Is it?
My listing of similar games:
- Grim Omens 3/5 - Revengate 4/5 - Dungeon Crawl Soup (on pc) 4/5 - The greedy cave 5/5 - Pathos 4/5
Brogue, on the other hand, is perfectly simple but perfectly well-executed, a five-ingredient recipe that lets every ingredient shine.
[0]https://store.steampowered.com/app/2941710/Project_Silverfis...
Of course, this is just your opinion, presented as an objective fact.
HyperRogue is one of the few roguelikes that I got sucked into. In comparison, I never "got" DCSS and despite several tries I always got bored immediately.
How to create a game using hyperbolic geometry? (2020) - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36448270 - June 2023 (44 comments)
HyperRogue: A puzzle roguelike in a non-Euclidean world - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26073813 - Feb 2021 (34 comments)
HyperRogue – a non-Euclidean roguelike - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17432974 - June 2018 (38 comments)
HyperRogue – A non-Euclidean roguelike - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9744353 - June 2015 (33 comments)
You can buy it on steam too if you want to support the developer!
versteegen•12h ago
[1] http://www.zincland.com/7drl/kobold/
[2] http://www.zincland.com/
integralid•10h ago
I think geometry being euclidean or not is specifically about parallel lines, and the term "non-euclidean" is sightly misused for other kinds of spatial gimmicks. At least that's what I learned after watching several ZenoRogue videos (HyperRogue channel) :)
zenorogue•10h ago
jerf•10h ago
Euclidean geometry is an extremely precise geometry, and there is nothing wrong with calling any deviation from it "non-Euclidean". Since Euclidean geometry is a fairly specific point in geometry-space, the only real objection is that calling something "non-Euclidean" doesn't tell you much about what it is, but Euclidean geometry isn't a bad choice for a "default" geometry and at least it tells you it's not that. There is no requirement for it to be continuously curved in some spherical or hyperbolic manner to be "non-Euclidean". Even just permitting a single portal into an otherwise Euclidean geometry would utterly shred Euclid's Elements from top to bottom.
By my examination of the original postulates, not only would portals wreck the parallel line postulate, it in fact ruins 4 out of 5 of them, leaving only that a line can be continuously extended (and that line can still self-intersect, which may in fact violate the definition of a "line" and mean all 5 axioms are busted if you really dug in). It means it is no longer possible to draw a line between any two points (portals can shadow portions of the space such that some points are not connectible), cicles lose a lot of their properties that we rely on (imagine the unit circle, and a portal starting x = .5 and going straight up... they're no longer necessarily continuous), right angles may not be equal to each other any more (portals can change the apparent angles, or give two interpretations rather than one), and of course the parallel line doesn't hold. Putting portals into a geometry fairly comprehensively makes it non-Euclidean.
zenorogue•9h ago
(The original meaning is of course about breaking 5th postulate while all the others hold, showing that it was possible was a celebrated result in mathematics, while it is trivial to break the postulates in some arbitrary way.)
oofbey•9h ago
Here the geometry is very unusual. But using the existence of portals to define that seems insincere.
Mond_•8h ago
This feels a bit like saying that putting a wall in a room makes it non-euclidean since there's now a barrier in the way.
I know where you're coming from, but this is confusing geometry and topology. (Curvature vs. how the space is connected.)
thaumasiotes•6h ago
Maybe that's what H. P. Lovecraft meant about non-Euclidean architecture in R'lyeh. ;D
(It probably isn't - the quote from The Call of Cthulhu says "the geometry of the dream-place he saw was abnormal, non-Euclidean, and loathsomely redolent of spheres [...]".)
zahlman•8h ago
thaumasiotes•6h ago
(This is also true of the recall effect, for no reason stated by the ingame text. But then again, the ingame text never claims anything other than that you'll recall to a particular depth, as opposed to a particular place.)
jhbadger•8h ago
thaumasiotes•6h ago
Postulate 1 defines what a line is.
Postulate 2 defines what a direction is.
Postulate 3 defines what a circle is.
Postulate 4, in modern terms, doesn't say anything at all. (We aren't even sure why the Greeks felt it was necessary to state it!)
mouse_•10h ago
thaumasiotes•6h ago
That sounds like an artifact of the display. Pathing through a non-Euclidean map is, for example, a major game mechanic of Super Mario Galaxy; it's not difficult at all.
MoltenMan•5h ago
Additionally, 2D sphere surfaces are very understandable because they can actually exist in our 3D world and we're used to them; hyperrogue has a hyperbolic non-euclidean 2D geometry which is impossible in real life, much more confusing, and impossible to display with no confusion. I don't know what Smart Kobold is, but I presume it's also not just a regular 3D game like Super Mario Galaxy.
thaumasiotes•5h ago
That is not true in any meaningful sense. You can jump. But you can't move through the 3D space. You're stuck to the surface of the closest sphere. All of your pathfinding problems are non-Euclidean pathfinding problems.
If you were a sprite embedded within the surface, moving from sphere to sphere by using pipes, that would add nothing to the difficulty of pathing around the sphere.
MoltenMan•5h ago
More relevantly to your original comment, it is always going to be far easier to understand 2D spherical geometry (possible to create in 3 dimensions, we see it every day) than 2D hyperbolic geometry (not possible to create in 3 dimensions, completely foreign to us), so I don't think it is a 'display' issue at all.
skopje•1h ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9744353#9746212
:-)