Roguelikes and their appearance... in Design Philosophy

ID:153512
 
Nov 21 2003, 5:01 pm
People seem to have different opinions on what truly defines a roguelike. I think that ASCII-based graphics are one of the most defining features, seconded by the sheer randomness of the game. I'm here to discuss the former. :P

As many of us already know, BYOND's textmode can display both foreground symbols (letters) and pure background colours. Obviously foreground symbols are more rogue-ish, but the unique background colours that BYOND supports are a very nice features that I'm not sure I want to give up.

While the foreground symbols stay true to their Rogue heritage, the background colours can really flesh out the environment around you. For comparison, look at Volte's demo of background colours compared to mine of foreground symbols.

What I'm trying to do is determine what the best path would be for an ambitious roguelike being developed within the constraints of text-mode. I look forward to hearing your opinions on the matter. :)
#1 Nov 21 2003, 5:41 pm
Malver wrote:
What I'm trying to do is determine what the best path would be for an ambitious roguelike being developed within the constraints of text-mode. I look forward to hearing your opinions on the matter. :)

It really depends on what you want.

Personally, I enjoy the use of using the font background color, because it provides a certain texture to land when you randomize the tent of the color.

Of course, there is always the option of using foreground AND background. Try using a background color a little lighter of a color than the foreground color, and see what you come up with.

But like I said before, it really depends on what you want. Classically, I believe the foreground use is used a lot more than background. So it's your choice; Go with the classical version, or spice it up a bit, and modernize it?

~>Volte
#2 Nov 22 2003, 6:03 pm
Watch out for locations that change in colour. Every single soft-coded change in colour is sending a minimum of 21 bytes over the connection. Multiply that by the number of locations that are changing colour and you'll quickly discover that you can overload even a good connection with pointless graphical adaptations.
#3 Nov 23 2003, 2:04 am
I think graphics need to evolve with the genre. I think the only reason rogue-likes haven't evolved graphically is because no one plays/makes them anymore (Compared to the other game types).
They are a great genre, but they don't appeal to a lot of people because of the two things you mentioned.
-They use ASCII based graphics, which makes people think they are lame nerd games.
-The sheer randomness of the game makes it difficult to get in a rut, which is what a lot of gamers rely on to get through the game. Walk, walk, kill. Walk, walk, kill. If you die, you just pick up where you left off. In a rogue-like you actually have to play constently.

I think if they had stayed popular they would have grown with the graphic capabilities.
Anyway, back to your post. I think you should go with basic graphics. Like the ones in Castle of the Winds or Hedgerow Hall.
A rogue-like is expected to put programming ahead of graphics, but it's not meant to just throw them away as standard.
Break the rules, use your own mold. =P
#4 Nov 23 2003, 12:56 pm
In response to DarkView (#3)
DarkView wrote:
I think graphics need to evolve with the genre. I think the only reason rogue-likes haven't evolved graphically is because no one plays/makes them anymore (Compared to the other game types).

You're kidding, right? Roguelikes are some of the most active game development communities on the internet. There are thousands of roguelikes on the internet (a fair portion are variants, but the rest are scratch-made), hundreds more in development, and what's more, it's a very diverse community (i.e. not comprised almost entirely of North Americans).


They are a great genre, but they don't appeal to a lot of people because of the two things you mentioned.
-They use ASCII based graphics, which makes people think they are lame nerd games.
-The sheer randomness of the game makes it difficult to get in a rut, which is what a lot of gamers rely on to get through the game. Walk, walk, kill. Walk, walk, kill. If you die, you just pick up where you left off. In a rogue-like you actually have to play constently.

Roguelike games are definitely a niche game. The people who think of the games as bad because of their lack of graphics are generally the ones the author doesn't want playing their game anyway.

Niche games aren't a bad thing -- as long as you make your game well for the people within the niche you're making it, it'll be a great game. The people who don't like it don't have to play it.


I think if they had stayed popular they would have grown with the graphic capabilities.

Actually, from what I've seen, at least half of the roguelike players (including myself) prefer to have ASCII character graphics as opposed to cheesy hand-drawn icons. [edit] Another thing that could be mentioned is that Diablo is a glorified roguelike. It was popular with the hack and slash game community but wasn't popular with the roguelike community.

Besides, roguelikes are just as popular as they ever were, if not more popular than they used to be. It's just that they weren't incredibly widespread in the first place, given that they're catering to a limited market. I'm not sure where you're under the impression that they're a dying breed. =)
#5 Nov 23 2003, 3:15 pm
In response to Spuzzum (#4)
DarkView wrote:
...haven't evolved graphically is because no one plays/makes them anymore.

No one with the major resources makes them anymore. I'm talking the big boys.


Spuzzum wrote:
Niche games aren't a bad thing -- as long as you make your game well for the people within the niche you're making it, it'll be a great game.

Agreed, but as long as you go beyond the rest sometimes.

Spuzzum wrote:
Actually, from what I've seen, at least half of the roguelike players (including myself) prefer to have ASCII character graphics as opposed to cheesy hand-drawn icons.

Yeah, but you've got to admit most of them just like it that way because that's how roguelikes are done.
I'll admit I don't get the apeal of ASCII over actual graphics. To me it seem's like something they done at the time because they didn't have the ability to make the game as good as they did and have fancy pants graphics.



Spuzzum wrote:
I'm not sure where you're under the impression that they're a dying breed. =)

I think they are a dying breed, because no one nowdays will give a game with ASCII graphics a chance. When all the current roguelike fans are old and grey I don't think there will be any young ones to replace them.
#6 Nov 23 2003, 4:50 pm
In response to DarkView (#5)
DarkView wrote:
DarkView wrote:
...haven't evolved graphically is because no one plays/makes them anymore.

No one with the major resources makes them anymore. I'm talking the big boys.

The big boys have never made roguelikes, though. They've always been a fan market.



Spuzzum wrote:
I'm not sure where you're under the impression that they're a dying breed. =)

I think they are a dying breed, because no one nowdays will give a game with ASCII graphics a chance. When all the current roguelike fans are old and grey I don't think there will be any young ones to replace them.

I'm a new fan. I started playing roguelikes two years ago and have no intention of stopping. I'm also considering making my own sci-fi type one in the unforeseeable future.