Print

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

[Zasir]

The Berlin International Roguelike Development Conference has issued a redefinition of the term "roguelike":

=High value factors==

====Random environment generation====
The game world is randomly generated in a way that increases replayability. Appearance and placement of items is random. Appearance of monsters is fixed, their placement is random. Fixed content (plots or puzzles or vaults) removes randomness.

====Permadeath====
You are not expected to win the game with your first character.  You start over from the first level when you die.  (It is possible to save games but the savefile is deleted upon loading.)  The random environment makes this enjoyable rather than punishing.

====Turn-based====
Each command corresponds to a single action/movement.  The game is not sensitive to time, you can take your time to choose your action.

====Grid-based====
The world is represented by a uniform grid of tiles.  Monsters (and the player) take up one tile, regardless of size.

====Non-modal====
Movement, battle and other actions take place in the same mode.  Every action should be available at any point of the game. Violations to this are ADOM's overworld or Angand's and Crawl's shops.

====Complexity====
The game has enough complexity to allow several solutions to common goals. This is obtained by providing enough item/monster and item/item interactions and is strongly connected to having just one mode.

====Resource management====
You have to manage your limited resources (e.g. food, healing potions) and find uses for the resources you receive.

====Hack'n'slash====
Even though there can be much more to the game, killing lots of monsters is a very important part of a roguelike.  The game is player- vs-world: there are no monster/monster relations (like enmities, or
diplomacy).

====Exploration and discovery====
The game requires careful exploration of the dungeon levels and discovery of the usage of unidentified items. This has to be done anew every time the player starts a new game.

==Low value factors==
====Single player character====
The player controls a single character. The game is player-centric, the world is viewed through that one character and that character's death is the end of the game.

====Monsters are similar to players====
Rules that apply to the player apply to monsters as well. They have inventories, equipment, use items, cast spells etc.

====Tactical challenge====
You have to learn about the tactics before you can make any significant progress.  This process repeats itself, i.e. early game knowledge is not enough to beat the late game.  (Due to random environments and permanent death, roguelikes are challenging to new players.)

The game's focus is on providing tactical challenges (as opposed to strategically working on the big picture, or solving puzzles).

====ASCII display====
The traditional display for roguelikes is to represent the tiled world by ASCII characters.

====Dungeons====
Roguelikes contain dungeons, such as levels composed of rooms and corridors.

====Numbers====
The numbers used to describe the character (hit points, attributes etc.) are deliberately shown.

To me, it appears that Dwarf Fortress fits firmly within this redefinition as a roguelike game, the only significant exceptions being a lack of unknown items requiring discovery and a lack of dungeons in the traditional sense.

The IRDC post may be found at http://www.roguetemple.com/forums/index.php?topic

[Neonivek]

what a coincidence that non-pernament death exempts you from being a Roguelike... I hope this doesn't become the official definition because that could cause a steamline of the Genre just like WoW did with MMORPGs or Final Fantasy did with JRPGs.

I am not happy about this definition (I had a rant about this but deleted it)

[inaluct]

I think the IRDC should STFU and get back to making games.

WE PAY YOUR SALARY

[Jude]

The definition of Roguelikes is quite good. It leaves out something that seems so obvious that it's almost not necessary to list.....except when people try to use its absence to say this definition makes Dwarf Mode a roguelike.


The most important of a roguelike, not mentioned because it's a no-brainer....is that the game is LIKE ROGUE.


DF is not a roguelike. Adventure mode, kind of. Dwarf Mode (which is the real meat of the game) nowhere near.

[Muz]

DF counts as a roguelike under that description. It's got dungeons too in adventure mode.. they're just not so randomly generated.. and I haven't lived long enough in adventure mode to find monsters. DF does break the "numbers" rule.. most of the stats and stuff avoid numbers. It also breaks the "non-modal" one.

Which gets me thinking.. the one about roguelikes being ASCII, using numbers, and being non-modal is stupid. I am not happy about this description either. All the "roguelikes" I like are no longer so roguelike.

[Tormy]

DF is not a roguelike. Adventure mode, kind of. Dwarf Mode (which is the real meat of the game) nowhere near.

I agree. In fact there was a topic before, and some of us were arguing about this. Not that it matters. What matters is: DF is an awesome game. 

[McDoomhammer]

The definition of Roguelikes is quite good. It leaves out something that seems so obvious that it's almost not necessary to list.....except when people try to use its absence to say this definition makes Dwarf Mode a roguelike.


The most important of a roguelike, not mentioned because it's a no-brainer....is that the game is LIKE ROGUE.


DF is not a roguelike. Adventure mode, kind of. Dwarf Mode (which is the real meat of the game) nowhere near.

Words change in meaning over time.  the term "Roguelike" originally meant just that, but now there are enough of them for it to be a genre in itself.  The genre has diversified enough that it's perfectly possible to be part of the genre without actually being like Rogue- unfortunately, we have no other term for it.  You can't really expect the progress of game development to respect semantics.  Regardless of the literal meaning, plenty of people, me included, will continue to call DF a Roguelike.

Or to put it another way, Team Fortress 2 is an FPS.  It isn't really anything like, say, Wolfenstein 3D or Doom, but if the random machinations of fate had conspired to have the genre referred to as "Doomlike", that's what we'd call Team Fortress because it fits, sure enough.  (No arguments about the similarities between TF2 and W3D, please, it's an example- just substitute MOO3, Civilisation and Turn-Based Strategy or whatver.)

Incidentally, I'm sure I've seen elves and orcs fighting in Nethack.  Does that mean it's not a Roguelike?

[Mr.Person]

The only Roguelikes I can think of offhand that fit that description are Hack and Nethack. Hack had a starting shop (Rogue might of too, I forget)

You know a definition is bad when the best games in the genre are specifically mentioned as left out.

The worst part about this shitty definition is this

====Grid-based====
The world is represented by a uniform grid of tiles.  Monsters (and the player) take up one tile, regardless of size.

This is just trying to limit game designers. This is being stuck in the past. The only reason they disallow multitile creatures is because they look terrible in an ascii interface. Speaking of which, even though they put it as a lesser thing, they shouldn't have mentioned that either. Another example of a morons accidently limiting designers. The sooner there's a new definition, the better.

[Neonivek]

There have even been multiple tile monsters in other Roguelikes such as IVAN and if Dwarf Fortress counts, which it does by popular oppinion, the Wagons count as well.

[Sean Mirrsen]

Dwarf Fortress is close to being my definition of an "Unroguelike", that is, a game containing all the basic gameplay-important elements of a roguelike (this list works for that), but not being a "roguelike" per se, meaning it's not so much a game about having a specific global goal and fulfilling it, but rather being a freeform sandbox in which you can do anything you want to do. And yes, I also disagree that roguelikes "have" to be single-mode, or have every creature be of same size.

[Jude]

I'm still baffled by how people can't see the basic fundamental difference between Fortress Mode and a Roguelike. It's so obvious I almost can't explain it.

Adventure mode is a somewhat unusual one in a lot of senses, but you can safely call it one. But Fort mode? No.

But like the guy said, this is a retarded thing to argue about.

[McDoomhammer]

What else are we supposed to call it... a DungeonKeeperLike?  A fantasy sim?  An RPG?  An RTS?  All ether cumbersome or inaccurate.  My point, as a student of linguistics, is that you can't control language use or semantic change.  Look at what happened to the word 'gay'.  The fact is that "Roguelike", the noun, is no longer necessarily synonymous with 'Rogue-like', the adjective.

You're right, it is a silly thing to argue about.  Somehow your insistence that the meaning of the word is set in stone and everyone else ought to respect your idea of the definition just irks me.  Same goes for the original post.

[Jude]

What else are we supposed to call it... a DungeonKeeperLike?  A fantasy sim?  An RPG?  An RTS?  All ether cumbersome or inaccurate.

While none of those descriptions are quite accurate, they're far closer to what DF is than "Roguelike" if you're trying to convey what DF is. If you hear "Roguelike" you're going to think along the lines of Angband, Nethack...Rogue. DF has some things - mostly mechanical ones - in common with that genre, but in terms of the basic gameplay, it's a different thing altogether.

Anyway I promised myself I wouldn't get into anymore bickering about this , so I'm done.

[Zasir]

I don't think that the IRDC meant for their list of attributes to be an inflexible definition for the genre.  Even within the list in the original post, exceptions such as Angband, which is doubtless a roguelike (and rogue-like), are noted.  Certainly, such a genre-bending game as DF is impossible to definatively pigeon hole.  The advantage to being termed a roguelike comes from the community that is associated with it.  When DF was first released, I only discovered it because it was referenced within the roguelike community.

So, how about Liberal Crime Squad?  It was definitely considered a roguelike game when it was released, but it's not very rogue-like at all.  Likewise, Gearhead, the giant robot roguelike, only fits loosely within the genre.

Anyway, I prefer to see DF categorized as a roguelike than as an RTS as I've seen elsewhere on this forum.
     

[Tormy]

What else are we supposed to call it... a DungeonKeeperLike?  A fantasy sim?  An RPG?  An RTS? 

What about "THE game", or "masterpiece". We don't have to compare DF to any other games. We don't have to find a genre for it. This game is unique.