Because you have a better chance of beating the game? Also there's unlockable stuff. It does have an end, the same as other games like this such as Ziggurat 1 + 2, Immortal Redneck, etc. It has an infinite mode, in which case you see how far you get (also a common feature). Which you would play because it's fun. Why else would you play any game? I played a whole lot of Moria back in the day, and never managed to win. No regrets. How about multiplayer games, or single-player games with a skirmish vs AI mode, where you play matches over and over, and win or lose you start again from zero every time. You might as well ask what's the point of advancing in Civilization, when you're just going to start over with a settler and no technology.

Regardless, it's relatively rare for gamers to reach the end of games. It's far more important to be having fun than to get to the end. Not to mention that ultimately everything is a "waste of time," given that the universe itself will end one way or another.

It's easy to say it like that, but if it were really that simple, everyone would be making hits. Procedural generation and randomized loot are just tools. What makes a game engaging is the balance between reward and frustration, the coherence of the world, the progression mechanics, the player's experience… in short, thoughtful game design, not just randomness wrapped in a pretty setting. So, to agree with you, yes, but that's for all video games.

A purely random game without vision or meaning quickly becomes empty. What makes a roguelike or looter-shooter interesting isn't repetition, but how each run tells a slightly different story. Randomness is just the fuel—the engine is the design.

That's exactly it. :)

Then you won't really lose your rewards, would you? ;^)

But that does not mean that I agree with the lazy effort for a segment of games in this genre, though I am still biased, as we all are for things that we do or don't like, but nothing is written in stone, as that is how one remains ignorant, though I will never be a fan of losing hours of progress of lesser games from this genre…

Thanks for the info, as specificity is king!

My statements are best served for the low-effort dreck, (That includes AAA titles as well) but yes, I have not played this game, so this is great info, as what good is an opinion if it's not been challenged, it's the main reason I express my opinions freely, how else can I learn different perspectives?

Hence, my earlier statement that it's not a waste of time, if that's how you love to spend your time, and thanks for reminding me of Ziggurat 1 + 2, I have one, but not 2, which I'll have to pick up as I'm more of a game hobbyist/collector, but yes, if it's a question of not finishing a game, well, I'm a collector for a reason, but repetition for repetition's sake is still a cheap way out in my opinion…

The difference is that thanks to the feedback from those that have the game, that this game may be the exception, as I said, I don't have this game, that's why I am *also* speaking largely in general about the genre, so if I'm wrong about this particular game, then I'm wrong, I have no problem admitting that as that's the best way to learn going forward…

Indeed, as they stand far above the low-effort dreck, within this, genre, as I've said, I am not a fan of permadeath that wipes progress, and thanks to someone's earlier distinction between the subgenres, I now have a better understanding of what to accept, and what to watch out for.

Roguelike = no interest from me.
Roguelite = interest piqued.

Thanks for this info, yes, the overreliance of certain tools in lieu of gameplay is the cop-out that defines one's game as useless dreck!

However, the titles mentioned are good examples to search out, but I admit that I still bristle whenever I read about roguelike elements in genres that are not under the umbrella of the pure roguelike genre, as my own fear of permadeath is ever present…

As too many just slap a tool set on their game to cash in on the overwhelming popularity of this genre, as it is popular regardless of my opinion, as I have to defer to quantifiable facts surrounding the subject, it's mostly trepidation of the spectre of permadeath that influences my own biases however…

And I completely understand you too. :)

People keep arguing about rogue-like elements, and no one but me ever seems to bring up the more glaring issue (visually speaking): the perspective stretching that's quietly become the norm in most fist-person (and almost exclusively first-person) games over the last several years. It's gross and headache-inducing, and it's ruining first-person games for me. Even the Unity implementation of Daggerfall has this problem to some extent, seemingly regardless of FOV and other settings.