I like it until I get pretty good at the game. At that point the runs start taking too long to complete and it’s no longer fun. I know this is pretty controversial but I especially hate it in games like Hades where you progress, come up against something new, fail until you learn the mechanic, and then have to get through all the previous bullshit before you can apply what you learned.

I understand the sentiment, but in some way I think you are missing the point. Let me try to explain the appeal.

When you play, for example, Diablo you spend the time with the game making your build. You also play the story and see the bosses but your focus gameplay wise is your build.

Yo go for that skill. You farm that weapon. Yo optimize your buffs and load out.

And when you are done, after 20 or 30 hours… the game becomes extremely easy. Playing your fully builder character has no challenge. And building another is a 20 hour time investment.

So you get into PVP. Or into boss rushes where yo can get marginal improvements. You repeat a very small amount of end game content for months.

Enter the “rogue” mechanics.

The play unit is no longer “the character”, now it is “the run”

You build a full character each run. You make meaningful decisions to make the most of your build with what the game is offering.

If a run goes badly you are 30 min or less away from getting were you were. If you win you can play again for a completely different experience.

You have no complete control about your build, so you can’t really on the same strategy and gameplay for the whole game. You have to engage with every system.

And your reward for playing is choice (more options to better controls your play style) and knowledge (to better use what the game throws at you)

And it’s true you repeat the initial part of the game a lot. But in Diablo (keeping with my previous example) you repeat the endgame. The only diferente is that one is front loaded and the other is back loaded. And initial areas USUALLY have more work put into them in both cases.

Also remember that there are a spectrum between Isaac likes and Hades likes. There are games were chance has lots of importance and a good build in the hands of a bad player can steamroll the game, where in others a bad build in the hands of a great player is viable.

I think you’re describihg “Rogue-lites”, which are games where you can maintain some permanent progression even after you lose. “Rogue-likes”, which are games that are like the game Rogue, are games where when you lose you just go back to the start with no progression at all, so you need to complete the game altogether.

The permanent progression rewards are meant to be a kind of crutch, which is where the “lite” comes from.

Why I’m making this distinction is that the original rogue-likes don’t expect you to fail at all - or rather, they do, but there’s no expectation of needing to fail to progress.

Definitely. Crypt of the Necrodancer probably has really cool locales and enemies in it. I don’t know, because most of my sessions were locked to the first few worlds where any mistake minimizes your time in future worlds.