Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Lectorog]

Okay, let's take a step over in this direction.
I apologize to anyone whose feelings I hurt.
Answer this clearly so we can have a decent discussion:
Why is Spelunky better labeled a roguelike than a platformer with randomly-generated levels?
To rephrase: (I think that) Spelunky should be labeled a platformer with randomly-generated levels. Why should it be labeled as a roguelike instead?

[kingfisher1112]

Okay, let's take a step over in this direction.
I apologize to anyone whose feelings I hurt.
Answer this clearly so we can have a decent discussion:
Why is Spelunky better labeled a roguelike than a platformer with randomly-generated levels?
To rephrase: (I think that) Spelunky should be labeled a platformer with randomly-generated levels. Why should it be labeled as a roguelike instead?

Because it's reminiscent of roguelikes in a way that I can't put my finger on. I guess you could say... It's got a "main quest" kind of like a roguelike, or net hack at least. You may not get it the first time, but you will eventually. Every game has different circumstances: Sorta like Nethack and how you got that incredibly powerful weapon in level 1. It's called a roguelike not by any technicality, more so by a perceived similarity.

[Pnx]

Spelunkey was originally made to be a genre shift of the roguelike, being a platformer that plays something like a roguelike with randomly generated levels, loot, permadeath, and other aspects rogeuelikes typically share.

It was built with the intention to be a platformer that has a kind of progression and feel similar to nethack with the player gaining skills and knowledge that help them make it through the game by learning about the game's mechanics and strategies.

EDIT: I'd like to point out that this is really also just a branch of the same old... old... old... old... debate.

As in the ancient Greek philosophers were arguing about "what makes a stick a stick", or "is this still Theseus's ship?"

[freeformschooler]

Why is Spelunky better labeled a roguelike than a platformer with randomly-generated levels?
To rephrase: (I think that) Spelunky should be labeled a platformer with randomly-generated levels. Why should it be labeled as a roguelike instead?

If we're going with the Berlin interpretation, for example...

Random environment generation: Yes. Best I've seen in a platformer. Kind of wish the same techniques were applied to other games.
Permadeath: Sort of has it to an extent. Yes, it's possible to eventually accumulate shortcuts. However, there is always some amount of levels you will have to traverse that must be redone if you die.
Turn-based: No. I would make an excuse that you can at least watch foes before you engage them from a safe place, but that's true of a lot of games, and there's always The Ghost.
Grid-based: Yes. Your movements aren't tile-based, but the whole game is built around a grid of blocks, each of which are the same size as you. Most of the platforming challenges in the game arise from finding a way around an impassable section of the tile grid (which, due to randomness, can totally happen). You can abuse the shape of the tile grid to take on creatures from a safe place in the same way you can cheese parts of DCSS and Angband.
Non-modal: Yes. Everything takes place in the same mode.
Complexity: Yes. The definition of Roguelike Complexity as described on that page is "the game has enough complexity to allow several solutions to common goals." This is completely true for every scenario in Spelunky, and the items you gain only increase potential solutions.
Resource management: Yes. Pretty obvious. In addition to "not die," the guns have bullets, your ropes and bombs have limited use, and you have to really ask yourself if you're going to lose more health trying to save that Indiana Jones babe than you're going to gain saving her
Hack-and-slash: Yes. Do I even need to elaborate? Most of the game is silly Castlevania hack-and-slash.
Exploration and discovery: Yes (mostly). I will admit that, once you know the level layouts, you can always head toward the general direction of the exit from the start. However, unless you're reealllyyy good at the game, exploration grants you gold, items and lots of other helpful things to make the next level less brutal.
Single player character: Yes.
Monsters are similar to the player: No. Many follow the same physics rules as the player, but they're otherwise totally different. The only enemies following the same rules are other humanoids like Shopkeepers.
Ascii Display: There's a mod for it, believe it or not
Dungeon: Yes. That's the whole game.
Numbers: Yes. The main point of the game other than getting to the end is racking up a high score. I can't remember but they MIGHT not show uses for limited-use items.

Soo... Lectorog, please tell me how this doesn't fit what plenty here consider to be the standard accepted definition of a roguelike. With so few unshared features with the rest of the genre, I'd love to hear it rebutted.

[Lectorog]

Soo... Lectorog, please tell me how this doesn't fit what plenty here consider to be the standard accepted definition of a roguelike. With so few unshared features with the rest of the genre, I'd love to hear it rebutted.

It is a roguelike under the Berlin Interpretation, or at least very close to one.

What I'm getting here is that it feels kind of like a roguelike to you guys, so you choose the most believable definition that supports your proposition.
Or perhaps the game creator said it's a roguelike, you decided to agree with him, and you decided to go with the definitions he likes (because they support his proposition).

You're (all) saying why it's close to a roguelike. You're not saying why it's not closer to a platformer with randomly generated levels.

[freeformschooler]

You're (all) saying why it's close to a roguelike.

No, we aren't "all" doing that. Some are doing the opposite.

You're not saying why it's not closer to a platformer with randomly generated levels.

Moving the goalposts, bro. You asked

Why should it be labeled as a roguelike instead?

and I answered the question. To be more specific, I gave the exact reason I think it should be labeled a roguelike instead or at least could be labeled a roguelike instead. Don't move the goalposts, please.

If you want to throw a different definition of roguelikes at me instead, please do so. I'm just using the most commonly-accepted intepretation (not the one most believable one).

[Frumple]

You're (all) saying why it's close to a roguelike. You're not saying why it's not closer to a platformer with randomly generated levels.

Spoiler: I'd guess because of all this stuff (click to show/hide)

Permadeath: Sort of has it to an extent. Yes, it's possible to eventually accumulate shortcuts. However, there is always some amount of levels you will have to traverse that must be redone if you die.
Grid-based: Yes. Your movements aren't tile-based, but the whole game is built around a grid of blocks, each of which are the same size as you. Most of the platforming challenges in the game arise from finding a way around an impassable section of the tile grid (which, due to randomness, can totally happen). You can abuse the shape of the tile grid to take on creatures from a safe place in the same way you can cheese parts of DCSS and Angband.
Non-modal: Yes. Everything takes place in the same mode.
Complexity: Yes. The definition of Roguelike Complexity as described on that page is "the game has enough complexity to allow several solutions to common goals." This is completely true for every scenario in Spelunky, and the items you gain only increase potential solutions.
Resource management: Yes. Pretty obvious. In addition to "not die," the guns have bullets, your ropes and bombs have limited use, and you have to really ask yourself if you're going to lose more health trying to save that Indiana Jones babe than you're going to gain saving her
Hack-and-slash: Yes. Do I even need to elaborate? Most of the game is silly Castlevania hack-and-slash.
Exploration and discovery: Yes (mostly). I will admit that, once you know the level layouts, you can always head toward the general direction of the exit from the start. However, unless you're reealllyyy good at the game, exploration grants you gold, items and lots of other helpful things to make the next level less brutal.
Single player character: Yes.
Ascii Display: There's a mod for it, believe it or not
Dungeon: Yes. That's the whole game.
Numbers: Yes. The main point of the game other than getting to the end is racking up a high score. I can't remember but they MIGHT not show uses for limited-use items.

F'me, the resource management, permadeath, learning progression/progression in general, multiple means of approaching most of the problems encountered, and just general feel of it puts Spelunky closer to roguelike than platformer. When I think platformer, I think Mario more than I think Castlevania (that falls into its own Metroidvania niche), and Spelunky is closer to the latter with additional roguelike trappings (permadeath, randomization, particular styling of resource management). Yeah, Mario -- platformers in general --has some limited resource management, but it's rarely strongly needed, usually doesn't have permadeath, rarely has multiple means of approaching a problem, etc., so forth, so on. Spelunky shares too many roguelike trappings to be considered just a "platformer with random levels". Which is kinda' why it's fairly well agreed (from what I've seen in the roguelike community) to be a roguelike platformer.

[freeformschooler]

Yeah, Mario -- platformers in general --has some limited resource management, but it's rarely strongly needed, usually doesn't have permadeath, rarely has multiple means of approaching a problem, etc., so forth, so on. Spelunky shares too many roguelike trappings to be considered just a "platformer with random levels". Which is kinda' why it's fairly well agreed (from what I've seen in the roguelike community) to be a roguelike platformer.

Also this.

It's basically the reason Gentrieve 2 is considered a roguelike even though it has some major platforming gameplay.

[Lectorog]

By saying "all" I meant to clarify that I was responding to all three posts since my last one, rather than responding only to you (freeformschooler).

You're giving reasons it can or should be labeled as a roguelike, not reasons it should be labeled as a roguelike instead of a platformer with randomly generated levels.

I wasn't aware that the Berlin Interpretation is the most commonly-accepted. I really don't think it's a good definition. Rather than explain why I don't think it's a good definition, I think it would be clearer to propose a possible definition I currently agree with:
- dungeon crawler
- lack of conventional or convenient save system
- replayable [edit:] due to randomized elements

When I think platformer, I think Mario more than I think Castlevania (that falls into its own Metroidvania niche)

Metroidvania is a type of platformer. AFAIK you can't have a metroidvania that isn't a platformer. Castlevania is a platformer, even if it has other elements that Mario doesn't.

[freeformschooler]

You're giving reasons it can or should be labeled as a roguelike, not reasons it should be labeled as a roguelike instead of a platformer with randomly generated levels.

Okay. Here's your answer to that: it can be labeled a platformer with randomly generated levels. Totally can be labeled that. Because that is a part of Spelunky. You run and jump, and there are randomly generated levels. You try not to die. That's part of it.

However, "randomly generated platformer" doesn't describe anything beyond that. There are LOTS of games labeled platformers. The most common accepted feature of a platformer is you run and maybe jump across platform to platform. That doesn't describe all of Spelunky's features. Roguelike describes them better. Roguelike doesn't describe all possible features of every roguelike, but it does describe most of the features of Spelunky aside from the fact that you run and jump.

I am willing to concede that you do not run and jump in a lot of Roguelikes. That's totally true. You don't have non-dungeon levels in a lot of roguelikes. That's also true, but they are a VERY prominent feature in ZAngband, ADOM and a couple other roguelikes. Repeat for any other non-standard, standout feature of a roguelike game that is widely accepted as a roguelike.

[Frumple]

You're giving reasons it can or should be labeled as a roguelike, not reasons it should be labeled as a roguelike instead of a platformer with randomly generated levels.

Um, no, we're giving reasons Spelunky should be labeled as a roguelike platformer instead of a platformer with randomly generated levels. Since it's notably more than just a platformer with randomly generated levels.

I wasn't aware that the Berlin Interpretation is the most commonly-accepted. I really don't think it's a good definition. Rather than explain why I don't think it's a good definition, I think it would be clearer to propose a possible definition I currently agree with:
- dungeon crawler
- lack of conventional or convenient save system
- replayable [edit:] due to randomized elements

There's more than one obviously!roguelike that violate one of those first two. There's that java based one whose name I'm forgetting that's largely story/plot driven for the former (and possibly the gearhead games, which are largely mission based instead of dungeon crawl), and something like dreadmor for the latter, as examples. There's more than that, of course. With Spelunky in particular, the only one that's not covered is the dungeon crawler (and then only if you're referring more to the RPG style than literal crawling through dungeons, which Spelunky does do).

Metroidvania is a type of platformer. AFAIK you can't have a metroidvania that isn't a platformer. Castlevania is a platformer, even if it has other elements that Mario doesn't.

And a dungeon crawl is a type of RPG, but is generally (and often appropriately) considered its own sort of thing.

[Lectorog]

Let's see which elements of the Berlin Interpretation can be applied to a platformer and are thus irrelevant to this discussion. (Berlin Interpretation may be shortened to BI in the following.)
- Random environment generation: obviously an integral part of the conversation
- Permadeath: Its role in platformers depends on your interpretation of permadeath. Typically, when you die you have to restart the level. Note that the shortcuts of Spelunky move it closer to the traditional level-by-level checkpoint system of platformers than the traditional complete restart of roguelikes. However, Spelunky does have gear you lose upon death. Pure platformers don't have an emphasis on gear collection while roguelikes do, putting Spelunky closer to roguelikes there. One for, one against.
- Turn-based: not applicable to Spelunky
- Grid-based: Very common in platformers.
- Non-modal: Platformers don't enter into separate modes as an integral part of the game.
- Complexity: "enough complexity to allow several solutions to common goals": Common in platformers. Some platformers require precise timing for jumps throughout, but others allow leeway, choosing to destroy or avoid enemies, multiple paths, the options to interact with objects, etc. "Strongly connected to having one mode" is true for platformers. "Item/monster and item/item interactions" are generalized to player/environment interactions, which may or may not include items and/or monsters. You could nitpick that this isn't a part of platformers, but under those exact criteria it isn't an integral part of roguelikes either.
- Resource management: Very common in platformers. (Heavy example: The power-up box in Mario games)
- Hack'n'Slash: Spelunky is no more hack'n'slash than many platformers.
- Exploration and Discovery: Limited exploration and discovery is present in (almost) every platformer. Any more than standard in Spelunky comes from its random environment generation, which isn't being contested.
- Single player character: Very common in platformers.
- Monsters are similar to players: not applicable to Spelunky
- Tactical challenge: broken up
-- "You have to learn about the tactics before you can make any significant progress.": Definitely in platformers. Tied heavily to complexity (as defined in the BI), which I have established as a part of platformers.
-- "This process repeats itself, i.e. early game knowledge is not enough to beat the late game.": Definitely in platformers. The environment changes dramatically as most platformers progress, introducing new level designs that may include new enemies, obstacle types, etc. What you know about timing, risks, and similar previously don't apply to the new situations.
-- "The game's focus is on providing tactical challenges (as opposed to strategically working on the big picture, or solving puzzles).": The focus in platformers is not on tactical challenges. However, platformers typically have about as much tactical challenge as roguelikes. Neither has more of the other in "working on the big picture or solving puzzles".
- ASCII display: If anyone here believes ASCII display is integral to roguelikes, rather than a common aspect, please come out now. The consensus here seems to be that ASCII vs other tile display has no influence on the roguelike classification.
- Dungeons: The dungeon theme of Spelunky can easily be present in a platformer, and is in plenty.
- Numbers: "The numbers used to describe the character (hit points, attributes etc.) are deliberately shown.": I don't know of a platformer in which this isn't present.

In summary:
The following are irrelevant to the Spelunky roguelike platformer vs. non-roguelike platformer debate:
 - random environment generation, turn-based, hack'n'slash*, monsters are similar to players, ASCII display
The following cannot be used to argue that Spelunky has more roguelike elements than a standard platformer because they are acceptable, if not common, parts of any pure platformer:
 - permadeath**, grid-based, non-modal, complexity, resource management, hack'n'slash*, exploration and discovery, single player character, tactical challenge, dungeons, numbers
The following are defined in the BI and are not typically seen in platformers, but are present in Spelunky:
 - [none]

* If you say Spelunky is hack'n'slash, then so are many platformers, putting it in the second list. If you say Spelunky isn't hack'n'slash, then it goes in the first list. Hack'n'slash isn't well enough defined for me to definitively say whether or not Spelunky is hack'n'slash, but comparison is valid enough.
** Spelunky does have permadeath. Spelunky does not have the same type of permadeath that is common to roguelikes. Spelunky does have a checkpoint or level progress system. Spelunky does not have the same type of checkpoint or level progress system that is common to platformers. Therefore, I propose that the most accurate term for Spelunky is "platformer with randomly generated levels and a unique death system".

LET THE MOST CIVIL DEBATE COMMENCE

There's that java based one whose name I'm forgetting that's largely story/plot driven for the former, and something like dreadmor for the latter, as examples.

You can have story drive a dungeon crawl, if that's what you mean. And I wouldn't consider Dungeons of Dredmor to be a roguelike with permadeath turned off.

Metroidvania is a type of platformer. AFAIK you can't have a metroidvania that isn't a platformer. Castlevania is a platformer, even if it has other elements that Mario doesn't.

And a dungeon crawl is a type of RPG, but is generally (and often appropriately) considered its own sort of thing.

RPG is a dreadful term that would complicate things drastically to discuss now. Regardless of the metroidvania platformer status, I did not include any related genres or subgenres (including metroidvania) in the above breakdown, only traditional platformers. The Super Mario games are probably the most extreme example needed to back up the breakdown, and I'm pretty sure everyone agrees that the Super Mario games are firmly platformers and nothing more or less (barring custom and special levels, of course).

[alexandertnt]

I dont know if many people are actually trying to argue that Spelunky is more roguelike than platformer per se. I would argue that it is irrelevant and difficult to quantify, It felt like both a roguelike and a platformer to me.

Still, many of your points completely miss the specific implementation of the features. It is possible to have more "roguelike" resource management mechanics and more "platformer" resource management mechanics. I think shoehorning general game mechanics into specific categories and comparing the lengths of the resulting lists is a pretty poor way to come to any meaningful conclusion.

(Mario's "power-up box" is resource management comparable to roguelikes?? Really?)

[Criptfeind]

I don't think the check point system should really be taken into effect if you are actually trying to seriously classify splunky. I don't know if everyone will agree with this, but I put forward that, yes it exists, no it's not really seriously part of the game. It's just a thing to play around with and to give people very new to the game something to look forward to other then a hundred more deaths before their win. I don't think anyone seriously says "I beat Splunky. The game. Beaten. By me." If they win using the check point system. Additionally, and this is a point I sorta think most people who have played enough of Splunky of will actually agree with, it's not actually a progression system. It's just the illusion of progression for, lets be honest, people who are not that great at the game. Skipping the easy levels, levels where you can get a lot more items and consumables a lot easier, and the only way to get the best item in the game... With even a moderate level of skill using the check points makes the game harder actually. Especially the last two worlds. Which are both totally trivial with items and very hard without. It's only at a very very low level of skill where you are practically relying on blind luck to make it though do the check points actually help you any.

[puke]

My favorite part of the Berlin Interpretation is that it allows for any or none of its listed criteria to be present in any given rogue-like game.  So, according to that, this forum post is equally valid as being a rouge-like game.  I feel more roguish for having posted it.