3 ms·
I don't think most roguelike players would describe those games as roguelikes, though. The quintessential roguelikes are Nethack, Moria, Angband and AdoM. You'
by mcv 4y ago
I don't think most roguelike players would describe those games as roguelikes, though.
The quintessential roguelikes are Nethack, Moria, Angband and AdoM. You're a @ fighting monsters represented by other ascii characters, in an environment (usually a dungeon, though AdoM expanded that) represented by ascii characters. Procedurally generated, turn-based, super deadly, very tactical, with an almost infinite amount of stuff you can find, use, or do. Playing all the way through the end is nearly impossible, would take many hours on a single run, but years to learn and master the game to the point that you can actually make it that far in a single run.
I can understand adding some graphics to the game (though I'm personally not a fan of that), and AdoM certainly showed how the genre can be stretched from a single dungeon to a landscape with multiple very different dungeons, but the further you move away from this core, the less roguelike the game becomes. Because it simply becomes less like the original game rogue (which nobody seems to have played).
I suppose 'roguelite' is a more suitable name for games that take some of the roguelike elements but not all of them, and make it into something completely different.
- socialismisok 4y agoI play roguelikes like Hades. If you asked Hades players "is Hades a roguelike" I think most would say yes. Language evolves. Rogue, Nethack, Angband, etc are now just a type of roguelike.
- dolni 4y agoWhy do you think a group of people who never played a roguelike (a term with an established meaning for decades) should be the ones to redefine what a term means? The only people who use "roguelike" so loosely are people who never knew what it meant in the first place.
- socialismisok 4y agoAh, the No True Scotsman. You seem to be under the (imo mistaken) impression that language is prescriptive. The idea that we define a term and then people will either use it "correctly" or gave stigma for being wrong. Imo, language is descriptive - people use a word a certain way and the definition evolves to meet that usage. Just like how "literally" means "figuratively" in some contexts. You might feel that's wrong, but fundamentally the language is being used that way.
- anthk 4y agoI declare Tetris a platform game like Super Mario Bros. It's a multiplatform game with millions of ports, right?
- socialismisok 4y agoGreat. When a huge community agrees with you, I'm happy to update my mental language model.
- dolni 4y agoWords can't just mean what anybody wants, whenever they want. Otherwise communication becomes impossible. Define roguelike. You tell me what you think it means, and we will see if that definition is applied with consistency. > Just like how "literally" means "figuratively" in some contexts. You might feel that's wrong, but fundamentally the language is being used that way. Congratulations, you have discovered sarcasm. The meaning of literally is not different because people employ sarcasm. It means that they are being sarcastic. You literally can't be sarcastic if a word like "literally" doesn't have an agreed upon meaning.
- socialismisok 4y agoLiterally isn't always used in a sarcastic tone. "That was like, literally the biggest breakfast anyone has ever eaten!" Means it was a very large breakfast. And words can change meaning to whatever is understandable. Definitions follow usage, not the other way around. Merriam Webster didn't write "yeet" down and then a bunch of teens started using it.
- dolni 4y agoSo do you actually have a definition for roguelike, or no?
- jabits 4y agoInstead of repeatedly stating language is not prescriptive, just state your definition of a rogue like please…