in say, Nethack or Crawl, where if I die, it tends to be fairly quickly (in terms of play time).

I do like both games, although my first love is nethack.

mariodonick

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • LambdaRogue .:. roguelike RPG
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #4 on: March 27, 2010, 03:25:47 PM »
Quote
What's great is that the game seems to always allow possibility of figuring out new tricks.  ...  It didn't but it did remove its cursed status.  Apparently the wand of cancellation removes blessed/cursed statuses!

Hm ... this is surely rewarding. It all breaks down to a comparison of obstacles and means to overcome the obstacles. When I again think of LambdaRogue (sorry, folks ...), I can name just a few obstacles:

  • monsters
  • food issues
  • bad status changes, caused by monsters, gods or items
  • dead ends or otherwise bad structures in dungeons
  • need for certain potions or items in certain situations

To overcome these obstacles, the player can use

  • weapons, magic and divine assistance to kill monsters
  • food, magic and praying to fight hunger
  • potions and praying to remove bad status changes
  • digging through rock, searching for hidden doors or teleporting to leave bad dungeon areas
  • placing of rocks to build barriers against enemies
  • sacrificing items or dipping them into wells to gain other items or status changes as reward
  • digging through rock or searching crypts to find rare items
  • ... and finding and selling lots of stuff to earn enough money to buy spell upgrades, better weapons, food etc.

These are all the major game elements. Nothing similar to Nethacks "The dev team thought of everything" approach, 'cause the existing possibilities are enough to survive in LambdaRogue. When I die, it's because I am unpatient and rush through a corridor, or forget to regenerate HP and PP (= mana).

Hm ... But this might as well perceived as boring by many players ...  :-\
https://mariodonick.itch.io/lambdarogue-the-book-of-stars
-- LR: The Book of Stars graphical roguelike RPG

ywgdana

  • Newcomer
  • Posts: 33
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #5 on: March 27, 2010, 04:33:10 PM »

Hm ... this is surely rewarding. It all breaks down to a comparison of obstacles and means to overcome the obstacles. When I again think of LambdaRogue (sorry, folks ...), I can name just a few obstacles:

[snip]

These are all the major game elements. Nothing similar to Nethacks "The dev team thought of everything" approach, 'cause the existing possibilities are enough to survive in LambdaRogue. When I die, it's because I am unpatient and rush through a corridor, or forget to regenerate HP and PP (= mana).

Hm ... But this might as well perceived as boring by many players ...  :-\

That doesn't sound boring to me.  Your audience might be a little different than the people who are really focused on all the nethack trickery* but you can certainly make a fun and challenging game without those aspects.  It just changes the sort of game you are aiming to make.

A lot of people do find Angband boring, but a lot of people find nethack too weird, silly and quirky.

Darren Grey

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 2027
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • It is pitch black. You are likely to eat someone.
    • View Profile
    • Games of Grey
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2010, 07:20:33 PM »
What is it, that makes Nethack, Angband, Dungeon Crawl SS, Adom, Powder to belong to the major ones?

There are two factors.  The first is scope and complexity - these are big games developed over years with a *lot* of content and complexity and interesting things.  They all take years to truly master.

The second factor, which I think stems from the first, is the size of their communities.  They all have very active communities with dedicated wikis, forums, newsgroups, etc.  When it comes to discussions of roguelikes these are the ones that are talked about most, because these are the ones with the most players.  Of course as I said this is because they have the most complexity - they keep people attached to them for longer.

Krice

  • (Banned)
  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 2316
  • Karma: +0/-2
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #7 on: March 28, 2010, 09:06:47 AM »
What is it, that makes Nethack, Angband, Dungeon Crawl SS, Adom, Powder to belong to the major ones?

I guess they are nice games people want to play. And what makes a great game? It's really THE question any game developer should ask. When I play games I try to think what are the features that I like. Then I make them better.

getter77

  • Protector of the Temple
  • Global Moderator
  • Rogueliker
  • *****
  • Posts: 4957
  • Karma: +4/-1
    • View Profile
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #8 on: March 28, 2010, 03:26:52 PM »
Pretty much to most all of the above.  Visibility and word of mouth go a long ways....the likes of TIG pimping a game a time or so on the main page, likewise RockPaperShotgun, Bay12 forums, SomethingAwful, TalkingTime somewhat----these get the word out and tend to snowball.  I've surely thought that LambdaRogue along with the likes of MageGuild, Triangle Wizard, and Ragnarok/Valhalla simply are not as "big" as they SHOULD be due to the above combined with the little communal lightbulb just not dinging "on" for some damn reason.  Particularly Valhalla/Ragnarok as, barring some technological issues(?), is one of the Angband/Nethack era oldies that got quite a boost back in the day but then fell off the map before the big Internet Boom.  I mean, at least a "uLarn" makes so much sense and add that one to the "should be big" list assuming the development remains as brisk and successful as it has thus far.

Otherwise, getting on every possible platform, polishing most every aspect(perhaps forming a team, though it'd really depend, to wrangle the big issues actively as Stone Soup tends to) and growing as things come up is about all that can be done.  The other path though, one I never see talked about here, is for a developer to be a bit more strategic in what their game springs from aside from "just" language choice and whatnot.  In the not incredibly distant future, for example, seemingly, the likes of Chaosforge/Neko(especially), Dwarf Fortress to an extent in this regard, and the whole Doryen thing(unless things just implode somehow) will be essentially "on fire" in terms of awareness/hype and all else.  As such, and in keeping with the laws of nature, it is far easier and usually more dramatic to serve as an accelerant to an ongoing fire than to necessarily luck out on the means and knowhow to start up a blaze oneself.
Brian Emre Jeffears
Aspiring Designer/Programmer/Composer
In Training

mariodonick

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • LambdaRogue .:. roguelike RPG
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2010, 05:57:32 PM »
Quote
Visibility and word of mouth go a long ways... ... not as "big" as they SHOULD be due to ... the little communal lightbulb just not dinging "on" for some damn reason.

This is an interesting perspective indeed. And I'd really like to know what this "damn" reason might be. I think the suggestions of the other postings in this thread are all part of the truth.

Quote
The other path though, one I never see talked about here, is for a developer to be a bit more strategic in what their game springs from aside from "just" language choice and whatnot.  In the not incredibly distant future, for example, seemingly, the likes of Chaosforge/Neko(especially), Dwarf Fortress to an extent in this regard, and the whole Doryen thing(unless things just implode somehow) will be essentially "on fire" in terms of awareness/hype and all else.  As such, and in keeping with the laws of nature, it is far easier and usually more dramatic to serve as an accelerant to an ongoing fire than to necessarily luck out on the means and knowhow to start up a blaze oneself.

I don't really understand your language here ... it reads all very beautiful, but could you explain this again for a stupid non-native speaker?
https://mariodonick.itch.io/lambdarogue-the-book-of-stars
-- LR: The Book of Stars graphical roguelike RPG

Hi

  • 7DRL Reviewer
  • Rogueliker
  • *
  • Posts: 154
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2010, 06:13:02 PM »
It's easier to hype the already successful than to try to get people to play a game nobody has head of.

mariodonick

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 296
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
    • LambdaRogue .:. roguelike RPG
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2010, 06:39:06 PM »
Quote
It's easier to hype the already successful than to try to get people to play a game nobody has head of.

Ah. I see. :)
https://mariodonick.itch.io/lambdarogue-the-book-of-stars
-- LR: The Book of Stars graphical roguelike RPG

Vanguard

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 1112
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2010, 07:37:44 PM »
A lot of people do find Angband boring, but a lot of people find nethack too weird, silly and quirky.

Yes, but it doesn't matter how many people dislike them so long as a good number of people do like them.  Nethack and Angband know their audience pretty well.  Decide what your game's goals are, and what its "draw" will be, and then focus on getting those aspects as polished and complete as possible.

getter77

  • Protector of the Temple
  • Global Moderator
  • Rogueliker
  • *****
  • Posts: 4957
  • Karma: +4/-1
    • View Profile
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2010, 11:00:46 PM »
It's easier to hype the already successful than to try to get people to play a game nobody has head of.

Right, but in that case it is a bit more like making use of an existing audience.  Take Chaosforge for example:  Due primarily to somehow/luckily hitting just the right notes with DoomRL, the bounties, the new member influx, the post count---all these things have seen, and continue to see, tremendous growth.  Even more than that, the earlier/other games are now seeing attention paid to them when they were moreso skipped over beforehand like Berserk, DiabloRL, and AliensRL  I think.  They've now got an entirely new framework coming, Neko, that DoomRL2 and various other projects to come will be organized around---and the hype will continue to rise meanwhile once the fully realized Tile version of DoomRL is on the scene and all is done and opened to modding.

Choasforge is on a trajectory to become the very first Roguelike Dynasty of sorts, at least as far as I know unless one counts the myriad of *BANDS in the same league.  If somebody with skills were to be contemplating some robust RL development and wanted to minimize the chances of getting passed over, I'd surely encourage them to try and get involved with the likes Chaosforge.

I mean, common wisdom is something like "language doesn't matter much, just get things done."  right?  By that token, one might as well then pick a place already very visible and work from that "local flavor".

Oh, as to "damn reason", that's mainly my bitter old man side showing.  Unlike most here, I see a GREAT deal to this historical side of the world of Roguelikes in terms of accomplishments outright deserving preservation, merit, accolades, and so forth---not terribly unlike in import of preserving classical music, works of art, and so on.  Best example on here is my long ranting pleas about the Jaunt Trooper series situation---something ahead of its time that deserved so much more, but due to people not necessarily realizing just what they have, such things tend to fall on deaf ears.  Because Roguelikes, and videogames outright, are so very "young" in this context---even most aware people simply don't have the proper conditioning towards the subject in this way.
« Last Edit: March 28, 2010, 11:06:50 PM by getter77 »
Brian Emre Jeffears
Aspiring Designer/Programmer/Composer
In Training

Darren Grey

  • Rogueliker
  • ***
  • Posts: 2027
  • Karma: +0/-0
  • It is pitch black. You are likely to eat someone.
    • View Profile
    • Games of Grey
Re: What makes "major" roguelikes different from the smaller ones ...
« Reply #14 on: March 29, 2010, 12:35:28 AM »
Rogue had the first dynasty - there were a lot of variations and expansions made, though most are now forgotten.  Hack then had a small dynasty of its own, and so did Nethack for a while (most got integrated into the mothertitle).  Crawl has had a line of single descendents instead of a real family tree.  The *Bands obviously are the most extensive and branching of the dynasties, with the most inbreeding and the most diversity.  Chaosforge's community may be producing a new dynasty, but it's certainly not the first, nor the only modern one.  I think libtcod could spark a great dynasty if ever one of its developers produces a major game instead of faffing about with graphical effects for ages.

You're right about the communities helping the dynasties, but this has gone on for a long time, with each new title in these chains being helped by the existing community around it.  I guess it's not so bad an idea to try to latch on to an existing community to get more players interested in your game, though there are other methods (participating in the 7drl competition for instance).