Henrique_FB from roguelikedev reddit left comment on my previous post. Here’s a brief summary:
Classic roguelikes don’t have to be complicated — there are simple examples like Pixel Dungeon, Sil, Golden Krone Hotel.
The issue isn’t complexity or obscurity, but that the genre just doesn’t *look* appealing to new players — visually and UX-wise.
Also, I don’t agree that ditching turn-based gameplay necessarily shrinks the audience. Crypt of the Necrodancer is a great counterexample.
And while a real-time system may seem like the obvious choice for an MMO-roguelike, it’s still possible to make a turn-based MMO — take WAKFU, for instance, with its turn-based combat and persistent multiplayer world.
Thanks a lot for the interesting thoughts. I agree that the picture is broader than what I described in my post — there are definitely different angles to look at it from.
I’d like to dive into the examples you mentioned to make the discussion more concrete.
Pixel Dungeon: classic roguelike adapted for mobile
Pixel Dungeon is a great example of a simplified (in a good way) classic roguelike adapted for mobile. Many things were deliberately made simpler: no digging through walls, no trap disarming, movement is limited to four directions, and so on. This allowed for a minimalistic UI that works well on touchscreens.
It’s truly a solid game, but it’s still very challenging — even though it’s turn-based. Now imagine a multiplayer version of this minimalist roguelike where turns happen automatically every second instead of on button press — suddenly you lose control and die 100500 times. For a newcomer such multiplayer zeitnot will be extremely stressful and not much easier than classic roguelikes. Basically like throwing a newbie into blitz chess (or even bullet chess).
Sil: the illusion of simplicity
Sil is a pretty hardcore roguelike despite its seemingly simple appearance. I’d say it’s tougher than vanilla Angband. As such, the entry barrier is even higher than in most classic roguelikes (not to mention the stress of multiplayer).
Golden Krone Hotel: thanks, added to wishlist
Golden Krone Hotel — I haven’t played it yet, but added it to my Steam wishlist 🙂 Thanks for the recommendation. But again — as long as it stays turn-based, it works. I suspect that if it went real-time, a lot of its charm would be lost.
EVE Online: a different kind of difficulty
About EVE Online — I’ve been playing it for many years too. I think the controls are conceptually simple: just two mouse buttons to perform any action. Keyboard is optional — useful but not required. The UI may seem overwhelming at first, but after a couple of hours it becomes quite intuitive.
The difficulty isn’t in the controls, but in the overall setting — it’s a spaceflight simulator (not on Elite’s level, but still). After a simple tutorial, you’re already a functional pilot, and after a year — you’re clicking crosses like in Excel.
EVE’s complexity lies in its asynchronous nature, scale, economy, and social dynamics. In classic roguelikes, you operate on a different scale and with higher stakes: one wrong move — and it’s game over. Roguelike difficulty is tangible: the risks are high, the options are vast, and every turn matters. The stress level is already high even without real-time.
So yes — EVE is deep and complex, but not “brutal”. Classic roguelikes in a multiplayer setting (with real-time element), even in their most “friendly” forms, can easily break a player — simply due to their harshness, pace, and zero room for error.
Crypt of the Necrodancer: roguelike or arcade?
Crypt of the Necrodancer is a very specific project. I see it more as a rhythm arcade with roguelike elements. That’s why its online potential feels closer to social-oriented arcade games.
Wakfu and the time-bubble in Tangaria
Real-time — Wakfu — this is a great example. We use a similar mechanic in Tangaria, where time slows down around a wounded player (while it continues normally for others). We call this time-bubble.
Yes, it’s a very promising mechanic. But the problem arises in player-to-player interactions. How many players can comfortably be in a turn-based battle together? Two? Maybe. But with four — it becomes borderline torture waiting for each player to decide their move.
As a result, this system only works well in session-based single-player events, where large-scale interaction isn’t required. It still has great potential, especially for scenarios focusing on individual tactics and immersion. But when scaling to a full multiplayer environment, it starts to conflict with the “living world” concept. You end up having to limit the number of participants or isolate them into separate modes. Such a project would be niche — and that’s totally fine. It could still be popular if implemented well. It’s just a very atypical and underexplored approach. I’d love to see (and try) more MMOs using these mechanics — even in experimental form.