Traditional roguelike?

[᲼᲼]

Will the developer consider adding a traditional roguelike mode or spinoff with the spell and upgrade system in tact?

[Blackenblood]

You are talking about him making an entirely different game. Maybe let him make this one first.

[[They/Them] ChesseTheWasp]

Originally posted by Blackenblood:

You are talking about him making an entirely different game. Maybe let him make this one first.

Good reply, gave you the fire breathing chicken

[Vault Dweller]

this is a traditional roguelike, you start the run at level 0 each time

[Cogi234]

I'm not sure what you mean. This already is a traditional roguelike.

[Haldurson]

I've only been playing for a short time. But speaking as someone who's played roguelikes of many kinds since the 1970s (the original rogue included), this is a particular kind of roguelike, which IS NOT TRADITIONAL. That's ok. It is what it is, and it's pretty good at what it is trying to do. But it isn't traditional.

The biggest thing that separates this from traditional roguelikes is that YOU ARE NOT PLAYING AS A ROGUE. In a traditional roguelike, you are not forced to kill everything on a level. Killing all the bad guys is very unroguelike behavior. Normally, in a roguelike, you are not REQUIRED to kill everything on a level before proceeding to the next level. This is more of a puzzle game than a traditional roguelike. There's at least one other game similar to this, and the creator doesn't even label it as a roguelike because he doesn't consider it a roguelike. But that's not important, that's just marketing. (I can't recall the name of the game offhand, but it also is very puzzle-like, as opposed to roguelikes which only occasionally result in puzzle-like situations organically). The fact is that THIS game presents each level as a PUZZLE. That's why you can see everything all the time. That's the difference between a puzzle game and a traditonal roguelike. Not only are you not a rogue in this game, but you are not even the character. You are a deity looking down on a level and controlling a character in the game. You are NOT playing from the point of view of the character. I have my own personal definition of a roguelike that I go by, but I daresay some real traditionalists would object to this even being CALLED a roguelike. I'm ok with it as it does have a bit of the feel of a roguelike. But I can see the point of the traditionalists as well. Roguelite is probably a more accurate term.

So the OP is correct. This is certainly a TYPE of roguelike, but not a traditional one.

[Zingarina]

Originally posted by Haldurson:

I've only been playing for a short time. But speaking as someone who's played roguelikes of many kinds since the 1970s (the original rogue included), this is a particular kind of roguelike, which IS NOT TRADITIONAL. That's ok. It is what it is, and it's pretty good at what it is trying to do. But it isn't traditional.

The biggest thing that separates this from traditional roguelikes is that YOU ARE NOT PLAYING AS A ROGUE. In a traditional roguelike, you are not forced to kill everything on a level. Killing all the bad guys is very unroguelike behavior. Normally, in a roguelike, you are not REQUIRED to kill everything on a level before proceeding to the next level. This is more of a puzzle game than a traditional roguelike. There's at least one other game similar to this, and the creator doesn't even label it as a roguelike because he doesn't consider it a roguelike. But that's not important, that's just marketing. (I can't recall the name of the game offhand, but it also is very puzzle-like, as opposed to roguelikes which only occasionally result in puzzle-like situations organically). The fact is that THIS game presents each level as a PUZZLE. That's why you can see everything all the time. That's the difference between a puzzle game and a traditonal roguelike. Not only are you not a rogue in this game, but you are not even the character. You are a deity looking down on a level and controlling a character in the game. You are NOT playing from the point of view of the character. I have my own personal definition of a roguelike that I go by, but I daresay some real traditionalists would object to this even being CALLED a roguelike. I'm ok with it as it does have a bit of the feel of a roguelike. But I can see the point of the traditionalists as well. Roguelite is probably a more accurate term.

So the OP is correct. This is certainly a TYPE of roguelike, but not a traditional one.

As a regular lurker and observer on the r/roguelikes, I must admit that your post made me quite confused.

I say this because at most times I agree when people get "angry" over there for roguelites trying to be passing as roguelikes.

But dare I say, that's most definitely NOT THE CASE with Rift Wizard. One thing that "traditionalists" as you define love to mention is the berlin interpretation, which can be found here: http://www.roguebasin.com/index.php/Berlin_Interpretation

If you read it carefully, you'll realize that Rift Wizard simply fulfill ALL of the requirements to be a 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 Angband'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.


You may argue that the "Exploration and Discovery" part is not there in Rift Wizard, but if it disqualifies it as a roguelike, the same would happen with Tales of Maj'Eyal, where exploration is done 99% of the time through a "Auto-Explore" button and there isn't an identification system since the whole game is pretty transparent in this sense.

The fact that it has puzzle elements definitely play more in favor of it than against. What it's Nethack if not a big puzzle where you have to find the pieces you need (the ascension kit) and use it to your advantage?

So, I'd really like to be proven wrong, but the whole "You don't play as a rogue" or "you have to kill everything" argument falls short to disqualify Rift Wizard as a roguelike. If that would be the case, we would be condemning a genre that already is niche to being completely locked in a mindset without ever evolving.

[eb]

Originally posted by Haldurson:

I've only been playing for a short time. But speaking as someone who's played roguelikes of many kinds since the 1970s (the original rogue included), this is a particular kind of roguelike, which IS NOT TRADITIONAL. That's ok. It is what it is, and it's pretty good at what it is trying to do. But it isn't traditional.

The biggest thing that separates this from traditional roguelikes is that YOU ARE NOT PLAYING AS A ROGUE. In a traditional roguelike, you are not forced to kill everything on a level. Killing all the bad guys is very unroguelike behavior. Normally, in a roguelike, you are not REQUIRED to kill everything on a level before proceeding to the next level. This is more of a puzzle game than a traditional roguelike. There's at least one other game similar to this, and the creator doesn't even label it as a roguelike because he doesn't consider it a roguelike. But that's not important, that's just marketing. (I can't recall the name of the game offhand, but it also is very puzzle-like, as opposed to roguelikes which only occasionally result in puzzle-like situations organically). The fact is that THIS game presents each level as a PUZZLE. That's why you can see everything all the time. That's the difference between a puzzle game and a traditonal roguelike. Not only are you not a rogue in this game, but you are not even the character. You are a deity looking down on a level and controlling a character in the game. You are NOT playing from the point of view of the character. I have my own personal definition of a roguelike that I go by, but I daresay some real traditionalists would object to this even being CALLED a roguelike. I'm ok with it as it does have a bit of the feel of a roguelike. But I can see the point of the traditionalists as well. Roguelite is probably a more accurate term.

So the OP is correct. This is certainly a TYPE of roguelike, but not a traditional one.

is this pasta, because if it is it's a really good one

[Wrong Window]

Whether this game is a traditional rl or not is irrelevant. Asking for a mode that isn't in the base game is a rather big request. The game is what it is and that's fine.

[Zingarina]

Originally posted by 1.21 gigawatts:

Whether this game is a traditional rl or not is irrelevant. Asking for a mode that isn't in the base game is a rather big request. The game is what it is and that's fine.

Problem with the question is: traditional roguelike is not even a mode that can be added. It would be like asking for adding a soccer mode in Fifa or something similar lol.

[Haldurson]

Originally posted by ElTomatoMatador:

Problem with the question is: traditional roguelike is not even a mode that can be added. It would be like asking for adding a soccer mode in Fifa or something similar lol.

I agree that it would require an entirely different game. But it's always ok to wish big.

As far as my opinion on what constitutes a Roguelike, I don't care about how other people define it. It's my personal definition that I go by -- some games have a definite roguelike feeling, and this has enough of that that I'm willing to accept that label. I'm not sure if people understood that I was NOT claiming that it wasn't a roguelike. It's a personal definition, and everyone SHOULD have their own perception of what constitutes a roguelike, and the label is pretty irrelevant anyway. I was simply supporting the OP because I felt the attacks on his post were very unfair.

[Zingarina]

Originally posted by Haldurson:

Originally posted by ElTomatoMatador:

Problem with the question is: traditional roguelike is not even a mode that can be added. It would be like asking for adding a soccer mode in Fifa or something similar lol.

I agree that it would require an entirely different game. But it's always ok to wish big.

As far as my opinion on what constitutes a Roguelike, I don't care about how other people define it. It's my personal definition that I go by -- some games have a definite roguelike feeling, and this has enough of that that I'm willing to accept that label. I'm not sure if people understood that I was NOT claiming that it wasn't a roguelike. It's a personal definition, and everyone SHOULD have their own perception of what constitutes a roguelike, and the label is pretty irrelevant anyway. I was simply supporting the OP because I felt the attacks on his post were very unfair.

I think the big problem with OP post is how he phrased it. Maybe he meant to say an adventure mode? With free dungeon crawling and such?

Anyway, the post is so old that it doesn't make a difference I guess.

[T1-M4T]

I can see where the roguelite argument can come from if you're more of a purest. It doesn't necessarily scratch the same itch that most roguelikes satisfy. Many people prefer more RNG in their roguelikes. To prepare for the possibility of situations rather than certain situations outright.

It is for that reason, however, that people who are often repulsed by regular roguelikes may find a lot of enjoyment in this game. Every spell available right from the get go instead of hoping to find something cool. Must commit mass genocide on each level, no decision to stealth around enemies or moving on/running away from enemies/situations you can't handle. No getting "surprised" by an enemy from rounding a corner.

Personally, I'm more of a fan of games like DCSS, Brogue, Cogmind, ADOM, etc. Roguelikes, to me, has always been about making the best decisions out of the hand you've been given.

[CtenosaurOaxacana]

This game is definitely more roguelike than rogue'lite

[Dylan]

An ancient debate, but an interesting one nonetheless.

Sometimes I like to joke that Rift Wizard is a roguelite with roguelike style combat.

The structure is much more akin to Slay the Spire or FTL than TOME or ADOM.

I do think that when people browse for the tag 'traditional roguelike' on steam, many of them are looking for something very much like Rift Wizard. So in that sense, I'm pretty comfortable referring to it that way.

And hey, as mentioned above: Berlin interpretation.

Regarding the puzzle label: IMO any good game is constantly presenting the player with interesting puzzles. A good game is, in a way, a puzzle generation algorithm.

Anyways getting back the the original posters question:
For RW I'm resistant to add an open world adventure mode. Really the things I care about with RW are character building and combat, the rest of the game is just the minimum set of supporting mechanics to let these those shine.

[cymrpg999]

Berlin interpretation is one of the worst thing in the entire space time.
For me RW is "Almost Traditional Roguelike" imo, lol~
RW is way more "traditional" than many others.
Many games are just not qualified to be roguelike.
They are just using roguelike elements...