Arcen Games

Games => Starward Rogue => Topic started by: tombik on October 13, 2015, 10:59:37 AM

Title: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: tombik on October 13, 2015, 10:59:37 AM
I am hearing rogue legacy like progression and roguelike word at the same time, and it itches my obsession about correct categorization.

If there is metaprogression, it does not fit in the definition of roguelike. And if it has not got grid based play, the only thing that might be common would be random generation, which does not justify selling this as a roguelike.

You guys also deceived me before in Bionic Dues, calling it mecha roguelike or something, while it was balanced for a save reload play. (I am not blaming anyone btw, I should have done my prepurchase research better). I know it has ironman option but game has so many implicit imbalances that you actually chose to make that mod as extra, not the main way to play.

Please do not call this a roguelike, if it is not. Call it roguelite. Roguelikelike. Or something.

PS: If you are more interested about why I am that freaked out with the word roguelike, there is more here:
http://steamcommunity.com/id/zulmetefza/recommended/241600/
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Aklyon on October 13, 2015, 11:12:57 AM
No offense meant, Chris, but people need to stop using the term Roguelike when referring to games that don't occupy the same design space as Stone Soup, NetHack, ToME, Angband, etc. It's getting to the point where the term is beginning to lose all meaning as a strong descriptor and that when developers use the term, it says very little to the potential customer about the style/genre of the game. If you mean permadeath with high levels of randomness, say that. That alone isn't really a genre.

I realize there are 'rogue purists' out there stomping out the whole "this isn't a rogue or rogue-lite or rogue-like' thing. But lets face it, the term means much broader things than it did before. And if you want to quickly communicate some fundamental ideas, rogue-like is a legitimate one and that while not adhering to the strict sense of the term, is still a useful broad descriptor.

W'ere sorry us 'casuals' have hijacked the term but it is what it is. And youc ant blame people for using it in its new colloquial use, rather than its previous strict purist interpretation
Until someone else replies, I'll just leave the quote here from another topic.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Misery on October 13, 2015, 11:27:46 AM
Ehhhh... Okay, I'm not supposed to reveal too much here, so I cant really say WHY I'll say this, but I do think the "roguelike" term will fit this one, based on... er... stuff.  Well, at least by my own opinion anyway, from everything I know of it so far.

I know turn-based roguelikes are, well, the "classical" types, but there are other sorts I do definitely consider to be those.... it very much depends.  One of my personal favorites, which is Isaac, I definitely consider to be one.  It's not turn-based, but absolutely everything else about it fits, and most people seem to think so as well (including the devs of the game).  Or something like Vagante (look it up if you havent seen it, it's very good) I also consider to be one, despite what it's like.  And a whole pile of others, as I have lots of these.  I mean, seriously, LOTS of these.  Both action-y and turn-based classic types.

Now, if I go to something like, say, Spelunky, then no, I dont consider that one to be of this genre.  It's definitely got some elements of it, and it's a fantastic game, but I'd really have a hard time giving it that label.  Same with Rogue Legacy; I dont see that one as a roguelike whatsoever.  It's a constant-progression Metroid-ish game with a randomized map. 

I swear, genre labels have become really subjective though in alot of ways these days.  I usually dont mind TOO much, but it is a little annoying at times.  Of course, alot of games are blending genres nowadays, so that just adds to the confusion.

Also, for what it's worth, I do consider Bionic Dues to be one as well.  I know the game doesnt have permadeath, but that's not really an absolute requirement.  A common feature, yes, but not a requirement of the genre.   Hell, even ToME defaults to having more than one life, and I cant imagine anyone saying THAT game isnt a roguelike.  Of Arcen's games though, BD is definitely the full roguelike among the group.  But with it's own unique twists.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: tombik on October 13, 2015, 11:32:22 AM
No offense meant, Chris, but people need to stop using the term Roguelike when referring to games that don't occupy the same design space as Stone Soup, NetHack, ToME, Angband, etc. It's getting to the point where the term is beginning to lose all meaning as a strong descriptor and that when developers use the term, it says very little to the potential customer about the style/genre of the game. If you mean permadeath with high levels of randomness, say that. That alone isn't really a genre.

I realize there are 'rogue purists' out there stomping out the whole "this isn't a rogue or rogue-lite or rogue-like' thing. But lets face it, the term means much broader things than it did before. And if you want to quickly communicate some fundamental ideas, rogue-like is a legitimate one and that while not adhering to the strict sense of the term, is still a useful broad descriptor.

W'ere sorry us 'casuals' have hijacked the term but it is what it is. And youc ant blame people for using it in its new colloquial use, rather than its previous strict purist interpretation
Until someone else replies, I'll just leave the quote here from another topic.

But that does not say anything about my point. The hijacked version of roguelike term does not include anything about the game itself, leaves much without any specification, so does a bad job as a word.

We use tags, categories and words for talk about things. And as the hijacked roguelike word will just imply randomized, why dont we use randomized instead? Why to cause confusion just for better marketability?

I am not a purist. I am a consumer, who has a small amount of time for my pre purchase researchs. So I really find it useful when all of the categories are well defined, and have a uniform meaning. I don't blame anyone to use the "hijacked version" wrongly.

Except the ones who are selling a game. This may lead confusion, or wrongly informed purchase decisions, and since even developers would be using a wrong term, it will cause that mistake's being even more common.

Also, for what it's worth, I do consider Bionic Dues to be one as well.  I know the game doesnt have permadeath, but that's not really an absolute requirement.  A common feature, yes, but not a requirement of the genre.   Hell, even ToME defaults to having more than one life, and I cant imagine anyone saying THAT game isnt a roguelike.  Of Arcen's games though, BD is definitely the full roguelike among the group.  But with it's own unique twists.

TOME is completely balanced for a single life run though. And afaik permadeath is the most definitive feature of roguelikes, even more so than grid basedness.

Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Misery on October 13, 2015, 11:35:16 AM
No offense meant, Chris, but people need to stop using the term Roguelike when referring to games that don't occupy the same design space as Stone Soup, NetHack, ToME, Angband, etc. It's getting to the point where the term is beginning to lose all meaning as a strong descriptor and that when developers use the term, it says very little to the potential customer about the style/genre of the game. If you mean permadeath with high levels of randomness, say that. That alone isn't really a genre.

I realize there are 'rogue purists' out there stomping out the whole "this isn't a rogue or rogue-lite or rogue-like' thing. But lets face it, the term means much broader things than it did before. And if you want to quickly communicate some fundamental ideas, rogue-like is a legitimate one and that while not adhering to the strict sense of the term, is still a useful broad descriptor.

W'ere sorry us 'casuals' have hijacked the term but it is what it is. And youc ant blame people for using it in its new colloquial use, rather than its previous strict purist interpretation
Until someone else replies, I'll just leave the quote here from another topic.

But that does not say anything about my point. The hijacked version of roguelike term does not include anything about the game itself, leaves much without any specification, so does a bad job as a word.

We use tags, categories and words for talk about things. And as the hijacked roguelike word will just imply randomized, why dont we use randomized instead? Why to cause confusion just for better marketability?

I am not a purist. I am a consumer, who has a small amount of time for my pre research purchases. So I really find it useful when all of the categories are well defined, and have a uniform meaning. I don't blame anyone to use the "hijacked version" wrongly.

Except the ones who are selling a game. This may lead confusion, or wrongly informed purchase decisions, and since even developers would be using a wrong term, it will cause that mistake's being even more solid.

Hmm, I actually think it's just because people have gotten used to it.  It's kinda baffling to me, but ALOT of gamers these days have no idea where the term "roguelike" even comes from.  They know it involves alot of random generation and permadeath, but they've never heard of the original Rogue, or even games like Nethack or anything like that.  I know a few people that are like this.  If I show them a "real" roguelike, one of the true classic types, they have no freaking clue as to what they're even looking at and may or may not declare it to be stupid. 

Yes, this is just as annoying as it sounds.

But yeah, it's become the sort of thing where it can be stuck into the description because people now just automatically associate the term with "randomized generation and possibly permadeath".  It's just an easy way to say hey, our game has these couple of specific qualities.   That it doesnt actually play like a real roguelike never seems to matter, does it...
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Coppermantis on October 13, 2015, 11:36:19 AM

You guys also deceived me before in Bionic Dues, calling it mecha roguelike or something,


Just FYI, BD is, in fact, described as a "roguelite" on its Steam store page.

Quote
Bionic Dues is a tactical, turn-based roguelite with mech customization

Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: tombik on October 13, 2015, 11:37:57 AM

You guys also deceived me before in Bionic Dues, calling it mecha roguelike or something,


Just FYI, BD is, in fact, described as a "roguelite" on its Steam store page.

Quote
Bionic Dues is a tactical, turn-based roguelite with mech customization

Thanks, then my eyesight must have betrayed me back then :)


Hmm, I actually think it's just because people have gotten used to it.  It's kinda baffling to me, but ALOT of gamers these days have no idea where the term "roguelike" even comes from.  They know it involves alot of random generation and permadeath, but they've never heard of the original Rogue, or even games like Nethack or anything like that.  I know a few people that are like this.  If I show them a "real" roguelike, one of the true classic types, they have no freaking clue as to what they're even looking at and may or may not declare it to be stupid. 

So am I really wanting too much if I want Chris to not participate this mediocrity? :)

As far as I have understood from what you are saying, there is not even that big of a list which will justify using a word to express them. Permadeath is not required, even random progression is not a must that much for some games. (Risk of Rain anyone?). So we are basically including a word to describe a game, which adds exactly nothing to our understanding of the game.

Hell, we can even call a game Blue, and it will tell more about it.

If we are not to follow the "purist" version of the word, we must realize that the non purist version is actually a blabbering marketing trick which is not descriptive.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: crazyroosterman on October 13, 2015, 11:57:34 AM

You guys also deceived me before in Bionic Dues, calling it mecha roguelike or something,


Just FYI, BD is, in fact, described as a "roguelite" on its Steam store page.

Quote
Bionic Dues is a tactical, turn-based roguelite with mech customization

Thanks, then my eyesight must have betrayed me back then :)


Hmm, I actually think it's just because people have gotten used to it.  It's kinda baffling to me, but ALOT of gamers these days have no idea where the term "roguelike" even comes from.  They know it involves alot of random generation and permadeath, but they've never heard of the original Rogue, or even games like Nethack or anything like that.  I know a few people that are like this.  If I show them a "real" roguelike, one of the true classic types, they have no freaking clue as to what they're even looking at and may or may not declare it to be stupid. 

So am I really wanting too much if I want Chris to not participate this mediocrity? :)

As far as I have understood from what you are saying, there is not even that big of a list which will justify using a word to express them. Permadeath is not required, even random progression is not a must that much for some games. (Risk of Rain anyone?). So we are basically including a word to describe a game, which adds exactly nothing to our understanding of the game.

Hell, we can even call a game Blue, and it will tell more about it.

If we are not to follow the "purist" version of the word, we must realize that the non purist version is actually a blabbering marketing trick which is not descriptive.
I wish some one would come up with a better name with this genera to stop the constant arguing over the name its not even a good name in the first place.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Aklyon on October 13, 2015, 12:01:14 PM
Its about as likely roguelike will change its name as much as moba will become a reasonable genre name.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: tombik on October 13, 2015, 12:03:29 PM
I wish some one would come up with a better name with this genera to stop the constant arguing over the name its not even a good name in the first place.

I really hope so.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: ElOhTeeBee on October 13, 2015, 12:19:32 PM
I would totally take advice on linguistics from someone who thinks "Please not market this as a roguelike if it is not" is grammatically correct.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Misery on October 13, 2015, 12:20:57 PM
I wish some one would come up with a better name with this genera to stop the constant arguing over the name its not even a good name in the first place.

I really hope so.

Aye, all of this is why these days I just dont even really look at the "genres" too much anymore when browsing Steam and whatnot.

Just simple screenshots can often tell me more about the nature of the game in question, than any stupid labels.

It's like, okay, I understand fully WHY the labels are chosen the way they are, but they really dont help so much anymore.  So for me it's screenshots, and bullet-point lists (is that what they're called?) of the game's features.   Any developer worth their salt will have those two things up, and that's all I think is truly necessary.

Ugh. Used to be so much simpler.  Back in my day, a platformer was a platformer, for instance!  Ya hopped around and jumped on Goombas, and called it a day!  And we liked it that way, dagnabit! didn't need like, an FPS and a fighting game squeezed in there too!  Bah.   And every day we walked to school uphill, in the snow, both ways, for 30 miles and... *nonsensical rambling*
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: nas1m on October 13, 2015, 12:23:32 PM
Also, for what it's worth, I do consider Bionic Dues to be one as well.  I know the game doesnt have permadeath, but that's not really an absolute requirement.  A common feature, yes, but not a requirement of the genre.
Actually it has by now - by conduct ;).
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on October 13, 2015, 12:24:28 PM
Okay, a few notes:

1. I think that, personally, the difference between "roguelite" and "roguelike" are mainly in terms of how the penalties for death are handled.  And how progression is handled. 

2. With Bionic we went with "lite" because it has a lot of progression outside of the individual levels... and the levels themselves are not really full runs anyhow.  Overall the entire campaign is kind of your run, but kind of not.  It's a mix because there's not an exact analogue there.

3. With Bionic we also went with lite because it has a back and forth strategy element to it.  Losing has consequences, but in the same sense that a strategy game does: you lose ground.  Eventually that can lead to an overall loss, but it's not a given.

Regarding Rogue Legacy:

4. I definitely view that as more of an RPG in a lot of respects given how much is based around you definitely dying and then doing another run.  And how much is revolving around stats in general.

Regarding Isaac:

5. I view that as a roguelike because you're unlocking things only based on the run you are in.  And the other things you unlock that are for cross-run are basically just making future runs more varied and interesting, or harder, or what have you.  But each run is self-contained.

Regarding Starward Rogue:

6. There's not overarching progression like BD or RL, per se.  That said, you do have an overarching objective like you do in RL or BD: in this case, repairing your ship.  And like BD, you can't do this without doing multiple runs.

7. That said, the ship repair work is more of a meta-goal between runs, and doesn't really affect individual runs much.  You also have to win runs for that to be improved.

8. Overall that provides goals for progressively harder runs, and progressively more complexity in the runs, etc.

9. The RPG elements are absent.  You can't grind stats.  This is a skill-based game, and if you can avoid taking hits you could win every run without getting any upgrades or whatever at any point (that would be incredibly tedious, though, if you never upgraded your weapons as part of a given run -- but not upgrading your health any would certainly be possible yet tense).

Regarding genre labels:

10. Overall we have to choose terms that match as closely as possible so that people have some idea of what the heck they are looking at at all.  If I tell you that a game is "blue" or "it's a game," then you have no idea what I mean.

11. If I get TOO specific to the point that you are misled, that's a problem obviously.  But I don't think most games do that.  Saying something like "this is a clone of Rogue, but minus these elements and plus those" would be really descriptive, but obviously a lie if that wasn't an accurate descriptor.  Also, the odds of a game being able to be described as "Triple Town but with a snow theme" is very... questionable.  That rarely happens with legit games.

12. Beyond that, getting as close as possible with subgenre labels that mostly-fit-but-not-completely is the best that anyone can do.  Genre labels are easy: people agree that if you are holding a gun and it's a first person view, that's a FPS game.  Although actually even the strategy and simulation labels can be contentious: what degree of simulation do you have to be before it's simulation?  How much focus has to be on strategy before it's strategy?  Anything with levels and EXP is an RPG?  Etc.

13. Subgenre labels will usually be only partly-correct unless a game does nothing that is too novel.  How realistic do the controls have to be for a game to be a legitimate flight simulator?  If I make a very arcade-y flight sim that would be accessible and fun for non-purists of that genre, but that would be a huge disappointment for someone looking for the true pilot experience, did I describe it well or poorly?  Probably the best descriptor there is "an arcade-y flight sim."

In other words, to sum up:

14. I think that devs almost never give a game a given description in order to deceive you.  That would be incredibly stupid, because unhappy customers is the last thing anyone wants -- at least if they plan on making more than one game and then disappearing into the night.

15. Describing games with the right amount of precision that people can find things that interest them means going a bit too broad sometimes.  If there are things that are kinda-sorta-roguelikes, don't you want to know about those?  I know that I do.  It's easy for me to read more about a given one and then hit Not Interested if it's not my bag.  And a ton of them aren't.  But they were definitely in the realm of what would scratch my roguelike itch, so the tag did its job.  I wasn't getting gas stations when I search for restaurants or something (thanks Yelp).

16. Overall that's kind of what it comes down to.  If I get gas stations when I look for restaurants, that's a problem.  If I get McDonalds and Ruths Chris in the same list... well, I think that's valid.  Both are restaurants, despite one being fast food (and both being an immediate "no" if I'm looking for typical medium-priced food options).  Finding Rogue Legacy in your list of roguelikes is I think like finding a Chilis and going "hey I just wanted non-chain restaurants!" or something.  I won't do them the discredit of comparing them to Micky D's.  But basically I get that you think roguelike means something a lot less mass-oriented, by the very nature of part of its definition.  So that's going to be something you just kind of have to sort through.  The alternative is that you might miss out on some really cool games every so often.

17. The other alternative, of course, is to come up with constant new genre labels.  If we say that something is a "castle intrusion upgrade" game, what the heck does that mean, though?  Is it some kind of stealth game?  What exactly am I upgrading there?  Do you mean a literal castle, or just some sort of stronghold?  And imagine being presented with another 40-such labels that you suddenly have to remember what each means.  That quickly becomes less meaningful to you than subgenre labels that only sort of fit, or fit but kind of look wonky while being worn by the game in question.

18. Or we could just do away with labels entirely and go witih two-page descriptions of every game.  But people realistically would read a line or two of that and form an initial impression based on that whether to read further a lot.  So those first lines would get more and more symbolic and jargon-y to the point that we are back to labels with then the added description that is longer.  ...Which is the system that we have now!

19. In short I think that the system we have now (as an industry) is pretty good.  New subgenres would be nice to add a bit more often than we do, perhaps.  And sometimes a game gets a bit off-categorized, but usually that opinion is not universally held on a given game.  Sometimes specific devs could do a better job of categorizing a given game.  But ideally in those instances the description text and/or bullet points helps to clear up any confusion that might result.

And... whew.  Back to work for me. ;)
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: crazyroosterman on October 13, 2015, 12:41:02 PM
Okay, a few notes:

1. I think that, personally, the difference between "roguelite" and "roguelike" are mainly in terms of how the penalties for death are handled.  And how progression is handled. 

2. With Bionic we went with "lite" because it has a lot of progression outside of the individual levels... and the levels themselves are not really full runs anyhow.  Overall the entire campaign is kind of your run, but kind of not.  It's a mix because there's not an exact analogue there.

3. With Bionic we also went with lite because it has a back and forth strategy element to it.  Losing has consequences, but in the same sense that a strategy game does: you lose ground.  Eventually that can lead to an overall loss, but it's not a given.

Regarding Rogue Legacy:

4. I definitely view that as more of an RPG in a lot of respects given how much is based around you definitely dying and then doing another run.  And how much is revolving around stats in general.

Regarding Isaac:

5. I view that as a roguelike because you're unlocking things only based on the run you are in.  And the other things you unlock that are for cross-run are basically just making future runs more varied and interesting, or harder, or what have you.  But each run is self-contained.

Regarding Starward Rogue:

6. There's not overarching progression like BD or RL, per se.  That said, you do have an overarching objective like you do in RL or BD: in this case, repairing your ship.  And like BD, you can't do this without doing multiple runs.

7. That said, the ship repair work is more of a meta-goal between runs, and doesn't really affect individual runs much.  You also have to win runs for that to be improved.

8. Overall that provides goals for progressively harder runs, and progressively more complexity in the runs, etc.

9. The RPG elements are absent.  You can't grind stats.  This is a skill-based game, and if you can avoid taking hits you could win every run without getting any upgrades or whatever at any point (that would be incredibly tedious, though, if you never upgraded your weapons as part of a given run -- but not upgrading your health any would certainly be possible yet tense).

Regarding genre labels:

10. Overall we have to choose terms that match as closely as possible so that people have some idea of what the heck they are looking at at all.  If I tell you that a game is "blue" or "it's a game," then you have no idea what I mean.

11. If I get TOO specific to the point that you are misled, that's a problem obviously.  But I don't think most games do that.  Saying something like "this is a clone of Rogue, but minus these elements and plus those" would be really descriptive, but obviously a lie if that wasn't an accurate descriptor.  Also, the odds of a game being able to be described as "Triple Town but with a snow theme" is very... questionable.  That rarely happens with legit games.

12. Beyond that, getting as close as possible with subgenre labels that mostly-fit-but-not-completely is the best that anyone can do.  Genre labels are easy: people agree that if you are holding a gun and it's a first person view, that's a FPS game.  Although actually even the strategy and simulation labels can be contentious: what degree of simulation do you have to be before it's simulation?  How much focus has to be on strategy before it's strategy?  Anything with levels and EXP is an RPG?  Etc.

13. Subgenre labels will usually be only partly-correct unless a game does nothing that is too novel.  How realistic do the controls have to be for a game to be a legitimate flight simulator?  If I make a very arcade-y flight sim that would be accessible and fun for non-purists of that genre, but that would be a huge disappointment for someone looking for the true pilot experience, did I describe it well or poorly?  Probably the best descriptor there is "an arcade-y flight sim."

In other words, to sum up:

14. I think that devs almost never give a game a given description in order to deceive you.  That would be incredibly stupid, because unhappy customers is the last thing anyone wants -- at least if they plan on making more than one game and then disappearing into the night.

15. Describing games with the right amount of precision that people can find things that interest them means going a bit too broad sometimes.  If there are things that are kinda-sorta-roguelikes, don't you want to know about those?  I know that I do.  It's easy for me to read more about a given one and then hit Not Interested if it's not my bag.  And a ton of them aren't.  But they were definitely in the realm of what would scratch my roguelike itch, so the tag did its job.  I wasn't getting gas stations when I search for restaurants or something (thanks Yelp).

16. Overall that's kind of what it comes down to.  If I get gas stations when I look for restaurants, that's a problem.  If I get McDonalds and Ruths Chris in the same list... well, I think that's valid.  Both are restaurants, despite one being fast food (and both being an immediate "no" if I'm looking for typical medium-priced food options).  Finding Rogue Legacy in your list of roguelikes is I think like finding a Chilis and going "hey I just wanted non-chain restaurants!" or something.  I won't do them the discredit of comparing them to Micky D's.  But basically I get that you think roguelike means something a lot less mass-oriented, by the very nature of part of its definition.  So that's going to be something you just kind of have to sort through.  The alternative is that you might miss out on some really cool games every so often.

17. The other alternative, of course, is to come up with constant new genre labels.  If we say that something is a "castle intrusion upgrade" game, what the heck does that mean, though?  Is it some kind of stealth game?  What exactly am I upgrading there?  Do you mean a literal castle, or just some sort of stronghold?  And imagine being presented with another 40-such labels that you suddenly have to remember what each means.  That quickly becomes less meaningful to you than subgenre labels that only sort of fit, or fit but kind of look wonky while being worn by the game in question.

18. Or we could just do away with labels entirely and go witih two-page descriptions of every game.  But people realistically would read a line or two of that and form an initial impression based on that whether to read further a lot.  So those first lines would get more and more symbolic and jargon-y to the point that we are back to labels with then the added description that is longer.  ...Which is the system that we have now!

19. In short I think that the system we have now (as an industry) is pretty good.  New subgenres would be nice to add a bit more often than we do, perhaps.  And sometimes a game gets a bit off-categorized, but usually that opinion is not universally held on a given game.  Sometimes specific devs could do a better job of categorizing a given game.  But ideally in those instances the description text and/or bullet points helps to clear up any confusion that might result.

And... whew.  Back to work for me. ;)
I guess your right but I just wish people would arguing over what to call this genera it does waste a lot of time also I generally speaking don't really look for games it tend to come across them by accident and usually I tend to try them if they look interesting enough I don't really think about what genera it is when I'm looking into a game.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Misery on October 13, 2015, 12:49:37 PM
After reading that, I'd just like to say, I'm going to call Rogue Legacy a "castle intrusion upgrade game" from now on.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on October 13, 2015, 12:54:34 PM
I do use genre as sort of a basic early partial-filter.  If something comes up with certain genres or tags then I'm automatically less interested; but with others it will get me to take a slightly closer look.  I do enough of a look in either case to satisfy myself I don't want the game, or really look into it more to see that I do.  But I'm not sure how typical I am.

After reading that, I'd just like to say, I'm going to call Rogue Legacy a "castle intrusion upgrade game" from now on.

Ahahaha. :)
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: crazyroosterman on October 13, 2015, 02:38:56 PM
I do use genre as sort of a basic early partial-filter.  If something comes up with certain genres or tags then I'm automatically less interested; but with others it will get me to take a slightly closer look.  I do enough of a look in either case to satisfy myself I don't want the game, or really look into it more to see that I do.  But I'm not sure how typical I am.

After reading that, I'd just like to say, I'm going to call Rogue Legacy a "castle intrusion upgrade game" from now on.

Ahahaha. :)
the only tag which honestly makes me avoid a game is the early access tag unless I know its finished enough to be worth buying outside the novelty of being involved in the games development.(like bro force for instance which is meant to be realising this year yippee!)
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: tombik on October 13, 2015, 02:41:19 PM
After reading that, I'd just like to say, I'm going to call Rogue Legacy a "castle intrusion upgrade game" from now on.
+1 on that.

Thanks for detailed reply Chris, I am sad for causing you to lose time :)

Still, I strongly believe that, if we categorize a game which does not have first person camera as FPS, on the pretense that "but it has all the OTHER things", this is not a good place to stand as an industry.

And no, looking through all games to eliminate for tastes without help of tags is not efficient. There are 5000 games on steam now, and indies have even less visibility.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Captain Jack on October 13, 2015, 03:33:19 PM

Still, I strongly believe that, if we categorize a game which does not have first person camera as FPS, on the pretense that "but it has all the OTHER things", this is not a good place to stand as an industry.
...But the FPSes genre is defined by the perspective, not the content. You'd have a better argument if you talked about "shooters" and how the genre's been adapted to MMOs (Gun) and RPGs (Alpha Protocol).

The problem is that the defining characteristic of the roguelike is permadeath and randomly generated levels. Unless that changes people will keep calling games with those mechaics roguelikes. RPGs are defined by experience points and level ups in the same way. (Just to be clear this isn't an invitation for you to explain exactly what a roguelike needs to be. I read your explanation already)

I think there's a much better reason to not call the game a roguelike. The genre was very popular just a few years ago so developers made a lot of them, which led to a lot of talking about them. The genre's popularity has cooled since then, meaning there's a small backlash against media coverage of all but the biggest games with stated Rogue influences, even though people still like playing all kinds of games with those elements. Not using the roguelike label could mean extra work to raise awareness though; it still a stronger genre than twin-stick shooter or shmup ever have been.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: wwwhhattt on October 14, 2015, 10:26:16 AM
I think there's a much better reason to not call the game a roguelike. The genre was very popular just a few years ago so developers made a lot of them, which led to a lot of talking about them. The genre's popularity has cooled since then, meaning there's a small backlash against media coverage of all but the biggest games with stated Rogue influences, even though people still like playing all kinds of games with those elements. Not using the roguelike label could mean extra work to raise awareness though; it still a stronger genre than twin-stick shooter or shmup ever have been.
Very much this - at least I always start to phase out whenever I read the word (even though some of them turned out to be among my favourite games). Still beats 'hardcore retro whatever' mind.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Billick on October 14, 2015, 02:13:37 PM
I like the term "procedural death labyrinth" .
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: tbrass on October 14, 2015, 06:53:38 PM
Still beats 'hardcore retro whatever' mind.

retro just means pixelated graphics, right?
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Aklyon on October 14, 2015, 07:32:34 PM
Still beats 'hardcore retro whatever' mind.

retro just means pixelated graphics, right?
how pixellated? :P
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Draco18s on October 14, 2015, 08:34:47 PM
I'll just sick in here to say that there exists a genre of game that is wholly defined by its camera angle.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Tridus on October 14, 2015, 10:16:37 PM
I'll just sick in here to say that there exists a genre of game that is wholly defined by its camera angle.

Well, they tend to categorize things a bit more than that. Skyrim, Tomb Raider, and Call of Duty are not the same genre despite sharing that camera angle.

But really, lots of genre barriers make little sense. RTS just means real time strategy, but MOBA is a different genre despite being realtime, strategic, and birthed out of an RTS. Thus, RTS also has to mean "strategy where you control lots of stuff". TBS is the same thing only turn based, and yet lots of people wouldn't call an online chess game a TBS (despite that being exactly what it is).

It's a pretty pointless argument.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Misery on October 15, 2015, 12:35:13 AM
I like the term "procedural death labyrinth" .


How about "randomized explosion factory?"

Or at least that's what I would call it, because how could I not?
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: kasnavada on October 15, 2015, 02:33:03 AM
No offense meant, Chris, but people need to stop using the term Roguelike when referring to games that don't occupy the same design space as Stone Soup, NetHack, ToME, Angband, etc. It's getting to the point where the term is beginning to lose all meaning as a strong descriptor and that when developers use the term, it says very little to the potential customer about the style/genre of the game. If you mean permadeath with high levels of randomness, say that. That alone isn't really a genre.

I realize there are 'rogue purists' out there stomping out the whole "this isn't a rogue or rogue-lite or rogue-like' thing. But lets face it, the term means much broader things than it did before. And if you want to quickly communicate some fundamental ideas, rogue-like is a legitimate one and that while not adhering to the strict sense of the term, is still a useful broad descriptor.

W'ere sorry us 'casuals' have hijacked the term but it is what it is. And youc ant blame people for using it in its new colloquial use, rather than its previous strict purist interpretation
Until someone else replies, I'll just leave the quote here from another topic.

This.

Language evolves. Diablo-like has become ARPG now. RPG more or less means "any game in which units / character have an XP bar and levels". Which is kind of silly because it means "Role-playing games" and neither role, nor playing nor game indicates XP bar and levels. But that's what it means now. Strategy is also used for games where you lead a team of 3-4 units.

Also, purists stating it's not a rogue-like while it is by the commonly accepted definition generate traffic which is good for indirect publicity.

Therefore, Chris, if it has any rogue-like elements at all, and XP bars, IMO you should feel free to call it a SHMUP ROGUE-LIKE WITH RPG ELEMENTS. or even something fancier  >D.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Shrugging Khan on October 15, 2015, 02:36:55 AM
Call it a real-time metaphor on the impermanence of consciousness.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Captain Jack on October 15, 2015, 03:20:42 AM
Call it a real-time metaphor on the impermanence of consciousness.
Goddamn it, between this and the book I'm reading it's like I'm back in philosophy class.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Pumpkin on October 15, 2015, 06:41:13 AM
I like the term "procedural death labyrinth" .
At last! Someone said it!!!
Read this! (http://www.proceduraldeathlabyrinth.com/)
This page has so many interesting links, among them the Berlin Interpretation and its critisism.

Quote
In the year 2008 several men and women came together in Berlin to create the last, best definition of a roguelike. It failed…

I wish devs and community would use the term PDL... T_T
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: wwwhhattt on October 15, 2015, 10:26:09 AM
Still beats 'hardcore retro whatever' mind.

retro just means pixelated graphics, right?
I always imagine retro means nostalgia for a past I never had, but I never get far enough to check.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Draco18s on October 17, 2015, 04:24:40 PM
It's a pretty pointless argument.

I believe that was my point.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on November 17, 2015, 12:03:41 PM
Just a heads up that folks might be interesting in a redshirts phase of the alpha, which is around now: https://www.arcengames.com/forums/index.php/topic,18148.0.html
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Pumpkin on November 17, 2015, 01:35:06 PM
I just read the description of the game on the sub-forum's description.
Quote
procedurally-generated twin-stick shooter
I love this. I feel it's much more accurate and less debate-able than the shaky "roguelike-like".

GG, Arcen.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Captain Jack on November 17, 2015, 01:37:59 PM
I just read the description of the game on the sub-forum's description.
Quote
procedurally-generated twin-stick shooter
I love this. I feel it's much more accurate and less debate-able than the shaky "roguelike-like".

GG, Arcen.
:P
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on November 17, 2015, 01:51:56 PM
I just read the description of the game on the sub-forum's description.
Quote
procedurally-generated twin-stick shooter
I love this. I feel it's much more accurate and less debate-able than the shaky "roguelike-like".

GG, Arcen.
:P

IIRC, it was indeed Watashiwa who came up with that. :D
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: steelwing on November 17, 2015, 01:57:52 PM
Just for clarification:  This game will still be playable for mouse-and-keyboard types like me, right?
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on November 17, 2015, 02:06:02 PM
Just for clarification:  This game will still be playable for mouse-and-keyboard types like me, right?

Yes, very much so.  I anticipate mostly playing this with my 360 controller and generally prefer that style of play for this style of game.  However, since I'm testing most often while I'm also using my mouse+keyboard, I'm spending more of my time with the mouse+keyboard controls by a large margin at the moment.

So... yeah.  That is a potential Very Dangerous Thing with this sort of description, because it makes it sound like you need a gamepad, when really either works equally well.  If you're average proficiency with both, the mouse+keyboard is actually superior.  But for someone who is mainly used to the gamepad, there's just as much power there as with the m+k setup, which was very important to me.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: steelwing on November 17, 2015, 02:33:50 PM
Yay!  8)  Not able to volunteer for this one, but I'm likely to buy later.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on November 17, 2015, 03:18:47 PM
No worries, and I appreciate it! :)

What sort of genre label would communicate to you what I just said, by the way?  I told you in-a-lot-of-words more or less what it is, but how would I tell you in 2-3 words? I'm really struggling with that, and twin-stick shooter is clearly conveying something very different from what it is.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Pumpkin on November 17, 2015, 04:24:49 PM
No worries, and I appreciate it! :)

What sort of genre label would communicate to you what I just said, by the way?  I told you in-a-lot-of-words more or less what it is, but how would I tell you in 2-3 words? I'm really struggling with that, and twin-stick shooter is clearly conveying something very different from what it is.
Can't we get rid of "twin-stick" and just keep "shooter"? I think "shooter" alone is enough to convey that. Or maybe "top-down shooter" or "2D shooter" to highlight the difference with First Personal, 3D shooters.

Also, with "procedurally generated" alone, I feel there is a need for the permadeath element. Maybe "procedurally generated" may be folded into "randomized" (also I prefer "procedurally generated") to make place for something like "hardcore" or "permadeath".

So here are my suggestions:
- Procedurally Generated Permadeath 2D Shooter (still too verbose, IMO)
- Randomized Ironman 2D Shooter (sounds dumbed down)
- Procedural Hardcore 2D Shooter (that kinda sounds catchy...)

The PDL tag may be risky because it's rarely seen, however it get my preference. But I understand why "nope-STFU-pumpkin!!!"
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: x4000 on November 17, 2015, 04:37:40 PM
I don't want to scare off people who think that ironman or hardcore sounds... not fun, though.  And honestly the game isn't that way any more than Rogue Legacy or similar is.  Our Darker Purpose, Isaac, etc.  Yeah each run is permadeath, but there's overall meta-progression between runs.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: Pumpkin on November 17, 2015, 04:39:24 PM
I don't want to scare off people who think that ironman or hardcore sounds... not fun, though.  And honestly the game isn't that way any more than Rogue Legacy or similar is.  Our Darker Purpose, Isaac, etc.  Yeah each run is permadeath, but there's overall meta-progression between runs.
Yeah. I miss the old true-permadeath games. But that's just me. I guess I need to enjoy this new kind of "I must gain something extrinsic" instead of trying to change it.
Title: Re: Please Not Market This As A Roguelike If It Is Not
Post by: GiftGruen on December 23, 2015, 11:01:45 PM
I think Rogue Legacy is called a "roguelike RPG". *shudder*

I have to say that Chris' arguments were very convincing for me. I'm actually put off by many of these 'purist' discussions about some word or another, because, really, it's basically complaining about 'you do not use this word the same way I do', which I find narrowminded. It's the same way with every word: It has characteristics that it shares with similar words, its synonyms. It cannot be totally expressed by only combining any of its synonyms in any short way, it always has connotations that its synonyms lack. That's when you know that word is legitimately part of our vocabulary: It's needed to fill a hole in the web of meanings and connotations the other words of our vocabulary already form, the web being spanned by meanings and connotations shared by multiple words (yeah, I'm not very good at metaphors in English, but I hope you get my point).

For me at least roguelike means an at least partly randomized world with the implication of 'positional combat', whether it be turn-based or - like in Rogue Legacy - by quickly reaching the right distance to your enemy at the right time. It also implies managing some sort of resource, possibly one like hitpoints that you can deplete either very fast with bad play or very slowly with near-perfect play. Permadeath depends on the overall balance of the game and its length. I would consider a game with really cheap deaths (I-wanna-be-the-guy-style of cheap) to be very rude to also throw permadeath in your face, while a shorter or an easier game that e.g. focuses on good long-term planning and your ability to survive with the choices you made and the things you sacrificed to gain some other advantage would really lack its main gameplay element if it didn't threaten permadeath.