Rogue Like - Not Excited

[Grifman]

Was very excited about this but too bad this is a rogue like with one save. My game time is limited and I don't have time for multiple play throughs to learn all the tricks. Not sure I will be picking his one up.

[ProbablyRichard]

It's a roguelike, but it's a much fairer one than most. We're trying to avoid 'lol, death' moments for instance, and full run-throughs are a few hours. It helps a lot that you're pushing towards a specific target rather than just dropped into the middle of the universe, with replayability intended as a key part of the experience - even if you find the same situation, you'll have different ways to deal with it each game. At heart though it's important that decisions made have weight to them - that when a crewmember is lost, they're gone, that an accidental diplomatic snafu isn't just a case of going "Whoops, reload," but something to try and live with and handle.

Basically, if you want to just race through and mark it as 'done', it might not be your game. But individual runs are intended to respect the amount of time you have available, and we're aiming to be fair in terms of difficulty and the encounters you have. Some runs *will* be harder than others depending on which aliens are around, and certainly you can have bad luck where someone will just decide they don't like you and decide to blow you out of the sky just for existing. Overall though, we think you'll find it the kind of roguelike where the limits add tension rather than just allowing unfair, out of nowhere death designed to wipe out your progress.

[Tex Murphy]

Originally posted by ProbablyRichard:

It's a roguelike, but it's a much fairer one than most. We're trying to avoid 'lol, death' moments for instance, and full run-throughs are a few hours. It helps a lot that you're pushing towards a specific target rather than just dropped into the middle of the universe, with replayability intended as a key part of the experience - even if you find the same situation, you'll have different ways to deal with it each game. At heart though it's important that decisions made have weight to them - that when a crewmember is lost, they're gone, that an accidental diplomatic snafu isn't just a case of going "Whoops, reload," but something to try and live with and handle.

Basically, if you want to just race through and mark it as 'done', it might not be your game. But individual runs are intended to respect the amount of time you have available, and we're aiming to be fair in terms of difficulty and the encounters you have. Some runs *will* be harder than others depending on which aliens are around, and certainly you can have bad luck where someone will just decide they don't like you and decide to blow you out of the sky just for existing. Overall though, we think you'll find it the kind of roguelike where the limits add tension rather than just allowing unfair, out of nowhere death designed to wipe out your progress.

That sounds awesome to me! I hope to not easily die just due to doing a poor job of piloting a spacecraft. With Richard doing the writing, I know that the narrative aspects will be fantastic!

[ProbablyRichard]

Fingers crossed :-)

Just on the piloting thing - if you fly into a planet or the sun then you take damage and the crew will be hurt, but it's probably not going to kill you (the ship goes into auto-pilot to try and fly around). As for the Lander, dunk it in lava or keep smashing it into rocks and yeah, it'll explode and kill the pilot (though it's pretty sturdy, and scanning planets will tell you which ones are probably best avoided), but there are ways of getting more Landers and you have four crew.

[Tex Murphy]

Awesome! I look forward to exploring planets and moons that have tons of scary storms, lively lightning, cool quakes, fierce winds, wild waves, and violent volcanos spewing up lava or ice into space! It would be great to find a moon like Io, with lava being spewed up into space, or a moon like Enceladus, supplying some of Saturn's rings through its volcanoes.

[Radioactive]

As much as I disagree with the notion of dismissing a game purely because it describes itself as "rogue like", I have to admit that Grifman has a point. So long as the game doesn't go out of its way to to screw you over (like some rogue like games like to do), I personally don't have an issue with it being a single life, rogue like experience.

That being said... Why not to make a hardcore difficulty setting? I can't see a single reason why you couldn't add a softcore/casual or hardcore difficulty choice at the start of a playthrough, with the former allowing as many saves you wish.

As far as achievements go... well, for one they hardly matter. Secondly, if you'd prefer to encourage the hardcore difficulty, do what Paradox does, block achievements from triggering when you're not picking the hardcore choice.

[ProbablyRichard]

The basic reason is that it takes all the tension out of things. It's not about easy/difficulty or being hardcore. It's about things like damage, and making decisions out of desperation. It's about death not just meaning a restart, but a whole new universe of opportunities. It's about the micro-decisions that saves just completely negate, like whether you can risk responding to a distress call, or the satisfaction of pulling a miracle. Simply hitting a save, or going "Whoops, never mind"... you just wouldn't have the same experience. Really. You'd enjoy it far, far less. That's not something that can be said for all roguelike games (Sunless Sea for instance, I entirely recommend playing with manual saves) but it's definitely true here.

But as said, don't get too caught up on 'roguelike = hardcore'. One mistake isn't typically going to kill you, and that includes flying into the sun (it's not GOOD for you, but...) It's more about the accumulation of damage, the results of your decisions, and having loss being temperered with the chance to head back in and find lots more cool stuff as well as be better informed.

[Radioactive]

Originally posted by ProbablyRichard:

The basic reason is that it takes all the tension out of things. It's not about easy/difficulty or being hardcore. It's about things like damage, and making decisions out of desperation. It's about death not just meaning a restart, but a whole new universe of opportunities. It's about the micro-decisions that saves just completely negate, like whether you can risk responding to a distress call, or the satisfaction of pulling a miracle. Simply hitting a save, or going "Whoops, never mind"... you just wouldn't have the same experience. Really. You'd enjoy it far, far less. That's not something that can be said for all roguelike games (Sunless Sea for instance, I entirely recommend playing with manual saves) but it's definitely true here.

But as said, don't get too caught up on 'roguelike = hardcore'. One mistake isn't typically going to kill you, and that includes flying into the sun (it's not GOOD for you, but...) It's more about the accumulation of damage, the results of your decisions, and having loss being temperered with the chance to head back in and find lots more cool stuff as well as be better informed.

Fair enough. In any case I look forward to the launch of the game.

[darrell999]

+1 from someone who despises rogue-like play.
The player should have options to play the game however he wants.

Please consider "rogue/one-save" as a hard option, and "save as many times as you want whenever you want" as an option for those who want that.
When people have OPTIONS, then everyone's happy.

[Andi]

Richard said most of it already but I have the urge to comment on that topic too.

There is a lot discussion what aspects are important to be a "rogue-like" I like this one:
http://www.proceduraldeathlabyrinth.com

For us are two aspects important:

When you want to feel lost you should know the way home -> generated play field

When you want to have decisions with impact and being a REAL decision -> only one save, can't go back and correct your decision because you didn't like the outcome.

What we don't want and need is: random death. We want that your decisions matter so there need to be consequences. And yes, sometimes hard consequences. But when you want to give freedom to the player, there should always be enough ways to overcome a rough time.

So at the end some purist might say we are not a rogue-like and I think it is not important what category we fall in as long as we achieve to make stun game.

You might get a better idea from a video and an interview I gave during E3.
https://youtu.be/MxqBU9RxZiY

Or when you are from the Seattle area come to the PAX and I let you play *nervous twitching eye*

[AxxessDenied]

Grifman I don't understand why you even posted if you don't plan on buying it.... must it be known that you don't prefer that it is rogue like and now you aren't going to purchase it? Thanks for letting everyone know.. we DON'T care. Why post at all if you can't say something nice. Sheesh, gamers these days expect too much. I remember when games weren't about the graphics or about the way it was made.. all that mattered is that it was fun and engaging. Why make a point to the devs that you will not be picking up the game because it's not your style? Oh, hurry up devs! Change the style of the game so Grifman will buy it!

[KnightRat 17]

Originally posted by ALot2Swallow:

Grifman I don't understand why you even posted if you don't plan on buying it.... must it be known that you don't prefer that it is rogue like and now you aren't going to purchase it? Thanks for letting everyone know.. we DON'T care. Why post at all if you can't say something nice. Sheesh, gamers these days expect too much. I remember when games weren't about the graphics or about the way it was made.. all that mattered is that it was fun and engaging. Why make a point to the devs that you will not be picking up the game because it's not your style? Oh, hurry up devs! Change the style of the game so Grifman will buy it!

I think it should be made to the way Grifman wants. As a matter of fact we should only speak when Grifman deems it necessary. I kid

In all seriousness I think what Grifman was saying is that this game is everything he wanted but the rogue part puts a damper on it and he is hoping there can be an option not to play it that way.

My 5 cents is that this will be a short play through so the rogue part won't interfere. I think developers do this because there wouldn't be enough content to have a 20 hr game. Reminds me of into the stars, hopefully without the pitfalls.

[ProbablyRichard]

No need to be mean. Everyone has their own tastes.

Ironically, roguelikes need *more* content than a linear game, since they have to keep players interested for game after game after game rather than just worrying about filling X hours, rolling the credits and everyone moving on. In the case of TLJH for instance, only half the main empires appear in any playthrough, which means more quests needed overall since the ones who are left have to offer a full game's worth of possibilities. Just for starters :-)

[RileyWRussell]

The thread poster has played 107 hours in the last two weeks. Kind of confused how he's pressed for time when it comes to gaming.....

[(ZX-S) sceptre]

I am mystified why the Dev's would not just make it a player CHOICE. One poster said it was because the game would have low hour playthroughs and the Dev said that was not the case. Havinga choice NEVER hurt a DEV.......not having it HAS.

[ProbablyRichard]

Not true, sadly, as in the other thread. Too many choices can hurt, the wrong choices can hurt, choices that are too easy can hurt...