I wouldn't call "non-modal" a "high-value" feature. I don't think most people mind "entering" a shop (or into a conversation). One could argue that "targeting prompts" are modal. In which case nearly every RL violates this. Simul
- I feel like model issue is important when considering the input/interface overall. A modal interface makes a lot of sense for a mobile roguelike (think iPhone/Android), where there is no hardware keyboard and limited screen real estate. Also, in the case of ASCII roguelikes, you could also say that interacting with your inventory is a model activity, as well. I suppose the idea is that, besides special cases like inventory/targetting, the "main interface" is non-modal. This is fair, I think. But (once again), in a mobile context, this wouldn't lead to the best UI for the platform, based upon my experiences in this space. Pfox 16:08, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
"The world is represented by a uniform grid of tiles. Monsters (and the player) take up one tile, regardless of size. "
- While a discrete spatial model is an important defining factor for roguelikes, I agree that restricting a character to one tile is more of a convention than a hard restriction. Modality, I'd say, is even less relevant to defining the genre, being moreso an artifact of oldschool interface design. In general, I've found that attempting to define "roguelike" entirely quantitatively is a futile effort, as it always comes down to how each game feels. --Nolithius 15:02, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
- Although there are always developers out there waiting to break the rules, the statement could be generalized to "monsters (and the player) take up an integral number of tiles, usually one" to include NetHack's worms (and quite possibly other roguelikes with similar monsters.)
- Hmmm...all this talk about grid-based gameplay makes me wonder whether there are any roguelikes with triangular or hexagonal grids... Nnz 18:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)