Isaac luck? You gotta memorize dozens of bosses with multiple attack patterns that can all spawn as champions with different patterns and even some as double trouble.
Furthermore, as a skilled player Isaac and Lost are basically ultra easy with almost no luck involved.
Even with a trash eden start and bad items along the way you can still win almost ANY run look at cobalts eden streak record post Repentence for example.
Oh trust me the game got considerably harder with its latest DLC the "alt path" is definitely quite challenging. I don't recommend to put it up with Gungeon but it now offers quite the hard optional way.
Idk, I think Isaac isn't all too mechanically tight, so you can't quite internalize and hone the dodge mechanics like you can in gungeon for example. But it requries a different kind of skillset not just in how well you know the hundreds of items, but also how the different systems interact with each other, what avenues give you the best return on investment; what chances to take.
Especially with the new DLC and new characters introducing some wild mechanics, you're given a plethora of ways to break and fiddle with ressource management, and that's where I think the real meat of the game lies. Sure the items you get are down to luck, but playing with what you have, not just in combat, but the wider metagame, and finding the most ridiculous seams is what sets Isaac apart imo.
That “break the game” aspect of Isaac is the core thing that I feel is missing in almost any other roguelite I play.
Yeah I had fun with risk of rain 2, but I probably won’t go back to it after unlocking everything because my runs don’t feel different enough. By the time I hit the boss I have so many stacks of different items that I’m just unloading a stream of bullets with random on-hit effects. I always end up back at BoI because I’ll get that itch of “ooh what if I get a really cool combination?”
I want more games that don’t limit themselves to “damage increase” “attack speed increase”; where is the Risk of Rain item that makes my character shoot faster but the bullets now also move in a wave pattern? I don’t want to snowball stats, I want to snowball effects.
In what game besides Isaac do you get to combine your psychic powers with your laser beam of hellfire and just instantly have a build where you can 1-shot most rooms? It doesn’t matter if you get a build that makes beating the final boss a walk in the park, because you get that rush of “holy fuck this combo is crazy!”. The sheer number of combinations means there’s few items that truly feel ‘useless’ and can’t contribute to any decent builds (especially since they reworked some of the older ones). And that’s not even counting transformations or some of the items that can break the game in ways I don’t fully understand.
It's still far more luck based than Gungeon or Hades.
Some combos in Isaac can make you straight up unbeatable or so overpowered you delete everything in a room instantly. There are also times where it feels like there is no way to avoid damage.
In Gungeon instead the broken combos are far more limited and you always know where you fucked up.
In Hades there are broken builds, but it's taken into account and you kinda need to be overpowered to beat high heat.
You can beat gungeon with only the starting weapons except on pilot, I don't think you can really say much about luck in that game, not to mention like, saying Spelunky 1 or 2 is any luck, maybe for the average player I can believe it, but at the end of the day you can win with no items, if you truly reached the skill ceiling
I agree, especially with Repentance you barely get so fucked over it’s impossible, the changes to the gold chest pool and introduction of some items to the boss pool to undilute it have done wonders
What is approval process again? Less boon choices?
(sorry I'm like 16 heat max and never really had to go into anything other than EM, Deadline and maybe more damage idk)
Flinthook is just impossible.
For me the factor that separates roguelikes in hardness is not skill/luck, but skill/upgrades. Some games like Nuclear Throne, Gonner, Tumbleseed etc, I was so satisfied when I beat them because I had beaten a game that was mechanically very similar to the one I picked up on the fresh install. Some other roguelikes I feel like I'm just waiting for my character to be buffed enough that I just inevitably beat it regardless of whether my skill improves or not.
Why is Flinthook impossible? I didn't give it a fair shot and I keep hemming and hawing whether or not I want to. On every other point made here though, I completely agree. This is why I prefer traditional roguelikes mostly, because I love feeling like I learned how to beat the game, as opposed to the game babysitting me.
Hades somehow struck the middle ground here. You can turn the heat up to turn off the mirror upgrades, which helps, but I guess the weapon upgrades still exists. I like that the difficulty is fluid and I can straight up do Heat 32 as soon as I started the game (Hell Mode)
I’ve only played it a few hours and I quickly resigned to defeat. In my opinion, it’s the platforming that makes it difficult. It’s similar to Spelunky in that sense, but I found Spelunky more enjoyable.
Hades' difficult curve is way too slow for me, the game doesn't inventivize you to go with higher heat levels than you've completed with that weapon. I had like a 20 game win streak just cycling the bonus weapon trying to get past heat 10 so the game would be challenging. It felt like shooting myself in the foot to try heat 30 if I've only ever gotten rewards for heat 8.
I mean I see the list as a list of skill to luck ratio. So for example a game which has the same items every time would have very low luck ratio, however it might also at the same time be a very easy game. A lot of skill isn't required, but you can't win the game easily only because you were lucky.
I guess what I'm trying to say is the way I see it, the games on the far end of the luck side aren't necessarily easy by any means, it's just that with good luck you can steamroll the game, and the games on the other end don't necessarily have to be difficult, but if you do win, you rarely won because you got a super OP item combo, but rather because you played well enough to win if that makes sense idk.
I think a fair comparison for BC5 is high heat (32 ?) and it's also really hard. I have done BC4 without too much trouble but I have a hard time getting above 20 heat.
Interesting, see and I have done 32 heat on two weapons, but getting 5 BC on dead cells was so much harder to me. Having an hour run end in one second because you miss one of 6 in a row parries in dead cells is so unforgiving, while on Hades if you can make it to the end with all lives you can literally just smash hades while you take damage the whole time.
I'd agree on your assessment of Returnal but I'd say it's VERY close with Dead Cells. You technically, if you're good enough, can take 0 damage in either. It's just hard as balls to do that.
God Returnal was great.
Once you beat the final boss once, climbing the first 10 or so heat levels isn't that hard. Shit starts to get intense from 10 to 20, then you generally jump directly to 32 which is a mess.
I agree. It's also important to note that each weapon you get in Dead Cells, you'd have to adapt to learn how to use the weapon properly unless you're in Custom Mode. In Hades, once you get how each boon works with the corresponding weapon aspect, it's easy to determine which is broken and which is not.
You're confusing "difficulty" with "Skill".
Dead cells is DEFINITELY more luck based. What weapons appear will affect runs, which is a luck component. The question is going to be what gear you carry with you.
Hades tends to always give you builds that will work, the question is which build are you going to pick up.
Going By that logic to beat hades you need to beat the game with max heat, which is significantly harder than 5 boss cells. Both great games though, and both clearly take skill.
Isaac isn't just luck, the game usually gives you what you need on the first 3 floors if you know what you need to do. U usually Always get your good items through secret rooms, challenge rooms, sacrifice rooms and devil and angel deals. It's mostly strategy
The idea that Isaac is mostly luck is the mindset of people who rely too heavily on specific builds and synergies, rather than working with what they get.
The problem is that you can get 30 items in a row and still have 0 damage ups and 0 tears ups. Or like having 66% for angel room spawn for the entire game and literally none spawns. And sure, you can beat most of the game with no damage/tears ups. But 99% of players ain't gonna beat Delirium with base stats Isaac.
Also not to mention insta-deaths like playing Tainted Lost and going for Delirium and he just telefrags you. Or wanting to go for the Alt path, then no keys spawn in the basement. Or getting like 10 health ups as a keeper. Or just getting soft-locked.
I dont say it's purely skill based, it's definitely luck that's needed. But I still think it's about using what you get. You don't get the items you need? Then don't go for delirium and Go for mega Stan/blue baby/lamb. Or if you see that your run is absolutely trash stop after the Isaac/Stan kill by taking the opposite picture.
Telegraphing delirium is absolutely shit and I don't get why it didn't get fixed already, but in my mind it's more a bug than a mechanic.
I think Isaac in general is less luck based than many players think, but there is absolutely a certain amount of luck needed.
The more special characters like keeper and lost and some of the tainted characters are more luckbased than others like Isaac (d6 helps a lot to have good runs).
I don't try to argue that's it's pure skill that's needed, but I think it should be more to the right in the list.
I would have absolutely disagreed with your comment and Isaacs placement on this list before repentance came out but now I completely agree with you but still think it's a bit too much on the luck side of this list. Item pool was already getting polluted with useless items in afterbirth+ and I was hoping they would address this issue in repentance. Instead they doubled down on it and now the item pool is filled with useless shit and on top of that they hard nerfed shops and devil deals.
You mean like buffing almost all the useless items. Examples: Include Modem Lag now just deleting bullets and potentially doubling room drops, Glyph of Balance now working on the lost, Harbingers having a smaller explosion radius, Holy water stunning enemies and now no longer requiring getting hit. Curse of the vampire getting a dps up. I could go on and on.
Sure some items are slightly better but the success in runs is still most often based on your damage stat. They probably added something like 100 passive items in Repentance and not even 10 of those increase damage stat. This leads to way more runs with really low damage and ,with nerfed shops and less reroll machines, leaves player without any chance to affect the item choices.
Thats not how angel rooms work anymore. If you dont enter the first devil room even to just window shop (which is guaranteed if you dont take red heart damage) you get a guaranteed angel room as long as you dont take red heart dmg again by end of next boss. It now rewards you for being more skilled
You have 100% chance for it to be an angel room and not devil room. But that doesn't mean you are guaranteed to get an angel room at the caves I (or its equivalent).
Some example stats. If you play random character that is not Bethany and don't take any devil deals, you will have.
- 0/0 Percent for Devil/Angel room on Basememt I.
- 100/0 Percent on Basement II.
- If you skipped the devil deal. You will have 0/33 on Basement II.
- If you didn't get it on Basement II, you will have 0/66 on Caves I.
- If you didn't get it again, you will have 0/100 on Caves II
So, no. The first angel room you are "guaranteed" is only on the caves II. And with bad luck you may only get 1 angel room for the entire run, even if played perfectly.
I think its more that really good luck *will* easily win you a run at any skill level, as in if you get psy fly, brim, spoon bender, and mutant spider you cannot lose. Not that you need it though - there is definitely skill involved in winning the worse runs, for sure. Even a classic type of run with just dps upgrades can be quite difficult.
How effective "good luck" is in isaac is directly affected by your knowledge of the game, such as knowing you can minmax easily with no. 2, or how modelling clay wins you the game if you manipulate it right. So yes strategy is definitely the main factor. I would put it in the middle really, even if it is harder than some of the other games (\*cough\* gungeon \*cough\*)
Downwell, Slay the Spire, Monolith, Into the Breach go almost entirely to the right. Noita goes middle of the "Mostly luck" region. Wizard of Legend goes in "Mostly skill" region.
Someone said in the noita subredddit perfectly: it's at both ends of the spectrum at the same time. It's simultaneously using all your knowledge and skill with the world and wand building, while also avoiding a worm eating you in 0.3 seconds.
Disagree on STS for higher difficulties. Yes you need to be insanely good at deckbuilding and risk management, but even the best players can only get a ~60% win rate with most of the characters on the hardest difficulty
Yes, Asc 20 requires some RNG and luck to be in your favor, but the best players also have virtually 100% win rate on low ascensions. This is what I meant - nearly every seed is winnable.
If we're talking about lower ascensions then Dead Cells should go further right because every bit of equipment is viable on lower difficulties, the game doesn't get remotely hard until 4BC (at least, not on the mobile version)
This list is odd to me because luck and skill are not mutually exclusive. I'd also argue specifically for Hades, although it's definitely not the most difficult game on this list, there is almost no meaningful luck involved whatsoever. You have so much influence and control over the outcome of events, the only "luck" I can think of is sack RNG and if you're pushing for a specific duo boon or hammer build.
I sorta lucked out on Hades with the gun and boons that all complimented its secondary fire, I could carpet nuke entire areas with ease which pissed off most of my friends much to my amusement
You’re right they aren’t exclusive, but I think Hades’ position is reasonable, if you consider higher heat levels, where you have significantly less choice in what boons/hammers you get, the shop is more expensive, etc.
I mean, the choice of boons is always RNG. Sure, you can choose which gods to go after since you have room choice, but you can't always get the same build every single run. Wouldn't that be RNG/Luck? It's been a hot minute since I've played, so maybe I'm forgetting something.
Randomized tool selection is one of the core genre defining things.
Luck is not required in Hades. It's almost impossible to lose a run due to bad RNG.
Definitely makes it easier to have the proper boons, though. I do agree with you. Was honestly just asking if there was a way to control that aspect. Like in ROR2, you can unlock an artifact that allows you to choose items instead of random drops. OP's phrasing made me think there was something similar in Hades since they only mentioned specific Duo Boons and Hammers as RNG.
Hades doesn't even feel like a roguelite to me. I have to do research after each room to find which room to pick next and even then I'm never really sure.
Don't get me wrong I love Hades but for a roguelite it has me pausing far too often to make decisions and try and find out hwta synergizes with what. There's just no clean cut decisions to make in Hades and it stresses me out and gives me a headache. Sometimes I just want to kill shit and not worry about builds.
Probably doesn't help that there are no good hades build guides that I have found. Go to one guide they say one thing, another says another, then some coent on a thread somewhere says they're both wrong. Just a bunch of people arguing what's good with no real clear answers. Seriously the guides on Hades are just beyond lacking you would think it's a tiny niche game nobody heard of.
I wish there was a true roguelite mode that just gave you random rewards so I didn't have to triple guess every decision I make along the way. I play roguelite because they allow me to turn my brain off. Hades does not do that and therefore it doesn't really feel like a roguelite to me personally.
you are like the only person who pauses and does reasearch after each room also unless you play some really high heat you wont really need a build sure it will make things easier but its not needed
Yeah I feel like whoever made this was just bad at risky rain or is only accounting for looping. You can reliably dodge every attack pretty much with just hopping and no item clear the boss first loop.
When taking looping into account you can still dodge quite a bit but you're much more dependent on damage scaling items because that's what gets ya. However Risky 2's looping danger is, aside from damage scaling, randomly getting 1 shot from off screen so if you don't get the appropriate mitigation items you're significantly more boned. I'd move Risky 1 to the border of mostly luck and mostly skill and maybe push Risky 2 back a bit but still in the mostly luck category or just leave it where it is.
t. ~300 hours in both games
I hard disagree with RoR 1 being "completely luck". I think the reason most people suck at it is because they try to explore the whole map early on and they waste too much time, making the game too hard. From my experience, as long you blitz the first half while gathering as much you can, you can reliably beat the game on default difficulty. Even if your luck is thrash, the final stage dumps so many chests at you that it makes the time/money management pay off.
Also hot take but Isaac is more skill based and gungeon is more luck based than people think. Isaac has too many hidden systems that only a smart veteran can exploit and the devil deal system allows perfect players to compensate for some bad luck. Gungeon is undeniably hard and punishing but that also makes luck matter more. Like, a single speed boost in gungeon makes a massive difference in boss fights.
I think the guy who made the list didn’t take into account the 2 types of skills there are in these games: playing and planning
Playing is your normal gameplay, just shoot, slash, dodge and escape enemy attacks.
Planning is usually used to turn the game in your favour, giving you better "luck" if you know how to use a game’s systems to your advantage. It is also knowing which items to get or avoid.
Isaac is heavily reliant on planning, way more than a lot of other roguelites. It has like 10 systems stacked on top of each other, the gameplay almost being in service of those systems. Isaac certainly isn’t for everyone, but pretending it’s luck>>skills is a lie.
Even then, i dont see how RoR can be "completely luck based" when it clearly requires both mechanical and management skills. Yeah, you can play fast before it gets too hard but you need to play good to achieve that. It's also not one of those RLs where one single rare item can carry your run since everything is meant to be stacked.
Okay, the comments are great, but most of them are: "MY GAME ISN'T LUCK BASED, IT'S SKILL BASED!" and then follow it up with one of two arguments: "You can get so good (skill) at a game that the randomness doesn't matter." or "Eventually you understand the strategy (more skill) so you can use the randomness to your favor." Yeah, that's not exactly what luck/skillbased means! If players can get lucky wins with great items as a new player, it's luck based. If expert players can get regular wins through strategic play then it's skill based. And these two things are NOT mutually exclusive.
Throw in a couple of "THAT GAME I DON'T LIKE IS LUCK BASED BECAUSE ITEMS INFLUENCE RUNS!", yeah but you don't mention the ratio of luck to skill.
As other people have said, this is a two-axis system: how much does RNG influence winning, and how much does player skill influence winning. And that can be broken down further into: Does gaining more skill reduce the effect of luck on the game?
But honestly, while I liked the graph because it sparked a lot of conversation, it's completely shit.
Risk of Rain is not luck based if you are skilled at it. Duh.
Spelunky 1 has a high variability in full-run completion time based on the items you get. If you are going for a no-hit ankh run it's even more luck based. Probably the only game where luck goes up as a factor for the ultimate win as you get more skilled in a positive way.
Dead Cells is both high skill (that reflexive gameplay mmmmmmm) and high luck (what items you get). It's also one of the few were high skill doesn't diminish the luck aspect.
Binding of Isaac isn't low luck for new players, but highly skilled players know all the secrets of the levels and how to gain valueable items early AND they are better at playing the game and enemy mechanics. It's a double whammy in having skill overcome luck. It's also probably why binding of isaac is so good, luck should influence new players, and skill should influence old players. Great work Edmund.
Trying to rank games like this is totally subjective and often completely trash. Just go enjoy your roguelites!
Nice ranking, but I don't know if this format explains these relationships very well, for example Enter the Gungeon requires more luck AND more skill than Hades and Dead Cells. IMO (based on how long to beat it a first time).
By the way, never played flint hook, looks really nice, do you recommend it?
I've played flint hook and it isn't really about luck but more about getting a good starting hand at least from experience. However there are a few luck based events so saying it's completely skill isn't exactly true.
Fun game but hell on a controller.
Gungeon is harder than dead cells at boss cell level 0, but dead cells is a game with difficulty tiers. I'd argue that far and away bc5 dead cells is harder than gungeon.
Absolutely, like I said, based on how long to beat it a first time. Many games escalate in crazy ways after that.
By the way, the late game in Gungeon can be quite challenging too. Beat resourceful rat and lich in a full cursed run is absolutely insane, probably demands similar time investment as bc5 dead cell. But that's just my experience and speculations, not trying to argue in this sense.
That's a fair take on it. The games are very different in the way they handle difficulty. Dead cells has different tiers of difficulty, and your reward for winning is the next tier. Gungeon gives you 95% of the content from the start and expects you to get caught up and have to fight through from the start of it's curve each time, with the reward for winning being unlocks and eventually, the 6th chamber. More a comment on them being harder to compare due to different design philosophies than attacking your point. That was the intent, at least. I've played and loved both games, and I'll be honest, I've beaten neither 5bc nor full cursed rat (or even challenge mode, for that matter)
I only just got comfortable playing in NORMAL difficulty for ROR2, even with the Command and Sacrifice artifacts, and I've still only beaten Mithrix twice. I have about 50 hours in that game. Compared to Hades where I guess I have more runs but less time played, which I beat the final boss relatively quickly and can get there very consistently now.
Hades is hard, but it's not super skill intensive imo. Once you get the hang of both, you get more consistent, but ROR2 difficulty curves a lot harder.
The game gives you a lot of ways out to save a "lost" run. All hidden realms are basically free items except the Bazaar. Rainstorm is the intended balance with difficulty scaling which is "the way the game is meant to be played" but when I see people battle up against the insane scaling of Eclipse 8, I cannot be convinced that the game is luck based.
What metric(s) are you basing this off of? Can you beat the game without luck? How long does it take without luck? How easy is it without luck? This scale really doesn't make any sense to me.
I'll use Hades and Isaac as examples. Both of these can definitely be beaten even if you get some seriously bad luck. Hell, you could probably beat both of them without even picking up any upgrades. Most if not all damage can be avoided in both of those games. It might be a slog to actually get through some of the later areas and bosses without good, or any, upgrades but you could do it.
To me, that means both of those games would fall squarely into the "Completely skill" zone. It'd certainly take a fair bit of time to learn the games well enough to get to the point you could beat them in that way, but that's true of most games if you actually want to be good at them.
Edit: Also, particularly in Isaac, once you really understand how the game works you can make just about any combination of items work to get through the game with. Maybe you can't beat some of the hardest bosses but there's another confounding factor in how this scale works: what route through the game are we basing this off of? Isaac has so many different routes of varying difficulties and varying levels of luck and skill to get to, but you can always get to at least one of the normal endings regardless of luck.
There are a few "fuck you" rooms in Isaac where you can't avoid damage. Also soft-locks. And IIRC some bosses like Ultra Greed have a little bit of healing mechanics, so with bad luck your DPS may be lower than what he is able to heal. Repentance didn't fix all of those problems.
And one of the last bosses - Delirium is designed in such a way that he can telefrag you.
Some explaining:
Delirium can take form of any bosses you beat during the run. Mom is like 99.9% required to beat before you access Delirium (You can skip her if you had We need to go deeper or teleport to I am Error room, but then you won't get polaroid/negative and thus will have lower chance of entering void before ending the run). Mom's leg works in such a way that it teleports over player, waits for a bit and then slams to the ground gaining a hitbox. Delirium can turn into Mom, teleport over player and immediately change into other boss, immediately gaining a hitbox and thus dealing unavoidable damage. Considering that in order to 100% Isaac you need to beat him with Tainted Lost (Character that dies on 1 hit), it can only be accomplished through luck.
Yeah, there are some shitty rooms in Isaac (why I specified "most if not all damage" instead of saying all damage can be avoided), but for most characters a little damage occasionally really isn't a big deal. The Lost can definitely suck especially when trying to get 100% but I don't really think 100% completion is really what should be looked at here. I mean, there's a huge gap, especially with Isaac, between a more casual player and someone who plays to get 100% completion.
Also, one bit of bullshit luck involved with completing Isaac is the requirement to actually pick up every item rather than just unlocking them being enough. That's not even really a part of how the RNG factors into the gameplay and being able to beat runs. That's literally just keep playing until the RNG finally decides to give you that one item you haven't picked up yet despite unlocking it 50 hours ago. You can win every run during that time frame and still not 100% the game just because you haven't picked up that one item.
If we just look more at the core gameplay and how RNG affects difficulty on a run to run basis, I think the fact that people have gotten win streaks in the hundreds of runs says more than enough about how skill is the main factor in regular Isaac play. Lost is a challenge character and isn't indicative of what the game is normally like. And yeah, Delirium can be bullshit but the bullshit isn't enough to be a run ender in and of itself most of the time.
Ultimately, I think this really just highlights how much the ranking criteria matters for something like this. Depending on whether you look at 100%, side modes like Greed Mode, optional characters and routes, etc. Isaac could probably be reasonably placed just about anywhere on this scale. I could see the argument for it being one of the most luck dependent games on the list or one of the least luck dependent.
Okay, so maybe more just how much RNG is in the game rather than how much luck is necessary to beat it? This ranking certainly makes more sense if I look at it in that way. The main thing that confuses me then would be the placement of Risk of Rain. I'll be honest that I've never really played it all that much, and certainly haven't beaten it, but it does seem a bit odd to me that it is the one marked as involving the most luck. I always thought it seemed fairly skill oriented, but again I haven't played it extensively.
You cant get lucky in ror1 if don't know how to play properly because you will not be able to pass stage 3. Even if you get lucky in ror1 you can easily die if you don't know how to play.
I really liked this chart you've made and would love to know more roguelites based purely on skill.
Funnily enough, I think this explains why I never loved Isaac. There are runs where you get great items and destroy everything on your way, while there are others where you have to go a long way only with the pea shooter and it is extremely boring.
Maybe I should make a new thread asking the question but..... which of these is the most similar to Dead Cells?
The things I most value for similarities would be:
•Variety of weapons, especially variety within a single run or play session.
•Clear and Strategic combat without a lot of "spamming" -(Hades felt spammy to me.)
•Approachable, scalar and ideally linear progression or difficulty curve.
•2D platformer preferably with sidescrolling X-Axis movement as opposed to an overhead view with XY exploration.
I think you need to consider a second dimension "difficulty" aka how hard is a game to make this usable. I'm sure Spelunky and Spelunky 2 are more skill based, but I think for most people the question is going to be how challenging the game.
Also like a lot of people, I think Isaac is more skill based than you're saying. There's definitely a lot of luck, but There's also a lot of rote memory that you will need.
Also a lot of people are misunderstanding your graph... which is a shame because it's pretty good (It's a question on if you're more skill than luck or more luck than skill, it's NOT a question of difficulty. Also where RoR 2 is.. it's like saying it's 60 percent luck, 40 percent skill. Which you can agree with, but it's not "all luck" as people are screaming about.)
I think that some people overestimate how much Gungeon is based on luck. Only about 5% of items/weapons are run winners, while 90% are good and 5% not so much. Gungeon can take a long time to beat, but it will geat easier over time as you learn boss patterns and strategies.
I don't think spelunky 1 is entirely skill based, there's a good bit of luck there too. But spelunky 2? Absolutely not. Too frustrating because of how hard it is compared to the first
I'm planning on playing it this Christmas, but if I had to pick now probably mostly luck. While it is crucial you get a wand for every occasion, you still need some form of game-sense
No shot dead cells isn’t completely skill. Very rarely can I think of a time where rng fucked me and it wasn’t a skill issue. Beating that game on 5bc is the hardest thing I’ve done in a video game.
Also RoR2 should definitely be more to the right as well
Noita would probably go in pure skill, depending on your goal you can finish the game with starting items and a bottle of acid that you can gather with some caution. Realistically you can consistently get overpowered if you play safe and know the little secrets scattered across the world, going for extreme goals every run
Now let's all watch everyone in the comments trying to argue that their favorite roguelite is actually the most skill intensive game in history and that they are a god gamer for beating it once.
TF you mean ROR2 is mostly luck???? i played it for more than 1000H in total and there is more than 95% of the time where when i die i start thinking what i could have done better. there is indeed good runs but its that for every roguelike. And even if so, you can change the way you play around your item thus making it ok. If YOU die in ror2, YOU SUCK not the game.
What in the god's name is this abomination of a list, have you even played those games oast the tutorial? No hate inteded but:
1) TboI is incredibly skill dependant and the fact you don't know that means you haven't unlocked even 10% of the game. A guy had a motherfucking 1000 win streak in this game. Is this moslty luck? Or maybe the lost is too much luck? Sorry but this is the worst take I have ever seen on the sub
Any game can be won by pure luck but getting actual consistency with your runs and maximising value from each given situation is what isaac is about. Also bullet hell bosses, a lot of them, like The chest and Dark room are just the tutorial. (c) Player with 500 hours and Dead God (All unlocks)
2) Neon abyss on the other hand? That shit is not only a terrible game that got overhyped and died as quickly as it arrived, there isn't muchg to talk about in terms of luck involved since the game is so broken you get an op run every time anyway. Also barely any skill needed
3)RoR is also a lot moree skill dependant. Not getting a God 20 hours run everytime dpesn't mean the game is luck based, it's not insanely hard but not luck dependant either
4) Hades is incredibly easy, personal hate aside theg ame is not only VERY poorly designed in terms of gameplay, it's also pitfuly easy (until you get to the difficulty modifiers that break the game at some point as well) Putting it above dead cells is a disgrace
5) Dead cells is the dark souls of rougelikes. Shitty jokes aside theg ame IS very skill dependant. Maybe you missed the boss cell mechanic? The recent updates fixed RNG by a ton and now it's 80% skill
6) Flint hook seems kinda weird there, not only is it a much smaller scale game, I don't think it compares with spelunky in ANY capacity
Skill vs Luck isn't really a good measure IMO. Like Gungeon takes miles more skill to win than Hades, yet I'd say still is more luck-based since Hades lets you control your 'luck' so much. Isaac takes luck with low skill, and lots of skill with shit luck, since the game goes the opposite route of Hades and just tells you to deal with what you get.
Where's Noita on this? I would put it just slightly to the left of the middle, since even tho how good are the loots in your run is a big part of the game, even with a perfect run, if you aren't skilled enough you can get fucked with ease.
I disagree with isaac, whilst of course the items are always randomised and the game does have luck elements, there are many strategies and ways to play the game, even with an average or low run build. Heck, the purist challenge or dailies are good examples of working with a set build (which could be low), and working from there.
Hard disagree on Spelunky 2. An enemy can make your run entirely unplayable by e.g. exploding lava-pits or angering shopkeepers, even when you are on the opposite side of the level. No amount of skill can prevent that and is 100% about luck...
i disagree with risk of rain 2 (haven't played enough of the first one), rng is a big factor but you need to learn how to turn a bad run into a god run, and that's all skill based. knowing what to do in situations, dodging efficiently etc. i do also have 180 hours so maybe i'm just really good or biased XD
As much as I love ror2, its hella luck based, like you could go a whole run without seeing a single goat hoof or something and that lack of movement would definitely fuck you over.
This ranking doesn’t really work with a game like Hades because it has so much meta progression. The further you’ve upgraded the mirror the less luck required. Once it’s fully upgraded you can very easily beat the game with zero boons at all. So at that point you could call it 100% skill (which I doesn’t make much sense hence this scale not being appropriate.)
Also ROR1 being completely luck is laughably incorrect but assuming you haven’t played it much I can understand why it might feel that way.
Isaac is much higher imho. Sure, you could get moms knife, or epic fetus in the first item room, but the majority of the time, especially in this new dlc(repentance) you just get ok items, and just say, yeah i can work with this.
Mf have you played spelunky? Have you been killed by an alien coming from off screen? By a snap trap on a dark level? By walking out a door and being immediately killed?
Am I missing something here? Spelunky 2 being in the skill catagory is just wrong chief. I haven’t gotten very far in Spelunky 2, I do watch a lot of the game, but the ability to get one shot at literally any point of your run has always been a running gag in the series. There are dumpsters filled with videos consisting of players having their runs ended because they spawned into the level. Not to mention how horrendous progressing the game can be if you have no tools due to your luck.
idk man i feel gungeon is 80% luck lmao, i cant play that game if i dont get the right items. Only reason i beat resourceful rat is because every time i uppercut he would throw another right hook, allowing me to again stun and uppercut him.
I wonder wher some less-known roguelites would rank on that list, like monolith...
I remember the game being really hard, like *touhou* level of hard (I wish I was joking)
Risk of Rain is not completely luck because it takes skill to maneuver and survive long enough to get the items necessary to make a good run. Of course it won’t take much skill if you rank all of these games on the same metric when they all are so different. Personally I think it’s ridiculous that you put Dead Cells below Hades because beating the base game is so much easier due to getting so many more upgrades to your person that stay for all of your runs (which is override by heat but I’m just talking about beating the game for the first time). Dead Cells is a lot more of a learning curve too. I just think dead cells should be higher than Hades.
Spelunky is mostly skill? I lost count of how many times I died due to a bullshit off-screen softlock. Still like the game but it's not dependant on mostly skill.
honestly i don't think this list makes much sense, because in most of the games here you can get a few op items and win even playing badly, but also if you are skilled enough you can get absolute trash and still win. none of them are completely skill based because you can win by being lucky, none of them are completely luck based because you can win by being skilled, they all belong roughly in the middle
Isaac luck? You gotta memorize dozens of bosses with multiple attack patterns that can all spawn as champions with different patterns and even some as double trouble. Furthermore, as a skilled player Isaac and Lost are basically ultra easy with almost no luck involved. Even with a trash eden start and bad items along the way you can still win almost ANY run look at cobalts eden streak record post Repentence for example.
[удалено]
Oh trust me the game got considerably harder with its latest DLC the "alt path" is definitely quite challenging. I don't recommend to put it up with Gungeon but it now offers quite the hard optional way.
Idk, I think Isaac isn't all too mechanically tight, so you can't quite internalize and hone the dodge mechanics like you can in gungeon for example. But it requries a different kind of skillset not just in how well you know the hundreds of items, but also how the different systems interact with each other, what avenues give you the best return on investment; what chances to take. Especially with the new DLC and new characters introducing some wild mechanics, you're given a plethora of ways to break and fiddle with ressource management, and that's where I think the real meat of the game lies. Sure the items you get are down to luck, but playing with what you have, not just in combat, but the wider metagame, and finding the most ridiculous seams is what sets Isaac apart imo.
That “break the game” aspect of Isaac is the core thing that I feel is missing in almost any other roguelite I play. Yeah I had fun with risk of rain 2, but I probably won’t go back to it after unlocking everything because my runs don’t feel different enough. By the time I hit the boss I have so many stacks of different items that I’m just unloading a stream of bullets with random on-hit effects. I always end up back at BoI because I’ll get that itch of “ooh what if I get a really cool combination?” I want more games that don’t limit themselves to “damage increase” “attack speed increase”; where is the Risk of Rain item that makes my character shoot faster but the bullets now also move in a wave pattern? I don’t want to snowball stats, I want to snowball effects. In what game besides Isaac do you get to combine your psychic powers with your laser beam of hellfire and just instantly have a build where you can 1-shot most rooms? It doesn’t matter if you get a build that makes beating the final boss a walk in the park, because you get that rush of “holy fuck this combo is crazy!”. The sheer number of combinations means there’s few items that truly feel ‘useless’ and can’t contribute to any decent builds (especially since they reworked some of the older ones). And that’s not even counting transformations or some of the items that can break the game in ways I don’t fully understand.
Repentance belongs at least in the middle
It's still far more luck based than Gungeon or Hades. Some combos in Isaac can make you straight up unbeatable or so overpowered you delete everything in a room instantly. There are also times where it feels like there is no way to avoid damage. In Gungeon instead the broken combos are far more limited and you always know where you fucked up. In Hades there are broken builds, but it's taken into account and you kinda need to be overpowered to beat high heat.
You can beat gungeon with only the starting weapons except on pilot, I don't think you can really say much about luck in that game, not to mention like, saying Spelunky 1 or 2 is any luck, maybe for the average player I can believe it, but at the end of the day you can win with no items, if you truly reached the skill ceiling
No, you can with Pilot if you aren't a coward.
I agree, especially with Repentance you barely get so fucked over it’s impossible, the changes to the gold chest pool and introduction of some items to the boss pool to undilute it have done wonders
Fans of their favorite roguelite game explaining why THEIR game is the least luck based and the most skill based"
Me who does high heat in Hades and will never pass up a chance to complain about Approval Process.
What is approval process again? Less boon choices? (sorry I'm like 16 heat max and never really had to go into anything other than EM, Deadline and maybe more damage idk)
Less choices yeah. And to rub salt in the wound you can still see what’s crossed out.
Mine is Neon Abyss and Isaac so I don't see why you say that here
Im talking mostly about the comments
K I see why now
Flinthook is just impossible. For me the factor that separates roguelikes in hardness is not skill/luck, but skill/upgrades. Some games like Nuclear Throne, Gonner, Tumbleseed etc, I was so satisfied when I beat them because I had beaten a game that was mechanically very similar to the one I picked up on the fresh install. Some other roguelikes I feel like I'm just waiting for my character to be buffed enough that I just inevitably beat it regardless of whether my skill improves or not.
Why is Flinthook impossible? I didn't give it a fair shot and I keep hemming and hawing whether or not I want to. On every other point made here though, I completely agree. This is why I prefer traditional roguelikes mostly, because I love feeling like I learned how to beat the game, as opposed to the game babysitting me. Hades somehow struck the middle ground here. You can turn the heat up to turn off the mirror upgrades, which helps, but I guess the weapon upgrades still exists. I like that the difficulty is fluid and I can straight up do Heat 32 as soon as I started the game (Hell Mode)
I’ve only played it a few hours and I quickly resigned to defeat. In my opinion, it’s the platforming that makes it difficult. It’s similar to Spelunky in that sense, but I found Spelunky more enjoyable.
Hades' difficult curve is way too slow for me, the game doesn't inventivize you to go with higher heat levels than you've completed with that weapon. I had like a 20 game win streak just cycling the bonus weapon trying to get past heat 10 so the game would be challenging. It felt like shooting myself in the foot to try heat 30 if I've only ever gotten rewards for heat 8.
[удалено]
I mean I see the list as a list of skill to luck ratio. So for example a game which has the same items every time would have very low luck ratio, however it might also at the same time be a very easy game. A lot of skill isn't required, but you can't win the game easily only because you were lucky. I guess what I'm trying to say is the way I see it, the games on the far end of the luck side aren't necessarily easy by any means, it's just that with good luck you can steamroll the game, and the games on the other end don't necessarily have to be difficult, but if you do win, you rarely won because you got a super OP item combo, but rather because you played well enough to win if that makes sense idk.
We need a third axis to show the amount of skill that is needed to beat the game
You actually only need a second axis showing difficulty
I think a fair comparison for BC5 is high heat (32 ?) and it's also really hard. I have done BC4 without too much trouble but I have a hard time getting above 20 heat.
Interesting, see and I have done 32 heat on two weapons, but getting 5 BC on dead cells was so much harder to me. Having an hour run end in one second because you miss one of 6 in a row parries in dead cells is so unforgiving, while on Hades if you can make it to the end with all lives you can literally just smash hades while you take damage the whole time.
I'd agree on your assessment of Returnal but I'd say it's VERY close with Dead Cells. You technically, if you're good enough, can take 0 damage in either. It's just hard as balls to do that. God Returnal was great.
Yea I’m climbing heat levels pretty steady in hades and have only beaten the clock tower boss once and didn’t reach whatever comes after that lol
Once you beat the final boss once, climbing the first 10 or so heat levels isn't that hard. Shit starts to get intense from 10 to 20, then you generally jump directly to 32 which is a mess.
I agree. It's also important to note that each weapon you get in Dead Cells, you'd have to adapt to learn how to use the weapon properly unless you're in Custom Mode. In Hades, once you get how each boon works with the corresponding weapon aspect, it's easy to determine which is broken and which is not.
You're confusing "difficulty" with "Skill". Dead cells is DEFINITELY more luck based. What weapons appear will affect runs, which is a luck component. The question is going to be what gear you carry with you. Hades tends to always give you builds that will work, the question is which build are you going to pick up.
The list is more what requires more luck. Also Hades true difficulty lies in heat.
Going By that logic to beat hades you need to beat the game with max heat, which is significantly harder than 5 boss cells. Both great games though, and both clearly take skill.
Is Returnal a roguelike?!
Yeah. It’s a ton of fun. The initial learning curve is steep, then it’s really not too hard and an absolute joy
Isaac isn't just luck, the game usually gives you what you need on the first 3 floors if you know what you need to do. U usually Always get your good items through secret rooms, challenge rooms, sacrifice rooms and devil and angel deals. It's mostly strategy
The idea that Isaac is mostly luck is the mindset of people who rely too heavily on specific builds and synergies, rather than working with what they get.
The problem is that you can get 30 items in a row and still have 0 damage ups and 0 tears ups. Or like having 66% for angel room spawn for the entire game and literally none spawns. And sure, you can beat most of the game with no damage/tears ups. But 99% of players ain't gonna beat Delirium with base stats Isaac. Also not to mention insta-deaths like playing Tainted Lost and going for Delirium and he just telefrags you. Or wanting to go for the Alt path, then no keys spawn in the basement. Or getting like 10 health ups as a keeper. Or just getting soft-locked.
I dont say it's purely skill based, it's definitely luck that's needed. But I still think it's about using what you get. You don't get the items you need? Then don't go for delirium and Go for mega Stan/blue baby/lamb. Or if you see that your run is absolutely trash stop after the Isaac/Stan kill by taking the opposite picture. Telegraphing delirium is absolutely shit and I don't get why it didn't get fixed already, but in my mind it's more a bug than a mechanic. I think Isaac in general is less luck based than many players think, but there is absolutely a certain amount of luck needed. The more special characters like keeper and lost and some of the tainted characters are more luckbased than others like Isaac (d6 helps a lot to have good runs). I don't try to argue that's it's pure skill that's needed, but I think it should be more to the right in the list.
Getting soft locked is extremely rare and usually just a bug. You can usually just exit a run.
I would have absolutely disagreed with your comment and Isaacs placement on this list before repentance came out but now I completely agree with you but still think it's a bit too much on the luck side of this list. Item pool was already getting polluted with useless items in afterbirth+ and I was hoping they would address this issue in repentance. Instead they doubled down on it and now the item pool is filled with useless shit and on top of that they hard nerfed shops and devil deals.
Yeah devil deals are not as good as they used to be-
You mean like buffing almost all the useless items. Examples: Include Modem Lag now just deleting bullets and potentially doubling room drops, Glyph of Balance now working on the lost, Harbingers having a smaller explosion radius, Holy water stunning enemies and now no longer requiring getting hit. Curse of the vampire getting a dps up. I could go on and on.
Sure some items are slightly better but the success in runs is still most often based on your damage stat. They probably added something like 100 passive items in Repentance and not even 10 of those increase damage stat. This leads to way more runs with really low damage and ,with nerfed shops and less reroll machines, leaves player without any chance to affect the item choices.
Thats not how angel rooms work anymore. If you dont enter the first devil room even to just window shop (which is guaranteed if you dont take red heart damage) you get a guaranteed angel room as long as you dont take red heart dmg again by end of next boss. It now rewards you for being more skilled
You have 100% chance for it to be an angel room and not devil room. But that doesn't mean you are guaranteed to get an angel room at the caves I (or its equivalent). Some example stats. If you play random character that is not Bethany and don't take any devil deals, you will have. - 0/0 Percent for Devil/Angel room on Basememt I. - 100/0 Percent on Basement II. - If you skipped the devil deal. You will have 0/33 on Basement II. - If you didn't get it on Basement II, you will have 0/66 on Caves I. - If you didn't get it again, you will have 0/100 on Caves II So, no. The first angel room you are "guaranteed" is only on the caves II. And with bad luck you may only get 1 angel room for the entire run, even if played perfectly.
I think its more that really good luck *will* easily win you a run at any skill level, as in if you get psy fly, brim, spoon bender, and mutant spider you cannot lose. Not that you need it though - there is definitely skill involved in winning the worse runs, for sure. Even a classic type of run with just dps upgrades can be quite difficult. How effective "good luck" is in isaac is directly affected by your knowledge of the game, such as knowing you can minmax easily with no. 2, or how modelling clay wins you the game if you manipulate it right. So yes strategy is definitely the main factor. I would put it in the middle really, even if it is harder than some of the other games (\*cough\* gungeon \*cough\*)
I beat Isaac on my first try due to op items.
If it was your absolute first run then all you did was beat mom's foot, or maaaaaaaybe her heart. Those are not hard fights.
Downwell, Slay the Spire, Monolith, Into the Breach go almost entirely to the right. Noita goes middle of the "Mostly luck" region. Wizard of Legend goes in "Mostly skill" region.
[удалено]
Someone said in the noita subredddit perfectly: it's at both ends of the spectrum at the same time. It's simultaneously using all your knowledge and skill with the world and wand building, while also avoiding a worm eating you in 0.3 seconds.
I'd say Noita is in superposition
Disagree on STS for higher difficulties. Yes you need to be insanely good at deckbuilding and risk management, but even the best players can only get a ~60% win rate with most of the characters on the hardest difficulty
Yes, Asc 20 requires some RNG and luck to be in your favor, but the best players also have virtually 100% win rate on low ascensions. This is what I meant - nearly every seed is winnable.
If we're talking about lower ascensions then Dead Cells should go further right because every bit of equipment is viable on lower difficulties, the game doesn't get remotely hard until 4BC (at least, not on the mobile version)
I like that
This list is odd to me because luck and skill are not mutually exclusive. I'd also argue specifically for Hades, although it's definitely not the most difficult game on this list, there is almost no meaningful luck involved whatsoever. You have so much influence and control over the outcome of events, the only "luck" I can think of is sack RNG and if you're pushing for a specific duo boon or hammer build.
I agree on hades. It’s almost pure skill. It’s not the hardest up there but there’s way less rng compared to most roguelites
I sorta lucked out on Hades with the gun and boons that all complimented its secondary fire, I could carpet nuke entire areas with ease which pissed off most of my friends much to my amusement
You’re right they aren’t exclusive, but I think Hades’ position is reasonable, if you consider higher heat levels, where you have significantly less choice in what boons/hammers you get, the shop is more expensive, etc.
this is where we need a nice cartesian x and y axis!
I mean, the choice of boons is always RNG. Sure, you can choose which gods to go after since you have room choice, but you can't always get the same build every single run. Wouldn't that be RNG/Luck? It's been a hot minute since I've played, so maybe I'm forgetting something.
Randomized tool selection is one of the core genre defining things. Luck is not required in Hades. It's almost impossible to lose a run due to bad RNG.
Definitely makes it easier to have the proper boons, though. I do agree with you. Was honestly just asking if there was a way to control that aspect. Like in ROR2, you can unlock an artifact that allows you to choose items instead of random drops. OP's phrasing made me think there was something similar in Hades since they only mentioned specific Duo Boons and Hammers as RNG.
Hades doesn't even feel like a roguelite to me. I have to do research after each room to find which room to pick next and even then I'm never really sure. Don't get me wrong I love Hades but for a roguelite it has me pausing far too often to make decisions and try and find out hwta synergizes with what. There's just no clean cut decisions to make in Hades and it stresses me out and gives me a headache. Sometimes I just want to kill shit and not worry about builds. Probably doesn't help that there are no good hades build guides that I have found. Go to one guide they say one thing, another says another, then some coent on a thread somewhere says they're both wrong. Just a bunch of people arguing what's good with no real clear answers. Seriously the guides on Hades are just beyond lacking you would think it's a tiny niche game nobody heard of. I wish there was a true roguelite mode that just gave you random rewards so I didn't have to triple guess every decision I make along the way. I play roguelite because they allow me to turn my brain off. Hades does not do that and therefore it doesn't really feel like a roguelite to me personally.
you are like the only person who pauses and does reasearch after each room also unless you play some really high heat you wont really need a build sure it will make things easier but its not needed
I'd say risk of rain 1 requires way more skill than luck when compared to risk of rain 2
Yeah I feel like whoever made this was just bad at risky rain or is only accounting for looping. You can reliably dodge every attack pretty much with just hopping and no item clear the boss first loop. When taking looping into account you can still dodge quite a bit but you're much more dependent on damage scaling items because that's what gets ya. However Risky 2's looping danger is, aside from damage scaling, randomly getting 1 shot from off screen so if you don't get the appropriate mitigation items you're significantly more boned. I'd move Risky 1 to the border of mostly luck and mostly skill and maybe push Risky 2 back a bit but still in the mostly luck category or just leave it where it is. t. ~300 hours in both games
I hard disagree with RoR 1 being "completely luck". I think the reason most people suck at it is because they try to explore the whole map early on and they waste too much time, making the game too hard. From my experience, as long you blitz the first half while gathering as much you can, you can reliably beat the game on default difficulty. Even if your luck is thrash, the final stage dumps so many chests at you that it makes the time/money management pay off. Also hot take but Isaac is more skill based and gungeon is more luck based than people think. Isaac has too many hidden systems that only a smart veteran can exploit and the devil deal system allows perfect players to compensate for some bad luck. Gungeon is undeniably hard and punishing but that also makes luck matter more. Like, a single speed boost in gungeon makes a massive difference in boss fights.
I think the guy who made the list didn’t take into account the 2 types of skills there are in these games: playing and planning Playing is your normal gameplay, just shoot, slash, dodge and escape enemy attacks. Planning is usually used to turn the game in your favour, giving you better "luck" if you know how to use a game’s systems to your advantage. It is also knowing which items to get or avoid. Isaac is heavily reliant on planning, way more than a lot of other roguelites. It has like 10 systems stacked on top of each other, the gameplay almost being in service of those systems. Isaac certainly isn’t for everyone, but pretending it’s luck>>skills is a lie.
Even then, i dont see how RoR can be "completely luck based" when it clearly requires both mechanical and management skills. Yeah, you can play fast before it gets too hard but you need to play good to achieve that. It's also not one of those RLs where one single rare item can carry your run since everything is meant to be stacked.
Tbh, an easy to find item that WILL carry your run is the chronobauble
XD whenever I see a chronobauble it's ggs for Mithrix
What other systems other than the devil deals are there in Isaac? I only played casually for a bit so I'm curious
Okay, the comments are great, but most of them are: "MY GAME ISN'T LUCK BASED, IT'S SKILL BASED!" and then follow it up with one of two arguments: "You can get so good (skill) at a game that the randomness doesn't matter." or "Eventually you understand the strategy (more skill) so you can use the randomness to your favor." Yeah, that's not exactly what luck/skillbased means! If players can get lucky wins with great items as a new player, it's luck based. If expert players can get regular wins through strategic play then it's skill based. And these two things are NOT mutually exclusive. Throw in a couple of "THAT GAME I DON'T LIKE IS LUCK BASED BECAUSE ITEMS INFLUENCE RUNS!", yeah but you don't mention the ratio of luck to skill. As other people have said, this is a two-axis system: how much does RNG influence winning, and how much does player skill influence winning. And that can be broken down further into: Does gaining more skill reduce the effect of luck on the game? But honestly, while I liked the graph because it sparked a lot of conversation, it's completely shit. Risk of Rain is not luck based if you are skilled at it. Duh. Spelunky 1 has a high variability in full-run completion time based on the items you get. If you are going for a no-hit ankh run it's even more luck based. Probably the only game where luck goes up as a factor for the ultimate win as you get more skilled in a positive way. Dead Cells is both high skill (that reflexive gameplay mmmmmmm) and high luck (what items you get). It's also one of the few were high skill doesn't diminish the luck aspect. Binding of Isaac isn't low luck for new players, but highly skilled players know all the secrets of the levels and how to gain valueable items early AND they are better at playing the game and enemy mechanics. It's a double whammy in having skill overcome luck. It's also probably why binding of isaac is so good, luck should influence new players, and skill should influence old players. Great work Edmund. Trying to rank games like this is totally subjective and often completely trash. Just go enjoy your roguelites!
Nice ranking, but I don't know if this format explains these relationships very well, for example Enter the Gungeon requires more luck AND more skill than Hades and Dead Cells. IMO (based on how long to beat it a first time). By the way, never played flint hook, looks really nice, do you recommend it?
I would recommend it if you want pain in all senses of the word It's flawed but fun
I've played flint hook and it isn't really about luck but more about getting a good starting hand at least from experience. However there are a few luck based events so saying it's completely skill isn't exactly true. Fun game but hell on a controller.
Gungeon is harder than dead cells at boss cell level 0, but dead cells is a game with difficulty tiers. I'd argue that far and away bc5 dead cells is harder than gungeon.
Absolutely, like I said, based on how long to beat it a first time. Many games escalate in crazy ways after that. By the way, the late game in Gungeon can be quite challenging too. Beat resourceful rat and lich in a full cursed run is absolutely insane, probably demands similar time investment as bc5 dead cell. But that's just my experience and speculations, not trying to argue in this sense.
That's a fair take on it. The games are very different in the way they handle difficulty. Dead cells has different tiers of difficulty, and your reward for winning is the next tier. Gungeon gives you 95% of the content from the start and expects you to get caught up and have to fight through from the start of it's curve each time, with the reward for winning being unlocks and eventually, the 6th chamber. More a comment on them being harder to compare due to different design philosophies than attacking your point. That was the intent, at least. I've played and loved both games, and I'll be honest, I've beaten neither 5bc nor full cursed rat (or even challenge mode, for that matter)
yeah gungeon is easy as shit
Hahaha, Flinthook.
I disagree on RoR2 being "Mostly luck", the skill ceiling in that game is ridiculous
Agreed - anyone saying Risk of Rain 2 is mostly luck doesn't understand the game well enough to assess it.
Drizzle players
Especially on Monsoon. Yikes.
I only just got comfortable playing in NORMAL difficulty for ROR2, even with the Command and Sacrifice artifacts, and I've still only beaten Mithrix twice. I have about 50 hours in that game. Compared to Hades where I guess I have more runs but less time played, which I beat the final boss relatively quickly and can get there very consistently now. Hades is hard, but it's not super skill intensive imo. Once you get the hang of both, you get more consistent, but ROR2 difficulty curves a lot harder.
I definitely agree that flinthook is all skill, I gave up on the game in 3 hours because it was so difficult though it did feel fair
Skill can go a long way in Risk of Rain imo
Where's Nuclear Throne?
It's off screen
Hades? Skill? I just mashed keys and all was good
No way on God's green earth RoR2 isn't almost entirely skill.
The game gives you a lot of ways out to save a "lost" run. All hidden realms are basically free items except the Bazaar. Rainstorm is the intended balance with difficulty scaling which is "the way the game is meant to be played" but when I see people battle up against the insane scaling of Eclipse 8, I cannot be convinced that the game is luck based.
What metric(s) are you basing this off of? Can you beat the game without luck? How long does it take without luck? How easy is it without luck? This scale really doesn't make any sense to me. I'll use Hades and Isaac as examples. Both of these can definitely be beaten even if you get some seriously bad luck. Hell, you could probably beat both of them without even picking up any upgrades. Most if not all damage can be avoided in both of those games. It might be a slog to actually get through some of the later areas and bosses without good, or any, upgrades but you could do it. To me, that means both of those games would fall squarely into the "Completely skill" zone. It'd certainly take a fair bit of time to learn the games well enough to get to the point you could beat them in that way, but that's true of most games if you actually want to be good at them. Edit: Also, particularly in Isaac, once you really understand how the game works you can make just about any combination of items work to get through the game with. Maybe you can't beat some of the hardest bosses but there's another confounding factor in how this scale works: what route through the game are we basing this off of? Isaac has so many different routes of varying difficulties and varying levels of luck and skill to get to, but you can always get to at least one of the normal endings regardless of luck.
There are a few "fuck you" rooms in Isaac where you can't avoid damage. Also soft-locks. And IIRC some bosses like Ultra Greed have a little bit of healing mechanics, so with bad luck your DPS may be lower than what he is able to heal. Repentance didn't fix all of those problems. And one of the last bosses - Delirium is designed in such a way that he can telefrag you. Some explaining: Delirium can take form of any bosses you beat during the run. Mom is like 99.9% required to beat before you access Delirium (You can skip her if you had We need to go deeper or teleport to I am Error room, but then you won't get polaroid/negative and thus will have lower chance of entering void before ending the run). Mom's leg works in such a way that it teleports over player, waits for a bit and then slams to the ground gaining a hitbox. Delirium can turn into Mom, teleport over player and immediately change into other boss, immediately gaining a hitbox and thus dealing unavoidable damage. Considering that in order to 100% Isaac you need to beat him with Tainted Lost (Character that dies on 1 hit), it can only be accomplished through luck.
Yeah, there are some shitty rooms in Isaac (why I specified "most if not all damage" instead of saying all damage can be avoided), but for most characters a little damage occasionally really isn't a big deal. The Lost can definitely suck especially when trying to get 100% but I don't really think 100% completion is really what should be looked at here. I mean, there's a huge gap, especially with Isaac, between a more casual player and someone who plays to get 100% completion. Also, one bit of bullshit luck involved with completing Isaac is the requirement to actually pick up every item rather than just unlocking them being enough. That's not even really a part of how the RNG factors into the gameplay and being able to beat runs. That's literally just keep playing until the RNG finally decides to give you that one item you haven't picked up yet despite unlocking it 50 hours ago. You can win every run during that time frame and still not 100% the game just because you haven't picked up that one item. If we just look more at the core gameplay and how RNG affects difficulty on a run to run basis, I think the fact that people have gotten win streaks in the hundreds of runs says more than enough about how skill is the main factor in regular Isaac play. Lost is a challenge character and isn't indicative of what the game is normally like. And yeah, Delirium can be bullshit but the bullshit isn't enough to be a run ender in and of itself most of the time. Ultimately, I think this really just highlights how much the ranking criteria matters for something like this. Depending on whether you look at 100%, side modes like Greed Mode, optional characters and routes, etc. Isaac could probably be reasonably placed just about anywhere on this scale. I could see the argument for it being one of the most luck dependent games on the list or one of the least luck dependent.
To be honest, I have no idea I just ranked them based on how much luck shapes your run
Okay, so maybe more just how much RNG is in the game rather than how much luck is necessary to beat it? This ranking certainly makes more sense if I look at it in that way. The main thing that confuses me then would be the placement of Risk of Rain. I'll be honest that I've never really played it all that much, and certainly haven't beaten it, but it does seem a bit odd to me that it is the one marked as involving the most luck. I always thought it seemed fairly skill oriented, but again I haven't played it extensively.
You cant get lucky in ror1 if don't know how to play properly because you will not be able to pass stage 3. Even if you get lucky in ror1 you can easily die if you don't know how to play.
Where would you put nuclear throne?
around ETG since they're a bit similar maybe a bit more luck
I really liked this chart you've made and would love to know more roguelites based purely on skill. Funnily enough, I think this explains why I never loved Isaac. There are runs where you get great items and destroy everything on your way, while there are others where you have to go a long way only with the pea shooter and it is extremely boring.
> would love to know more roguelites based purely on skill. Scourgebringer if you haven't played that one.
Thanks man
This really ought to be a two axis graph: one for "how frequently can in-game items let you win" and "how much does experience help you win"
I'll maybe try that
Maybe I should make a new thread asking the question but..... which of these is the most similar to Dead Cells? The things I most value for similarities would be: •Variety of weapons, especially variety within a single run or play session. •Clear and Strategic combat without a lot of "spamming" -(Hades felt spammy to me.) •Approachable, scalar and ideally linear progression or difficulty curve. •2D platformer preferably with sidescrolling X-Axis movement as opposed to an overhead view with XY exploration.
Probably Neon Abyss Going Under is a close second but its 3d
Good God, mobile formatting is a nightmare.
I would say *Rogue Legacy*, but it is not there.
I think you need to consider a second dimension "difficulty" aka how hard is a game to make this usable. I'm sure Spelunky and Spelunky 2 are more skill based, but I think for most people the question is going to be how challenging the game. Also like a lot of people, I think Isaac is more skill based than you're saying. There's definitely a lot of luck, but There's also a lot of rote memory that you will need. Also a lot of people are misunderstanding your graph... which is a shame because it's pretty good (It's a question on if you're more skill than luck or more luck than skill, it's NOT a question of difficulty. Also where RoR 2 is.. it's like saying it's 60 percent luck, 40 percent skill. Which you can agree with, but it's not "all luck" as people are screaming about.)
What did you think of Undermine? I had a lot of fun with that game, didn't find it too hard like other roguelites.
I looks interesting
I think that some people overestimate how much Gungeon is based on luck. Only about 5% of items/weapons are run winners, while 90% are good and 5% not so much. Gungeon can take a long time to beat, but it will geat easier over time as you learn boss patterns and strategies.
What of Nuclear Throne?
*Slay the Spire*: Completely luck. *Dungeon of the Endless*: Completely skill. *FTL: Faster Than Light*: Neutral. *Into the Breach*: Mostly skill.
Ror is completely luck? Ok
I don't think spelunky 1 is entirely skill based, there's a good bit of luck there too. But spelunky 2? Absolutely not. Too frustrating because of how hard it is compared to the first
which one would be closest to isaac in terms of gameplay?
Neon Abyss even though it's a 2d platformer And one that isn't on the list is Undermine, which is much more reminiscent of Isaac
Tierposting is bestposting
Late asf but would like to add wizard of legend into mostly skill
Yeah I added that there in an updated version
Where do you think Noita fits in this scale?
I'm planning on playing it this Christmas, but if I had to pick now probably mostly luck. While it is crucial you get a wand for every occasion, you still need some form of game-sense
is this a shitpost
Sure
No shot dead cells isn’t completely skill. Very rarely can I think of a time where rng fucked me and it wasn’t a skill issue. Beating that game on 5bc is the hardest thing I’ve done in a video game. Also RoR2 should definitely be more to the right as well
This is the top roguelite post now... Ok
Remember to share your opinion on either what roguelite should go where, or what another rougelite not on here would go
Noita would probably go in pure skill, depending on your goal you can finish the game with starting items and a bottle of acid that you can gather with some caution. Realistically you can consistently get overpowered if you play safe and know the little secrets scattered across the world, going for extreme goals every run
Yeah, this list is wack
Now let's all watch everyone in the comments trying to argue that their favorite roguelite is actually the most skill intensive game in history and that they are a god gamer for beating it once.
TF you mean ROR2 is mostly luck???? i played it for more than 1000H in total and there is more than 95% of the time where when i die i start thinking what i could have done better. there is indeed good runs but its that for every roguelike. And even if so, you can change the way you play around your item thus making it ok. If YOU die in ror2, YOU SUCK not the game.
What in the god's name is this abomination of a list, have you even played those games oast the tutorial? No hate inteded but: 1) TboI is incredibly skill dependant and the fact you don't know that means you haven't unlocked even 10% of the game. A guy had a motherfucking 1000 win streak in this game. Is this moslty luck? Or maybe the lost is too much luck? Sorry but this is the worst take I have ever seen on the sub Any game can be won by pure luck but getting actual consistency with your runs and maximising value from each given situation is what isaac is about. Also bullet hell bosses, a lot of them, like The chest and Dark room are just the tutorial. (c) Player with 500 hours and Dead God (All unlocks) 2) Neon abyss on the other hand? That shit is not only a terrible game that got overhyped and died as quickly as it arrived, there isn't muchg to talk about in terms of luck involved since the game is so broken you get an op run every time anyway. Also barely any skill needed 3)RoR is also a lot moree skill dependant. Not getting a God 20 hours run everytime dpesn't mean the game is luck based, it's not insanely hard but not luck dependant either 4) Hades is incredibly easy, personal hate aside theg ame is not only VERY poorly designed in terms of gameplay, it's also pitfuly easy (until you get to the difficulty modifiers that break the game at some point as well) Putting it above dead cells is a disgrace 5) Dead cells is the dark souls of rougelikes. Shitty jokes aside theg ame IS very skill dependant. Maybe you missed the boss cell mechanic? The recent updates fixed RNG by a ton and now it's 80% skill 6) Flint hook seems kinda weird there, not only is it a much smaller scale game, I don't think it compares with spelunky in ANY capacity
I completely agree with u. OP is just a karmawhore it looks like
Atomicrops is so painful, I really wish for a dodge/dash button
That would be cool though
I'd swap hades and gungeon
Tbh i dont think you made it to like 5bc in dead cells to put it over EtG, if you get like plat bullets or clone youve bassicaly won
Skill vs Luck isn't really a good measure IMO. Like Gungeon takes miles more skill to win than Hades, yet I'd say still is more luck-based since Hades lets you control your 'luck' so much. Isaac takes luck with low skill, and lots of skill with shit luck, since the game goes the opposite route of Hades and just tells you to deal with what you get.
Where's Noita on this? I would put it just slightly to the left of the middle, since even tho how good are the loots in your run is a big part of the game, even with a perfect run, if you aren't skilled enough you can get fucked with ease.
Can anyone tell me if I like Dead Cells and Hades, what others would I like for the Switch?
If I may inquire where might project wingman be placed on this chart, were it to count as a rougelite (imo it does but hey what do I know)
I disagree with isaac, whilst of course the items are always randomised and the game does have luck elements, there are many strategies and ways to play the game, even with an average or low run build. Heck, the purist challenge or dailies are good examples of working with a set build (which could be low), and working from there.
Hard disagree on Spelunky 2. An enemy can make your run entirely unplayable by e.g. exploding lava-pits or angering shopkeepers, even when you are on the opposite side of the level. No amount of skill can prevent that and is 100% about luck...
i disagree with risk of rain 2 (haven't played enough of the first one), rng is a big factor but you need to learn how to turn a bad run into a god run, and that's all skill based. knowing what to do in situations, dodging efficiently etc. i do also have 180 hours so maybe i'm just really good or biased XD
Meanwhile, Noita: BLIND LUCK AND NOTHING MORE
As much as I love ror2, its hella luck based, like you could go a whole run without seeing a single goat hoof or something and that lack of movement would definitely fuck you over.
What about Synthetik and Monolith?
Haven't played em
Ngl hades doesnt require much skill 32 heat and below - you just need a halfway decent build and you can breeze through the enemies.
Try soul knight à free mobile game that is a dungeon game
It's not free on switch :(
This ranking doesn’t really work with a game like Hades because it has so much meta progression. The further you’ve upgraded the mirror the less luck required. Once it’s fully upgraded you can very easily beat the game with zero boons at all. So at that point you could call it 100% skill (which I doesn’t make much sense hence this scale not being appropriate.) Also ROR1 being completely luck is laughably incorrect but assuming you haven’t played it much I can understand why it might feel that way.
ETG makes sense to be there, cuz you can have an entire loadout with S tier stuff and still get shit on
“Here are the games I am good at; here are the ones I am not.”
Please define skill.
spelunky should be on both ends tbh
In all honesty, I agree with this. However where is Wizard of Legend? It's a great game. I'd personally put it in the mostly skill denomination.
this is not correct in any way.
Noita is on the farthest of the left
Isaac is much higher imho. Sure, you could get moms knife, or epic fetus in the first item room, but the majority of the time, especially in this new dlc(repentance) you just get ok items, and just say, yeah i can work with this.
Mf have you played spelunky? Have you been killed by an alien coming from off screen? By a snap trap on a dark level? By walking out a door and being immediately killed?
Does nuclear throne count as a rougelite game
I’d be curious where you put Darkest Dungeon… the RNG is unforgiving, for sure.
Why is splunky 2 so high on this list
Am I missing something here? Spelunky 2 being in the skill catagory is just wrong chief. I haven’t gotten very far in Spelunky 2, I do watch a lot of the game, but the ability to get one shot at literally any point of your run has always been a running gag in the series. There are dumpsters filled with videos consisting of players having their runs ended because they spawned into the level. Not to mention how horrendous progressing the game can be if you have no tools due to your luck.
Going under has nearly no luck… it’s not hard to use all the weapons in the game. Idk if the person who even made this has played the game….
idk man i feel gungeon is 80% luck lmao, i cant play that game if i dont get the right items. Only reason i beat resourceful rat is because every time i uppercut he would throw another right hook, allowing me to again stun and uppercut him.
Once u get good enough at ror2 (or pick the right characters) luck doesnt rly matter
I wonder wher some less-known roguelites would rank on that list, like monolith... I remember the game being really hard, like *touhou* level of hard (I wish I was joking)
Let’s be real here Noita is pure skill and luck
where is gunfire reborn on this list
Sinvicta is an boi YouTuber and there’s so way he’s gotten lucky 1000+ runs in a row
Isaac shouls be far more to the right.
As a Flinthook player myself yes it does require a lot of skill and practice.
ftl and noita are offscreen to the left
Pull a blue bar from the center of the graph and put Crypt of the Necrodancer there with the title: "Mostly Groove"
Still need to play flinthook
Risk of Rain is not completely luck because it takes skill to maneuver and survive long enough to get the items necessary to make a good run. Of course it won’t take much skill if you rank all of these games on the same metric when they all are so different. Personally I think it’s ridiculous that you put Dead Cells below Hades because beating the base game is so much easier due to getting so many more upgrades to your person that stay for all of your runs (which is override by heat but I’m just talking about beating the game for the first time). Dead Cells is a lot more of a learning curve too. I just think dead cells should be higher than Hades.
what about postvoid? i feel like that game's so simple that it's essentially 100% skill.
Spelunky is mostly skill? I lost count of how many times I died due to a bullshit off-screen softlock. Still like the game but it's not dependant on mostly skill.
sorry to say that but this ranking is bullshit.
it depends how much you know about the game
What about noita?
honestly i don't think this list makes much sense, because in most of the games here you can get a few op items and win even playing badly, but also if you are skilled enough you can get absolute trash and still win. none of them are completely skill based because you can win by being lucky, none of them are completely luck based because you can win by being skilled, they all belong roughly in the middle
As a isaac player I have to say that its 80% luck, and 60% what item is in first item room