2
\$\begingroup\$

I am looking to find improvements upon my Roguelike Dungeon generator. I find it is not 'roguelike' enough, with dungeons just looking like a mess more than anything. What would improve my generator(images below)? I just can't seem to get it to look 'right'. Reference image for what roguelike should appear as: [link]

Roguelike #1 Roguelike #2 Roguelike #3

Improve this question
\$\endgroup\$
6
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ Well just going by your images I'd say you just need to modify whatever algorithm you're using (what are you doing anyway?) to make shorter (or no) hallways. \$\endgroup\$
    – Tetrad
    Apr 2 '13 at 16:33
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ It is hard to tell you how you could improve what you currently have since you posted only the result but not the generator itself. You might also want to take a look at this related question. \$\endgroup\$
    – danijar
    Apr 2 '13 at 17:00
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ I agree with Tetrad. Morevover, also explain what features of the given image you'd like to mimic, for example, placements of rooms, length of hallways, size distribution of rooms, features of the path(s) such as typical length of dead-ends, absence of loops, etc. etc. [And don't say all, otherwise just just write an algorithm to replicate that exact map ;)] Added: Basically, you need to write a tech spec, then it's much easier to come up with a possible algorithm. Some of your specs might be in conflict, but that will only come to light if you put it down. \$\endgroup\$
    – Herman Tulleken
    Apr 2 '13 at 17:01
  • 5
    \$\begingroup\$ For what it's worth, the results you show here look substantially more like Rogue (see e.g. upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/17/… or lcurtisboyle.com/nitros9/rogue-80.gif ) than the link you provide, so using 'Roguelike' as a literal metric rather than a genre you're already there! I agree with the others - if there are particular features you're after then give more details on those, but otherwise, aside from hallways that are too straight over long stretches your work looks quite good to me. \$\endgroup\$
    – Steven Stadnicki
    Apr 2 '13 at 17:05
  • \$\begingroup\$ I'm not after any specific features, I just didn't think it looked very roguelike (I've never played a roguelike game though, so IDK :D) \$\endgroup\$
    – Jack Wilsdon
    Apr 2 '13 at 18:11
9
\$\begingroup\$

Based on the discussion in comments, I would say that the question you're asking is several steps removed from the question you should be asking at this stage of your project. The first and foremost question is, "What do I want my player experience of the dungeon to be like?" Do you want the player in near-constant combat, with a sense that they are never actually safe? Or Do you want them to have brief bursts of excitement and action with pauses for recovery in between in order to heighten the next encounter?

After you've ironed out the player experience you want, then you can start asking the next question: "How can I design a dungeon to support the player experience that I'm after?" But be careful here — dungeon design is much more than just the layout of the individual units. It also includes issues like encounter density (does every 'room' have something in it? Does every room have a monster in it? What about monsters roaming the corridors?), features (what is my 'special' room set? Should every level have one? What about entire special levels?), global geography (is there just one stairway up and one stairway down per level, or do levels have separate exits to the aforementioned special levels? What about exits that traverse multiple levels? What about traps that might drop the player several levels? Do I have secret doors? What about secret stairs?), and so on.

Once you understand what your dungeon is trying to provide from a game design perspective and how its structure supports that design, then you can start to worry about how your code works to build the sort of dungeon structure that you're after — but worrying about the code before you really have a good grasp on your design is putting the cart before the horse here.

Improve this answer
\$\endgroup\$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .