Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tree of roguelike evolution"
(→Larn) |
|||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
Err, but the Rogue wasn't the first one. If was merely the most popular one (probably because it was included in the BSD distribution). --[[User:TheSheep|The Sheep]] 08:31, 11 Jul 2005 (CEST) | Err, but the Rogue wasn't the first one. If was merely the most popular one (probably because it was included in the BSD distribution). --[[User:TheSheep|The Sheep]] 08:31, 11 Jul 2005 (CEST) | ||
Larn is listed as released in 1986, Rogue in 1980. It may be Larn was developed entirely independently of Rogue. This is where building a classificaton tree based on matching characteristics conflicts with building one based on "inspiration" or "source code". It is convenient to put *something* at the root of the tree to be a concrete example of a Roguelike and define everything as variants of that thing. It is imperialistic to give Rogue this honour for merely being (one of?) the first and most popular, but I really can't get that worked up over it. --[[User:JeffLait|JeffLait]] 22:49, 30 Sep 2005 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 20:49, 30 September 2005
Larn
I don't thing that Larn originates from Rogue :/ Of course, it's nice and tidy to have a single predescor, but it's not that simple, I'm afraid. --The Sheep 10:20, 10 Jul 2005 (CEST)
My opinion is that the link between Rogue and the roguelikes on the second line of the tree is more influencial than actual succession. It's there to show Rogue was the first one and Moria, Larn and such defined gameplay. - Poulpy 17:00, 10 Jul 2005 (CEST)
Err, but the Rogue wasn't the first one. If was merely the most popular one (probably because it was included in the BSD distribution). --The Sheep 08:31, 11 Jul 2005 (CEST)
Larn is listed as released in 1986, Rogue in 1980. It may be Larn was developed entirely independently of Rogue. This is where building a classificaton tree based on matching characteristics conflicts with building one based on "inspiration" or "source code". It is convenient to put *something* at the root of the tree to be a concrete example of a Roguelike and define everything as variants of that thing. It is imperialistic to give Rogue this honour for merely being (one of?) the first and most popular, but I really can't get that worked up over it. --JeffLait 22:49, 30 Sep 2005 (CEST)