Eh, there's disagreement in the definition of the "Roguelike" genre, I gather; amok's definition fits my own impression--albeit that I'll admit that I'm not a part of the Roguelike community.

As to Diablo, I haven't played it myself but I believe that it doesn't include perma-death, and thus wouldn't fit amok's definition. If it did have perma-death, then yes, it probably would count as a Roguelike of one sort or another.

Well, there's Baroque (probably the original more than the remake, though the remake can be played in first person too)

Well yes, shockingly enough I care about gameplay (turn-based combat, tile-based, permadeath, random generation) to classify a game as a roguelike, not perspective. Yes, Dungeon Hack was all of those things. Yes, it's actually not particularily difficult to change perspective in a roguelike without touching any of its base qualities - well unless you want to suggest that tower defense games are 25% roguelikes because of the way camera is positioned :-P

I know, shocking! I do wonder what your reaction to actual problems would be like if all it takes to shock you are people with different opinion :-P

Diablo II does have an option for permadeath.

True, but maybe Receiver fits your criteria then. From what I've seen, if you die you lose all progress and start from scratch again, in a new environment, and there are items to pick up, but tbh it doesn't have any more item management than your average shooter, and most of the items are just ammo, weapons or story logs. I also suppose it's rather short, and to me it feels more like a tech demo than a commercial game.


Dungeon Hack turn-based?

The perspective was an integral part of the genre.

Bending the definition to that extent leads to a muddying of the waters. When somebody tells me that there's a roguelike, then I expect it to have something in common with Rogue.

And yes, it is difficult to change the perspective, a large part of that game was seeing all around you knowing that those tempting items could seal your fate. Being locked in to being able to only see what's directly in front of you greatly diminishes that aspect of the game.

Ah, my mistake--in which case I suppose that one might say that it has an optional "Roguelike mode".

Yes, it was a part of the genre. Not much of a genre tho, since clearly, any game belonging to it has to be a genuine copy of Rogue to belong to it - with that approach, it's not particularily surprising that it pretty much died instead of evolving.

Having everything in common with rogue except for perspective doesn't classify as 'Having something in common with Rogue'?

Oh you're right, it wasn't! I remember it wrong. Nevermind, I'm sure someone, at some point came up with changing perspective in a roguelike game.

It's a completely different experience. By your logic Tomb Raider would be a doom-like as the main thing they differ in is the fact that one is first person and the other is 3rd person. Going between those perspectives has a huge influence on the game mechanics and how they work.

You must be playing that game in a completely different way from me. Which is fine, it's asinine to tell people they're having fun wrong.

And jumping puzzles, and acrobatics... Gears of War would have been a better example. Then again, the defining quality of First Person Shooters is being first person and being a shooter, thus the name. Defining qualities of roguelikes are... Whatever whoever is playing them thinks they are, that's the problem, which absolutely brings up the
Well... Yes? What does that have to do with anything?

Downloading now :)

I see what you mean. I think that I need to add something about character in the criteria also- character growth, choice, rpg lite elements? Receiver is ... I struggle to call it roguelike, though it have randomisation and perma-death. I think it is because there is no character progression in it (that I could see... I keep dying at first mob...) I know Receiver started out very much as gun porn, and it shows (also why I did not try it before).

On the other hand, Rogue itself had next to none of that as far as I recall: it had character levels, but they simply increased stats, with no input from the player.

That said, I feel that I should mention the term "Roguelite"; as I understand it, this covers games that use elements of Roguelikes, but don't go all the way. I believe that I've seen it applied to Rogue Legacy and Tower of Guns, for example.

ToG do have static stat progression, so it fits. Receiver have none (that I could see). I do count static stat increase as character progression (your character grows stronger)

Just here to add my voice to those others speaking highly of Tower of Guns.