Cryptical Path: When developing a roguelike feels like playing one

In this guest post, Old Skull Games share how they lost, learned, and iterated their way to a unique gameplay experience.

Game development, much like a roguelike, is about iteration. You push forward, thinking you’ve found the right path – only to hit a wall, fail, and start over, a little wiser than before.

Our journey in developing this roguelike dungeon crawler was no different. Our initial focus was on crafting a responsive and rewarding gameplay experience, but we soon realized that strong 3Cs (character, controls, camera) alone weren’t enough. What Cryptical Path lacked was a clear identity – something that truly set it apart. We were struggling to find a unique element that aligned with our original vision.

After months of production, we had to make a drastic pivot – all in pursuit of that elusive "one more run" magic. Here’s what we learned along the way.

Run #1: The illusion of a good start

Like many roguelike adventurers, we began our journey with confidence. The game was born from an internal jam at Old Skull Games, where we created a universe we loved, and paired it with a genre that could attract core gamers. It was at this moment that the concept became a dungeon crawler with tight controls and great game feel.

The first few months felt productive. We built a solid foundation, with:

• A responsive combat system
• A cool environment
• A basic item system
• A complete gameplay loop

But, much like an overconfident first run in Cryptical Path, these preparations weren’t quite enough because of other choices we’d made.

Run #2: Searching for a differentiator that wasn’t there

With Cryptical Path’s core mechanics in place, we were asked: What makes this roguelike different? We needed something original to set the game apart but soon realized the concept lacked a truly new idea.

Our first approach was a system of affinities with light and shadow specializations that players could build around. It sounded great on paper, but it was hard to prototype and envision fully without producing an excessive amount of content. Looking at this initial idea more critically, we realized it lacked depth and didn’t really have the game-changing element we were looking for.

We sought feedback from publishers and industry peers. Their verdict? “You have a great game feel, but it doesn’t stand out.”

That was our first real death. We had built our run around a system that didn’t work.

Time to restart.

Run #3: Defining a clear vision

One of the biggest mistakes in game development – especially when making a roguelike – is thinking that adding mechanics equals adding depth. We were stacking systems on top of each other without asking ourselves the most important question:

"What problem are we solving for players?"

To answer this, we organized focused brainstorming sessions and workshops until we generated new ideas. One question that we always kept in mind was, “Would my favorite roguelite be better with this feature?”

That’s when we had a breakthrough: One of the biggest sources of frustration in roguelikes is the lack of control. Players love the chaos, but they also crave agency.

We realized that being at the mercy of RNG and being forced onto a preset path – often receiving unneeded resources and rewards – was a pain point. What if, instead of just reacting to a procedurally generated world, players could shape it themselves?

This was the moment we found our true USP: allowing players to place their own rooms and create their own path. This would give them more control while preserving the core challenge of the genre.

Run #4: Iterating until it hurts

Like any good roguelike, the real work begins after the first few runs. Now that we had our concept for Cryptical Path, we had to make it actually work.

Excited by the idea, we jumped straight into prototyping the flow of a run. Instead of diving into code and refactors, we took a more hands-on approach. Using a poker set, we turned cards into rooms and difficulty levels, chips into currencies, and dice into randomness. And just like that, we brought our vision to life: Crafting a run that wasn’t just fun, but truly unique in every experience. This helped us validate the theoretical idea before committing to implementation – and it worked. Players enjoyed planning their route as much as playing through it.

Now came the real challenge: Integrating this concept into our existing platformer mechanics. To do this, we:

• Started over and revamped all the level design work.
• Built and discarded over ten different prototypes for room placement.
• Experimented with different ways to force players to engage with the system instead of bypassing it.

At one point, the game was almost unrecognizable from our original vision. And that was a good thing. While we preserved the core game feel we loved, we were able to refine and enhance several other aspects.

Run #5: The hardest pivot

Just when we thought we had everything figured out, we hit another wall. Our external playtests confirmed what we had begun to suspect and could not ignore anymore:

"We love the mechanics… But visually, this game looks like it’s for kids."

Another death screen.

We had been so focused on gameplay that we neglected the game’s cohesion. A roguelike needs a strong theme that reinforces its mechanics. Our previous art style didn’t sell the fantasy of dungeon-building. It wasn’t just a cosmetic issue, it was an identity crisis. One reason was that the art direction had been set up at a time when the game’s vision was totally different.

And so, we rebooted again:

• We scrapped the old art direction and character designs.
• We redesigned the entire game’s theme around the idea of The Architect, a figure who constructs their own dungeon.
• We made sure the board-building mechanic was the heart of every gameplay decision.

This was our final boss moment. We had finally found a direction that worked.

Run #6: Highway to heaven

Now that we had found our way, we were mastering the dungeon. Content creation became faster and more seamless – whether it was items, enemies, levels, or anything else the game needed. With every team member aligned to our now fully realized vision, everyone was able to create more cohesive, meaningful, and relevant work for the game.

No longer drifting off course, we were finally rowing together toward a common goal.

Five key takeaways for developers

Looking back on Cryptical Path’s development, here’s what we wish we had known at the start:

1. A strong USP isn’t just a cool idea – it’s better to think of it as a solution to a common player frustration.
2. Having a clear vision is key, and going full steam ahead before that is a bad idea.
3. Adding mechanics isn’t the same as adding depth. If a feature doesn’t reinforce the game’s core experience, cut it.
4. Cohesion is everything. Gameplay, theme, and visuals must tell the same story.
5. Don’t hesitate to scrap months of work. Keeping unnecessary features will only slow you down.

Much like roguelike players, game developers need to embrace failure as part of the process. Every mistake, every bad prototype, and every frustrating pivot brought us closer to the game we were meant to make.

We can’t wait for players to take their own first run at Cryptical Path, available now on PC.

Check out Cryptical Path and other Made With Unity games on our new Steam Curator page. Explore more inspiring stories from creators on Unity's Resources page.