[Sohcahtoa82]

When I think of a "roguelike", I think of a game that is played in "runs" where a run is typically 60 minutes or less, but completing a game round is not completing the entire game, as it will take several runs to unlock all the features and content. You are also generally not expected to be able to complete a run to the final boss in your first several attempts.

Hades, FTL, Vampire Survivors, Gunfire Reborn, and Crypt of the Necrodancer all satisfy these.

RimWorld is not at all a roguelike because a "run" can easily last hundreds of hours.

[djur]

The classic roguelikes can take many hours to complete and do not have any kind of between-run unlocking. By some common definitions, unlockable content makes a game not a roguelike. I wouldn't go that far, but I'd never call Vampire Survivors a roguelike, either.

[Bakary]

It's hard to say because the terms end up shifting to mean various things as the genre solidifies. I personally like using roguelite for games such as Hades, in which case the operating features are procedural generation, permadeath, and metaprogress with each run

[ncallaway]

I’ve used roguelite the same way. It’s definitely my preferred model for the space, mostly because I’m bad at games, so the meta progress gives me the feeling of progression without nearly so much work!

[Bakary]

The design concept is absolutely perfect for working adults. Instead of having a session where you make slow progress on a very long adventure, you get an actual self-contained experience while also making some headway towards a larger goal each time.

[qu4z-2]

You could make a case for the genre "re"solidifying, but roguelikes as a genre were hardly an indistinct vapour before this recent craze.

[fknorangesite]

The strict roguelike fans would argue that these are in fact roguelites, since there is some (small) amount of carryover between runs. The more orthodox view is that every run starts from zero.

[bavell]

I'd also add that "rougelikes" heavily emphasize replayability (at least in my limited experience).

FTL and Slay the Spire are probably my top two favs in the genre.

[donio]

None of the games you mention are roguelikes. Crypt of the Necrodancer is closest.

[socialismisok]

I would disagree. As a game dev, I'd argue that if players categorize a game as a roguelike, it's a roguelike. Language is not prescriptive.

They may be roguelikes with additional elements, but there's no one true definition of what a roguelike must be.

And yes, I'm aware of roguelites. The existence of a more specific piece of jargon does not invalidate the use of the more generic term.

Insisting on a narrow, historical use of language serves only the purpose of gatekeeping and pedantic "I know better than you" behaviors.

[mcv]

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]

I 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]

Why 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]

Ah, 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.

[chongli]

The issue is not with players categorizing a game as a roguelike (or not), it’s developers categorizing their game as a marketing tactic. The way discovery works on a platform such as Steam, developers are incentivized to tick as many boxes as possible on the genre list in order to get their game seen by as many players as possible. In effect, this self-categorization lets developers dilute the meaning of genre labels in order to make money.

Roguelike just happened to be one of the genre labels with a long-standing and passionate community. Now the community members are everywhere speaking out against this dilution. This is not gatekeeping — anyone is welcome to play roguelikes — it’s preservation of the genre’s distinctiveness.

[socialismisok]

> it’s preservation of the genre’s distinctiveness.

This is literally gatekeeping. You are deciding which things may pass the gate.

[chongli]

Gatekeeping pertains to people, not things. If you have a rock n' roll club you're allowed to say that "Happy Birthday" is not a rock n' roll song. That's different from saying "people who like the Happy Birthday song aren't allowed in the club", which is gatekeeping.

[socialismisok]

Now you are gatekeeping the concept of gatekeeping, incredible.

[b0rsuk]

"Roguelike" is nowadays commonly defined by having a meta progression system (unlocks). Scroll through reviews of a game like Noita or DCSS (Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup) and you will see some people complaining the game doesn't have (enough) permanent unlocks.

[socialismisok]

I have no idea why you were down voted. Most folks I know who play roguelikes would agree with you.

[anthk]

Bullshit. That could put Zelda in the Roguelike genre while being just an action-adventure one.

[socialismisok]

My favorite part of Zelda games are the procedural dungeons, permanent death.

[lofaszvanitt]

No one really knows what a roguelike is, yet it is repeated ad infinitum. If the general populace doesn't really know what a roguelike is, why not describe it with proper wording like:

mostly shallow content sold as something shiny in a repetitive way, lack of original story/background, time vampire if no proper checkpoint/save system in place.

The best egregious example of terrible game design is the game called Returnal where the game designers sentenced the player to recollect most of the items/loot upon failure because who knows why. This isn't a problem in itself if done properly, but why going through the same area again and again, why collect the proper weapon again if you fail at a boss, is just plain stupidity or malignancy.

So in essence a childish idiot sentences you to replay his "super creation" multiple times, because he thought that's cool. thank you.

you, the gamer, will come into this equation with your most precious resource: time. how do you want to spend your time? by repeating the same BORING shit or progressing and experiencing new, stimulating areas while a story is told to you?