[DISC][PLAYER] No-effect triggered objects

[namida]

Okay so, these existed in the past, but were culled during the move to new-formats.

These of course would be purely a thematic thing, with no gameplay effect. They animate when a lemming walks past (presumably, both a "once" and a "infinite" version could exist), but otherwise do nothing.

The common argument against them is that if an object looks like it gets triggered when a lemming walks past, it should do something, and that it's misleading if it's not.

I'm not convinced by this. I do understand where it's coming from but, "nothing" is just another possibility to a list of things it could do. Without any context beyond "it animated when a lemming walked past", you don't know exactly what it does. You have to either look closer, or use CPM, to find out regardless - or, use context, like "what does the object look like?", at which point these are no different to anything else in regards to "don't make them look like things they aren't". (Even if you look at "did the lemming disappear?" - if it does, that could be a trap or a teleporter. If it doesn't, that could be an unlock button, a pickup skill, or a splitter that's pointing the direction the lemming is already facing.)

The benefit of course is purely an aesthetic one; but the effort to do this is relatively low - almost all the code could simply be copied from traps, with the "kill the lemming" lines removed.

One other reason is - some people have expressed interest in trying to do this anyway; one even trying to figure out a workaround to emulate this with features that do exist (it's possible - but I'm not going to explain how, and I don't believe that person figured it out). This may be a case where it's better to implement it properly, at which point CPM can hide or appropriately label it, or even potentially an option can be added user-side to hide them (or make them not function).

What's other people's thoughts here? Does anyone feel I'm underestimating how significant the "it should do something" factor is, or that there are other reasons against this?

[Simon]

You've already given the argument why noop gadgets don't exist, right: You would introduce extra cognitive load, in every new tileset, for every yes-op gadget that doesn't immediately reveal its function.

Thus you need a really convincing argument for noop gadgets.

some people have expressed interest in trying to do this anyway

Who is some people? What kinds of design? Pictures, ideally?

Counterexample: The decorative fire in the Pieuw lamps (attachment). This fire is really a trap with only-on-terrain. This fire can be deadly, no problem, it's out of the way anyway, and it's still decorative. This was my main argument to ditch the fake flag.

(it's possible - but I'm not going to explain how, and I don't believe that person figured it out). This may be a case where it's better to implement it properly, at which point CPM can hide or appropriately label it, or even potentially an option can be added user-side to hide them (or make them not function).

I agree that proper implementation would be cleaner than such workarounds. The workarounds would be even more misleading in CPM. (And there is the third outcome, to have neither; thus first, we should look at the proposed level designs.)

-- Simon

[Proxima]

I'm not convinced by this. I do understand where it's coming from but, "nothing" is just another possibility to a list of things it could do. Without any context beyond "it animated when a lemming walked past", you don't know exactly what it does. You have to either look closer, or use CPM, to find out regardless - or, use context, like "what does the object look like?", at which point these are no different to anything else in regards to "don't make them look like things they aren't".

I don't agree with this. There are strong conventions for what most gadgets should look like; even teleporters, which are fairly diverse, tend to be recognisable as portals. Whatever animates and is not recognisable as some other gadget is a trap.

Now, you could say "if a lemming walks past an object and it animates but the lemming doesn't die, it's clearly not a trap", but that won't always be true. Lemmings may be tightly bunched; the player may have their attention elsewhere; the player may be startled by the animation before noticing whether the lemming is still there or not.

I just don't see what the option would bring that's worth the annoyance -- especially as I haven't yet seen anyone give any use cases where they would want specifically a no-effect triggered object as opposed to some other form of decoration.

[WillLem]

The only thing I can think of that such objects might be useful for is delaying lemmings...

So, for example the object could be a bed, and when a lem walks up to it the secondary animation is that of the lem climbing into it and having a doze for X number of frames, after which they exit the bed and carry on walking.

It could also be a milkshake stand where they stop for a quick smoothie, or a grandma lemming that gives them a cuddle and a smoosh as they walk past, or whatever...

This kind of thing could make the object potentially useful.

[namida]

The only thing I can think of that such objects might be useful for is delaying lemmings...

So, for example the object could be a bed, and when a lem walks up to it the secondary animation is that of the lem climbing into it and having a doze for X number of frames, after which they exit the bed and carry on walking.

It could also be a milkshake stand where they stop for a quick smoothie, or a grandma lemming that gives them a cuddle and a smoosh as they walk past, or whatever...

This kind of thing could make the object potentially useful.

The object would have no effect on physics whatsoever. The lemming walking past sets off the animation, but it doesn't delay the lemming in any way. It's for decorative purposes.

[ccexplore]

Whatever animates and is not recognisable as some other gadget is a trap.

Doesn't NeoLemmix still have constantly animated decorative objects?  Or is that also removed?  It feels like your argument would also apply to any decorative objects, not just ones that need triggering.

I could maybe see some use of a triggered decorative animation that only happens once.  I'm more skeptical of infinitely triggerable decorative animation, that might simply get too distracting for some people.  Would be interested to see how exactly they had been used in the past before getting culled.

I noticed that many styles don't carry all the different object types.  It's entirely possible for a new player to not recognize some objects because the levels they played so far never featured a particular kind of object.  I'm less convinced than Proxima that all the non-trap object types are all easily recognized by many.

Sound could perhaps be a way to convey danger even when the player isn't actively looking at a triggered trap.  Decorative triggered animations should either have no sound or a sound that doesn't convey danger, to contrast with triggered traps with more disturbing sounds.

At the end though, it does seem a little hard to not get potentially someone to wonder, did something actually changed in the level even though I can't seem to see any changes.  After all, it certainly looks like the object have responded to the lemming passing by, doesn't that kind of mean something of significance must have happened?  Constantly animated decorations at least don't behave like they are responding to lemmings passing through, so it seems much less likely for people to get confused about lack of changes to lemmings and level.  (Although that said, I still think it's preferred to keep such decorations out of direct way of lemmings at least for the most likely solution paths.)

[WillLem]

Doesn't NeoLemmix still have constantly animated decorative objects?

Yes - willlem_lemminas features several of these; all are obviously decorative (blinking unicorn, wand-waving fairy on a cloud, bouncing ladybug house...)

I'd disagree that these are the same as an object that only animates when triggered, though. These continuously animate, and are usually placed somewhere that the lems aren't supposed to access easily anyway. It's very clear that they have no effect and are just decorative (a quick glance at CPM confirms this, of course).

Conversely, if a lem walking past an object triggers its animation, the player will quite naturally assume that something has actually happened.

EDIT: That's not to say that these objects are unfair, as such. Just... different from purely decorative, trigger-free animated objects.

[namida]

I've put up a poll.

(Note: I'm not interested in differentiating "I think they're unfair and I wouldn't use them" vs "I think they're unfair but I'd use them anyway". If you think they're unfair, you shouldn't use them. On the other hand, there are plenty of reasons why one might think they're fair but choose not to use them anyway, so that's a different viewpoint that's worth giving weight to IMO.)

[ccexplore]

One other reason is - some people have expressed interest in trying to do this anyway; one even trying to figure out a workaround to emulate this with features that do exist (it's possible - but I'm not going to explain how, and I don't believe that person figured it out).

Any chance it can be shared out (even if vaguely) what kind of triggered animation they want to do?