Cull Disarmers, Triggered Decorations and Radiation/Slowfreeze?

[Colorful Arty]

Excuse me, how can you remove objects that are used in several levels like that? In my mind, culling something because "very few people use it" is a terrible reason to cull it, because it will break several levels while giving literally no benefit to anyone else. If few people use it, then why remove it any destroy the levels that do use the feature just because not enough use it? I do not see the rationale for that decision I must say.

[ccexplore]

Excuse me, how can you remove objects that are used in several levels like that? In my mind, culling something because "very few people use it"

Which things specifically are you referring to?  There are too many things being discussed on this thread, no one can tell for sure which removal you are talking about.

But I don't think anything here that was talked about was culled strictly due to lack of usage, or even primarily due to it.  I believe other reasons were given for every removal, even if some people may not fully agree with the reasons given or be convinced of their strengths.  Obviously lack of usage will make the removal less damaging which lowers the barrier in the removal/keep decision.

I also feel like it has been said several times that existing levels using removed features aren't really "destroyed".  You get the fallback option to play it with the obsoleted version.  Obviously this is still a barrier in a number of ways.

[Colorful Arty]

Ah, I forgot about playing on previous versions of NeoLemmix. I guess my main thought was I didn't see any benefit to removing ANY of the features being talked about (including the invisible and fake flags for terrain/objects) and I don't see why people are being so adament about insisting on their removal.

[ccexplore]

Specifically for invisible/fake objects, I think there is already a pretty vocal majority of people not keened on dealing with levels (or just the possibilities thereof) that essentially troll the player with such things.  So I'm sure you'll get at least those people to tell you the removal would be a net benefit for them.

Some of the miscellaneous features like some of the flags stuff (or maybe it's a different feature, but anyway) I think are actually just leftovers from earlier NeoLemmix version that have since already been superceded by better features that can support the same stuff.  The level designer would have to modify their level accordingly but should otherwise not be prevented from exercising the ideas supported by the removed feature (since it can be re-implemented using other features still kept), so I expect those removals to be relatively less contentious.

[Strato Incendus]

As far as designing new levels goes, Lemmix is dead.

That's what I thought. So it's quite funny then that I was pointed towards Lemmix for all my timed bomber needs . Creating levels with timed bombers thereby wouldn't be possible, not to speak of combinations of timed bombers with the new skills. Radiation is the only thing that kinda emulates this in NeoLemmix, and that might go on the chopping block sometime in the future, too. Even though it seems like it survives this round and people promise "what stays now will stay for a long time", what does "long" really mean in this context? The older versions that feature a lot of the stuff I've grown to like are from when, 2016?

Excuse me, how can you remove objects that are used in several levels like that? In my mind, culling something because "very few people use it" is a terrible reason to cull it, because it will break several levels while giving literally no benefit to anyone else. If few people use it, then why remove it any destroy the levels that do use the feature just because not enough use it? I do not see the rationale for that decision I must say.

Thank you !

Indeed, the only reason I see to remove something that barely gets used anyway is being afraid of what people might come up with. If it's just something less favoured by the community, so what? No one forces any member of the community to play the pack. Even troll levels, as much as they can be hated, can just be skipped - I know a lot of people did that with the trolling level from PARALEMS, and I'm fine with that. That doesn't necessitate nor justify taking the option of trolling away completely .

And who says level creators only build for the Lemmings forum? I've given my pack to my brother and a friend of his, who is a lot more casual in his playing of Lemmings, it mainly has nostalgic purposes for him. If I just serve him puzzles all day he will get a knot in his head after a couple of them and quit before finishing the first rank.

Of course, those who do the programming have the power in the end. I just can't get rid of the feeling that you simply don't want to see any remotely execution-based levels pop up. Yes, it will likely be new level designers who use these objects. Yes, their levels will probably look stupid to the seasoned players involved in the programming. What does it hurt you to let the kids have fun? Their packs will probably be too easy for you anyway. You're simply a different target audience.

I also think level packs providing a greater variety of challenges could also help the YouTubers here on the forum in growing their channels. Watching someone think about a puzzle for half an hour isn't really that much fun, is it? You could just play the pack and think about it yourself, then. Watching someone trying to execute an idea that has a little more action to it would make for a much more entertaining Let's Play experience, I think!

You are comparing apples with eggs here:
- Zombies are far more often used, so the hurdle to remove them is far higher.
- They are considered useful (and are used) by far more people.
- They add something far more unique to NeoLemmix than Slowfreeze or Radiation objects do.
- They don't cause any confusion.

Zombies don't cause confusion, really? Pre-skilled lemmings caused a lot of confusion on my pack, so just imagine how much confusion skilled zombies can cause, because their labels can't even be read properly, aside from the initial letter .

Up to now, we almost only added features and almost never removed any.

Timed bombers, rising water, wraparound, anti-gravity, the "kill your lems rather than saving them" idea... if you consider all the gimmicks individually, quite a lot of features were removed in one big chunk, and now a second one follows. If you had never added them in the first place, this would be a totally different thing. But as we all know, "you can't contain ideas". All these objects existing inspired level ideas, perhaps for some more than for others, and perhaps more than could be put into practice until now. You're trying to put the genie back into the bottle here.

This is also what I meant by "rushing the creation of levels featuring slowfreeze will diminish their quality". Of course, the first iteration of these levels will have backroutes (thanks to nin10doadict for telling me, I'll put a wall of steel between the hatches! ). Slowfreeze is a largely unexplored item, I'm one of the first people who seems to have the courage / creativity to toy around with it. What does it matter that no one found a use for it during the last two years? Now, there are people trying to use it, and there may be more in the future.

Btw, the hopefully fixed version of "Airborne aid" is attached .

Sorry, but if we wait until noone is creating a pack using some feature, before we remove it, no removal will happen at all.

Oh, I'm not asking for anyone to wait for me. I'm not asking for a delay. I'm asking for slowfreeze, anti-splat pads & their like to stay in, because, as Colorful Arty pointed out, I still can see literally no gain to anyone in removing them. "No removal will happen at all" sounds like "no removal" would be a loss. I have outlined to you how losing slowfreeze would be a loss, so can you tell me now how not removing something is a loss for anyone?

[Nepster]

Excuse me, how can you remove objects that are used in several levels like that? In my mind, culling something because "very few people use it" is a terrible reason to cull it, because it will break several levels while giving literally no benefit to anyone else. If few people use it, then why remove it any destroy the levels that do use the feature just because not enough use it? I do not see the rationale for that decision I must say.

As ccexplore already mentioned, I gave reasons besides low usage to cull these objects. However I always stressed the low usage, because I wanted to preserve as many levels as possible. Actually there are quite a few features that I would love to remove as well, but due to their high usage, I refrain from even suggesting it. In other words:
  "Low usage is not a reason to remove features, but high usage is a reason to keep them."
Unfortunately all such culling discussions have a tendency to focus on this usage aspect, in part because all people having actual levels using the features will complain and say "But you destroy my level!". That's totally understandable, and I have done so myself in the past.

Thanks to everyone for their replies and opinions. Here are my final decisions. I am aware that whatever I decide, there will be someone unhappy about it, and most likely noone will agree with all of my decisions (and this includes myself).

Dear Strato, have you read this? I know that you are unhappy if we don't keep everything, in the same way that I know Proxima and others (including myself) would have liked to cull more. The point here is: You are totally entitled to your own opinion and can ignore the given arguments for removal as irrelevant. But everyone else is entitled to their opinion, too! And this holds even true, if you cannot understand how they arrived at their opinion.
So I have to make some sort of compromise, and this time it was: You get to keep radiation objects and disarmers, and I get to remove slowfreeze and steel areas.
If you have any suggestion how to make everyone happy, please tell me! But simply keeping slowfreeze objects doesn't do this!

As far as designing new levels goes, Lemmix is dead.

That's what I thought. So it's quite funny then that I was pointed towards Lemmix for all my timed bomber needs .

If you like timed bombers so much, then revive Lemmix or build levels in Lemmini! If others agree with you and like timed bombers, then they will play your levels in Lemmix.

Even troll levels, as much as they can be hated, can just be skipped - I know a lot of people did that with the trolling level from PARALEMS, and I'm fine with that.

For this they have to know first, that the level is actually a trolling level. The hatred for such levels comes exactly from the fact, that people who would love to skip such levels, don't realize they play a troll level and try to solve it for a long time until the realization hits them.
This is actually one of the main reasons why we strive to present the player with the full information on the level: To enable to player to decide right away whether they want to play it or not!
Fun fact: When I played Paralems, I knew that there would come a trolling level somewhere, but while playing through the pack, I didn't find it. Only afterwards I actively looked for the trolling level using the clear physics more and then found it.

And who says level creators only build for the Lemmings forum? I've given my pack to my brother and a friend of his, who is a lot more casual in his playing of Lemmings, it mainly has nostalgic purposes for him. If I just serve him puzzles all day he will get a knot in his head after a couple of them and quit before finishing the first rank.

Noone is saying that people just build for the Lemmings forums. But unsatisfactory as it is, we can only hope to please the lemmings forums crowd, because we have no way to know what everyone else thinks.

I also think level packs providing a greater variety of challenges could also help the YouTubers here on the forum in growing their channels. Watching someone think about a puzzle for half an hour isn't really that much fun, is it? You could just play the pack and think about it yourself, then. Watching someone trying to execute an idea that has a little more action to it would make for a much more entertaining Let's Play experience, I think!

And you seem to confuse "puzzle levels" with "hard levels". Almost all of the original lemmings levels are still perfectly fine levels and even here you'll find several packs with relatively easy levels that have received a warm welcome. So while we certainly have packs, where one has to think for half an hour before getting some idea, not every pack is like this.
And sorry, but I don't really agree with your opinion regarding YouTube play-throughs: I remember a live-stream of Wafflem playing Raymanni's pack, where some of the levels took quite some time. But there was always a lot of action, because Wafflem tried out a lot of different approaches, that didn't work.
On the other hand, I don't see much sense in watching 30 minutes of "We all fall down", where someone has to repeat the level time and again due to some misclicks.

Zombies don't cause confusion, really? Pre-skilled lemmings caused a lot of confusion on my pack, so just imagine how much confusion skilled zombies can cause, because their labels can't even be read properly, aside from the initial letter .

That's actually a very good point. It needs to be easier to find out permanent skills that zombies have, or we will have to remove skilled zombies from the game, too.

I have outlined to you how losing slowfreeze would be a loss, so can you tell me now how not removing something is a loss for anyone?

I have to repeat myself here:
- Slowfreeze objects are not sufficiently distinguishable from radiation objects, so these two types can easily be confused with each other.
- Slowfreeze objects require very often frame-precise positioning, making solutions hard to execute.
- The effect of slowfreeze objects cannot be distinguished from the effect of radiation objects until the ten seconds have passed. Lemmings with a timer on top look all the same.
- New players have to wait for ten seconds until they see what happens. Good features give an immediate feedback.
Note that the loss is purely on the side of the people playing the game, not for level designers.

[Proxima]

That's what I thought. So it's quite funny then that I was pointed towards Lemmix for all my timed bomber needs.

Well, you can always try to revive Lemmix if you really want to build levels with timed bombers. Or make your own engine. I'm sorry if some of the responses in the timed bomber discussion were a bit curt. I'm afraid that is how we tend to react when a debate we've had at great length, and hoped was dead and buried, starts to show signs of life again.

Creating levels with timed bombers thereby wouldn't be possible, not to speak of combinations of timed bombers with the new skills.

True. But NL isn't aiming to be a platform for all possible level ideas. You also can't combine NL features with L2 skills such as the twister in any engine.

Radiation is the only thing that kinda emulates this in NeoLemmix, and that might go on the chopping block sometime in the future, too. Even though it seems like it survives this round and people promise "what stays now will stay for a long time", what does "long" really mean in this context? The older versions that feature a lot of the stuff I've grown to like are from when, 2016?

Nearly all of NL's new skills and objects are from around the time of Lemmings Plus III and Omega, both 2014.

Indeed, the only reason I see to remove something that barely gets used anyway is being afraid of what people might come up with. If it's just something less favoured by the community, so what? No one forces any member of the community to play the pack. Even troll levels, as much as they can be hated, can just be skipped - I know a lot of people did that with the trolling level from PARALEMS, and I'm fine with that. That doesn't necessitate nor justify taking the option of trolling away completely .

It's also about making the game more welcoming, and easier to learn, for new users. As you might see in the other current topics, right now there's a push to add yet more features to NL, because there are a few ideas that several community members would like to see included. But the engine already has a glut of features, so removing the least used ones is a reasonable way to maintain some kind of balance.

And who says level creators only build for the Lemmings forum?

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that. Thing is, the forum is the locus of pretty much all the feedback NL gets, so naturally when we debate over what features to maintain, remove and add, it's mainly going to come down to the input we get from forum members.

I've given my pack to my brother and a friend of his, who is a lot more casual in his playing of Lemmings, it mainly has nostalgic purposes for him. If I just serve him puzzles all day he will get a knot in his head after a couple of them and quit before finishing the first rank.

I don't agree at all. There are a few easier packs around; have you tried Casualemmings? Most of the large packs, such as the Lemmings Plus series and Lemmings Reunion, start with easy puzzles in the first rank or two.

I also think level packs providing a greater variety of challenges could also help the YouTubers here on the forum in growing their channels. Watching someone think about a puzzle for half an hour isn't really that much fun, is it?

You couldn't be more wrong. As well as Lemmings, I've been part of the DROD community for years, and I love watching DROD LPs; it's very satisfying to follow along with someone as they try to think their way towards a solution, and to see whether you can spot what they're missing before they do "Action" just isn't something I'd associate with Lemmings, even the original game; it's too slow-paced for its action to be thrilling.

Timed bombers, rising water, wraparound, anti-gravity, the "kill your lems rather than saving them" idea... if you consider all the gimmicks individually, quite a lot of features were removed in one big chunk, and now a second one follows. If you had never added them in the first place, this would be a totally different thing. But as we all know, "you can't contain ideas". All these objects existing inspired level ideas, perhaps for some more than for others, and perhaps more than could be put into practice until now. You're trying to put the genie back into the bottle here.

Not sure what you're trying to argue here. Gimmicks were removed a long time ago. Anyone who wants to design new levels with the old gimmicks has to dig up 1.43, and the maintainers of large packs had to remove or rework gimmick levels. Yes, that means we lost the potential for some possible level ideas ever to see fruition; but given the small size of the community and the limited time each of us has, I don't think that has decreased anyone's output. It's just changed the direction we've taken.

[Strato Incendus]

If you have any suggestion how to make everyone happy, please tell me! But simply keeping slowfreeze objects doesn't do this!

Gladly so! I think this statement of yours outlines the core of the reasons for our differing opinions:

That's actually a very good point. It needs to be easier to find out permanent skills that zombies have, or we will have to remove skilled zombies from the game, too.

You want to get rid of things that are currently confusing. That's understandable; I just ask "Why get rid of something if it could be improved?"

- I agree that radiation and slowfreeze look similar as objects. So why not simply make the colours of the graphics more distinguishable? Make the slowfreeze stars more blue, the radiation stars more yellow / orange. Also, the countdown numbers above the lemming's head could be adapted: A yellow / orange countdown for radiation, a blue one for slowfreeze.
This should solve nearly all of the problems you mentioned:
1) Slowfreeze and radiation could be more easily distinguishable without having to do much work on the graphics themselves (just some "hue/saturation" shifts in photoshop should do it).
2) The player would know right away what object he is dealing with, not only due to the distinguishable colours, but also as soon as a lemming walks into the object, you'd see judging by the countdown colour whether it's radiation or slowfreeze.
3) If you're worried about new players, you could place pickup skills over the object, like you do with hatches, to tell them on the introductory levels what this object does. This means: The first level with a radiation object in a pack should have a Bomber pickup skill placed above it, the first slowfreeze object should have a Stoner placed above it. Obviously it would be even more user-friendly to do this on every level featuring radiation or slowfreeze. Alternatively, you could incorporate the graphic of that pickup skill into the graphic of the object, so that whenever someone places a slowfreeze object while creating levels, there'd be some kind of stoner-graphic attached to it, and for radiation it would be a bomber.

Please tell me if there are any programming challenges related to this that would make it particularly hard to do. But my estimation is, since we're only talking about colour-shifting and a new "etiquette" as far as pickup-skill labeling is concerned, all of this should be comparatively easy to do?

- For Zombies, I'd suggest to spell out the skill just as for regular lemmings, but with a "-Z" attached. The type line seems to be long enough for that.

- While we're at it, we could consider how to label athletes with the skills they have. In original lemmings, "athlete" could only mean "climber + floater", but with swimmers, disarmers, and gliders in the mix, "athlete", "triathlete" or "X-athlete" doesn't tell us anything. An "X-athlete" has all the skills, but it's still unknown whether it is a glider or floater. Here we could use the initials of the skills, as it is currently done for zombies, so for example "Triathlete-C-F-S" for a lemming that is a climber, floater, and swimmer. This would be a little inconsistent with the method I proposed for labeling zombies, but at least everything would be identifiable.

Fun fact: When I played Paralems, I knew that there would come a trolling level somewhere, but while playing through the pack, I didn't find it. Only afterwards I actively looked for the trolling level using the clear physics more and then found it.

That's why I gave the level a pre-text ("Beware! Forget all you've learned so far and all you believe to be self-evident! Nothing in this level is as it seems!"). I agree that being surprised by a trolling level and wasting hours on a level with rigged rules is annoying. I'd simply introduce them the same level gimmick levels were introduced back then: With a pre-text that tells you what you're getting yourself into. Of course, a trolling level, in contrast to a gimmick level, wouldn't necessarily tell you how the rules are rigged, just that the rules are rigged on this particular level. And then everyone could decide whether to play it or not .

Gimmicks were removed a long time ago. Anyone who wants to design new levels with the old gimmicks has to dig up 1.43, and the maintainers of large packs had to remove or rework gimmick levels.

I have downloaded the 1.43 editor, and there is a field called "gimmick" in the level preferences, however it is set to "0000" and can't be altered . Do I need an even older version of the editor to actually create levels with gimmicks myself?

[Nepster]

First of all regarding zombies and other lemmings with permanent skills: For the new-formats version I already plan to automatically add some white-gray icons with the skill symbol in the following cases:
- At hatches with preasigned skills all the time.
- Above zombies whenever they are below the cursor
- Above normal lemmings whenever they are below the cursor, and one is in clear-physics more.
On the other hand, I plan to remove these one-letter labels completely. Perhaps this still needs some modification, but I would like to test the above first and get feedback.

Now regarding the slowfreeze objects:

I agree that radiation and slowfreeze look similar as objects. So why not simply make the colours of the graphics more distinguishable?

This was discussed already a long time ago. Upshot is, that for all other objects, their color is completely irrelevant and they can be recognized by their form.
Moreover the flickering-lights like slowfreeze and radiation objects are already color-coded and it doesn't work.

Also, the countdown numbers above the lemming's head could be adapted: A yellow / orange countdown for radiation, a blue one for slowfreeze.

And what tells players that these colors signify anything? I wasn't aware of the already existing color-coding I mentioned above until namida told me explicitely about it.

3) If you're worried about new players, you could place pickup skills over the object, like you do with hatches, to tell them on the introductory levels what this object does.

All of this solves symptoms of the issue "No immediate feedback", but not the cause!

That's why I gave the level a pre-text

Rule 0 in programming: Users never read anything! They want to play levels, not read pre-view texts. I am guilty of doing so myself... So advising players of game mechanics or troll levels via preview texts is certainly advisable, but cannot be the only means.

And I noticed, that you didn't respond at all to my point:
  - Slowfreeze objects require very often frame-precise positioning, making solutions hard to execute.

I have downloaded the 1.43 editor, and there is a field called "gimmick" in the level preferences, however it is set to "0000" and can't be altered . Do I need an even older version of the editor to actually create levels with gimmicks myself?

Gimmicks can be changed via "View -> Gimmicks Window". Then select the desired gimmick and click on "Activate this Gimmick".

[Strato Incendus]

Upshot is, that for all other objects, their color is completely irrelevant and they can be recognized by their form.

Well, that would be easy to solve: Use the stars animation only for either radiation or slowfreeze, and the other one gets the "machine" look that for example radiation & slowfreeze objects on the Purple and Lab tileset have currently.

That's confusing enough, after all, that on some tilesets, the star design is used, on others the generator look. That said though, other objects differ between tilesets, too, from exits to one-way blocks and -fields all the way to traps.

I do believe though there should be some similarity between those two objects on purpose, because they have in common that they are deadly to the lemming passing through, more specifically "death by skill use", which sets them apart from regular traps.

That's also the reason why I don't get "removing slowfreeze, but keeping radiation", just like I don't understand "removing anti-splat pads, but not splat pads". Both are logical counterparts of each other, like Yin and Yang. Why should a bomber be assignable by an object, but not a stoner, if these are the only two lethal skills?

Concerning anti-splat pads: They may be redunant with updrafts in theory. But for a new player, since you've adressed you want to consider their issues as well, it should be much easier to infer that an anti-splat pad does the opposite of a splat pad than to figure out that an updraft can be used as the opposite of an anti-splat pad. Think about it: Triggered traps also always do the same thing, yet we have loads of different triggered traps available .

And I noticed, that you didn't respond at all to my point:
  - Slowfreeze objects require very often frame-precise positioning, making solutions hard to execute.

Indeed I didn't, because that is the only part not adressed by my suggestions - difficulty of execution is a much wider topic in my view that goes way beyond radiation and slowfreeze.

However, the suggestion has been made to add skill blueprints to slowfreeze and radiation objects, like for the other skills. Meaning when you hover the mouse over a lemming that has a countdown, you'd see how far it is still going to walk / fall until it explodes / stones. Kinda as if skill blueprints had been introduced before timed bombers were abolished: Then bombers probably also would have gotten a skill blue print, wouldn't they?

So far, I don't see how slowfreeze positioning is more or less difficult than radiation positioning: Both give lethal skills to a walking lemming, that is the root of the execution issue. For a walking bomber, there's usually some leeway or "confidence interval", as is for a falling stoner that is e.g. supposed to break a fall. Of course, a level creator would have the option to measure out the exact fall height so a stoner would have to land at one specific pixel. But that's a d*ck move by that level dessigner then, and not a problem of the tool itself.

If you want to cut down on execution problems, this would have to be done consequentially - which would mean throwing out radiation AND slowfreeze, but probably also teleporters, since they require a couple of seconds to execute their function and are sensitive to release rate and other timing factors, i.e. how close lemmings are to each other. Also cloners, especially when used to duplicate skills, can be very pixel-precision-y... and gliders also, despite their skill blueprint...

You see, we could go on and on with finding features that cause execution problems. If a level creator wants to be mean, he will always find a way. I in contrast have edited "Airborne aid", because the original version combined slowfreeze and gliders, and that was really a pain. With floaters, it's a lot better. So I wouldn't say slowfreeze or gliders per se are problematic, there are only certain combinations of skills and features that we could generally advise not to (over-)use.

Rule 0 in programming: Users never read anything!

That may be true. However, if you are the user and cause damage for not reading the instructions, that's still the user's problem. We all know the stories of American companies sued by some random person because they didn't write upon their microwave "don't put your cat in here to dry its fur". The same is true for medicine, it is always advised to read the package leaflet.

I don't think it is our job as level creators to provide all-around comfort to players, especially not on higher difficulty ranks. Yes, we should be fair and tell them if certain physics changes apply in levels that don't apply otherwise. But we don't have to make up for mistakes committed by the player, especially harder levels are usually unforgiving in this regard. Players who have come that far can be trusted they have some sort of own agency, and they will know they have to use all the information required. For example, also level titles sometimes give a hint on how to solve a level - if the player clicks right away without reading the title, that's his fault, not the creator's.

"Action" just isn't something I'd associate with Lemmings, even the original game; it's too slow-paced for its action to be thrilling.

Just wanted to comment on this: Since I saw the cover of the original Lemmings again recently, it was actually sold as an "action puzzle". The puzzle element is certainly there, still.

Gimmicks can be changed via "View -> Gimmicks Window". Then select the desired gimmick and click on "Activate this Gimmick".

Thank you very much, I'll try it right away!

[Proxima]

I do believe though there should be some similarity between those two objects on purpose, because they have in common that they are deadly to the lemming passing through, more specifically "death by skill use", which sets them apart from regular traps.

For the record, I made exactly this point in the IRC discussion in the time leading up to the final decision. (Yes, I'm mostly in favour of the cull, but I have also said that I think slowfreeze and radiation should be treated alike.)

However, the suggestion has been made to add skill blueprints to slowfreeze and radiation objects, like for the other skills. Meaning when you hover the mouse over a lemming that has a countdown, you'd see how far it is still going to walk / fall until it explodes / stones. Kinda as if skill blueprints had been introduced before timed bombers were abolished: Then bombers probably also would have gotten a skill blue print, wouldn't they?

So far, I don't see how slowfreeze positioning is more or less difficult than radiation positioning: Both give lethal skills to a walking lemming, that is the root of the execution issue.

In the IRC discussion, these points were made in response: blueprints are not very helpful for radiation/slowfreeze because you usually have to take several actions to get the lemming to the right place, which the blueprint can't predict; slowfreeze is usually more difficult than radiation because one usually has to get the lemming to a more precise position, allowing less leeway. (Levels where the slowfreeze is simply to break a vertical fall are not the most common use.)

If you want to cut down on execution problems, this would have to be done consequentially - which would mean throwing out radiation AND slowfreeze, but probably also teleporters, since they require a couple of seconds to execute their function and are sensitive to release rate and other timing factors, i.e. how close lemmings are to each other. Also cloners, especially when used to duplicate skills, can be very pixel-precision-y... and gliders also, despite their skill blueprint...

But with framestepping, clones and gliders are easy to place as precisely as desired. That's not the case for getting a slowfreezed lemming to a precise place, which may require several assignments with no feedback about whether positioning was correct until the last one.

I agree that being surprised by a trolling level and wasting hours on a level with rigged rules is annoying. I'd simply introduce them the same level gimmick levels were introduced back then: With a pre-text that tells you what you're getting yourself into.

Actually, the first pack that introduced gimmicks (Lemmings Plus II) did not do this; the player had to figure out the rules for each gimmick by observation. For my part, I think it worked well as a different sort of challenge, and it was only later when the number of gimmicks got out of hand that I joined the side clamouring for their removal.

[Nepster]

Let's be clear about one point up-front: The only reason why I decided to keep radiation objects, is to preserve the relative large number of existing levels using them!

That's also the reason why I don't get "removing slowfreeze, but keeping radiation", just like I don't understand "removing anti-splat pads, but not splat pads". Both are logical counterparts of each other, like Yin and Yang. Why should a bomber be assignable by an object, but not a stoner, if these are the only two lethal skills?

That's the one argument I never understood myself. Why is being a "logical counterpart" any argument for having a feature? Wouldn't photo editing tools require then a tool to add scratches, if they have a tool to remove them?
Sure, sometimes it is useful to have the logical counterparts, but then it's their usefulness that's the argument for having them, not being a "logical counterpart".

If you want to cut down on execution problems, this would have to be done consequentially - which would mean throwing out radiation AND slowfreeze, but probably also teleporters, since they require a couple of seconds to execute their function and are sensitive to release rate and other timing factors, i.e. how close lemmings are to each other. Also cloners, especially when used to duplicate skills, can be very pixel-precision-y... and gliders also, despite their skill blueprint...

That's exactly what I would do, if my opinion would be the sole one that counts. That this does not happen is purely because I feel that you all should have a say in this matter. If you want me to rethink my decision to keep radiation objects and splat pads, then I will gladly do so.

However, if you are the user and cause damage for not reading the instructions, that's still the user's problem

In theory (and in legal questions) this is a perfectly fine position to take, but unfortunately in reality it creates tons of unhappy users.

I don't think it is our job as level creators to provide all-around comfort to players, especially not on higher difficulty ranks.

Sorry, but I totally disagree here. Players are the gods and we have to do all we can to make their experience as pleasant as possible. This is my personal opinion, and it's fine if you disagree. But it hopefully helps you to understand my arguments and decisions.


Finally I have to confess: All these further discussions make me wonder whether it wouldn't have been better to cull radiation objects as well. They really are out of place in NeoLemmix.

[Strato Incendus]

Wouldn't photo editing tools require then a tool to add scratches, if they have a tool to remove them?

Actually, my version of Photoshop does indeed have such a scratch tool. And that is even just a very old version from Photoshop, from 2002 or so. So yes, in general I think for everything you can do in a programme, there should be some kind of counter-measure to balance it. We have a destructive skill that kills a lemming (bomber), and a creative skill that kills a lemming (stoner).

While original Lemmings didn't do this - building could only be done upwards, mining only downwards - we have started to move into that direction, by adding things like the platformer (moving along the same plain of motion as a basher) and the fencer (=a miner in reverse). A stoner is a bomber in reverse, and can actually be used in much more diverse ways than the bomber (break falls, turn lemmings including stopping climbers, build bridges etc.).

Therefore, if we want objects that assign skills, we should either have both or none of them. Taking this beyond lethal skills, one could even imagine timed objects that can assign any temporary skill to a lemming passing through - like slow-build, slow-bash, or slow-dig . A countdown over their head, and after 9 seconds the lemming starts / tries to dig / bash. This would e.g. allow to clone diggers, something that isn't useful so far. I know this won't be implemented, it's just a thought experiment.

Sorry, but I totally disagree here. Players are the gods and we have to do all we can to make their experience as pleasant as possible.

Okay, it's good to know this. In my view, the level creator is the god - but only in the sense of "with great power comes great responsibility". I see this a bit like being a game master in Dungeons & Dragons: The level creator's job is not to defeat the players (that could be easily done because you have the power to put them into impossible situations), but neither to make the experience a cakewalk. The game master should challenge the player in a fair and transparent way, I think that's something we can all agree on.

Where we seem to differ is what counts as "fair": I don't consider reaction time, multitasking or somewhat precise placement of skills unfair to the player. They are just different skills a player of the original Lemmings game needed to have, just as he needed to have problem solving / puzzling skills, and, coming from a psychologist background, I want to "measure" these skills with my levels as well, not just the competence of problem solving. Good estimation of the position where to assign a skill is a mark of visuo-spatial imagination that at least some levels in a pack should reward.

While the puzzly packs I have seen so far are by no means a cakewalk as far as figuring out the route is concerned, they certainly are with regards to the execution. Even "Save Me", the hardest level on original Lemmings, is a complete joke with NeoLemmix tools. And while I view framestepping and replay features as overall convenient, I don't believe the only challenge the introduction of these options leaves us with is creating huge levels that visually confuse the player on purpose and make them count the skills they use. I enjoy that from time to time, but I think there are more different types of challenges than that, many of them unexplored so far. After all, frame-stepping also allows us to do much more mean things with regard to pixel precision than the original Lemmings could have ever afforded, and your level "Ninjas in the attic" is a prime example of that ^^.

Trolling (i.e. making normal terrain steel or steel normal terrain, hiding exits / traps, invisible & fake objects etc.) I would consider unfair, but not to the point of banning them. I just think such levels should be clearly identifiable in advance so they adress only the target audience they are designed for an that will enjoy them. Once again, "with great power comes great responsibility": Just because you CAN create something trolly as a level maker, it doesn't mean you should. And if you decide you want to, you should carefully consider how to go about it. Outright "banning" stuff, in contrast, in my experience just makes people crave more for what has been formerly available and is now forbidden / impossible.

Finally I have to confess: All these further discussions make me wonder whether it wouldn't have been better to cull radiation objects as well. They really are out of place in NeoLemmix.

Well, as I have already cynically predicted: That will probably be the first thing to happen in the next NeoLemmix release then, won't it?

Perhaps paradoxically, I support that decision. As I've said before: Be consequential. Either remove both of them in the name of combating execution difficulties, or leave both of them in for future creators to explore.

And perhaps more people will speak out in favour of keeping something if their own levels are on the chopping block, too , which is the case with radiation more so than with slowfreeze. A lot of mine use slowfreeze and radiation in combination, so those levels are destroyed either way. Since I have nothing left to lose in this regard, I can just as easily openly support the removal of radiation from future versions of NeoLemmix!

[Ryemanni]

Yes, remove radiation too. No need to keep it in just because some old levels use it. We will make new levels.

[Nepster]

Ok, so let's reconsider the decision to keep radiation objects. I try to summarize the various opinions here:
- Nepster, Proxima, Raymanni: Remove radiation objects.
- möbius: Slight preference towards removing.
- IchoTolot, Simon, Wafflem: Indifferent - will never use, but not against keeping it.
- namida: Can see arguments for both decisions.
- GigaLem: Slight preference towards keeping it.
- nin10doadict, Colorful Arty: Keep radiation objects.
- Strato Incendus: Likes radiation objects, but advocates to be consequential and remove it nevertheless.

Correct so far? Then the opinions are rather varied, which doesn't really helpes to make a decision.