Game looked great until...

[ko]

I saw the dreaded "roguelike" design infecting the game. It's basically the indie dev way of getting around doing actual design and proper balancing. Such a lazy and thus popular approach to game "design" among indies. Incidentally it's also the most worn out and stale design you can build your game around. What a waste...

[Larry]

Originally posted by Sami:

Originally posted by Dr.Larry:

I wish it were roguelite and not roguelike...

What's the difference? I thought it was turn-based combat. But I guess not?

Roguelike is basically permadeath and then you have to start over from scratch. Roguelite is roguelike except death isn't permanent but your progression in a level resets. So on dying you might keep an equip you got from your last playthrough or you'll have an XP system that carries over and gives you some form of minor buff or if you progress so far you permanently unlock a shop or something that can help in future playthroughs. It adds a bit of meaning to an aimless "see how far you get" dungeon crawler. It's not for everyone but I think the majority generally veer towards roguelite.

[Goosey]

Originally posted by ko:

I voice my opinion because I can. I'm tired of lazy roguelike design ruining otherwise mechanically and artistically interesting looking games.

It's a bad game design crutch that needs to die.

So long as the game is fun and good and enjoyable... Who cares what its designed like. The whole purpose of a game is to enjoyable, if its enjoyable, who cares?

[holi_shet]

i think the game design is fit the gameplay and combat stlye actually

[Lord Gek]

NASCAR games are made by lazy devs who can't properly animate right turns. The cars just go round and round the track, how WEAK!

[splorch]

Originally posted by Lord Gek:

NASCAR games are made by lazy devs who can't properly animate right turns. The cars just go round and round the track, how WEAK!

I laughed, thanks for that <3

[Captain Crowbar]

Originally posted by Kaaz:

i thought roguelike was permadeath and roguelite was permadeath but with some stuff carrying over

No, they both mean exactly the same thing. Some people say -lite some people say -like.

The main hallmarks of roguelike/lites is that they have permadeath and usually produrally generated content. The general idea is to play through it a lot and die a lot. Roguelikes are about the "journey" moreso than the "destination" imo.

Some roguelikes have persistent unlocks/skills that carry on through each subsequent play through as a way of prolonging gameplay and adding more variety. Personally I love those types and wish more used that persistence mechanic.

Edit - Also, on the topic of the OP:

Do you seriously think it's LESS work to design a game engine that actually automatically performs a refined enough procedural generation of content to make quality levels versus manually designing levels? Lazy? Really?

[ttv/ElTuku473 en vivo]

Originally posted by Captain Crowbar:

Originally posted by Kaaz:

i thought roguelike was permadeath and roguelite was permadeath but with some stuff carrying over

No, they both mean exactly the same thing. Some people say -lite some people say -like.

The main hallmarks of roguelike/lites is that they have permadeath and usually produrally generated content. The general idea is to play through it a lot and die a lot. Roguelikes are about the "journey" moreso than the "destination" imo.

Some roguelikes have persistent unlocks/skills that carry on through each subsequent play through as a way of prolonging gameplay and adding more variety. Personally I love those types and wish more used that persistence mechanic.

Edit - Also, on the topic of the OP:

Do you seriously think it's LESS work to design a game engine that actually automatically performs a refined enough procedural generation of content to make quality levels versus manually designing levels? Lazy? Really?

Like Phyrex said, it depends on the time and culture, they're not the same, at least not when they were born, roguelike were turn based perma death and stuff from the 90s or something, roguelites were games that took some elements but not all of them, like removing turn based or stuff, nowadays roguelike is pretty much accepted for games like this or binding of isaac. Some "old school gamers" get pissed off when games like this gets called roguelike instead of roguelite or even roguelitelike or something (there was even a discussion in this forum about that) but tbh noone cares :p

found the disc http://steamcommunity.com/app/384490/discussions/?fp=9

[Captain Crowbar]

Originally posted by TuKku473:

Like Phyrex said, it depends on the time and culture, they're not the same, at least not when they were born, roguelike were turn based perma death and stuff from the 90s or something, roguelites were games that took some elements but not all of them, like removing turn based or stuff, nowadays roguelike is pretty much accepted for games like this or binding of isaac. Some "old school gamers" get pissed off when games like this gets called roguelike instead of roguelite or even roguelitelike or something (there was even a discussion in this forum about that) but tbh noone cares :p

found the disc http://steamcommunity.com/app/384490/discussions/?fp=9

Yeah, I basically meant the mainstream definition. If you see tags on steam for "roguelike" or "roguelite" they're basically interchangable.

[ko]

Ah, the day of release is upon us. Seems I was right, the game is weak sauce with poor design to boot. It turned out exactly as I expected. Poor roguelike/lite game design with sucky, floaty combat that's a mockery of its far superior inspiration. A poorly designed "me too" game with no noteworthy merits of its own and laughably poor "writing" that attempts to be funny while faceplanting in the attempt.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/necropolis

http://opencritic.com/game/2977/necropolis?tab=1

[Linux Programmer]

Actually the writing is rather entertaining to read as you playthrough it -- and I wouldn't necessarily say it's taking "inspiration" from darksouls just because it's an ARPG where you die alot. The combat itself isn't that floaty and pretty easy to master once you just realize that there is no animation cutting (which in itself is a very lazy design choice)

[Flamescion]

Just because you have an opinion doesn't make the opinion correct.

And you can express your opinion without being an idiot, too. That also helps.

[Sahel]

Originally posted by ko:

Ah, the day of release is upon us. Seems I was right, the game is weak sauce with poor design to boot. It turned out exactly as I expected. Poor roguelike/lite game design with sucky, floaty combat that's a mockery of its far superior inspiration. A poorly designed "me too" game with no noteworthy merits of its own and laughably poor "writing" that attempts to be funny while faceplanting in the attempt.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/necropolis

http://opencritic.com/game/2977/necropolis?tab=1

I doubt a lot of the negative reviewers played a lot of the game,reading through the reviews mostly feels like confirmation bias to me.

[ko]

Originally posted by Sahel:

Originally posted by ko:

Ah, the day of release is upon us. Seems I was right, the game is weak sauce with poor design to boot. It turned out exactly as I expected. Poor roguelike/lite game design with sucky, floaty combat that's a mockery of its far superior inspiration. A poorly designed "me too" game with no noteworthy merits of its own and laughably poor "writing" that attempts to be funny while faceplanting in the attempt.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/necropolis

http://opencritic.com/game/2977/necropolis?tab=1

I doubt a lot of the negative reviewers played a lot of the game,reading through the reviews mostly feels like confirmation bias to me.

Or maybe just plain old confirmation that the game is bland at best.

It has a 63% rating from Steam owners as well. That falls pretty much in line with the review average. It looks like the game is perceived as average and bland by many people.

[Confusing Name]

Originally posted by ko:

Originally posted by Sahel:

I doubt a lot of the negative reviewers played a lot of the game,reading through the reviews mostly feels like confirmation bias to me.

Or maybe just plain old confirmation that the game is bland at best.

It has a 63% rating from Steam owners as well. That falls pretty much in line with the review average. It looks like the game is perceived as average and bland by many people.

Seconding this.

[FractalMythology]

Although I find your intial critque lazy, I do agree with some of the points you made later on.

The 'humor' in the game doesn't land with me. It's just text. If it was more seen throughout the game I'd get it but it just being in the dialoge and written on the walls it doesn't really fit imo. The only moment I kind of chuckled was the first time I came across the checken vendor in the chest. Other than that I feel that the 'humor' could have been left out or more fleshed out in the game like the enemies bantering to eachother or fighting over a chest, something like that.

For an action type game I find the controls not as responsive as I'd like , floaty is accurate, and the animation is't very fluid in combat.

I don't like the semi-long parts of just running with nothing to look at or do.

The sound fx and music are lack luster as well. I keep turning up the volume thinking I'm missing it but I guess it's just very subtle.

For the price I do think is too much. Maybe the future content will be free at this price, I hope.

Overall though I still enjoy the game, but it does feel like it's missing something. What that is I can't quite put my finger on it. I will still be playing this for the next however long cause I am enjoying it.
That's just my opinion.