One of the most fascinating genres in gaming,
is the roguelike. The term was originally used to describe games
that closely mimicked the design of the 1980 dungeon crawler Rogue - but in more recent
times, it’s been commandeered to describe a whole fleet of indie titles that share two
very important characteristics: The levels must be randomly generated each
time you play. And the game must have permadeath, which means
all progress is reset to zero whenever you die. But that second characteristic isn’t always
what it seems. In some games, like Spelunky, permadeath means
permadeath. When you die, all progress through the game is reset - and you start your next
run with exactly the same starting criteria as your very first. So that means you always
begin with the same amount of health, bombs, and money. But in others, like Rogue Legacy, dying isn’t
quite so harsh. When you mess up in this game, you can use any money you’ve found to unlock
upgrades that will improve your health, magic, attack power, and so on. And those upgrades
persist from run to run, and will be applied to all characters going forward. Some have taken to calling games with no persistent
upgrades, “roguelikes” And games that do carry persistent upgrades, “roguelites”.
And in this video, I’m going to look at both the advantages and disadvantages of these
two approaches - and also look at how clever designers have tried to find ways to design
around those drawbacks. Let’s start with roguelikes - the games
that don’t have persistent upgrades. I’m talking about games like Spelunky and Enter
the Gungeon. The key advantage of this design, is that
the games almost exclusively reward player skill. Because the game never changes from run to
run, the overall difficulty level of the game - across multiple attempts, that is - is completely
flat. That means the only way to smash through that barrier and win is to improve your own
skill: by learning the ropes, practicing the controls, and becoming more familiar with
the game’s world. Nothing is standing between you and the final
boss, except for your own ability and knowledge of the game’s systems. Other than a particularly
lucky, or unlucky random roll, of course. And this means that a highly skilled player
has no barrier to simply finishing the game. But the disadvantage is that a low skilled
player may never finish the game. Roguelikes ask you to play through a really difficult
game in one go, and offer no real way to reduce the difficulty. And so if you can’t do that,
you’ll just never succeed. Ouch. Another drawback is that because your progress
through the game must be wiped clean every time you kick the bucket, every failed run
can feel like a waste of time. Sure, you’re improving your skills - but with nothing tangible
to show for it, you don’t get that unique dopamine rush that comes from numbers ticking
up. Okay, now let’s look at roguelites- the
games that do have permanent upgrades that carry over from run to run. I’m talking
about games like Rogue Legacy and Dead Cells. The key advantage of this design is that almost
every run is given meaning. When you die in Rogue Legacy you don’t feel like you’ve
wasted your time, because you know that you’ve earned enough money to unlock a new upgrade
- and improve your chances at succeeding in future runs. Ultimately, every attempt at
the game helps bring the difficulty of the game down. And this also allows pretty much all players,
regardless of skill, to finish the game eventually - they’ve just got to keep upgrading their
character until they’re super powerful and the game becomes a bit of a pushover. The disadvantage is that this is actually
a really weird difficulty curve - where the game is at its most challenging when you begin,
and slowly gets easier and easier over time. That’s the opposite of pretty much every
other type of game, where the difficulty should ramp up in sync with player skill. And one of the most pernicious outcomes is
that your success with these games is much less about your own skill - and much more
dependent on the level of your character. In a game like Dead Cells, it’s easy to
feel like you have no real chance of winning until you’ve purchased a few more health
potions from the shop - creating this artificial barrier you’ve got to grind through until
you can really start focusing on winning. But once you finally do win one of these games
- it’s ambiguous whether it was because of your improving skill level, or just the
ever-decreasing difficulty of the game. Did you get better, or did the game just get easier? So both types of game have their advantages
and disadvantages. But luckily for us, clever designers have found ways to alleviate the
worst drawbacks of the two design archetypes. So roguelikes can be accused of offering no
sense of progression. However, lots of these games have found ways to give you a feeling
of advancement - without changing the difficulty level of the game. By letting players unlock
stuff that’s fun, but has no meaningful impact on their chances at finishing the game. Take Enter the Gungeon. In this game, killing
bosses nets you a special currency that you’ll hold onto - even after you die. And you can
use this money in a shop in the game’s hub world: but it’s not to unlock new powers
for your character like extra health or bigger ammo crates. Instead, it simply adds more
weapons to the game’s already bursting selection of randomly dropped guns. Meaning next time
you go to a treasure chest, there’s now a few more firearms that could pop out. This doesn’t massively affect the balance
of the game, because these items are no more powerful than the guns you could find at the
beginning. It just adds extra variety to future attempts at the game. Another idea can be found in Nuclear Throne.
In this roguelike shooter, you can unlock new characters - giving you more options to
choose from when starting your next game. Just like before, these character aren’t
any more powerful than the default ones because they have their own advantages and disadvantages
to balance them out. They just provide different ways to play. It’s like the character classes
in the older roguelike games, but if the devs held most of them back to be unlockable after
a certain amount of play. Another option is to simply offer players
cosmetic upgrades that have zero impact on the way the game plays. The new colour options
in Downwell, for example, are given out as rewards for collecting a certain number of
gems across multiple runs. That gives you a small reward for continuing to play, but
they have no impact on the balance of the game whatsoever. Then, go look at Hades. This one does actually
have persistent upgrades, but I want to focus on something else: the way it incorporates
lore and character backstories. So in this game you unlock more about each character
every time you respawn, and you can find items in the game world that can be given to characters
in the hub to butter them up and unlock more story content. Unlocking new narrative stuff
gives you something to hold onto, even while you’re failing over and over again at the
actual game. Roguelikes can also seem impenetrable, because
there’s no way to reduce the difficulty of the game. But some of these titles do have
stuff to give players a helping hand - but without permanently changing the balance of
the game. One of which is shortcuts, as seen in Spelunky.
Here, if you do some chores for the tunnel man you can create a new door in the hub world
and start your adventure in, say, the jungle, skipping the first four rooms in the mines
entirely. This arguably does makes the game easier, and definitely allows new players
to practice at the the harder areas in the game. However, Spelunky makes it clear that you’ll
eventually want to play through the game from the beginning to finish it properly. For one,
your time won’t show up on the leaderboard if you use shortcuts. And for another, the
game’s true ending - where you descend into hell - requires you to find a series of items
that are hidden in every area. Meaning that if you use a shortcut to skip an early part
of the game, you won’t be able to get all the stuff you need to unlock the secret entrance
to the underworld. And then there are boosts that will carry
over into the next run - but don’t stick around permanently. In the tiny tactics game
Into the Breach, you can keep one levelled up soldier after death, who can then be used
during your next attempt. But because these characters don’t stick around forever, it’s
not making a persistent change to the game’s difficulty. It just gives you a bit of a leg-up,
and also an excuse for “just one more go”. And then there’s roguelites. Here, there’s
a real ambiguity over whether your successes and failures are due to the game’s difficulty
level - or your own skill. But the designers of these games are often careful to introduce
elements that still require a certain level of skill - and stop you from just grinding
through the game forever until you eventually win. Take Rogue Legacy’s creepy doorkeeper, Charon.
This dude hangs out at the front door of the castle and stops you from entering - and thus
starting your next run - until you give up all of your unspent money. The idea is, you
can’t save up small amounts of money over the course of multiple runs, and then spend
it all at once on an expensive upgrade. You have to earn a lot of money in a single run
- thus, proving your ability to stay alive long enough to fatten up your wallet. And then in Dead Cells, you don’t actually
keep your money when you die. You have to make sure that you spend your cash at one
of these upgrade stations, or it will be gone for good. The idea here is that you need to
actually be good enough to get through to the end of an area and bank your money - or
else it will vanish into the ether. Another downfall of roguelites is this feeling
that player skill isn’t as valuable as time invested. But pretty much every roguelite
is made with the intention that the player can actually finish the game without buying
a single upgrade - check YouTube and you’ll find players who can finish Rogue Legacy with
a level zero character. In fact, this could be turned into a meta
level challenge within the game - how few levels do you need to ascend before you can finish Rogue Legacy? So, there we have it. But, as I’ve found
out, everyone’s got a different viewpoint on this. Personally, I love the purity of roguelikes.
Random generation and permadeath mean you can’t memorise the level layouts, or rely
on the slow accumulation of power. It’s all about your skill. Roguelites, however,
do allow for that slow accumulation of power - and, if you ask me, that creates a weirdo
backwards difficulty curve that brings in an unpleasant ambiguity over whether you success
is down to your increasing skill, or the game’s falling difficulty level. But what about you? Do you prefer roguelikes
or roguelites - and why? Please let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Thanks for watching. ZAGREUS: Well, time to go get killed again.
What happened? It is almost the same video from weeks ago. Why he deleted the old one and reuploaded? Bad title?
Old one
I really think Mark needs to mention one caveat his stance on rouge-lite games. Ideally, rogue-lites should be punishing enough or pace the difficulty such that the combination of your skill progressing and the meta progression combine to break through the game's difficulty.
For example, I found Hades difficulty ramps up quite steeply. Once you get to room 7 or 8 there you fight two tough enemies you have never met before, then around room 10 there is a boss fight, and beyond that it gets tougher. Could someone beat the game with no upgrades or a lucky set of random buffs acquired in that run only? Maybe, but I don't think the meta progression detracts from the challenge or enjoyment of the game.
But the meta progression certainly makes the game much easier. You get more dashes, better stats, and best example is an ability that sets you to 20 health when you sustain a killing blow. With enough points, you can even get 2 charges of the "defy death" perk. However, getting to the later levels is pretty hard and even with those abilities and my skill progressing, it still feels like an achievement.
I find it really weird now that the difference between Roguelike and Roguelite is now being described as whether or not there is impactful meta progression.
The focus on the difficulty curve here is so strange. I don't really play roguelikes OR roguelites for the difficulty and challenge, I play them because it's fun to discover new things and new ways to interact with the game. Progression systems are just as strong in this regard—it's fun to discover new upgrades and explore how they affect the game. You don't have to win, or even get better, so long as you're always discovering something new, and in that respect games with progression systems even tend to have the upper hand than others.
I know plenty of traditionalists disagree but I think that it's fine to call old school Roguelike 'traditional Roguelikes'. I don't see the point in trying to lock away the term Roguelike when most people know Roguelikes to include games like BoI, Spelunky, Risk of Rain.
People already use Roguelike to hyphenate a game description. You check reviews for Into the Breach and it's called a turn based Roguelike. If I'm taking with my friends, they'll call something like Dead Cells a Metroidvania Roguelike.
I personally think calling them Traditional Roguelikes is a fine compromise. It keeps turn based Roguelikes as being the originator of the genre and it means I don't have to try to tell everybody they're wrong in calling boi Roguelike.
I agreed with his frustrations with grinding in the last video, but this is more consistent with his usual non-judgmental tone that he usually takes, the one remaining exception that I can think of being Batman: Arkham combat...someone needs to sit down with him and show him what he's missing there. Also worth noting is that it's becoming more of a thing for roguelikes to also have an easy mode. It removes the frustration of grinding and still doesn't compromise the design of the normal difficulty. Invisible, Inc. is like the gold standard of this, if you ask me.
For those willing to learn, roguelikes are best identified by the 'high value factors' of:
Or, simply by being like Rogue. Other points of reference include the likes of Angband, Caves of Qud, and Cogmind.
Roguelites, as the name suggests, are a 'lite' evolution of roguelikes and evoke a similar experience but modernised for a wider audience. They tend to have meta-progression. It's basically their defining feature. They also tend to be real-time. Some examples of the roguelite genre include Risk of Rain, Nuclear Throne, Dead Cells, and Faster Than Light.