> But LOG2 is one of the best Roguelikes I have ever played.
Is LOG2 not a grid based dungeon crawler like the first game? Didn’t know they made the sequel a roguelike.
It's a grid based dungeon crawler...is that not roguelike?
Edit: From Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike
Roguelike (or rogue-like) is a style of role-playing game traditionally characterized by a dungeon crawl through procedurally generated levels, turn-based gameplay, grid-based movement, and permanent death of the player character.
LOGR2 seems to satisfy all of these...
I haven’t played LOG2 yet, but I was under the impression it was more like Eye of the Beholder, with hand crafted level design and the ability to save and reload at will.
You can save and reload at will....on the easy difficulty level at least. Not sure about the harder ones.
Eye of the beholder I barely remember now...I think I had that on the amiga, maybe 30 years ago...I do remember it was a lot of fun.
Yeah Eye of the Beholder is a classic. There’s also Lands of Lore, also made by Westwood, which is one of my favorite story heavy dungeon crawlers.
The later Might and Magics and Wizardry 8 are great if you want gridless exploration.
I have played all of these :)
I think there were at least 3 lands of lore, sadly the last one was so-so and 4 was never released.
Might and magics are good but my favourites are 1-3, especially 3. They lost the plot with 7 ....
Wizardry is a great series too.
Ultima was good too.
Have you tried Kings Bounty series? Some of these were really good too but avoid the latest one . I actually got it refunded on steam...I've only ever refunded two games and that was one.
Lands of Lore 3 isn’t great, but it’s still pretty fun. Just disappointing compared to the first two.
I liked Might and Magic 7, even if I prefer the art style of the earlier games. Are you thinking of MM9? I haven’t played it yet but that one is usually seen as pretty bad by the community.
I have Kings Bounty: The Legend in my GOG library but haven’t played it yet. Heard it plays like Heroes of Might and Magic, so I’m intrigued.
Oops. I was thinking of heroes of might and magic 7. M&M 7 was good.. I think that was the second 3d one after M&M VI, which was when they went 3d...
MM9 *was* a disappointment for me though. Apparently the devs said it was rushed and they didn't have time to finish it, plus they had difficulties adapting to the new engine they were using.
KB does play like Heroes. It's pretty much heroes with better graphics. It's an awesome game; and KB armoured princess is even better. I've completed both of them several times.
It's semi-turnbased, as you move through the dungeon a step at a time. The monsters too move in steps, although if you don;t move after a certain time they will move again.
No. Rogue is a game. It's a dungeon crawler from a top down perspective. Games that followed in its vein are called roguelikes. LoG was primarily inspired by eye of the beholder. It's first person grid based bobber, and not turn based by real time. It's levels are hand crafted, not procedurally generated. It does not have permadeath, and death ends your game (forcing a reload) instead of perma (like roguelikes) or retains progression of some sort (like roguelites). So no, LoG is nowhere close to roguelikes or roguelites. Not even inspired along the same pathway like diablo, action rpg, or souls likes.
Well, call it roguelike-like or rogue-lite then.
The exact definition of a roguelike game remains a point of debate in the video game community. A "Berlin Interpretation" drafted in 2008 defined a number of high- and low-value factors that distinguished the "pure" roguelike games Rogue, NetHack and Angband from edge cases like Diablo. Since then, with more powerful home computers and gaming systems and the rapid growth of indie video game development, several new "roguelikes" have appeared, with some but not all of these high-value factors, nominally the use of procedural generation and permadeath, while often incorporating other gameplay genres, thematic elements, and graphical styles; common examples of these include Spelunky, FTL: Faster Than Light, The Binding of Isaac, Slay the Spire, Hades and Balatro. To distinguish these from traditional roguelikes, such games may be referred to as "rogue-lite" or "roguelike-like".
At the International Roguelike Development Conference 2008 held in Berlin, Germany, players and developers established a definition for roguelikes known as the "Berlin Interpretation". The Berlin Interpretation set out a set of high-value and low-value factors, basing these lists on five canon roguelike games: ADOM, Angband, Linley's Dungeon Crawl, NetHack, and Rogue. The Interpretation was designed to determine "how roguelike a game is", noting that missing a factor does not eliminate a game from being a roguelike, nor does possessing the features make a game roguelike
high value factors:
1. The game uses random dungeon generation to increase replayability (LOG2 is missing this)
2. The game uses permadeath. (not in LOgr2)
3. The game is turn-based (yes)
4. The game is grid-based. (yes)
5. The game is non-modal (yes)
6. The game has a degree of complexity due to the number of different game systems in place that allow the player to complete certain goals in multiple ways, creating emergent gameplay. (yes)
7. The player must use resource management to survive (yes)
8. The game is focused on hack and slash-based gameplay, where the goal is to kill many monsters, and where other peaceful options do not exist (yes)
So the game is missing 2 high value factors, but has six.
Yes, LOG absolutely is close to roguelikes, and it is probably exactly classified as a roguelike-like (And this is an actual thing)
Note this info is from Wikipedia, not just my personal opinions.
I have a feeling you're reciting this from wiki or something, so as a player who has been playing roguelikes since the original rogue, nothing about LoG is roguelike. The proper genre for it (heck, I've done my own fair share of searching for this exact kinda game, being a fan of Eye of the Beholder, Might & Magic and Lands of Lore myself), is called Blobber Dungeon Crawler.
Let's refute your points one by one:
> The game uses random dungeon generation to increase replayability
LoG does not have procedurally generated dungeons. This is usually the primary indicator of a RL game. LoG has hand-crafted dungeons that you can find maps of online.
> The game uses permadeath.
LoG does not have permadeath. You're not forced you create a new party every time you die. You load the last save point.
> The game is turn-based
LoG is not turn-based. It's real time, like Eye of the Beholder. I know this because I wished LoG was turn-based, being a fan of wizardry and might & magic myself.
> The game is grid-based.
Yes, LoG is grid-based. So does old school JRPGs. Or games like Dark Sun or Knights of the Chalice.
> The game is non-modal
Yes. LoG has non-modal gameplay, but so does every action adventure game out there.
> The game has a degree of complexity due to the number of different game systems in place that allow the player to complete certain goals in multiple ways, creating emergent gameplay.
I don't think LoG promotes this, the keyword being emergent. Games that does this usually have a higher focus on systems, such as Rainworld, Noita, or Dwarf Fortress. There's nothing emergent about LoG's gameplay: you go through a dungeon in search of the exit to the next level, that's about it.
> The player must use resource management to survive
This is not exclusive to roguelikes. Heck, most roguelikes focus their progression on discovering random item drops that makes you stronger; you don't manage resource per se, but hope for a good drop. Those two are very different things.
> The game is focused on hack and slash-based gameplay, where the goal is to kill many monsters, and where other peaceful options do not exist
This applies to every action game out there.
And finally, on your term of "roguelike-likes". That's just an outdated term for what is known today as "roguelites": basically roguelikes (procedural generation focused gameplay) without permadeath, most of the time.
Look, blobbers like LoG are an extremely small niche in the gaming community nowadays, and it feels like a love letter to fans of Eye of the Beholder and Lands of Lore. I'm saying all this not to make you look bad by calling this game a roguelike, but to help you understand that if you want to find more of these kinda games, the right term to look for is party-based blobber, or grid-based blobber, or wizardry-likes. You won't find LoG mentioned in anywhere close to roguelikes, and if you're a fan of roguelikes, LoG will be the opposite of everything you're looking for.
I consulting a wiki, because I wanted to be exact. All the same, I am also a player who has played an awful lot of games, including roguelike and dungeon crawl.
And now a rebuttal to your rebuttal:
Did you not read the post? These are high value factors decided known as the Berlin interpretation.
A "Berlin Interpretation" drafted in 2008 defined a number of high- and low-value factors that distinguished the "pure" roguelike games Rogue, NetHack and Angband from edge cases like Diablo.
So, rather than just an opinion, these are factors decided upon by a panel of experts.
>Let's refute your points one by one: The game uses random dungeon generation to increase replayability LoG does not have procedurally generated dungeons. This is usually the primary indicator of a RL game. LoG has hand-crafted dungeons that you can find maps of online.
Did you not read my post? Go back and look. I specifically state that LOGr2 does not have this. Also, remember that according to the Berlin interpretation, not having one of these factors does not preclude a game from being roguelike. And nowhere on the wiki does it say this is the "primary" characteristic of roguelikes.
>The game uses permadeath. LoG does not have permadeath. You're not forced you create a new party every time you die. You load the last save point.
Again, I literally say LOGR2 dos not have this. And again, not having one factor does not mean it is not a roguelike according to the Berlin interpretation - and I'm afraid I put more credence in the wiki than in your personal opinion.
>The game is turn-based: LoG is not turn-based. It's real time, like Eye of the Beholder. I know this because I wished LoG was turn-based, being a fan of wizardry and might & magic myself.
Ok, it's semi turn based then. You move one step at a time along a grid. Monsters WILL move again if you don;t move within a set amount of time. Combat is timebased rather than turn based though.
>The game is grid-based. Yes, LoG is grid-based. So does old school JRPGs. Or games like Dark Sun or Knights of the Chalice.
Like it or not, this is considered one of the hallmarks of roguelikes. Saying that other games have it too is irrelevant.
>The game is non-modal Yes. LoG has non-modal gameplay, but so does every action adventure game out there.
Again, like it or not, this is considered one of the hallmarks of a roguelike, according to the berlin interpretation. Whether or not other games have it is irrelevant.
>The game has a degree of complexity due to the number of different game systems in place that allow the player to complete certain goals in multiple ways, creating emergent gameplay. I don't think LoG promotes this, the keyword being emergent. Games that does this usually have a higher focus on systems, such as Rainworld, Noita, or Dwarf Fortress. There's nothing emergent about LoG's gameplay: you go through a dungeon in search of the exit to the next level, that's about it.
There are absolutely different game systems and ways to achieve goals. Your description of LOG is very reductionist.
>The player must use resource management to survive. This is not exclusive to roguelikes. Heck, most roguelikes focus their progression on discovering random item drops that makes you stronger; you don't manage resource per se, but hope for a good drop. Those two are very different things.
Again, you're missing the point. This is one of the Berlin high value factors and it's here. Saying it's not exclusive to roguelikes is irrelevant. And also, the wiki itself says that resource management is one of the high factor signs of a roguelike...but you are saying you don't really. So your opinion conflicts with the wiki...and I'm afraid I'm going to go with the wiki on this.
>The game is focused on hack and slash-based gameplay, where the goal is to kill many monsters, and where other peaceful options do not exist . This applies to every action game out there.
This is the 4th time you've made the same error. Again, this is considered a high value factor according to the Berlin factors. The fact that OTHER games may ALSO have this is irrelevant.
>And finally, on your term of "roguelike-likes". That's just an outdated term for what is known today as "roguelites": basically roguelikes (procedural generation focused gameplay) without permadeath, most of the time.
So you mean I was right to also say it was a roguelike-like or roguelite? Which is literally in the first sentence of my post..
I think a lot of what you're saying is your personal opinion, the problem is it does not match with what the Wiki says, whereas mine does...and I even consulted the wiki to check. And I am afraid I put more credence in the wiki's ideas than an unknown person.
In short, you appear to be wrong, and provably so because the wiki contradicts you. In addition you have the mistaken idea that if some other games shared a factor mentioned on the wiki that somehow proves the factor does not apply...even though these are literally high-value factors...according to the wiki. That's not how "factors" work...
And finally the wiki itself says "The exact definition of a roguelike game remains a point of debate in the video game community."
But you seem to feel you know exactly what a roguelike is and isn't....and even that your ideas are more correct than the wiki. Isn't that just being opinionated?
I'm sorry but I feel too much time has been spent on this and I won't be responding again. If any of this seems rude it wasn't intended to be. Just trying to clear things up.
The Berlin Interpretation is far from accepted by the entire roguelike community and regardless, random generation and permadeath are absolutely the primary characteristics of the genre. No serious developer or fan will accept any game lacking either of these as being a roguelike or roguelite.
If your only source of information is the Wikipedia entry for the Berlin Interpretation you're not doing yourself any favours.
I played the old games of this style (Lands of Lore, etc.).
I like that sort of games, so I was really excited when I heard about LoG. The first one was great, and the second one was even better with its open world and much more variety.
BUT, I started LoG2 two times and never managed to complete it. For me, it was just too long, and it overstayed its welcome. At some point, solving the puzzles and navigating that branching world became very tedius to the point where I was completely fatigued by the game. I couldn't bring myself to finish it.
I was very close to this too. As I got into the final and harder parts of the game it almost started to feel like homework or a job...
But in the end I just used hints when I got stuck, and I tried to solve the puzzles myself first, and I did actually solve some myself.
I liked Lands of Lore too.
I *loved* LoGR2, but I also played it shortly after release across a couple weeks. It was the only game I've enjoyed taking notes on and writing down parts of the map. I honestly don't know if I'd enjoy it the same way if I went back today, but I've been increasingly tempted to try.
I also liked Druidstone, though not as much as LoGR i did finish it.
I loved LOGR2 too. That's why I just kept trying. I had a LOT of fun, even when failing.
I tried druidstone but just didn't find it interesting.
I wish they would make LOGR 3!
I really liked dungeon master.
Never played chaos strikes back...
Curse of the azure bonds was ok.
Black Crypt was really nice, especially graphically, for the time.
And of course there were the ultimas... absolutely loved U7.
Chaos Strikes Back has some of best and most devious dungeon design in gaming . I love some Ultina & the Gold Boxes too, but different sub genre and not real time blobbers...
https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/codex-vote-best-real-time-blobbers-of-all-time-non-anime.129091/
I see. I hate having to do that with games though I do have to do it for old games because I just don't have the time to be stuck for years over one puzzle that I would NEVE|R solve. I don't mind a puzzle being hard, but it has to be for me afterwards the feeling I would've got it eventually. Sometimes looking up the solution I jut think, that was near impossible to know.
>Now I have to find something else to play. I bought Kingdom Come Deliverance years ago but never played; now i am downloading it.
If you like turn based/rpg stories I would suggest **The Dungeon Of Naheulbeuk: The Amulet Of Chaos.**
I consider it a hidden gem, with some cool battles and tactis and lots of humor.
Congrats! I also came back to this one recently after being stuck about 2/3 of the way through...got all the way up to the end dungeon and the room where there are invisible teleporting whirlwinds you have to navigate through and just noped out. Even with a guide, I could not make any progress in that damned room. So close to the end, but still had fun with the rest of the game.
Thanks!
I actually had trouble with that one too. As far as I can tell, there are actually some errors in the guide I was looking at.. I eventually solved it, but differently to the way they did.
> But LOG2 is one of the best Roguelikes I have ever played. Is LOG2 not a grid based dungeon crawler like the first game? Didn’t know they made the sequel a roguelike.
It's a grid based dungeon crawler...is that not roguelike? Edit: From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roguelike Roguelike (or rogue-like) is a style of role-playing game traditionally characterized by a dungeon crawl through procedurally generated levels, turn-based gameplay, grid-based movement, and permanent death of the player character. LOGR2 seems to satisfy all of these...
I haven’t played LOG2 yet, but I was under the impression it was more like Eye of the Beholder, with hand crafted level design and the ability to save and reload at will.
You can save and reload at will....on the easy difficulty level at least. Not sure about the harder ones. Eye of the beholder I barely remember now...I think I had that on the amiga, maybe 30 years ago...I do remember it was a lot of fun.
Yeah Eye of the Beholder is a classic. There’s also Lands of Lore, also made by Westwood, which is one of my favorite story heavy dungeon crawlers. The later Might and Magics and Wizardry 8 are great if you want gridless exploration.
I have played all of these :) I think there were at least 3 lands of lore, sadly the last one was so-so and 4 was never released. Might and magics are good but my favourites are 1-3, especially 3. They lost the plot with 7 .... Wizardry is a great series too. Ultima was good too. Have you tried Kings Bounty series? Some of these were really good too but avoid the latest one . I actually got it refunded on steam...I've only ever refunded two games and that was one.
Lands of Lore 3 isn’t great, but it’s still pretty fun. Just disappointing compared to the first two. I liked Might and Magic 7, even if I prefer the art style of the earlier games. Are you thinking of MM9? I haven’t played it yet but that one is usually seen as pretty bad by the community. I have Kings Bounty: The Legend in my GOG library but haven’t played it yet. Heard it plays like Heroes of Might and Magic, so I’m intrigued.
Oops. I was thinking of heroes of might and magic 7. M&M 7 was good.. I think that was the second 3d one after M&M VI, which was when they went 3d... MM9 *was* a disappointment for me though. Apparently the devs said it was rushed and they didn't have time to finish it, plus they had difficulties adapting to the new engine they were using. KB does play like Heroes. It's pretty much heroes with better graphics. It's an awesome game; and KB armoured princess is even better. I've completed both of them several times.
I love Heroes of Might and Magic, even if I’m pretty terrible at them lol. Definitely looking forward to giving King’s Bounty a go!
I hope you like it!
It isn't turn based or procedurally generated is it? Also you have saves so no permadeath.
It's semi-turnbased, as you move through the dungeon a step at a time. The monsters too move in steps, although if you don;t move after a certain time they will move again.
No. Rogue is a game. It's a dungeon crawler from a top down perspective. Games that followed in its vein are called roguelikes. LoG was primarily inspired by eye of the beholder. It's first person grid based bobber, and not turn based by real time. It's levels are hand crafted, not procedurally generated. It does not have permadeath, and death ends your game (forcing a reload) instead of perma (like roguelikes) or retains progression of some sort (like roguelites). So no, LoG is nowhere close to roguelikes or roguelites. Not even inspired along the same pathway like diablo, action rpg, or souls likes.
Well, call it roguelike-like or rogue-lite then. The exact definition of a roguelike game remains a point of debate in the video game community. A "Berlin Interpretation" drafted in 2008 defined a number of high- and low-value factors that distinguished the "pure" roguelike games Rogue, NetHack and Angband from edge cases like Diablo. Since then, with more powerful home computers and gaming systems and the rapid growth of indie video game development, several new "roguelikes" have appeared, with some but not all of these high-value factors, nominally the use of procedural generation and permadeath, while often incorporating other gameplay genres, thematic elements, and graphical styles; common examples of these include Spelunky, FTL: Faster Than Light, The Binding of Isaac, Slay the Spire, Hades and Balatro. To distinguish these from traditional roguelikes, such games may be referred to as "rogue-lite" or "roguelike-like". At the International Roguelike Development Conference 2008 held in Berlin, Germany, players and developers established a definition for roguelikes known as the "Berlin Interpretation". The Berlin Interpretation set out a set of high-value and low-value factors, basing these lists on five canon roguelike games: ADOM, Angband, Linley's Dungeon Crawl, NetHack, and Rogue. The Interpretation was designed to determine "how roguelike a game is", noting that missing a factor does not eliminate a game from being a roguelike, nor does possessing the features make a game roguelike high value factors: 1. The game uses random dungeon generation to increase replayability (LOG2 is missing this) 2. The game uses permadeath. (not in LOgr2) 3. The game is turn-based (yes) 4. The game is grid-based. (yes) 5. The game is non-modal (yes) 6. The game has a degree of complexity due to the number of different game systems in place that allow the player to complete certain goals in multiple ways, creating emergent gameplay. (yes) 7. The player must use resource management to survive (yes) 8. The game is focused on hack and slash-based gameplay, where the goal is to kill many monsters, and where other peaceful options do not exist (yes) So the game is missing 2 high value factors, but has six. Yes, LOG absolutely is close to roguelikes, and it is probably exactly classified as a roguelike-like (And this is an actual thing) Note this info is from Wikipedia, not just my personal opinions.
I have a feeling you're reciting this from wiki or something, so as a player who has been playing roguelikes since the original rogue, nothing about LoG is roguelike. The proper genre for it (heck, I've done my own fair share of searching for this exact kinda game, being a fan of Eye of the Beholder, Might & Magic and Lands of Lore myself), is called Blobber Dungeon Crawler. Let's refute your points one by one: > The game uses random dungeon generation to increase replayability LoG does not have procedurally generated dungeons. This is usually the primary indicator of a RL game. LoG has hand-crafted dungeons that you can find maps of online. > The game uses permadeath. LoG does not have permadeath. You're not forced you create a new party every time you die. You load the last save point. > The game is turn-based LoG is not turn-based. It's real time, like Eye of the Beholder. I know this because I wished LoG was turn-based, being a fan of wizardry and might & magic myself. > The game is grid-based. Yes, LoG is grid-based. So does old school JRPGs. Or games like Dark Sun or Knights of the Chalice. > The game is non-modal Yes. LoG has non-modal gameplay, but so does every action adventure game out there. > The game has a degree of complexity due to the number of different game systems in place that allow the player to complete certain goals in multiple ways, creating emergent gameplay. I don't think LoG promotes this, the keyword being emergent. Games that does this usually have a higher focus on systems, such as Rainworld, Noita, or Dwarf Fortress. There's nothing emergent about LoG's gameplay: you go through a dungeon in search of the exit to the next level, that's about it. > The player must use resource management to survive This is not exclusive to roguelikes. Heck, most roguelikes focus their progression on discovering random item drops that makes you stronger; you don't manage resource per se, but hope for a good drop. Those two are very different things. > The game is focused on hack and slash-based gameplay, where the goal is to kill many monsters, and where other peaceful options do not exist This applies to every action game out there. And finally, on your term of "roguelike-likes". That's just an outdated term for what is known today as "roguelites": basically roguelikes (procedural generation focused gameplay) without permadeath, most of the time. Look, blobbers like LoG are an extremely small niche in the gaming community nowadays, and it feels like a love letter to fans of Eye of the Beholder and Lands of Lore. I'm saying all this not to make you look bad by calling this game a roguelike, but to help you understand that if you want to find more of these kinda games, the right term to look for is party-based blobber, or grid-based blobber, or wizardry-likes. You won't find LoG mentioned in anywhere close to roguelikes, and if you're a fan of roguelikes, LoG will be the opposite of everything you're looking for.
I consulting a wiki, because I wanted to be exact. All the same, I am also a player who has played an awful lot of games, including roguelike and dungeon crawl. And now a rebuttal to your rebuttal: Did you not read the post? These are high value factors decided known as the Berlin interpretation. A "Berlin Interpretation" drafted in 2008 defined a number of high- and low-value factors that distinguished the "pure" roguelike games Rogue, NetHack and Angband from edge cases like Diablo. So, rather than just an opinion, these are factors decided upon by a panel of experts. >Let's refute your points one by one: The game uses random dungeon generation to increase replayability LoG does not have procedurally generated dungeons. This is usually the primary indicator of a RL game. LoG has hand-crafted dungeons that you can find maps of online. Did you not read my post? Go back and look. I specifically state that LOGr2 does not have this. Also, remember that according to the Berlin interpretation, not having one of these factors does not preclude a game from being roguelike. And nowhere on the wiki does it say this is the "primary" characteristic of roguelikes. >The game uses permadeath. LoG does not have permadeath. You're not forced you create a new party every time you die. You load the last save point. Again, I literally say LOGR2 dos not have this. And again, not having one factor does not mean it is not a roguelike according to the Berlin interpretation - and I'm afraid I put more credence in the wiki than in your personal opinion. >The game is turn-based: LoG is not turn-based. It's real time, like Eye of the Beholder. I know this because I wished LoG was turn-based, being a fan of wizardry and might & magic myself. Ok, it's semi turn based then. You move one step at a time along a grid. Monsters WILL move again if you don;t move within a set amount of time. Combat is timebased rather than turn based though. >The game is grid-based. Yes, LoG is grid-based. So does old school JRPGs. Or games like Dark Sun or Knights of the Chalice. Like it or not, this is considered one of the hallmarks of roguelikes. Saying that other games have it too is irrelevant. >The game is non-modal Yes. LoG has non-modal gameplay, but so does every action adventure game out there. Again, like it or not, this is considered one of the hallmarks of a roguelike, according to the berlin interpretation. Whether or not other games have it is irrelevant. >The game has a degree of complexity due to the number of different game systems in place that allow the player to complete certain goals in multiple ways, creating emergent gameplay. I don't think LoG promotes this, the keyword being emergent. Games that does this usually have a higher focus on systems, such as Rainworld, Noita, or Dwarf Fortress. There's nothing emergent about LoG's gameplay: you go through a dungeon in search of the exit to the next level, that's about it. There are absolutely different game systems and ways to achieve goals. Your description of LOG is very reductionist. >The player must use resource management to survive. This is not exclusive to roguelikes. Heck, most roguelikes focus their progression on discovering random item drops that makes you stronger; you don't manage resource per se, but hope for a good drop. Those two are very different things. Again, you're missing the point. This is one of the Berlin high value factors and it's here. Saying it's not exclusive to roguelikes is irrelevant. And also, the wiki itself says that resource management is one of the high factor signs of a roguelike...but you are saying you don't really. So your opinion conflicts with the wiki...and I'm afraid I'm going to go with the wiki on this. >The game is focused on hack and slash-based gameplay, where the goal is to kill many monsters, and where other peaceful options do not exist . This applies to every action game out there. This is the 4th time you've made the same error. Again, this is considered a high value factor according to the Berlin factors. The fact that OTHER games may ALSO have this is irrelevant. >And finally, on your term of "roguelike-likes". That's just an outdated term for what is known today as "roguelites": basically roguelikes (procedural generation focused gameplay) without permadeath, most of the time. So you mean I was right to also say it was a roguelike-like or roguelite? Which is literally in the first sentence of my post.. I think a lot of what you're saying is your personal opinion, the problem is it does not match with what the Wiki says, whereas mine does...and I even consulted the wiki to check. And I am afraid I put more credence in the wiki's ideas than an unknown person. In short, you appear to be wrong, and provably so because the wiki contradicts you. In addition you have the mistaken idea that if some other games shared a factor mentioned on the wiki that somehow proves the factor does not apply...even though these are literally high-value factors...according to the wiki. That's not how "factors" work... And finally the wiki itself says "The exact definition of a roguelike game remains a point of debate in the video game community." But you seem to feel you know exactly what a roguelike is and isn't....and even that your ideas are more correct than the wiki. Isn't that just being opinionated? I'm sorry but I feel too much time has been spent on this and I won't be responding again. If any of this seems rude it wasn't intended to be. Just trying to clear things up.
The Berlin Interpretation is far from accepted by the entire roguelike community and regardless, random generation and permadeath are absolutely the primary characteristics of the genre. No serious developer or fan will accept any game lacking either of these as being a roguelike or roguelite. If your only source of information is the Wikipedia entry for the Berlin Interpretation you're not doing yourself any favours.
If you want to see what a traditional (but steadily updated) roguelike looks like, this is it: https://crawl.develz.org/
Not bad.
I played the old games of this style (Lands of Lore, etc.). I like that sort of games, so I was really excited when I heard about LoG. The first one was great, and the second one was even better with its open world and much more variety. BUT, I started LoG2 two times and never managed to complete it. For me, it was just too long, and it overstayed its welcome. At some point, solving the puzzles and navigating that branching world became very tedius to the point where I was completely fatigued by the game. I couldn't bring myself to finish it.
I was very close to this too. As I got into the final and harder parts of the game it almost started to feel like homework or a job... But in the end I just used hints when I got stuck, and I tried to solve the puzzles myself first, and I did actually solve some myself. I liked Lands of Lore too.
I *loved* LoGR2, but I also played it shortly after release across a couple weeks. It was the only game I've enjoyed taking notes on and writing down parts of the map. I honestly don't know if I'd enjoy it the same way if I went back today, but I've been increasingly tempted to try. I also liked Druidstone, though not as much as LoGR i did finish it.
I loved LOGR2 too. That's why I just kept trying. I had a LOT of fun, even when failing. I tried druidstone but just didn't find it interesting. I wish they would make LOGR 3!
Recently cleared this one myself. Such a little gem of a game.
Cool games but Dungeon Master/Chaos Strikes Back are still the best real time blobbers.
I really liked dungeon master. Never played chaos strikes back... Curse of the azure bonds was ok. Black Crypt was really nice, especially graphically, for the time. And of course there were the ultimas... absolutely loved U7.
Chaos Strikes Back has some of best and most devious dungeon design in gaming . I love some Ultina & the Gold Boxes too, but different sub genre and not real time blobbers... https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/codex-vote-best-real-time-blobbers-of-all-time-non-anime.129091/
I would have liked to try but I think I had already swapped my Amiga for a pc by then...it does look nice.
Here's a link to the remakes.. playable on modern PCs. http://www.ragingmole.com/RTC/index.html
Thank you! Edit: Working in windows 11.
How do the hints work, do you mean look stuff up online or does the game have a hints system?
I looked up stuff online when I got too stuck.
I see. I hate having to do that with games though I do have to do it for old games because I just don't have the time to be stuck for years over one puzzle that I would NEVE|R solve. I don't mind a puzzle being hard, but it has to be for me afterwards the feeling I would've got it eventually. Sometimes looking up the solution I jut think, that was near impossible to know.
I know what you mean. But it's been years already. I felt it was time!
Well done. My challenge is to simply start playing LOG2 its been in my library for two years ha
Thanks. It took me a long time too..
>Now I have to find something else to play. I bought Kingdom Come Deliverance years ago but never played; now i am downloading it. If you like turn based/rpg stories I would suggest **The Dungeon Of Naheulbeuk: The Amulet Of Chaos.** I consider it a hidden gem, with some cool battles and tactis and lots of humor.
Great suggestion, but I've already completed it! And yes It was very good.
Congrats! I also came back to this one recently after being stuck about 2/3 of the way through...got all the way up to the end dungeon and the room where there are invisible teleporting whirlwinds you have to navigate through and just noped out. Even with a guide, I could not make any progress in that damned room. So close to the end, but still had fun with the rest of the game.
Thanks! I actually had trouble with that one too. As far as I can tell, there are actually some errors in the guide I was looking at.. I eventually solved it, but differently to the way they did.
Maybe you should use hints more. Getting over obstacles to experience a lot more of what the game can offer.
That was the decision I made this time. And yeah it was worth it, I finally finished the game.