Immediate turn-offs

[Strato Incendus]

So I really ask myself: How I should name levels in the future?

In fact, you already did make pop culture references in your pack - just off the top of my head, the two "Tomb Raider" levels come to mind. That's a game that was popular enough to have several movies made based on it.

But generally speaking, I don't take any issue either with levels which are merely "accurately descriptive" - like "The Block-Store", "A Study in Scarlet", "A Stroll on the Lawn", "Five Do Not Survive", etc.

It's hard for me to pinpoint what makes a level title feel generic to me, and this perception will obviously vary among individuals. But for me personally, Duudu's levels tend to have the most generic titles. "Introducing", "45 seconds", "10/10", "A normal level", "Starting your teacher career"... these are very unspecific, either they don't tell anything about the level at all, or they merely describe the level's game mechanics.

All this discussion about 10-of-everything levels gave me one idea: Would 5-skills-with-10-of-each levels be better? At least it would provide a bigger variety regarding the skill selection available. Otherwise I would be hard-pressed to create levels that fill the gap between "X-of-everything" levels and actual puzzle levels.

Indeed, you can approach this from two sides:
A) Only four or five different skill types, but then ten of each of those skills. These levels are probably going to be defined more by which skills are missing than by which are present.
B) Eight skills, but only five or three of everything. I outlined in the "case against 10-of-everything levels" thread why X-of-everything levels become exponentially less interesting the higher the X is. 3 to 5 is probably the sweet spot; 1-of-everything levels, while most people seem to enjoy them, can be a little too restrictive sometimes, e.g. by making it too obvious where the builder has to go.

Interesting, because I love mazes with thin terrain (you probably noticed that there are several of them in NepsterLems ).

Yes, a general pattern I noticed about your levels is that they have a lot of repeating elements. This is not only true for mazes, but also for stuff like "Smile if you love Lemmings", "Tomb Raider", "Diagonal Disarray", that Earth-Platform level etc. These are the type of levels I specifically tried to imitate in "Pit Lems", for example with "You had it coming", which is not a maze, but still a bunch of repeating chambers with various objects in them (hatches, stompers, fire traps, water, etc.).

When it comes to mazes, there are different degrees of tolerance for me. "Tomb Raider" for example is still nice, because, even though the screen is still cluttered with stuff, the paths the lemmings can take are not so small that identifying them becomes strenuous on the eye. It's not so narrow that it makes your eyes lose track of the path.

"Don't cross me" has a very symmetric structure, which makes it easier to work with as well. In contrast, Arty's "Labyrinth of Lucifer" or "Ensnared in a sticky maze" have practically nothing regular about them. That of course is the point of a maze, but this can be made a lot more convenient with thicker terrain pieces, as in Nessy's "Just dig (some more)!" from Lemmins Migration, than when each terrain piece is only 1 or 2 pixels in width.

[Nepster]

In fact, you already did make pop culture references in your pack - just off the top of my head, the two "Tomb Raider" levels come to mind. That's a game that was popular enough to have several movies made based on it.

But generally speaking, I don't take any issue either with levels which are merely "accurately descriptive" - like "The Block-Store", "A Study in Scarlet", "A Stroll on the Lawn", "Five Do Not Survive", etc.

Funny that you should mention them as examples: The title "Tomb Raider" was there before I realized that it is a pop culture reference. On the other hand I thought that "A Study in Scarlet" would be by far the most recognizable pop culture reference.

[Proxima]

Anyway, time for me to list my own level turn-offs, some of which will match things already mentioned.

- Trajectory manipulation. Gliders, swimmers in vertical water, batters, fling-bombers, trampolines: they can all get really fiddly because it's not at all clear from looking at the level where you can reach and where you can't. This is even more true if other skills have to be used to reach a starting-point, so that ideas take a long time to try out and adjust if incorrect.

- Very large levels, especially vertical scrolling ones, with tight solutions. These tend not to be very satisfying because there is no main theme or central idea behind the solution. I'm happy with resource management levels (lots of skill types, no main solution) if they are less tight; finding ways to save skills in one area so you have enough for another and putting it all together can be satisfying in itself. But a single intended solution with nothing left over, spread over a sprawling level, often crosses the line into frustration.

- Levels with lots of lemmings / lix and a high death toll, so that you can never be sure you've saved the maximum possible. (Sure, on puzzle levels you don't know for certain whether there's a different solution that saves more, but with this type of level you don't even know whether you've saved the maximum for your solution.)

- Visual clutter. You've worked hard on the level's appearance; I don't want to play with clear physics mode constantly on so that I can't appreciate it! But if there's too much clutter -- particularly if I can't tell what's background and what's terrain -- then that's what I will have to do.

- Levels that require a lot of pausing and framestepping to assign skills close together, or near the start of play. I'm happy that framestepping tools exist, but I want the majority of my play to be normal speed.

- The icicle trap in the Snow style.

[Strato Incendus]

I think I have another sub-category to add: Things that pointlessly waste the players time. The main criterion for this is repetitiveness:

- builder fests (platformers obviously also count by extension)
- we all fall down-type levels like "Private Room Available" where you have to assign lots of separate diggers (call them "digger fests", if you want to)
- lemmings falling to their death right from the hatch, either a fatal fall or dropping into a trap like in one Wafflemm level that I remember quite clearly. Often you have to keep assigning certain athletic skills (floaters, swimmers etc.) as a form of stalling until there is safe ground beneath the hatch.
In either case, you have to do a bunch of click-heavy, totally obvious stuff first before the actual level can get started. "Bitter Lemming" isn't so bad, but "POOR WEE CREATURES!" and "Steel Works" are more annoying examples of this.

[namida]

- lemmings falling to their death right from the hatch, either a fatal fall or dropping into a trap like in one Wafflemm level that I remember quite clearly. Often you have to keep assigning certain athletic skills (floaters, swimmers etc.) as a form of stalling until there is safe ground beneath the hatch.
In either case, you have to do a bunch of click-heavy, totally obvious stuff first before the actual level can get started. "Bitter Lemming" isn't so bad, but "POOR WEE CREATURES!" and "Steel Works" are more annoying examples of this.

With A Twist Of Lemming Please is the worst example of this. You have 50 lemmings and 50 floaters and must save 100%; obvious solutions involve making literally EVERY lemming a floater, as there is no obvious way to create a safe landing place and still complete the level. Some very creative solutions get away with less, but still need to give a very significant number of lemmings floaters - and whereas the "assign floater to everyone" solution allows for doing that first before trying to solve anything, the "use less floaters" solutions very noticably require multitasking between solving and floatering. And it's quesitonable whether the developers intended for such solutions to exist, given that the level appears to be set up to not allow splatforming. (And the worst thing? Take the needless floaters out of the equation, and it's actually a very good level.)

Poor Wee Creatures is actually a really good level IMO, because while it does involve creating a safe landing place from the entrance, part of the puzzle is how to build that safe landing place - it's not just a matter of "build up from the landing spot", nor does the level expect you to keep assigning floaters in the meantime.

Steel Works is a case that worked well for the original game, which had just as much focus on execution as it does on solving; but under modern standards, using an engine like NeoLemmix that minimizes execution difficulty, it no longer holds up.

Bitter Lemming is an early level, where either option is viable - build a splatform, or assign lots of floaters. I do think a better way to handle that level would've been to, eg, require 20 lemmings saved and give 20 floaters (not 50). Then, new players might discover the splatform option while trying to save 100% - while they may have already discovered the concept in general on Fun 27 (depending on what solution they used, and possibly what platform - eg. on Master System, a single miner solves Fun 27, but that doesn't cut it on DOS / Amiga), Bitter Lemming is the first case of a splat directly out of the trapdoor.

[Proxima]

- lemmings falling to their death right from the hatch

Heh. That's actually one of my favourite devices. I always avoid making such levels click-heavy, though. If the level is intended to be hard, then I only give one floater (or two if two workers are needed), and allow a certain number to die -- the puzzle is then to build the landing bridge quickly enough not to lose more than you're allowed. For easier levels, I just set the save requirement low so that you can make one or two floaters and allow lemmings to die, but you can also go for 100% if you like. The best example is "The Lion, Lix and the Wardrobe" where it's a 5-of-everything level, so only 5 floaters, and it's actually possible to complete the landing platform in time to save 100%, so the level ended up being a multi-layered puzzle.

Poor Wee Creatures is actually a really good level IMO, because while it does involve creating a safe landing place from the entrance, part of the puzzle is how to build that safe landing place - it's not just a matter of "build up from the landing spot", nor does the level expect you to keep assigning floaters in the meantime.

One of my favourite Orig levels too. Although the solution I used as a kid was indeed to build up from the bottom

Steel Works was a decent puzzle by Orig standards. It wasn't obvious a priori how to construct landing platforms under both fatal falls within the limitations of the skill set and save requirement. (Somewhat spoiled because the first fall is only fatal by one pixel, but since I didn't know, I went for a solution that didn't depend on this.)

while they may have already discovered the concept in general on Fun 27

I misread that as Fun 17, which by sheer coincidence is another level where one solution is to build a landing bridge under a fatal fall. (Although Fun 17 gives you enough floaters to meet the save requirement. Then again, so does Fun 27 on DOS, thanks to the nuke glitch!)

[namida]

One of my favourite Orig levels too. Although the solution I used as a kid was indeed to build up from the bottom

Actually, I vaguely remember doing it this way myself back in the day, including on DOS. I know on the Master System, a splatform built from the bottom is completely viable, but a while back I tried to do so on DOS and I couldn't find any way to do so and still complete the level.

I misread that as Fun 17, which by sheer coincidence is another level where one solution is to build a landing bridge under a fatal fall. (Although Fun 17 gives you enough floaters to meet the save requirement. Then again, so does Fun 27 on DOS, thanks to the nuke glitch!)

And Master System strikes again in my case. The Master System version of Fun 17 gives no floaters (and doesn't have steel glitches in the same vein as DOS, or at least, didn't that I knew of when I encountered this level), so a splatform is not an option. This actually happens a lot on the Fun levels in that version - instead of being 20 (sometimes 10) of everything, they're just 20(/10) of most, with floaters being the most commonly cut. However, it DOES have a much thicker ground under the trap (yeah, there's only one trap on Master System - technical limitations, it can only handle one triggered trap per level; no limit on constant hazards like water / fire though), which enables a different alternate solution: Dig and bash under the trap. IIRC, this even works on the repeat.

[Strato Incendus]

Okay, I got another one - something which is used in healthily low amounts in original Lemmings, but rather frequent in custom packs:

- endless lines of Fire tileset letters!

For me, this is another case of "just as tedious to play as it is to create (and vice versa)". Since you cannot actually type inside the level editor, you have to place every letter in the landscape by hand. That should be enough to deter people from doing it excessively - one would think!

But still, every now and then, there's a level where the main task is building from one "blood letter" to the next one, only occasionally mining or bashing to get out of an N or an H shape.

I'm fine with reading a long text ahead of the level in a pre-level screen - but I don't want my lemmings to actually walk through such a novel!

[namida]

For me, this is another case of "just as tedious to play as it is to create (and vice versa)". Since you cannot actually type inside the level editor, you have to place every letter in the landscape by hand. That should be enough to deter people from doing it excessively - one would think!

Not Fire set, and the lemmings don't actually interact with it, but...



...how's that for tedious to create? (Doomsday Lemmings, Plauge 1 "Cycle of Undeath")

[Strato Incendus]

Well, at least you don't have to build from letter to letter! So in that case, it's more effort for the creator than for the player (unless the difficulty of the level makes up for that, of course! )

Here it seems to have some significance for the hidden meaning of the level, though. Some people just seem to write completely random stuff all the way over their level terrain. Meaning, you still don't have to build across the whole mess, because the letters are placed on other terrain, but then you wonder even more what the purpose is .

[namida]

It's just to add to the creepy vibe. The translation is something like "When the end comes, every lemming will painfully die one by one".

[WillLem]

Just seen this topic (Icho linked to it from the 20th skill discussion). Wow! It's eye-opening to say the least.

Just to weigh in on a few of these points:

first of all: a generic title . This just gives me the impression that the creator merely created something random without putting much effort into it.

Probably agree on this. I put a lot of thought into my level titles, and I always try to make sure they either allude to the solution in some way, or are at least suitably decorative.

levels with an unnecessarily "unergonomic" terrain shape: If you constantly need additional builders just to cross a couple more pixels, rather than the gaps being measured out for a specific number of builders; or if you have to build close to oddly shaped ceilings where the lemming is constantly turning around and coming back just to add a couple more bricks, etc.

Agree on this, too. I think the only exception I'd make to this is when it's a level with precise timing, and the extra few pixels is needed to slow a lemming down - or, if the lem needs to turn around and you need a partial bridge to achieve that. But yeah, when it just feels like the author hasn't even tried to measure it out it is quite annoying.

relative pixel precision": Pixel precision is fine as long as it affects single lemmings... The problem arises when two or more lemmings have to be in very specific spots relative to each other, so the skill assignment becomes a game of Mikado.

Totally disagree with this. Having to keep close track of two or more lemmings at the same time can be great fun (as long as you know what the solution is!), and is very satisfying to get right.

Levels with an abundance of skills rarely feel rewarding to me, because whenever I solve one of these it feels like I couldn't really fail on that level to begin with

I'd say this one depends very much on the design of the level. I particularly enjoy playing through easy X-of-everythings, but more so when the design of the level is such that you have to think your way around a specific set of obstacles. A good example off the top of my head would be Konbanwa Lemming San - a much easier version of It's Hero Time, sure, but the layout of the level and the situation that it presents makes you think. Even with the abundance of skills, it's not a gimme by any means.

Don't underestimate the power of an X-of-everything level to welcome players into your pack by offering them the opportunity to create a solution.

Icho says "That's the way of video games for me: Start out easy then get harder and harder until the player has mastered the game." But we're not making a game; we're making expansion packs for a game that already exists. Everyone who plays our packs is at least intermediate level already, and most are experts. Why are we still clinging onto the idea that every pack should have difficulty ranks and that the first should be beginner level?

This is one I feel quite strongly about:

Firstly, I'd say that this is totally down to the designer of the pack: if someone wishes to build a beginner-style rank into their pack, there could be many reasons for doing this. Maybe they want to show the pack to someone who has never played Lemmings before, or at least not for a long time, and they want the person (or people) to be able to get some enjoyment from playing it. Or maybe they just want to try their hand at making good easier levels (which I think can be just as much of a challenge as making difficult ones).

Furthermore, even expert players want to be able to relax and enjoy the game now and again and not be bombarded with an endless stream of impenetrably difficult puzzles.

Whenever I play Super Mario Bros. after not having played for a while, I always start from World 1, Level 1. And I enjoy it immensely: it gives me a chance to warm up and get back into my game before taking on the more challenging levels. And I'm damn good at Mario!

Similarly, when it comes to Lemmings (sure, I'm by no means the best in terms of solving puzzles, but I can beat the original game) - sometimes it's nice just to make your way through a beginner rank for the Fun of it!

Also, I'd say this is particularly true when playing a brand new pack - it can be useful to have the opportunity to play through some easier levels by that author: it's a way of just getting to know their style, flavour, and what they're about when it comes to general design.

I've had the idea recently of going through as many packs on the forum as I can and just playing the first rank; mainly because I've tasked myself with getting good at making easier levels and so it's a research thing ostensibly, but also because if a designer can do easy levels well, I'll be that much more likely to want to see what their more challenging levels are like.

I disagree with that. My own packs are intended to be games that can stand alone. Technically there are expansions, but even a new player should be able to get into it and be able to solve at least a part of it. They should be able to learn the game even if they only have my pack.

Yes, exactly! It's good to know that someone who makes levels as difficult as yours also has an appreciation for the other end of the spectrum.

- Unnessesary tight timers.

I still haven't really got my head around the community's general feelings about timers, this one could probably be a topic in itself. I love the feeling of getting those last few lemmings in just before the time runs out, always have done. I thought timers in lemmings levels were a staple of the game, but I'm learning otherwise on this forum...

A number of people have said things like "timers are only justified when the solution demands it". But... if the timer is there, then the solution demands it! i.e. you have to work out a way to not only solve the level, but do it in a timely fashion. I have absolutely no issue with timers in levels whatsoever. If I solve a level and then time runs out, I just think: oh, OK, I need to release the crowd earlier, or maybe: ah, I need to make sure I assign the skills such that the solution happens at pace. I know people on here hate this, but for me it's a perfectly acceptable part of the game of Lemmings.

I don't really have turn-offs, as such, when it comes to levels. I've noticed that I tend to skip over levels that are too difficult early on in a pack, as I generally like to make my way through the first few levels in a pack quite quickly. I always appreciate it when level designers give you the opportunity to do this.

[ccexplore]

I love the feeling of getting those last few lemmings in just before the time runs out, always have done.

This is where it might be interesting to watch you do a lets play of Lemmings (though I suppose it's somewhat impossible now, since you already played through them once and it might not be the same to replay them again now), because I struggle to remember much levels where the timing is that tight.  You made it sound like running out of time (or getting down to last few seconds on the timer) is a very common experience and that just didn't seem like the case for me.  It's possible my memory could be slightly biased, but it's fair to at least say that running out of time isn't common enough to leave me a memory of it being a common experience playing through the levels.

Off top of my head I remember these levels where running out of time is a common mode of failure for many:

• Just a Minute (both part 1 and part 2):  Yes, but figuring out what you need to do extra to get everyone out in time is a core part of the puzzle.  It's not just a matter of when to crank the release rate to 99 (though you definitely will need to do that too).
• The Fast Food Kitchen:  The tight time limit [at least on versions like Amiga; the DOS version is a bit neutered and I think can actually be done without multitasking] forces you to execute both sides at the same time, rather than just handle one side first and then the other.
• We All Fall Down (Taxing and Mayhem):  You need to play these levels with the release rate above the default of 1, otherwise the last lemming won't even come out in time.
• Heaven Can Wait (We Hope):  You want to release the crowd as soon as possible, though I don't rememer how tight exactly the timing is.
• The Crossroads:  The tight time limit together with the 100% save requirement basically serves as a way to enforce making no mistakes in execution--roughly speaking, if any lemming ever turns around then you screw up.  [Aside: the DOS version of this level is also neutered--it doesn't even require 100%.]  Generally for most people, once they realize the implication of the time limit on execution accuracy for this level, they wouldn't need to wait for timer to run out anymore, they'd instead simply restart the level immediately as soon as a mistake occurs.  And the level already starts you on release rate 99.

For the rest of the 120 levels, the time limit is not challenging.  Sure, in some levels you need to crank up the release rate to 99, but generally it's safe to wait until after you've carried out the last skill assignment of the solution.  And most people would've done that anyway at that point in the level solution, just so they don't have to wait forever for the level to complete.

So sure, the timer is always present, but it also rarely matters for most levels.  It does, however, hinder exploration of the level to some degree--unless you frequently pause the level (and then you can only plan things out in your head during those pauses, and not try things out), you may run out of time over the course of trying to work out the level before you even have the complete solution.  Being forced to restart the level at those times is admittedly a little disruptive.

[WillLem]

This is where it might be interesting to watch you do a lets play of Lemmings

Interestingly, I've been thinking of doing this: the idea I had was to choose a handful of levels and then play them both on the Amiga emulator and NeoLemmix, if only because I often wax lyrical about the differences and yet, I do love both platforms equally. I thought it would be interesting to do a direct comparison and document the actual experience via an LP. So... I might actually do this at some point!

I struggle to remember much levels where the timing is that tight.  You made it sound like running out of time (or getting down to last few seconds on the timer) is a very common experience and that just didn't seem like the case for me

To be fair, it probably isn't that common, but there are enough levels across Lemmings and Oh No! (you've already come up with a decent list of the ones from the original game) that I would definitely describe it as a feature of the game, even if it's not one that's used very often. Compression method and flow control are also features, and they're used even less. I suppose that these are features that are more unique to Lemmings as a game, whereas time limits are a more generic feature.

I have to admit, I don't think that most levels lose anything by having the time limit removed, but I also don't object to there being a time limit, even arbitrarily, quite as much as some players.

To be honest, when it comes to creating levels it's something I'm probably over at this stage really. I'm happy enough that I can encourage time attack in my levels by implementing it as a Talisman and leaving the main level to have an infinite time limit; this seems like an ideal compromise, and I'll probably start to use it more sparingly as I progress.

[ccexplore]

Interestingly, I've been thinking of doing this: the idea I had was to choose a handful of levels and then play them both on the Amiga emulator and NeoLemmix, if only because I often wax lyrical about the differences and yet, I do love both platforms equally. I thought it would be interesting to do a direct comparison and document the actual experience via an LP. So... I might actually do this at some point!

You're welcome to do so, but obviously there's no denying that NeoLemmix took different stances on certain matters.  There is no denying that the original game do have things like hidden traps, ubiquitous timers and timed bombers, and lacks things like framestepping and rewinds.  It was a natural progression driven by the tastes of the community that things evolve the way it did for NeoLemmix.

I'm just particularly curious about the matter of timers and you constantly waxing lyrical about squeeze in the last few lemmings in last few seconds.  I just don't remember it being like that back when I played the original games, but it's also a long time ago and maybe it did happen more than I actually remember.  So I thought it might be interesting to see how you play the levels.  It would also let me observe whether there are major difference in playing style like the use of pausing and so forth.

The timer actually doesn't bother me too much, maybe because I pause a lot when playing the original games, maybe because for most levels I can figure out the solution quick enough.  And certainly with NeoLemmix's rewind, it's a bit less disruptive to deal with running out of time.  But I do recognize why many other people seem to feel so strongly against it, and plus also the original games never trained me to appreciate a tight time limit like it seems to for you, because most of the time the limit is not tight at all.

It's perhaps also worth pointing out that time actually runs a little faster in the Amiga version compared to some other popular versions like PC DOS and Mac.  For example, I think on Amiga it's 15 walker steps per second in-game, while on PC DOS it's 17.  Even on a short 1-minute levels like Just a Minute Part 2 and It's Hero Time (which I guess also qualifies to be added to my list above of levels where the time limit matters, though more as a core part of the puzzle I'd argue), that difference is actually quite noticeable.