Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
First, you can never be "done" with the game. You can't have a save where you're at max level, have all the best gear and whatnot, standing in front of the last boss with no intention to replay through the game. There are always more runs in your near future.
Second, the progress is player-based rather than stat-based. Instead of just grinding stats and gear until you become strong enough to overpower the content, the only thing you ever have at the beginning of each run is your own skill, knowledge and experience. When you win, you know it's because you played well.
Third, it lest you experience the joys of building up your power very quickly. You get to go from nothing to full power in half an hour every time you play (and don't die).
Of course, everyone has their own preferences. If those are things that you personally dislike, that's OK, this just happens to be a game from a genre that you don't enjoy.
Technically there could eventually be a mode that has permanent vertical progression, but... no word about it. You could keep an eye on the game in case it becomes reality eventually, however I wouldn't hold my breath.
Since you retain 0 bonus to help your future.
You do unlock some cards and can try it out in your future run.
Roguelike is not for everyone. Even COD and Civilizations are not for everyone.
This game is the combinations of 3 different things :
- Binding Of Isaac "item" and Roguelike
- FTL event and "blue option". Plus, the weapon/card you can encounter in your run, up to yourself want to use it or not.
- Card game genre except you don't setup your own deck before starting a run.
Thus this game play very heavily on RNG, some enjoy, some not.
If you prefer Card game that you can full freedom of deck setup, try Card Quest.
Very similar aside from the cards in hand during end of turn and stamina play differently
Die and retry : mostly a thing like Meatboy.
It IS a Rogue like. BUT, because there is a "but". I think there are not enough things to unlock yet.
There should be "general unlocks" whether you play Ironclad or The silent, like relics or common cards.
When i play Rogue like, What I do like is progress by unlocking. I don't unlock much in this game.
Isaac is the perfect example, of course.
I finish the game twice streak with Ironclad.
Only to see each victory only contribute 500+ exp to the progress bar.......
And I need 2000 to unlock.
In BOI, many items can unlocked by certain action of certain character.
Sadly, it is not the design here in STS
A Roguelike is, literally, a game that is "like Rogue"; a tile-based, turn-based dungeon crawler with procedurally generated environments, permadeath and no permanent vertical progression. Unlocks are only allowed if they provide horizontal progression rather than vertical progression.
Think... Angband, ADOM, Brogue, Dungeons of Dredmor, Tales of Maj'Eyal. Those are Roguelikes.
I do much prefer challenge-based unlocks over grinding-based unlocks.
But yes, sadly, this is not how StS works.
As for the core concept of the game (build a deck as you go, when you die try again), I don't think there's any major plans to overhaul it, no.
Having even a few mechanics from another game (rogue), does not make your game like that game. That is like calliing this game a Hearthstone-like just because it is a cardgame.
I believe the term roguelite was coined by Northernlion. It is a much better term to use to describe these types of games (even if I don't really like NL all that much).
Most of these games aren't even the same genre as Rogue, play nothing like it, and are often far less punishing of mistakes.
It was the developers of Rogue Legacy. "Roguelike" had a clear meaning for everyone before they messed it all up.
They marketed their game as being a Roguelike with permanent vertical progression (a major rulebreaker for Roguelikes). The permanent progression removes any difficulty (you're essentially guaranteed to win if you just grind enough), making the game easier, or "lighter". Hence the word Roguelite.
It would have been clever... if it hadn't been a huge lie. The only common thing Rogue Legacy has with Roguelikes is the procedurally generated dungeons. Really, it's just an action game with minor platforming elements.
This is why I'm irritated when someone calls Slay the Spire a Roguelike. The word has a literal, built-in meaning (like, say, hypothermia), which means that these people are saying that Slay the Spire is "like Rogue". That's just plain wrong.
And the word "Roguelite", as incorrectly as it was first applied, has had its meaning butchered even further, too. Despite having been specifically created to indicate the presence of permanent vertical progression (the "lite" part), people keep using it to refer to games that don't have it, like Slay the Spire or The Binding of Isaac.
So yes, you're absolutely right, these words get thrown around way too much nowadays and the people who use them practically never mean what the words literally mean.
It's all a big mess, and I blame the developers of Rogue Legacy for that.
You have 533 hours in Grim Dawn. Starting a new run in a game like this after 2-3 hours isn't much different than starting over a new character in Grim Dawn after 40+ hours. The time compression is just different.
So did "gay" and look how that turned out. Words change their meaning over time, all the time.
They do. And that's a bad thing.
Meanings get lost and old texts become incomprehensible or highly misleading.
This wouldn't happen if people just kept using words properly instead of polluting the language.
You do realise the very language we're speaking wouldn't exist if that were the case right? Also, most froms of poety and artistic writing wouldn't either, as metaphors break that concept.
Yes! That would be absolutely amazing. We'd be using a much better, much more consistent language that a lot more people would be able to understand, and that would have much more in common with related language. I'd be able to communicate with people from two or three dozen additional countries. I don't think anyone can fully understand how much better of a world we would live in.
As for "artistic writing", people wouldn't all become stupid overnight, they'd still be able to tell when you're, say, using an image or using a word figuratively.