The Problem with Reviewing Roguelikes
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 кві 2022
- Roguelikes. This is a genre of games I've always been fascinated with. Today, I have a special video to discuss the unworldly phenomenon that is Roguelikes. We analyze the likes of Dead Cells, Hades, Enter the Gungeon, Noita, Binding of Isaac, and more!
Music used:
pastebin.com/6CRsKHbh
My anime channel:
/ @pseychie_gi
Join the Discord server!
/ discord
#roguelikes #pseychie
v1.0 - Ігри
If you like this type of content, let me know what other topics you're interested in!
btw if you're a fellow weeb, considering checking out my anime channel. New upload over there:
Why Myanimelist Reviews are Embarrassingly Bad - ua-cam.com/video/G8ybLJ0SNvY/v-deo.html
Hey pseychie, i recommend you some rougelike games on android. "Otherworld legends"
Thanks for your attention.
Edit : i forget ,its already on steam btw
I also recommend playing soul knight on mobile . It's quite fun and looks like Enter The Gungeon on android
I think this type of content is thr most interesting one since its something a topic that rogue like players will be interested in, thanks for the video psyechie.
Ayo waaait...
How tf is a video thats uploaded in 38 mins has an 9 hour ago comment?????
I feel like I have a “got the game” for DeadCells after 300+ hours. I am still finding that there is so much to learn through all the different builds and just little nuances the game has to offer. I absolutely adore this genre
I have played it for preaty long
And I'm preaty good
But man
Am I still a bambling fool when it comes to synergizing weapon effects
Got any tips? I'm still struggling at 5 bc without feeling that I'm progressing... I get how synergies, mutations, etc... work, but I feel like I'm missing something huge that would improve my runs!
@@goRestart Try to take all items that interact with HP that you have. Focusing on a single mechanic for a while might make you find an interesting idea of synergies. Try to find at least recovery mutation, face flask and vampirism (old, recovery ver.) and you will understand it.
@@dusanivanovic5426 nice, thanks! I'll try this :)
I’ve been on my grind to get all the runes, and S.S. (Slumbering something) is starting to melt my brain.
7:45 “All roguelikes are single player” proceeds to play the only multiplayer roguelike in his catalog
fr bro i was like how u gonna say that. same with no cheese build for dark souls lmao that's a joke.
He found a way in the video to not reduce the likelihood of a like or subscribe, while baiting out comments like yours. He's won the game you didn't know he was playing.
pathos
@@pwndnoob4937 Or , you know, sometimes people are wrong while still making enjoyable content, it happens
@@celeste1727 eh. It's too coincidental to say that and one of the only multiplayer ones
8:14 "your not supposed to win the game" shows noita
I feel that
i still havent got past the hiisi base (but then again i havent played noita in forever)
@@TerraKnight27 same
I managed to get get a build that gave me infinite minions to fight for me and I still lost. I got a build that shot so many bullets it lagged the game significantly and perma stunned enemies and still lost. I only won with Plasma beam bloodlust glass canon combo.
Noita is fun bc you can make a wand that vaporises the whole level and can kill the final boss in 2 seconds, but if u walk into some funny pink liquid while not paying attention or blow up a propane tank you're just dead
lol Noita is literally so hard, (i can't get past the jungle most runs but furthest i got was the temple). However, Noita is also the game where you basically become Supreme Calamitas from terraria calamity mod if you become good and get a super long run so the skill ceiling for noita is basically infinite.
i feel like new player experience is also very important, if you don't like the game for the first 10 hours (and like it after that) then that's a major issue which might just make the game not worth playing if you don't want to sink hours of your life into it
true, really liked ur comment, hope u do well :)
Not even that, more like the first 10 minutes. It's like reading a book, if the beginning doesn't immediately hook someone, they will drop it and move on.
@@theotherjared9824
*Plays doki doki literature club for 10 minutes
Meh,just another generic dating simulator,not interested
And thanks to your logic,I just missed probably one of the best indie horror games in the decade. Not all good games makes people go “wow that’s good” at the very first beginning
@@Holenpense Yes they do. The reason DDLC got so popular was because people got hooked on it immediately. The beginning was just as captivating as the end, which is why the game is so good. People that aren't into dating Sims will not like that game, and that's fine.
@@theotherjared9824
“People that aren’t into dating sims will not like that game”
You know that ddlc is only like…*half dating sim* right? Someone who doesn’t play it simply because every ‘they don’t like dating sims’ is just,in the most straightforward way possible,dumb
While I agree that 10-20 hours is not enough to truly understand a roguelike, I do think that such a time investment is (usually) enough to judge whether a game is or isn't good. This should after all be plenty enough time to experience the core loop of a game and see if it is fun to play. This is the case for any game not just roguelikes.
A roguelike game has two layers: the base game (dungeon crawler/top down shooter/card game/city builder/anything with sufficient complexity) and the roguelike meta-game. This two layered structure is what makes roguelikes a meta-genre rather than a genre of its own*. A Roguelike is defined by randomness, a large amount of content and complexity that work together to create a long process of discovery, experimentation, exploration and mastery that is unique to roguelikes. Reviewing this upper roguelike layer is probably impossible on the relatively few hours a professional game reviewer has available for some random indie title.
Reviewing the lower layer on the other hand, is absolutely possible in such a timeframe. All the games shown in the video are great examples of their base genre and fun to play not just on the hundredth run, but also on the first. In a good roguelike game the roguelike layer interacts with the base layer to give it the depth, options and unpredictability. If the base game is not fun, acquiring mastery is a slog and no-one is going to stick around for long enough for the rogue-like part to matter.
*I'm specifically talking about the modern use of roguelike, not the Berlin Interpretation.
Agreed, it’s really hard to get into a rougelike/lite that you aren’t drawn into by the core gameplay loop. I love dead cells, Isaac, RoR2, and hades. But I don’t like slay the spire. The card mechanics don’t suit my action enjoyment play style. However there is also a flip side, where, after playing and unlocking items, learning synergies and whatnot, the way you play the game evolves. For example, you’re not going to play the same with tactics vs brutality. But in order to experience those complexities of the game, you have to fundamentally enjoy the core gameplay that it offers
Very well said. You don't need an extensive knowledge of the meta layer to give a meaningful review of a roguelike. The brunt of the game lays in the first layer. To the vast majority of players, that's what's most relevant.
I wouldn’t say all games are reviewable after 10 hours. That doesn’t sound like enough for a story-oriented game. I do think it’s enough for roguelikes though on a very basic level. You can generally know what to expect aside from the unique play styles or mechanics of certain characters. You can try a few characters and see how much changes. Maybe the game isn’t fun for a certain reason and then one character solves that issue and you write the review without playing that character, but generally I think you can figure out if a game is fun in even less time.
That's true
After those 10-20 hours you won't probably get a rouge like, but you'll definitely know wether you like it or not, since no one would after that time go for 100 more hours of what they don't enjoy, becouse there's supposedly something good after that
So it might not be an accurate show of the full game, it's what people will experience at the begging
Hello, sorry, could you give some example of a roguelike city builder? Sounds interesting 🤓
Personally I said yes for every single one of these. Reviews aren't really supposed to be comprehensive analysis. As long as the reviewer is upfront with how much time they spend with something, it's fair.
Same. Reviews and "complete analysis" are different things, and it's probably not a good idea look for new ways to gatekeep roguelikes.
When the average player is only going to paly Isaac long enouhg to beat mom once or twice at most, and half of them dont even do this, I think these 10 hours in reviews are in fact more valid and useful than 5000 hour reviews.
This.
Most people that buy RPG's or Roguelikes never see all the content or even complete the game so it's totally fair to make a review with 20 hours on a game if you are upfront with your playtime.
Genre enthusiasts will buy most high profile games of the genre anyway and reviews only serve as validation for them.
I think most people that respond to reviews in comments, etc are not the target audience
i know this probably was more of a joke thing, but deeming something OP as he did for corruption is something i'd disagree with.
reviews aren't supposed for the people who play a game for 100+ hours, it's a question if the average person will get what they pay for.
i mean, i've played hades for about 100 hours (99.6 according to steam) and i think i get the game. i have reached the true ending, i don't know how long before i stopped playing. i have tried a lot of builds, i have never played the resetting fists (athena/ares combo) people use in speedruns, i have never tried speedrunning it.
i'd say my word about this game should be worth something, but is it for the average buyer? according to achievement stats, 84% have escape tartarus, so i guess we can about 90% of buyers actually played the game. and 50% of buyers actually did a full run (so 5/9 players did at least ONE full run). it's safe to say these people probably enjoyed the game. but only 8% reached the epilogue. so like 15%-20% of people who seemed to enjoy the game did finish it completely.
actually, my main concern about hades is that you can't choose from which side the mirror powers are getting removed when raising the heat. this might be an issue for me personally as i'm not a roguelike-only player, but i prefer removing the bonus stat upgrades to removing the increased luck upgrades. removing the luck upgrades just increases the amount of runs you need to get good builds, while removing the stat upgrades would actually just make you weaker
Also, i like hollow knight more than Hades, but i've played HK only for 80 hours compared to the 100 of hades. and for hollow knight i can certainly say there is content i'm missing, as i have achieved 112%, but not gotten the last ending.
What i think is worse than these "hey, i've liked the game but there seem to some issues with it"-reviews are the "this game is way too hard and unplayable"-reviews for roguelikes. a genre that is based on doing mistakes, learning from them and completely mastering the game shouldn't be deemed too hard by people who don't usually enjoy roguelikes.
tl;dr: i agree, if you look at the numbers even people who enjoy the games will not play them fully.
Reviews are supposed to guide players to what they should buy with their money. If a game gets stale after reaching a certain part or gets better in a story game, it would change the review, so why not for rogue likes? The point of this video isn't "the reviewer has to spend 1k hrs and unlock everything just to review" but more of experience most stuff an average player would do to guide both casual and hardcore gamers to what they should buy with their money. Maybe play a couple more runs after finishing hades. Maybe beat moms heart 11 times to unlock sheoul and mausoleum. Maybe beat the game with 4 of the characters in slay the spire and maybe even try some ascensions. Most of these would take as long as a normal game (around 40-60). Some of the examples he mentioned felt like the reviewer's first impressions not a review. People sometimes forget what a review is.
If you spend 100 hours to "get" the game, chances are you're going to leave a very positive review because if you didn't like it you would've dropped it earlier. So the sample of reviews by people who "get" the game will always be biased. Meanwhile, a review from someone partway through the learning curve can still be an useful data point.
I think that consumers ought to see reviews as data points, no single review can be the complete source of truth for informing a purchase. Conversely, reviewers should not write like their word is the complete and unbiased source of truth about a game.
Actually in dark souls (and friends) there is a build that you just cheese everything. It’s called the pacifist build, basically you make the enemy face the final boss - gravity.
How do u fight this hidden boss "Gravity"?
@@xrefed so you jump of a building, in real life, and the battle starts at the hospital
@@xrefed By jumping off a cliff
Kicking people down a cliff or making them suicidal so they jump down by themselves doesn’t sound like pacifism to me.
@@atmatey Well at least that's kind of pacifism, i hope?
All reviews made in good faith are valid reviews, all reviews must be taken with a grain of salt, as all reviews are biased. A review for a roguelike from someone who's played for 10 hours is a review from someone who doesn't fully understand the game, like 99% of players, and is thus a better review than one from someone with 3000 hours for the vast majority. In addition, no one knows if they'll fall into that 1% who truly "know" the game until they play, so reviews from this group hold little value to anyone, as these reviews would only help someone in this category, which as mentioned previously, will not know if they fall into this category util they've played the game.
A review, in its best use, is a collaboration between the person who wrote the review doing their best to give a fair representation of the product in question, and a consumer having some form of awareness of what had them look at the review, what they generally like, and what pitfalls they have to watch out for.
I'm legally blind with cerebral palsy. So I look for things like "Does it have controller support?", "What is the controller layout?", "Does it have controller customization?". If I'm watching someone showing part of the game things I might infer are "Can I read the text?", "Can I see the map?", "How fast do enemies seem to be dying?", "Are there difficulty settings?", "What happens upon death?", etc.
There are three core components that need to be considered:
1) Is the gamer generally well made. Does it run properly, how complete is it, what do people seem to think of the gameplay systems, story, graphics design, music, etc?
2) Does the game have something that draws me in? This could be an aesthetic choice, a gameplay style, the presence of multiplayer, a certain theme or story beat, the pace of the game or any other thing based on my mood.
3) The third is "Can I play this game?", which is where all the questions I listed above begin being researched.
Sometimes careful research like this can allow me to go outside my comfort zone and play things I normally wouldn't touch. Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance (I tend to hate permadeath), Bioshock, Brutal Legend, Wild Arms 4, Super Mario 3D World, Borderlands, Genshin Impact, Astroneer, Sun Haven, and most recently Cult of the Lamb (which is how I ended up here) are all great examples for various reasons.
While I do agree with most of the points in the video, I think a lot of the points that you made can be applied to practically any game. Although more so with roguelikes than with any other genre, I think we can't just dismiss reviews just because they "didn't get the game". Its important to know how accessible a game is for the mainstream audience, and if someone didnt "get" the game 10 hours in but its a game where players only "get" it after 50+ hours, then I feel that its the developers job to create a game thats fun until you get to that point. It shouldn't feel like a slog or boring to get to the fun part of the game, and I feel it shouldnt be the responsibility of the player to go through so much to get to the part where they finally "get" the game
i agree with most points in this video too except the tainted lost bs which is mostly all wrong or gets the character wrong
they practically can not be applied to any game bcs some games are made with a scalability factor in mind. once you know the formular seeing how wide it is scaled out does not matter at all. there is no secret mechanic you can discover after 50h in an ubisoft game.
I would say all the rewiews you mentioned at the begining are valid, because an "outsiders" perspective is not less valid than a "insiders" one. Its just different. So different rewiews are useful to different people.
Definitely! Reviews are not merely meant for the passionately invested fans to check their notes with the writer’s. If a game in a more niche genre has a lot of difficulty selling new players on it before those players hit their frustration/disinterest threshold, that is more likely attached to the game and its design. Approachability is huge when you’re looking to expand your player base - if a game takes 20-50 hours of play to “get it,” then yes there’s going to be a lot of drop-off of players who aren’t hooked before then.
The reviews in the intro are valid so long as the reviewer emphasizes that this is simply their opinion. There's this extremely stupid narrative going on in the gaming world that you have to dedicate your life to a game to properly talk about it, or that criticizing a game's difficulty means that you simply suck at it. Neither of those are true. For example, I absolutely love Ninja Gaiden. It has some of the best combat of all time. But Jesus Christ are those games unfair. They're extremely difficult, but they're also unfair. Bosses can punish you for parrying them (cough cough genshin in 2), Alma just straight up phases through your attacks at random, and enemies will spam the most annoying projectiles ever. If all that is too much for you, then I understand. It's a shame, but I don't blame you, or think that you aren't good enough. It's the same with Rogue likes. Not everyone has 300 hours to sink into a game, and that's ok. The perspective of someone going in without any prior knowledge or experience with the game is vital information for consumers. As long as you recognize that you don't have the complete picture, it's ok to talk about a game you haven't mastered.
I still feel like this whole video works under the premise that "roguelikes can't ever be badly designed" since any problem beating the game can always be explained by "you're not getting it", which just makes roguelikes the get out of jail free card of videogame genres and can't ever under any circumstance be bad since any and all frustration is "by design". In the end there's more that makes a game good than just whether you can get good at it and beat it or not. There are base level measures of quality (besides graphics and sound) that you can base your review on. In the end if you need to play 40 hours to unlock the one character that feels fun to play, then that's the game's fault, not yours. If you're not having fun losing over and over, that's the game's fault.
I remember playing this roguelike on my phone where potions had unknown properties and didn't keep the same colours, along with basically most other consumables; this meant that a potion with a specific colour or a scroll with a specific symbol could have different effects on subsequent runs, which by itself is fine... until the player starts entering unwinnable fights where those consumables can do a world of difference and they are scarce enough that the player can't afford to just throw every single one at enemies to see what happens. The result, then, was a game that was slow, incredibly hard and horrifyingly punishing while teaching the player absolutely nothing about how to prevent those horrible instant deaths; it almost felt like I just wasn't understanding the game, but then I realized that a game that randomly throws a chair on my face without ever making any indication of why is not worth my time in any form, so I uninstalled it and I don't want to install it again.
@@maxwellsterling That's a pretty common game mechanic in older rougelikes or rougelikes emulating older roguelikes. _Dungeon Crawl Stone Soup_ , _Midboss_ , _Brogue_ , and _Shattered Pixel Dungeon_ all use that mechanic for one or more of their consumable item categories.
The idea is to figure out which items are which in the safest way possible. Do you use your scrolls of identification (if you know which ones they are)? Do you drink your potions and hope you drink the health potion after the poison one? Do you try to use your items midbattle and hope they work?
Don't do that last one if you can help it. I've done it way too many times. It just results in death.
For a roguelike that would be less frustrating to deal with in regards to potion testing, _Midboss_ has fast and easy healing relative to other rougelikes with its bodyswap mechanics. Plus, only potions are unidentified; books and scrolls don't have to be sussed out.
Yeah... right around the "let's dunk on the entire rest of the gaming industry" segment, I started feeling like the point of this video was that roguelikes are fundamentally better than all other games, and cannot be reviewed because everyone has a unique experience. Which is really just the old "git gud" philosophy--if you don't like a game, it must be because you haven't practiced it enough, or because you're just bad, or whatever; it can't possibly be the game's fault. But there must be differences in quality that are more or less consistent between players, otherwise every roguelike would be as popular as Elden Ring.
Ultimately, you have to look for reviews from people with a similar perspective and/or likely time investment to yourself. If you're only likely to play a game for 20 hours, someone who already played it for 20 hours can probably tell you what to expect pretty accurately, even if they didn't really "get" the game according to someone who played for 1000 hours. No two people will have exactly the same experience, but that's true of anything, really.
A fun, up to 2 player, Rougelike called Wizard of Legend is a relatively simple Rougelike. It doesn't take long "to get" but still takes as long to master and unlock everything
Yes, WoL is really cool. It didn't click for me as much as I expected and I've never actually won a run, but it was a pretty fun couple weeks messing with all the spells
tysm for this comment, this is exactly the kind of new game i've been looking for to play with my sister when she returns from the hospital
Yes! Not very talked about but WoL is so cool, all the different spells and the fact you can take a bunch with you at the start makes it really fun. I unlocked everything until they added more I think
this comment gave me a league of legends trauma trigger
Yeah, it was fun when I played it with my friend. We got it and it was the first roguelike we experienced.
As a single player game, I suck at it lol. It's too punishing for getting hit. Much easier unlocking stuff with two people. Double the resources lmao
Yes they are. Josh strife hayes is a MMORPG "reviewer" and also tackled that issue in a genre which is supposed to hold you attention for YEARS and got the same issue as you said, but ten times fold.
Even if you play a rogue like for like 5 hours and then quit it because it was too bad, or you beated it. You can still give a legit review. You just cant review the game in its entirety. You probably had to do multiple runs to kill mom, so you can feel how good the repetitiveness is.
A new player experience review is REALLY important and good to see. If the flaws of a new player experience just end up with people saying "Y-You have to play the game for 100 hours and do 200 runs" then its most of the time just a bad mechanic and design. Even if its intended.
I think a problem is the way people tend to look at reviews. Someone giving their perspective of what a game has allowed them to experience is exactly what a review should be. The claim that someone has to have played all of a game to give a review would be baseless: Depending in its length a large Portion of the playerbase will not do so, thus the reviews are very much representative of a part of the player base.
Holy crap yes, this. I ran a book blog for three years and one of the biggest things I figured out during that time is that what I said was only half of the equation. The other half is a reader or viewer having an understanding of their own tastes and preferences, with my review hopefully being written in such a way that it can help them understand whether a product was worth their money and time. The less aware an individual is of their likes and dislikes, the more likely it is that they will not find a suitable and matching product and end up dissatisfied.
'you can't cheese dark souls'. For the most part I laugh at this with my swarm of flies elden ring build, but even with mimic tear and myself both focusing down malenia with bleed (and she is literally WEAK to bleed) I still struggled for quite a while...
Honestly, I'm having trouble thinking of a build that DOESN'T cheese Elden ring
@@corvo6391 For bosses that aren't THAT hard like the first godskin apostle or like rennala and radhan I used a basic nagakuba, but swarm of flies allowed me to frist try maliketh and fortissax, and second try morgott. placiduax is next and he is not that hard but he has about 50x the resistances to statuses than other bosses(not an exaggeration). Such an annoyigboss tbh...
elden ring is not dark souls tho??
@@crcker3841 ok sure
wait people actually cheese the game i thought it was a joke
I answered yes to all the questions at the beginning, since the person would just be reviewing based on their experiences, while we might disagree, they aren't invalid.
I bet you wouldn't be saying this if an IGN critic rated your favorite game 2/10 after playing it for an hour though. I know I wouldn't, even though I technically agree with you. I think the examples stated in the video are valid, but where's the line? If they're valid, why does the example with the IGN critic feel so invalid to me? I think you're simplifying it too much, and reviewing based on one's own experiences does not automatically make a review valid.
@@ddd-op5wy To sort of answer your question, "where's the line?" Statistically, most players will bounce off a game after 2 hours if they're not enjoying it. To be fair, if you engage in a piece of entertainment media for 2 hours, and haven't found enough to keep you going, it seems completely fair to drop it. However, I would expect a professional reviewer to dig a little deeper. The '10 hours' example given by the video already seems more than generous, even for rogue-like games. If they haven't found something to like in 10 hours, then the average player likely isn't going to find that something in 2 hours.
I disagree with your last statement, "reviewing based on one's own experiences does not automatically make a review valid." One can ONLY review based on one's own experience. If a game hasn't provided a positive experience in 10 hours then that is surely the fault of the game. It is an issue that plagues rogue-like games in particular due to their random nature, but if 10 hours hasn't given you a positive experience then it's still the game's fault, not to mention there are definitely ways to give players a positive experience sooner by giving the player favourable RNG in their first few runs.
Much like we can't expect a game to truly be made for everyone, we can't expect a reviewer to write from everyone's perspective. It is up to the audience to look at multiple sources, find reviewers they trust, and not take a single review at face value.
@@ddd-op5wy I agree that an IGN critic should try to review based on what they actually think the game would play for others. I was referring more to user reviews. While I might think that the ghost in spelunky 2 is an important feature, that doesn't make the person who said the ghost was annoying incorrect. They are just talking about their experiences.
A reviewer usually can't "get the game" at the time of the review, that's a monumental task to ask of them. They can tell you if they had fun for the first 20-50 hours and what they liked about it. If they act any differently, then they're probably lying to you or making 1-2 tests a month and nothing else.
Almost 3000 hours in Isaac and I'm still learning how to play the game.
i feel like im the only one who conpleted 100% it in 600h (sadly only afterbirth+ )
@@thechadgreenmage Nah dude, infinity percent guy here.
@@TheKrisk ho sorry master
@@thechadgreenmage i completed rebirth - repentance in like 700 hours
pfffft I completed 100% in like literally 3 days
But still, saying that someone who has played a rougelike for 15 hours doesn‘t have a „valid“ opinion on it is gatekeeping as fuck. If a videogame is legitimately not enjoyable in it‘s first fifteen hours, then giving a bad review is perfectly reasonable. Saying that someone who gave your favourite game a bad review simply doesn‘t „get“ the game is gatekeeping in it‘s purest form and you should stay far away from that
I’ve always wrestled with the concept of rating and reviewing. As much as I love to do it I think it always come back to with opinions being like butt holes. Everyone has one. On the opposite end I think to truly rating review some thing and it’s complete essence you should have some sort of experience, expertise or an eye for whatever it is you’re rating and reviewing. The newest Batman film in my mind was a masterpiece 10 out of 10. But some of my friends they held it to the Christopher Nolan standard. I had to help him understand that those things are not comparable. Yes they are both Batman but both of them try to achieve different things. They have also never read a Batman comic book in their lives or seen any other Batman films. So at the end of the day I kind of have to take what they say for the grain of salt. And I think Hades is a masterpiece. It’s one of my favorite games of all time. I’ve put 700 hours into that game. But my brother couldn’t wrap the concept around his mind. That’s resulting in him not entirely understanding preventing him from truly enjoying the mechanics experience of the game. So in his opinion after five hours the game was “meh”. That to say. It’s all opinions at the end of the day. I think everyone can find the value and beauty in everything.
When you brought up the Batman comparison, I sorta felt that way with Morbius. I am totally clueless about his origins as a character so I thought he was a neat addition to the universe, and the story felt nice, but all the critics were berating the movie for so many superficial reasons because they compare it to the cream of the comic movie crop, and that is sorta unfair...
Reviews are difficult for games, mainly because games often appeal with vastly different styles and gameplay. Some of these styles cause biases in reviews.
Rogue likes are on the rough end of the stick, as with how games are commonly reviewed by reviewers, they will not have the time or patience to 'get' how to play, or to understand what the game is really about, because generally they have 50 other games to be playing and they do not have 100 extra hours to freely dump into every roguelike to get a fuller understanding and appreciation of the game.
I only started to fully appreciate what the binding of isaac had to offer after getting all the completion marks for the tainted lost. I also spent 200 fucking hours of my life getting runs deep into the game only to die to some random ass skill issue. Most reviewers cannot do this.
In the end, like with all forms of reviewing, the best thing to do is find someone with similar tastes to you, and to understand where you differ and why. It often ends up being more accurate for finding a game you like than general reviews.
You showcased a Dunkview in your video so I take it you're a fan of his work.
Dunkey makes a really good point in one of his videos that is a taking a look at "reviews" in general by stating something along the lines of it is important to understand who the reviewer is and what they are into when you look for a review. People have preferences, and people will rate things they like higher than things they don't like, because art (and games) is subjective.
If the question is "How long should you play a game before reviewing it", well it's kinda up to the reviewer when they feel ready to review it.
Over time, the audience will find reviewers that they have trust/faith in will give the game in question a fair rating after playing it for enough, otherwise you just wouldn't keep paying attention to that reviewer.
I platted both Hades, Slay the spire, and many countless rouge-likes, including enter the gungeon as well. And my instant thought was "yeah, I see them as valid enough. No one has the time to learn and memories everything but it's on point"
so yeah, it's up to you... Do whatever you feel like but you have to at least try it for an hour before judging anything.
Soul Knight, Blazing Beaks and GTTOD are also great roguelikes, that I highly recommend you.
Your vids are amazing! Thanks for making them for us!
Blazing Beaks is sick. I tried it on my own, found it ok, but then I played it with a friend and it was SOOO much better. Really one of the first roguelikes I’ve seen that feels designed around multiplayer. I found it weird when he said roguelikes are all singleplayer games, because that’s totally not a requirement, and plenty of people love the multiplayer in games like spelunky.
@@Peastable Nuclear Throne's multiplayer is a whole different thing from single player without changing much - which i love. The reviving system is better than ETG and/or Blazing beaks in my opinion. The only problem i have with multiplayer is if both players have 1 health collectively
@@Ainsatu yeah I’ve heard good things about nuclear throne. Never played it tho.
It all depends on what you expect a *review* to give you. Playing 5 to 10 hours of a given game is a huge time investment for most people. A guy reviewing any given game after that amount of time will give a good idea of what the first X hours of a given game will actually look like, which is the most important factor.
Taking your exemples - 30% of players don't ever unlock the womb, 39.5% never get past Mom's heart to unlock Eden. A review ending there would still correspond to the experience of 4 out of 10 players who bought the game.
The game is great, but at teh beginning unlocking things is very grindy. Needing to kill mom's heart 11 times to unlock it lives is a bit much
Great video. Also for me it's pretty cool to hear some bg music from Umineko no Naku Koro ni, that's you used in your video. Such a nice anime and visual novel!
Man that Slay the Spire analogy hit me hard - praise the algorithm for delivering you to me man - subbed!
I still feel a review is valid even if you didn't end up "getting it" as long as you are upfront with how much you played and establish that there is likely more you havent experienced. I have 31 hours on risk of rain 2 and I haven't really got it yet (Unless I use artifact of control that shit is my jam) but I still think my opinion on that game is valid. (My opinion is that it's pretty decent)
I think all reviews are valid because people can have preferences and while their review isn't an accurate representation of the entire game, reviews are just supposed to be insights into what other people think about the game. Some people aren't the type to sink hundreds of hours into a game unlocking and discovering every little thing, and may just enjoy other parts of the game.
So the cuphead review that didn't get past the tutorial because the reviewer literally couldn't read on-screen instructions is "valid"?
@@AtomicArtumas ok that's not what I meant by any review, the person has to at least play the game
@@AtomicArtumas i'm sorry but this is a strawman, there's casual play and there's "I have an actual lobotomy" play
6:58
"It's time to give me something new" - shows Elden Ring
Man of culture
That feeling when Akiyama's theme comes on and I wonder if my Yakuza playlist is on autoplay in another tab.... Also great video, I'm CONSTANTLY finding people complaining about Slay The Spire being totally luck based or too RNG heavy to the point I ended up actually writing a guide in no short words telling people to stop tunnel visioning on builds lol. It's so true though, at the 10-15 hour mark you're only just scratching the surface and barely have any idea how the game works beyond the bare basics.
I bought lottery 10 times and won nothing, left a review of 0/10 saying it is a waste of money.
I got swarmed by lottery elitist saying that I don’t get the game and you really need to get into the mechanics of wasting money in order to enjoy it.
Rogue like games aren't really comparable to lottery tickets though. There's fun to be even if you don't win, you're free to have as many attempts as you want, and even failed runs can net permanent progress.
Shit analogy. Even ignoring games completely some art simply demands more from people than other pieces of art. If a book has themes connected to philosophical or cultural ideas an understanding of that will lead to a greater enjoyment of the book. If a movie exists to critique a certain aspect of a culture, I'll get less from the movie If I don't understand that culture. Regardless of the type of game, (board, video, sports, ect.) games will often demand a certain amount of skill or understanding of the game to be fully enjoyed. Somebody fat and unathletic won't be able to experience soccer the same as someone more athletic who understands soccer better. You don't gain more from the lottery by playing more.
As an adult with life, responsibilites, and a limited (albeit sufficient) amount of free time: Yes, limited-time reviews are absolutely fair! I am not interested how good a game is after 400+ hours of play. I am interested in how fun a game is to play for like 2-3 hours per play session, about 2-3 times a week for like a month or two.
Yes, Roguelikes have a lot to offer after a lot of hours, and reviews with that insight should exist for fans of the genre with ample free time. But this doesn't invalidate the reviews with less play time, which are written for gamers with limited time and resources who have to decide which game to sink their free time into.
Man what a great video with such an unique subject earned a sub!
Great analysis!
"You can't predict a rogue-like" This is very true, just look at the difference between Risk of Rain and Risk of Rain 2, they basically overhauled the whole game while at the same time keeping the feel of the game very similar; the flexability of the genre is one of the greatest things about it.
This video reminded me of a thought I've had for a while: my single favorite game, Wizard of Legend, is a game that is almost impossible for me to introduce people to properly. It is a roguelike (roguelite? It kinda toes the line) where the main draw is that you can create the start of a build (4 of your 7 spells, 1 of up to 12 relics, and a cloak that gives you passive stat boosts) before you begin a run. This sets itself apart from other roguelike because it gives you an almost ENDLESS amount of possible builds to try. Forget choosing one of a dozen characters or choosing what weapon you want to take that changes how you play the game. Do it yourself! The amount of customization and experimentation you can do before even STARTING a run is ridiculous! But the limitations of this system leave JUST enough room for your build to expand beyond anything you could have possibly imagined. The only problem? At the start of the game, before you've unlocked many of the game's starting spells, relics, and cloaks, you have a very limited set of tools to work with, and the game drip-feeds you more options at a snail's pace. The first 100 runs or so are spent figuring out what all of this stuff does and how it synergizes. About 20-50 runs in, you'll likely settle on a favorite combo of spells, remix, and cloak to take in for every run. Heck, I did when I first got the game. And this is the COMPLETE OPPOSITE of what the game is at its peak! So when introducing people to this game I hold so dear, I have 2 options:
1. Introduce them to the game on my 100% save file where they will have no idea of how to create the build THEY want with the hundreds of unique spells and relics and almost certainly get overwhelmed with analysis paralysis, or
2. Introduce them to the game on a 0% save file, where they will not get to experience the absolute freedom the game has to offer for the first 20+ hours.
Tldr; Wizard of Legend is a FANTASTIC game that is impossible to introduce to people.
I haven't played it, but why not do both?
First do the 0% save file thing, so they get experience in the controls, so they know the very basic and style of the game. Then, when they've done 1-3 runs(depending on their patience) you let them try your 100% save file, so they get to know the possibilities.
If they still won't get hooked on it, then no convincing will help.
Gotta say this was actually a pretty impressive watch
Within a randomized genre like this, every player gets a different part of the wide variety, making it hard to make a really clear viewpoint, which ironically enough is why discussion of these games is so fascinating to me.
based nuclear throne pfp
Great video. I'd love to see more video essays like this. Even if they aren about roguelikes or videogames.
I actually appreciated this video and your outlook upon reviewing this genre of games.
I feel like roguelites cut off their "hook" and make their hook mechanical, if it clicks you love it if not it does nothing. In terms of your reviews I would say they are accurate because playing more would complicate those answers but probably not change them significantly (the corruption one aside because jfc).
the exception to this would be reviewing game balance, that is something you can't really understand until you "get it".
It doesn’t take a specific portion of time to “get” a roguelike, it takes a mix of patience, skill, and the will to learn. If you have all three, you can “get” a roguelike in a day.
I disagree. Understanding the majority of the many nuances of items, levels, and enemies in a Roguelike can easily take you a good 50ish hours or more depending on the game. If I sit down and binge a new Roguelike for an entire day I'll still get off feeling like there's a lot more to learn or be seen. There aren't any Roguelikes that come to mind that I think I could ever fully comprehend in just a day, especially not any Roguelites with large upgrade paths and unlockables. I'd say it takes two to three days to _get_ a Roguelike, minimum.
@@sagehanson190 agreed, and the time sink is very clear if you play multiple games to deeper levels than just the first week, hades took me like, 100 runs to feel like i finally knew the fundamentals of the gameplay loop, currentlt 300 hours i shifted to hard mode, and its going as swift as it is going because of those 300 prior hours
on a side note, im playing Hollow Knight and damn, i "finished the 1st playtrough" with 35 hours and 70% (goes up to 112%) completion, game is fucking massive i have at least 20 more hours of fresh content before restarting game loop, 50 hours is like the minimum for a profound experience
While I agree that it's not based on time since that varies for everyone, you definitely cannot get a roguelike in only one day.
Keep up the good work Pseychie love these type of videos 😁
Massive shoutout to the Baldr Sky battle preparation OST!
Amazing video with an amazing BGM to boost your point!
I think it depends on how fast you can understand the game, but generally it takes a lot of time.
Another problem is most of people do not have patience, like at all.
I spend 500h in slay the spire alone and some of my friends think I'm crazy, I watched 13 season Poirot and they say I'm nuts. They want straight easy game play and win like 2nd try, they want to watch a movie in 3 min then say "I watched it, it's blabla". A 5 season long masterpiece in their eyes is just trash because it's too long, yes I'm talking about Breaking Bad.
That's one of the reason why roguelike/lite can not and will not be very popular. While big companies keep making the same thing over and over again but keep saying it's better visual better sound better story. I mean, I'm not buying those shit.
Breaking Bad was good, but it's hardly a masterpiece. The last two seasons were straight mid.
@@ldskjfhslkjdhflkjdhf lmao same, I came to reply just so say Breaking Bad wasnt that amazing, I was full on 100% agreeing with Minamo until they said that. xd
Game at 4:00 is one step from eden
Obsessed with how that Slay the Spire character is called “FuckFace the Ironclad”. Spectacular naming choice
Cool video! It’s good to see you expanding outside of just dead cells content :)
i have "got" ror2 and BoI and still learn really niche things all the time, did you know brilliant behemoth applies to stacks of expose on mercenary's third slash? allowing both hits of whirlwind to be big damage. i just learned today.
lol I learnt that this morning too. It's amazing that even after over 450 hours you can still learn new things about rouguelikes.
I've been playing isaac since rebirth was released and only recently learned that the black fly enemies can turn into the pooter flies when they are over top of poop. Now not the most helpful information on a general basis but that exact mechanic is what killed one of my t.lost runs I thought I was safe as all the enemies had no way of dealing damage only suddenly for a fly to turn into something that can shoot at me. This has been in the game since the beginning apparently and after thousands of hours with the game and learning small nuanced interactions the game still surprised and killed me in a way I didn't expect it to.
@@raysay1818 Judging from everything else in the game, they put it in KNOWING that someone would die to that.
I got major goosebumps randomly catching Umineko soundtrack in the vid.
Good taste man
Aw that's my clip at 5:40! I feel honoured to (kinda) be in this video
I have played dead cells for almost 150 hours and let's just say i still die to Concierge sometimes. depending on build some boss may be a lil bit harder than other boss and the journey itself to reach the boss is hard enough sometimes. like bruh imagine have a very slow build that the enemies you're fighting literally just attack you and cancel your attack making it harder to hit/kill them
I feel like Hades doesn't quite belong in this examination, because as much as there is a slew of deep mechanics to uncover, the game is about relationships. Unlike most roguelikes, that are about the runs and the gameplay aspects of trying to get a little further than last time, Hades isn't about that. It contains that, but that's not the core of the experience. It's why I would argue that Hades is the most approachable roguelike on the market, because there is no fail state. You never lose progress. You can die, sure, but you will still progress character relationships, discover new dialogue, do some upkeep in the hub, etc.
The roguelike part of the experience is context for the story, rather than the plot being context for the gameplay. In that sense, it's not as important whether you understand all its mechanics, because the purpose of the game is to involve you in a story about failure and perseverance.
You just made Hades sound pretentious AF.
@@thedeadpoolwhochuckles.6852 How so?
I don't know why but I enjoyed Hades when I usually can't stand rougelikes.
@@thedeadpoolwhochuckles.6852 How is that pretentious?
@@thedeadpoolwhochuckles.6852 way to give a jab and not explain why
I have spent thousands of hours in Isaac and still learn new stuff every now and then (tbf the DLCs mixed things up but still)
Also great video - editing was very solid
"Let's take this one step at a time."
Background footage is One Step from Eden
Very clever.
Ok this might be silly, but as you said that all roguelikes are single player, you showed footage of one of the only roguelikes that are multiplayer (RoR2)
here is a challenge for you in dead cell
make every item on 2x damage in 5 bc
Glad you are expanding videos to a larger audience
Nice Vid. I noticed the Fishy Aroma @ 3:50 nice choice
4:58 This isn’t true. T Lost is the true equal of skill imo. He can’t be “ picked up “ (I personally think it’s a good character, but not the fact you need the completion marks. It’s a fun character to just throw yourself out.)This adds to your final point, It’s a character or game that can’t be just grasped in some time and you shouldn’t try making this true. You can’t just make such a contextual genre able to grasped without time and experience.
T.Lost is the definition of a Character made for the players that have dedicated so much time on the game (500+ hrs), that the only way to make it harder IS with that Character. Its literally the equavalent of playing a Dark Souls at SL0 with not Armor & a Club. Not so much a prof of "My Skill is Amazing" but "My Determination is Amazing".
@@Chris____. I didn’t say it wasn’t. I was just carrying on the words of an almost 3x dead god player that I agree with. I don’t nor will claim to be good as T lost, but I think it’s a fun character that can be skill-based while maintaining the ability to just throw yourself out and have fun.
My problem with current Roguelikes is that I'm old. When I hear the term, the first thing that comes to mind is hours upon end with Nethack (ascended 4 classes in my life), so I envision running in panic from a '&' or really wanting to kill that 'D' for some scales to convert to armor or being a Lvl 1 knight dipping my sword in fountains knowing it could be a 5 'turn' game. the twitch based roguelikes don't have that "holy crap, I survived the castle, I need a breather" moment to let my BP drop. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the current generation, hell, in previous generations, you could tell Diablo II devs put a lot of hours into hack, nethack, angband, or a variety of similar games and threw some great action gaming on top. Long version short, the current genre for old skoolers (or just old people) feels more like RLL (Rogue-Like Lite) than pure roguelike.
Giving a thumbs up just for the Umineko music, made watching the video much more enjoyable!
I was about to answer the question, but you really answered it very quickly.
I would also say that there are also great strengths & weaknesses in the Roguelike or Roguelike genre (as in any genre, there is really no perfect genre) and that isnt something you can easily say in a review. So in a review you need to adress (ina a general way) some of the genre problems, some of the genre weaknesses & then go into more detail. Going into more detail is even more important now (with the market being saturated, lots of options), but we never should forget the fundamental strenghts/weaknesses of said genre.
5:28 please... Please tell me you didn't get delirium as regular lost, that would be fucking hilarious, If anyone didn't know, beating delirium as the lost unlocks "Holy card", and item that gives you a holy mantle (1 hit) no matter the character, tainted lost happens to start with this item, and can find multiple if he takes damage as long as you don't get hit 2 twice
Pretty sure tainted lost can find holy cards wether or not you have them unlocked
@@ziadyasser5988 No, you literally have to unlock the item
This video essentially boils down to “if you don’t play the game the way I think you should, then your review doesn’t matter”
No it doesn't, he literally says it depends.
i never comment on videos but io really enjoyed how you explained rouge likes and almost put something that ive alwyes loved into words better then i ever could.
Reviews as a whole from where I see it are best when they give info about the game's systems and let it sell itself while giving their opinion on them, sseth's reviews are the pinnacle of this.
OOGA BOOGA
HOW
Usually for game reviews, I say that they have to finish the game for the review to be valid cause they have experienced what most people would experience. And they could cover most aspects. Even open world games. But roguelites have a high skill floor in order to finish them that would take hundreds of hours to finish. So how long
...idk, I really wouldn't consider most roguelikes to have that high of a skill requirement.
They just require you to not be a bumbling idiot.
There's a difference.
Most professional content creators tend to be bumbling idiots, which gives people a very biased view of what your average gamer's skill level is.
It's like people being impressed that a content creator cleared some new hard mode raid after 3 days of wiping to it in a MMO when I have a 95% clear rate of that same raid that week with exclusively PUG/rando groups. The majority of "gamers" that people actually SEE playing being horrendously bad seems to make people assume that the average skill level is a LOT lower than it actually is. Roguelikes are fun, but I wouldn't really call most of them "hard games". I mean, I beat Mom on my literal first ever run of Isaac... Won my first run of Gungeon... Beat Rogue Legacy 1 in like 6 or 7 runs total. They're not "cakewalk" games, but the majority really aren't "that" hard.
Of course, I also do save stateless mario romhack runs and stuff, so maybe my view on game difficulty is just skewed in the opposite direction. But like... most games really just don't feel as hard as people seem to ever describe them as being. Stuff like Souls-likes are great examples of that - I legitimately have no clue how anyone ends up stuck on any boss in that series for more than an hour. They're easier than the majority of KH bosses.
@@AtomicArtumas have you considered that you are just better than everyone else?
I feel like a lot of “difficulty” stems from something not clicking, and then when it does, it feels rewarding. If everything just clicks for you immediately, I imagine that feeling could be reduced.
@@AtomicArtumas You sound SUPER elitist here, seriously.
I played literally all of the games you put in the video. I love roguelikes so effin much 😍
Finally found a nice video with Umineko BGM fitting perfectly with narration.
Is the game fun to play?
Simple.
All this video is just excuses for awful games, if you need 100 hours to say if a game is good, then i can tell you, its not. A good game is good from the start.
I think it's fair to review a rogue-like when you get all the achievements in the game. I've completed Hades, Going Under, and One Step from Eden. I would've missed out on a lot content if I hadn't looked at the achievements. Plus completing games takes time and dedication therefore I think that gives enough time for an outsider to become an insider. That's just my opinion.
*looks at binding of isaac with its 600+ achievements*
...yeah about that
@@alans-dumb-username and other 200 thing that are not achivement but is required for 100%
I love about rouglikes is that even though it's a simple genre (you die, you start again and you losing everything), you must to get used to every rouglike game and learn it all over again. You may be the god of Dead Cells but so what if you suck at Risk of Rain. You can be the best player in Gungeon but still die again and again in The binding of Isaac. I also love rouglikes for their randomness. Each run is a different experience with different equipment and secrets to discover. For others, it's tedious and repetitive, but for me, it's something that made me love the genre.
That makes me think: Tier lists are better for rating stuff, when compared to grades
"All roguelikes are single player games"
*Proceeds to show Risk of Rain 2, a 2 time nominee for the steam "Better with friends" award*
Very good video! This explains exactly why I hated MoistCriticals review of RoR2
'FuckFace the Ironclad', brilliant
A recent roguelike that has been getting a decent amount of negative reviews, most of them having below 10-15 hours is Have a Nice Death. It is genuinely an amazing game and I highly recommend anyone check it out. It's only in early access and is still gonna get massive updates. I hope Pseychie sees this bc I really want more people to play this game.
the umineko bgm choice actually had me screaming, love it.
In my opinion, all 3 reviews are fully valid. What those reviews show and tell you are what you, as the player generally experience at the beginning and the criticisms are all on point, as a newcomer that is. Obviously there is an incredibly amount to unpack in roguelikes, and it is very difficult going in depth, unless you are a player who has already put in these 100s of hours, however once again, its the start thats the most important.
I feel like a lot of people in the comments are misunderstanding the examples in the intro.
He's not saying that the low hours make the review invalid, rather, he's saying that due to the nature of roguelikes, approaching the experience like other video game genres undermines the personal experience that a player would have due to the reviewer only seeing a small part the game. Other genres are point A to point B, and may have an online mode, postgame content and DLC (i.e. RPGs, Platformers, FPS games). You can generally understand the experience that game offers after one playthrough and write a valid review from that. Roguelikes, however, are made up of many "point As" and "point Bs". They are designed to be played through an infinite amount times as the player intrinsically understands how the game works. The reviewer's playthrough and experience can be different than a player's playthrough and experience.
Judging the entire experience based off of one playthrough in a rougelike is like playing a small portion any other game; It won't give much of an insight on how the game works to the player. That's why reviewing roguelikes are so difficult.
I'm not a fan of roguelikes but a chunk of my friends are. So I played risk of rain 1 & 2, gunfire reborn and 1 or 2 more. The most frustrating aspect for me is that since you can't replicate conditions in a game is reallly hard to test or train a build.
I don't know if some game have it. But a sandbox mode to play especified enemies and try how certain builds work by yourself instead of playing +1000 hours or having to follow a guide would help a lot on enjoying the genre.
I agree with a lot of what you had to say as I'm in love with the genre myself having over 1k hours spread across 5 or 6 games in the last 2 years or so. I wouldn't necessarily bash other genres or specific games because as passionate as I am about a genre or a game like Slay the Spire - someone else probably feels the same way about FPS games or the Battlefield franchise.
Loved when you say "all roguelikes are single player games" while RoR2 is playing in the background.
Loved the video!
For roguelikes the single most important aspect of the review needs to be the gameplay loop. The story and art literally do not matter if the game loop is boring as sin.
For instance, you can take out all of the story in hades and you’re still left with with an incredibly fun gameplay look that rewards runs with the ability to grow stronger over time. The function of the story largely serves to push the player towards more experimentation and intersection with the story gives more variety. It honestly doesn’t take long to get a feel for the gameplay loop and provide a review based on that (which in terms of roguelikes is a 10/10 imo).
Not really into roguelikes but not only has this video made me want to try a few more, im subbing just cause I heard umineko music
Liked the video, but damn dude, hit me with that umineko music, 10/10.
As a Binding ofIsaac player I reckon the review you made up for it in the start is actually pretty accurate. Although hearing "beat Mom for the first time" while seeing Polaroid and Negative unlocked makes me cringe slightly
thank you for the representation of nuclear throne in the gameplays, i love that game!
7:43 "All roguelikes are singleplayer games"
*shows picture of risk of rain 2 gameplay, a roguelike well known for its multiplayer*
Really good video!
So true, my first rougelike was enter the gundeon and it had easily became one of my fav games spending 100+ hours on it in the first 2 weeks
After only about 150 hours of Gungeon I was able to finally get the game and how to work with what it throws at me, even though everything is simple at base value and I took out floor 5 boss around the 60 hour mark
All three of those reviews in the intro would be valid, even if I agree that those three games offer more nuance that is being missed. It takes a long time to fully appreciate any game, and it's the game's job to make its most fun aspects apparent and accessible to the player. Some people will miss the finer nuance and play in a way that is less fulfilling, which can be disappointing, but it doesn't detract from the validity of the review, and rather gives us important insights into where players are guided by the game's design.
I have 1000 hours in Slay the Spire and have never beaten the game on A20. Good players of this game are insane.
Also kudos to you for using the Umineko OST in the video.
Got to say my favourite type if game is rougelike such as enter the gungeon, hades even risk of rain 2 and I enjoy all of them but I get the idea that some people might struggle with them or not enjoy them right away with rougelikes the game gets better the more you play because the more you play the more you unlock and the new stuff but eventually you will find etherything and even then its still repayable because of random run generation you'll barely see the same item combos again for me the true ending to rougelikes is beating the final boss with etherything unlocked bur that's just me for others I could be just beating the final boss or just geting all the items or finding all the secrets or all the achievements and the fact is you can play them how you want every item has a play style and you can always leve items you don't want it's all up to you thats why I love them
Really good video! I have ~370h in gungeon and still didn't see all the smal inetactions (for example: did you know tat alien engine has always 0 spread and knockback is applied to it's bullets so with more of them you get pushed back harder). I can say what guns are good or bad but that opinion changes on some guns. And you have also consider that to probably see everything or "get" a rouge-like you probably have to put a lot of hours, multiply that by amount of these games and one person can't handle it all alone
Yeah, I love Gungeon, but I still feel like a noob sometimes - pretty often actually haha
I beat a past for the first time today after over 550 runs lmao
Really interesting video. Roguelikes are such a unique idea and so cool. Speaking of I was wondering if you would consider the game Revita which releases on the 21st! Ive been following it for a long time now and I really think its got the promise to be one of the greatest roguelikes out there.
I have played multiple roguelike games and I've unfortunately given up on most that I've played. But I understand 3 and this video helped to understand why I quit most roguelikes. I adore the genre so much that I am always looking to play more roguelikes to find one that sticks out to me. + DeadCells is my personal favorite 90+ hours deep.