0
4

[–] Terkala 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

As much as many people hate it, I find that the Berlin Interpretation is a good way to judge roguelike-ness.

DF hits most of the high value targets.

Random environment generation

Check

Permadeath

Check

Turn-based

Check

Grid-based

Check

Non-modal

Not check, it does have an overworld.

Complexity

I feel like it deserves two check marks.

Resource management

Check

Hack'n'slash

Lots of combat, check here

Exploration and discovery

No unidentified items in exploration mode, so half a checkmark here.

Total, 7-8 out of 9. Most people consider anything 6 or above to be a "Roguelike" via the modern definition. Binding of Isaac is a 6. FTL is 6. ADoM and Crawl are only 8s on the above list.

0
3

[–] Kyuketsuki-sama [S] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I've never seen the Berlin Interpretation before, that's interesting! TIL, thank you!

0
2

[–] Terkala 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Be warned that a lot of people really strongly dislike it. But I've yet to see a solid argument for why it's a bad definition to use when defining what is a roguelike and what is not.

0
1

[–] DParse 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I would absolutely call it a roguelike - it's much closer to Rogue than, say, Binding of Isaac or Crypt of the Necrodancer. You explore randomly generated dungeons with a perma-death character that you can train to be good for your playstyle. The differences between them don't overcome the similarities.

0
0

[–] boogieman_ 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I feel a bit bad necroing this post, but it looks like this sub is a bit slow anyway... I think DF is a roguelike for sure. Even if you don't consider fortress mode strictly roguelike, the game still has adventure mode, which by any definition is a roguelike.

0
0

[–] DickTwaddler 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Hmm, I'd say the main game belongs in the "monster management" category, akin to dungeon keeper, but the adventurer mode is definitely a roguelike.