Buy a transformer.
Slay the Spire: yes. All four rules are there, specially in spirit. It's also a deck-building game but that's fine, a game can belong to 2+ genres at the same time.
I'm not sure on Balatro. I didn't play it, so... maybe?
There are a thousand definitions and mine is just one among many, I'm aware. This is not a "right vs. wrong" matter, it's how you cut things out.
For me, a roguelike has four rules:
- Permadeath—can't reuse dead chars for new playthrus.
- Procedural generation—lots of the game get changed from one to another playthru.
- Turn-based—game time is split into turns, and there's no RL time limit on how long each turn takes.
- Simple elements—each action, event, item, stat etc. is by itself simple. Complexity appears through their interaction.
People aware of other definitions (like the Berlin Interpretation) will notice my #4 is not "grid-based". I think the grid is just a consequence of keeping individual elements simple, in this case movement.
Those rules are not random. They create gameplay where there are limits on how better your character can get; but you, as the player, are consistently getting better. Not by having better reflexes, not by dumb memorisation, but by understanding the game better, and thinking deeper on how its elements interact.
I personally don't consider games missing any of those elements a "roguelike". Like The Binding of Isaac; don't get me wrong, it's a great game (I love it); but since it's missing #3 (combat is real-timed) and #4 (complex movement and attack patterns, not just for you but your enemies), it relies way more on your reflexes and senses than a roguelike would.
Some might be tempted to use the label "roguelite" for games having at least few of those features, but not all of them. Like... well, Isaac—it does feature permadeath and procedural generation, right? Frankly, I think the definition isn't useful, and it's bound to include things completely different from each other. It's like saying carrots and limes are both "orange-like" (carrots due to colour, limes because they're citrus); instead of letting those games shine as their own things, you're dumping them into a "failed to be a roguelike" category.
In Brazil both voltages and sockets (mentioned in the "details" link) are so much of a mess that it makes me irrationally angry.
EDIT - might as well go further.
Voltage-wise, in my city (yup, the mess changes by city!) most households have both 127V and 220V sockets. 220V is typically for heavy duty appliances, like the electric shower. But depending on the city you see only 220V, and I wouldn't be surprised if some were 127V only.
Now, the sockets. Two round pins? Two symmetrical flat pins? Two asymmetrical flat pins? Three round pins in an equilateral-ish triangle? Three round pins in an obtuse triangle? Yes. I've seen all of them. With varied thickness. The standard is the obtuse triangle, but since it was enforced just ~18y ago and imported appliances are common you'll see plenty aberrations. Or people who have old houses, 2 pins sockets, and rip apart the ground pin from their 3 pins plugs.
But perhaps this bloody mess prevents people from plugging 127V appliances into 220V sockets or vice versa, right? ...right? Nope! You'll see the same sockets mess for both voltages. And for bivolt appliances, too.
Fuck all this shit. Just stick to 220V@50Hz like in Argentina, at least I can have an electric kettle this way. And before someone says "but generators don't support it", look at Paraguay dammit, most of its energy is produced in Itaipu, and it's 50Hz. And speaking on that bloody sockets standard, now you have two options:
- Enforce the special snowflake standard harsher and encourage other governments to adopt it. And no, it isn't even compatible with the Swiss one, even if they look similar.
- Ditch it and use the same as some other group of governments; preferably the Schucko, plenty governments enforce it.
[Fun fact to lighten things up: people often call volts "velas" candles here. So e.g. "127V" and "220V" are often called "cem velas" (100 candles) and "duzentas velas" (200 candles) respectively. Confusingly enough some also do it with watts.]
I don't know which one is the coolest. But people keep me asking this one:
"MSG ME! MSG ME!"
Shhh, don't give it feedback. Let it rot, let it be hated, without knowing why.
I like the generative tech itself but feel disgust at the industry. First they grab the artists' content, with no permission; then they feed it into their models; then they make a product out of it; then they screech at those same artists "you've become obsolete trash! Our model makes everything you do!"; never acknowledging it's built upon their labour.
So I think there's a big case to tag the usage of AI into products, to mildly discourage it. And more importantly, people want this info.
I did because my older computer was a potato, so it was kind of obvious the game took a bit too long to install.
True - I'll edit my comment to include this info.
News from the "users are cattle to be herded, not humans to be listened to. Instead listen to ME! ME! ME!" department.
...seriously. Steam is doing it because people want to know if the games are made with AI or not. If that goes against the best interests of Epic, let them eat cake.
I regret not posting it before Canvas 2025, but hopefully it'll be useful for people playing it in 2026. All letters are 5 pixels tall, and most 3 pixels wide (some 4, a few 5). I've also included a few Cyrillic letters and the digits.
I tried to make it even smaller, but it gets really funky.
24
Linguistic evidence suggests that the Xiōng-Nú and the Huns spoke the same Paleo-Siberian language
(onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
view more: next ›
Not quite. Norman is a true Latin descendant; it starts with Late Latin grammar, then adds some sound and grammar changes. In the meantime, OP's conlang uses an English "base" grammar but replaces the native vocab with Classical Latin equivalents.
The difference is visible in cases like "id est uno vehicle accident". Norman would use ille→il and unum→(i)un, and odds are it already did so in Norman Conquest times (ditching is/ea/id, merging masculine with neuter, ditching vowels after /n/, those changes are so widespread that they were probably already in Western Late Latin).
Another difference is in the "tu est". English lacks second person conjugations, so it's using a third person one; a Norman descendant would use "tu es" (or rather "t'es") instead.
If you (or anyone here) is interested on what a British Romance language would look like, check Brithenig. It's more like a sister language to Norman than a descendant, and the conlanger added some Insular Celtic influence to spice things up, but it should give you a good idea.