[DISC][PLAYER] Midair exit rules

Started by Strato Incendus, March 20, 2021, 08:13:30 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Simon

#30
I've slept over the gravity argument. Gravity will generate dangerous and unclear guidelines. Be really careful before settling on guidelines based on gravity.

Faller in updraft, gravity pulls less than usual on him. Shall faller in updraft exit, by principle? What is with other activities in updraft?

QuoteI think the simplest resolution based on this idea is, a lemming can exit if:
- Its pin pixel is on an exit trigger area
- Its pin pixel is on solid terrain; or it is a swimmer and its pin pixel is on water
- It is in a state from which it can transition to another state, rather than only to "no longer exists"
- Special edge case: Drowner cannot exit

According to this, floater and glider should not exit.

Unexitable midair would be OK with me, creators will put terrain under the flying exits whenever a level breaks in replay validation. But rule will break some levels across the board, see Icho's warning. Hard to scan for breakage other than ruthless replay validation. Any missed exit will immediately produce unsolvable level.

Quote from: WillLem on March 21, 2021, 08:46:44 PM
Quote from: Simon on March 21, 2021, 08:24:10 PM
That's fine: Gravity merely accelerates downwards; gravity doesn't imply that affected things are already moving downwards. Thus, albeit without sleeping over it, your idea appears to catch the essence even for a non-exitable jumper/reacher.

This direction has converged really nicely.

I don't quite understand, please can you re-word this...?

Namida proposes rule that skills can exit whenever they're affected less than usual by gravity. Namida has fear that this rule means that jumpers shall exit. I explain that this rule means that jumpers shall not exit. "That's fine" means that namida can sleep well.

Direction is meant as in direction of attacking the problem, by gravity here.

-- Simon

Simon

I'm practically neutral on the jumpers/reachers/... midair stuff, given that (faller that has not yet fallen far) cannot exit but floater can. I still find this inconsistent, will be hard to make an obvious rule. You can drill it manually into pepole's skulls with the permanent abillity argument, but that feels further-fetched than I would expect for an exiting rule.

Shimmier feels like it should be treated like climber and slider.

There are leftover problems with all proposed rules so far. Permanent ability rule will lead to shimmier special case, and is hard to see. (Affected by gravity) has no meaning in Lemmings; it means something different for every skill.

The debate is highly enjoyable, and I'm not 100 % sure what I want. Very good input from everybody, thanks. Let's not hammer anything in stone before sleeping over it many times.

-- Simon

WillLem

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 22, 2021, 09:48:25 AM
More options does not automatically mean better and can actually lead to a severe loss in quality.

Sure, but it depends entirely on context. In the context of "mid-air exit rules", my argument is that more options is better for both players and designers.

I'm glad you agree that Floaters/Gliders exiting should be kept :lemcat:

Quote from: mantha16 on March 22, 2021, 06:10:15 PM
i kind of think if you allow it for gliders and floaters then you have to allow it for jumpers etc too.  I don't see that it negatively affects game play just gives designers another tool. 

Exactly. Why place unnecessary limitations on the game? Newcomers will either learn "Jumpers can exit" or "Jumpers can't exit" - either way, it's a piece of information. Why not choose the positive?

Quote from: Simon on March 22, 2021, 08:02:20 PM
Faller in updraft, gravity pulls less than usual on him. Shall faller in updraft exit, by principle?

I would suggest yes, for the same reason that Floaters can exit, i.e. their slowed momentum allows them to interact with the exit rather than fall past it.

Quote from: Simon on March 22, 2021, 08:02:20 PM
Unexitable midair would be OK with me, creators will put terrain under the flying exits whenever a level breaks in replay validation.

This does not fix levels where the intention is to fall past the exit in the first place.

Quote from: Simon on March 22, 2021, 08:02:20 PM
Namida proposes rule that skills can exit whenever they're affected less than usual by gravity. Namida has fear that this rule means that jumpers shall exit. I explain that this rule means that jumpers shall not exit.

Thanks for clarifying :)

Quote from: Simon on March 22, 2021, 08:16:41 PM
Permanent ability rule will lead to shimmier special case, and is hard to see.

Why? Shimmiers are not permanent abilities...


Proxima

Quote from: WillLem on March 22, 2021, 10:27:35 PMSure, but it depends entirely on context. In the context of "mid-air exit rules", my argument is that more options is better for both players and designers.

More options for the player means more backroute options for the player. That was one of the biggest reasons for the very strong consensus for removing direct drop.

QuoteExactly. Why place unnecessary limitations on the game? Newcomers will either learn "Jumpers can exit" or "Jumpers can't exit" - either way, it's a piece of information. Why not choose the positive?

Partly for the reason I just gave; also because the situation is not symmetrical. If jumpers can exit, there's another weird special case to be remembered; if they can't, you just things working as you'd expect for a "grounded" exit (as opposed to the "black hole" exit NL used to have).

I grant that the existing special case for floaters/gliders weakens this argument, in that if we already have two states with a weird special-case rule for exiting, it's not a huge leap to go from that to one more; but conversely, that strengthens the argument for taking that special case out. If newcomers discover "A, B and C can exit, while X, Y and Z cannot", then they have no way of knowing whether the special case will or will not apply to P, Q and R. Trying to solve puzzles without knowing the rules is a surefire recipe for frustration. And yes, the player can study and eventually learn the rules; but in order to help them get on to the fun part of playing the game, the rules should be kept simple wherever possible.

WillLem

#34
Quote from: Proxima on March 22, 2021, 10:59:48 PM
More options for the player means more backroute options for the player.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing; as a NeoLemmix challenger, I'd have thought you'd be very much in favour of backroute possibilities ;)

EDIT: I've created this thread to more specifically address the ongoing and obnoxious notion that backroute avoidance should inform game design.

Quote from: Proxima on March 22, 2021, 10:59:48 PM
If jumpers can exit, there's another weird special case to be remembered

Not necessarily. I would expect Jumpers to be able to exit in midair, and would be surprised (and disappointed) if they couldn't. I'm sure I'm not the only player who thinks this way.

Quote from: Proxima on March 22, 2021, 10:59:48 PM
yes, the player can study and eventually learn the rules; but in order to help them get on to the fun part of playing the game, the rules should be kept simple wherever possible.

As has already been pointed out, simplicity is not necessarily a good basis upon which to make these sorts of decisions. For example, which of the following is more simple?:

A) Lemmings can always exit upon reaching the exit's trigger.

B) Lemmings can exit upon reaching the exit's trigger, but only if they're also standing on terrain, or if they're a Floater/Glider/Swimmer, not in a dying state (apart from ohnoers), etc, etc, etc.

This demonstrates that simplicity is not actually all that desirable: the simplest ways of doing things more often than not open up a smorgasbord of problematic use cases which then leads to more complex rules being created, as has happened (and continues to happen) with NeoLemmix.

Therefore, the debate must come down to whether or not we would prefer, as a community, Jumpers to be able to exit - or not. And "simplicity" cannot be taken as a strong reason either way, that's my point.

Personally, I would prefer Jumpers to be able to exit because it offers more options to both players and level designers. The more limitations there are in this regard, the more repetitive and samey levels start to become, to the point where every 100 levels or so someone might come up with some ingenious new way of using a Blocker (for example), but such cases are notable by their singularity/rarity.

I'm sure I can come up with other reasons, though, if the "more options" thing isn't flying for you.




A level exists with a midair exit. The level provides Jumpers.

Would you expect to be able to use the Jumpers to reach the exit?

IchoTolot

QuotePersonally, I would prefer Jumpers to be able to exit because it offers more options to both players and level designers. The more limitations there are in this regard, the more repetitive and samey levels start to become, to the point where every 100 levels or so someone might come up with some ingenious new way of using a Blocker (for example), but such cases are notable by their singularity/rarity.

Lemming levels becoming repetitive because jumpers cannot exit. Please re-think this a little bit. :8():

I think we already have endless possibilities and options. So that is not really a factor.

If we assume that jumpers would be able to exit you gain the possibility to let single lemmings exit while the crowd still needs to build up - you can already simulate this with an exit on a hill and climbers / an exit in a pit and floaters....... the list goes on! The gain is not really there.

Also, ingenious levels do not need to rely on new tricks or so. Even with the most basic mechanics you can come up with the most insane levels. It all depends just on design.

As a result the only factors that really matter here are:

- Does it make sense in the game.   (conistency)
- Does it overcomplicate the game.  (simplicity)
- Does it break a lot of existing content. (stability)


We have enough possibilities and jumpers being able to exit is not really an incredible gain (and maybe not really a gain at all as the result can already be simulated) in that regard bur more just another extra rule to remember.

Quote
A level exists with a midair exit. The level provides Jumpers.

Would you expect to be able to use the Jumpers to reach the exit?

No. :8():    I would have to build a bridge to it first.

Proxima

Quote from: WillLem on March 23, 2021, 08:45:48 AMAs has already been pointed out, simplicity is not necessarily a good basis upon which to make these sorts of decisions. For example, which of the following is more simple?:

A) Lemmings can always exit upon reaching the exit's trigger.

B) Lemmings can exit upon reaching the exit's trigger, but only if they're also standing on terrain, or if they're a Floater/Glider/Swimmer, not in a dying state (apart from ohnoers), etc, etc, etc.

This demonstrates that simplicity is not actually all that desirable

No it doesn't. It shows that simplicity should not be the one and only deciding factor -- which is a straw man, because no-one said it should be.

The very simplest option is, as you say, for lemmings always to exit. This is ruled out on other grounds -- being extremely prone to backroutes, leading to unintuitive consequences (direct drop), and being something the community clearly does not want.

The next simplest option is that lemmings should exit if the exit is on terrain and the lemming is not dying. This is much better than your option B, and it is better precisely because of simplicity. Simplicity is extremely important, and your silly straw man does not disprove that.

WillLem

#37
Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
Lemming levels becoming repetitive because jumpers cannot exit. Please re-think this a little bit. :8():

Why? It's a valid argument. Please engage with it and respond to it rather than dismissing it.

Nice to see that you have done so, anyway... (i.e engage with it)

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
If we assume that jumpers would be able to exit you gain the possibility to let single lemmings exit while the crowd still needs to build up - you can already simulate this with an exit on a hill and climbers / an exit in a pit and floaters....... the list goes on! The gain is not really there.

Simulating one aspect of a skill's behavour disregards all other possibilities that may arise from that behaviour, particularly those which are unique to that skill. Jumpers are able to cross gaps, whereas Climbers are not. Jumpers are able to move horizontally as well as vertically, whereas Floaters are not.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
Even with the most basic mechanics you can come up with the most insane levels. It all depends just on design.

I agree. My point is that Jumpers being able to exit adds to this.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
- Does it make sense in the game.   (conistency)

Yes, it does. A Jumper is an active skill which momentarily breaks gravity and allows it to interact with things in midair.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
- Does it overcomplicate the game.  (simplicity)

No, it doesn't. Most of us are more than capable of assimilating a wide variety of complex rules and interactions in our understanding of Lemmings as a game. This only tends to come up as a negative when people want to use it as a reason not to have something they don't want to see in the game, hence its use in this particular argument.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
- Does it break a lot of existing content. (stability)

Granted, there likely aren't very many midair exit levels involving Jumpers. I have one such level, and it wouldn't be the end of the world if I had to fix it. However, I wouldn't like to see the possibility removed from the table altogether.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
jumpers being able to exit is...just another extra rule to remember.

So is "Jumpers cannot exit".

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
No. :8():    I would have to build a bridge to it first.

Fair enough. I would expect to be able to jump into the exit.

Quote from: Proxima on March 23, 2021, 03:54:41 PM
It shows that simplicity should not be the one and only deciding factor -- which is a straw man, because no-one said it should be.

Haha - accusing someone of straw manning rather than engaging with what they've said is a neat way to deflect the argument, but ultimately doesn't further the discussion.

And - you're not entirely correct in what you've said. Simplicity may indeed not be the only deciding factor, but it has been used many times in this debate - by Dullstar, yourself, Icho - so I feel the need to call its validity into question.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 10:06:06 AM
Simplicity is extremely important, and your silly straw man does not disprove that.

Come on Proxima, you're an intelligent guy. Surely you don't need to resort to insulting the argument just because you disagree. You can do better than that.

I believe that my argument effectively calls the importance of simplicity into question. You yourself have actually proven this as well:

Quote from: Proxima on March 23, 2021, 03:54:41 PM
The next simplest option is that lemmings should exit if the exit is on terrain and the lemming is not dying.

Exactly: the more favourable option is one which is more complex. Sure, it may only be more complex by a degree or two, but it is more complex, and it is more favourable.

Anyway, Icho proposed two other arguments in favour of removing the Jumper-exit behaviour (i.e. stability and consistency) which are more compelling than "simplicity" as a counter-argument. I have already responded to these earlier in this post.

Simon

For the mere jumper, simplicity is a wash either way. The jumper feels both similar to a short faller and to a floater. You're bound to introduce a new rule given the 12.11 baseline. You can find more oddities in 12.11 base rules, or accept that you must hack.

Simplicity will come into discussion if other exiting rules are on the table. E.g., when you require ground under the exit at all costs, then the digger and builder will be affected.

Anyway, simplicity is super important in design. Whenever stuff is simple, we can focus on more interesting things. If complexity comes at all, we want to reserve the chance to introduce complexity for where it's most exciting/practical.

-- Simon

IchoTolot

Quote
QuoteLemming levels becoming repetitive because jumpers cannot exit. Please re-think this a little bit. :8():

Why? It's a valid argument. Please engage with it and respond to it rather than dismissing it.

Come on you are joking here! You are dramatising the loss.

But if you want an explanation: Jumpers being able to exit would still be an edge case which not really contributes to counter repetitiveness. An edge case in a came with tons of skills, behaviors, objects, and already near endless combinations .... it's absense won't lead to an era of repetitive levels and wouldn't leave a gaping hole.

QuoteSimulating one aspect of a skill's behavour disregards all other possibilities that may arise from that behaviour, particularly those which are unique to that skill. Jumpers are able to cross gaps, whereas Climbers are not. Jumpers are able to move horizontally as well as vertically, whereas Floaters are not.

With arranging the terrain you can exactly simulate the outcome in the case of the exit.

1 jumper really just allows 1 lemming to exit. It serves as 1 ticket to the exit.

You can simulate 1 ticket to the exit with floters,climbers swimmers,... you don't nessesarily need the jumper for that.
You just have to rearrange the terrain acordingly.

For the jumper range: Set the resources needed for the crowd to get to the exit the same in both cases. Done!

That's why the gain in new possibilities is not there and you really only gain another method of accomplising the same thing other nearly identical set-ups can do. --> Not really a good addition, the jumper exit adds nothing new.

If you are still in denail over that I gladly build you examples in the editor and post the levels + pictures. :8():

QuoteYes, it does. A Jumper is an active skill which momentarily breaks gravity and allows it to interact with things in midair.

This depends on the direction you are arguing from. If you choose the permanent skill definition it does not make sense anymore.

Also, I would argue that the jumper state is closer to the faller state which would make sense as the jumper even transitions into it.

Quote
No, it doesn't. Most of us are more than capable of assimilating a wide variety of complex rules and interactions in our understanding of Lemmings as a game. This only tends to come up as a negative when people want to use it as a reason not to have something they don't want to see in the game, hence its use in this particular argument.

I could simply negate and reverse that ("It's only not a negative whem people want it in the game!"), but that would lead to nothing.

Depending on where people see the jumper the interaction can be logical or illogical. For the people who deem it as illogical it is another unexpected rule they have to learn.

But you are still underestimating the creeping dread of overcomplication. Tagging more and more little rules onto something is a slow and painful death. I've seen it in too many games.

Proxima

Quote from: WillLem on March 23, 2021, 05:12:15 PMHaha - accusing someone of straw manning rather than engaging with what they've said is a neat way to deflect the argument, but ultimately doesn't further the discussion.

Come on Proxima, you're an intelligent guy. Surely you don't need to resort to insulting the argument just because you disagree. You can do better than that.

And you are an intelligent and mature guy -- you can respond better than this when someone calls you out on the flaws in your argument. :P

QuoteAnd - you're not entirely correct in what you've said. Simplicity may indeed not be the only deciding factor, but it has been used many times in this debate - by Dullstar, yourself, Icho - so I feel the need to call its validity into question.

So how does that make me "not entirely correct"? I said that simplicity is important but not the only deciding factor. You're citing other people who agree with me... to prove that I was wrong? ???

QuoteI believe that my argument effectively calls the importance of simplicity into question.

It does not, because your "argument" consisted of a mere two cases, and you got me to admit that the simpler of those two was worse. That does not in any way prove the generality "simplicity is not actually all that desirable", it just proves that one particular case, in which simplicity was allowed to be carried to an unhealthy extreme, would be a bad idea.

It's as if someone were arguing "There are very few even prime numbers" and you said "2 is an even prime, so that disproves it!" You cannot argue that a generality is true from single cases.

WillLem

#41
Quote from: Simon on March 23, 2021, 05:36:10 PM
For the mere jumper, simplicity is a wash either way. The jumper feels both similar to a short faller and to a floater.

I have to confess, I don't get the comparison here. How is the Jumper similar to these states?

Quote from: Simon on March 23, 2021, 05:36:10 PM
when you require ground under the exit at all costs, then the digger and builder will be affected.

How so?

Quote from: Simon on March 23, 2021, 05:36:10 PM
we want to reserve the chance to introduce complexity for where it's most exciting/practical.

Such as being able to jump a lemming into an exit! ;P

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 06:13:27 PM
Jumpers being able to exit would still be an edge case which not really contributes to counter repetitiveness .... it's absense won't lead to an era of repetitive levels and wouldn't leave a gaping hole.

Sure, OK. Fair enough. But, it's absence would remove one possibility as opposed to adding anything to the game.

So, the score would be:

Allow Jumpers to exit = 0, if you like
Don't allow Jumpers to exit = -1, whether you like it or not

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 06:13:27 PM
With arranging the terrain you can exactly simulate the outcome in the case of the exit.
...
If you are still in denail over that I gladly build you examples in the editor and post the levels + pictures. :8():

That won't be necessary. I don't doubt that you can simulate the behaviour for one purpose (in this case, allowing 1 lemming to exit but not the others), my counter-argument here was that doing so ignores all other possibilies of said behaviour that are unique to that skill. For one thing, Jumping a lemming into an exit is a quick, easy manoeuvre - potentially great for multitasking, fast-solve times, speedrunning, and just plain good fun. You can't simulate that with a Climber!

Also, the "simulating the behaviour" argument ignores cases in which using the Jumper to exit is not intended, thus denying challengers of potential alternatives. Is this important? That's a whole other debate, but it is important to me personally, hence why I'm calling on it.

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 06:13:27 PM
QuoteA Jumper is an active skill which momentarily breaks gravity and allows it to interact with things in midair.

This depends on the direction you are arguing from. If you choose the permanent skill definition it does not make sense anymore.

I'm not quite sure what you're saying here. Jumpers aren't permanent skills...

Anyway, allow me to rephrase in case there's a misunderstanding. Jumpers can interact with things in midair - suspended platforms, traps, updrafts, pickup skills, teleporters, etc - that other lemmings cannot reach. They can also be assigned a Bomber to instantly explode. Allowing them to exit whilst in midair is, to my mind, merely another item on this list. If anything, removing the ability for Jumpers to exit from this list creates an unexplained gap in the skill's behaviour. As a player, I'd be thinking "why can't the Jumper exit?"

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 06:13:27 PM
Also, I would argue that the jumper state is closer to the faller state which would make sense as the jumper even transitions into it.

This is a contradition. If a Jumper transitions into a Faller, then it is not a Faller, and does not have to behave like one for any reason. Jumpers can also transition into Gliders, Floaters, Bombers, Stoners, Climbers, Drowners, Swimmers, Burners, any given trap/object animation, and - lest we forget - Exiters ;P

Quote from: IchoTolot on March 23, 2021, 06:13:27 PM
Depending on where people see the jumper the interaction can be logical or illogical. For the people who deem it as illogical it is another unexpected rule they have to learn.

But you are still underestimating the creeping dread of overcomplication. Tagging more and more little rules onto something is a slow and painful death. I've seen it in too many games.

You're forgetting that the rule is not being proposed as an addition, but a removal. It's very possible that there are NL players out there who have already gotten used to the fact that Jumpers can, at present, exit.

Surely removing this possibility has far more chance of leading to that dreaded complication you're talking about ;P

Quote from: Proxima on March 23, 2021, 09:06:15 PM
And you are an intelligent and mature guy -- you can respond better than this when someone calls you out on the flaws in your argument. :P

Calling out the flaws in my argument is not the same as disproving the argument. And anyway, I am not a professional arguer, I am a gamer with an opinion. Give me a break! ;P

Quote from: Proxima on March 23, 2021, 09:06:15 PM
QuoteAnd - you're not entirely correct in what you've said. Simplicity may indeed not be the only deciding factor, but it has been used many times in this debate - by Dullstar, yourself, Icho - so I feel the need to call its validity into question.

So how does that make me "not entirely correct"? I said that simplicity is important but not the only deciding factor. You're citing other people who agree with me... to prove that I was wrong? ???

To prove that you were wrong about me straw-manning. I am calling the validity of the argument into question due to its frequency of use amongst multiple users - this is a valid course of action during a debate, i.e. examine whether a frequently-used argument actually has any substance within the topic at hand. I agree that simplicity is an important goal generally, but not necessarily in this case. That's what I was taking issue with, and so it's not straw-manning. Can we get back to the debate now please?

Quote from: Proxima on March 23, 2021, 09:06:15 PM
You cannot argue that a generality is true from single cases.

That isn't what I'm doing. I'm pointing out that, in this case, the "simplicity" argument doesn't fly, by specifically using this case as an example. On the other hand, you've had to rely on applying the argument to prime numbers, a totally unrelated and incomparable topic, to desperately try to invalidate what I'm saying.

Anyway, again - please can we stop talking about the way that my arguments are presented. I'm not perfect, and I'm doing my best to present my thoughts as clearly as possible. I've always been more of a creative than logical thinker, so I'm bound to get things wrong occasionally. But, we're all intelligent enough to either understand the essence of what's being said, or ask for further clarification in the absence of understanding.

I look forward to resuming the conversation without having to defend my presentation style as well as my argument. Thanks! :lemcat:

IchoTolot

QuoteSo, the score would be:

Allow Jumpers to exit = 0, if you like
Don't allow Jumpers to exit = -1, whether you like it or not

9999999999999999999999999999999999 - 1

An acceptable sacrifice.

Quotedoing so ignores all other possibilies of said behaviour that are unique to that skill.

Show me some exiting jumper behaviors I cannot simulate!

Otherwise I won't give in to your uniqueness statements.

Be careful though as I will try my best to simulate them. :devil:


QuoteFor one thing, Jumping a lemming into an exit is a quick, easy manoeuvre - potentially great for multitasking, fast-solve times, speedrunning, and just plain good fun. You can't simulate that with a Climber!

Just because something is a few seconds faster doesn't mean the end result differs. Fast-solve times and speedrun possibilities are not really a relevant attribute for keeping game mechanics in a game not dedicated for speed. ---> The puzzles is the main focus of NL. A machanic should lead to unique puzzles and not just bring slightly faster solve times.

You can still try to solve the puzzle as fast as possible of course, it is a part of NL but not the main focus.

If the bahavior is a rarely used edge-case, can be simulated in multiple ways with already existing tools and is of questionable logic or even considered a bug, it can be fixed out.

QuoteJumpers can interact with things in midair - suspended platforms, traps, updrafts, pickup skills, teleporters, etc - that other lemmings cannot reach.

Ok, at this point I begin to repeat myself and I really don't like repeating myself over and over:

Quote
QuoteSide note: fallers can interact with traps. Everyone accepts this, so why not accept fallers being able to exit?


Simple:

The trap is the active part here. The trap simply kills every lemming entering its trigger area.

The exit is passive. It just allows the lemming to exit. The lemming has to do the work himself here.


In each of those cases the jumper is just passivly affected by the object's effect.



QuoteThis is a contradition. If a Jumper transitions into a Faller, then it is not a Faller, and does not have to behave like one for any reason.

And you are again not getting my point: I don't say it is a faller, but very close to one.


At this point it seems to me that I just repeat myself over and over again. It also seems like you won't change your mind anyway no matter the arguments are and my time is limited.

Therefore, I don't think any more usable results will come out of this discussion. At this point I think it's the best to list the arguments and then come to a decision.


In the end, these are my realizations:

1.) I still see no unique puzzles for exiting jumpers that cannot be simulated otherwise. I also don't see any proof that there are and as I result I don't see value in this behavior.
2.) The logic if jumpers belong to the class of lemmings that should exit is highly debatable. Currently only some permanent skills are allowed to exit mid air/water and the jumper/reacher. The jumper/reacher still looks like a unnessesary attachment to that rule. For me a jumper is closer to a faller than a permanent skill in action and therefore is a case of direct-drop that should be fixed.
3.) A case can be made to simplify the rule even further and only allow exiting on solid ground. This would break quite a bit of content though and thefore I am not in favor of this.

Dullstar

While we're currently under the impression that the Slider and the Laserer/Blaster will be the final new skills, there's no guarantee that we won't re-evaluate this decision to stop adding new skills in the future. I feel that if we do not create a proper rule for exiting behavior, this situation will only continue to get worse. I want to be able to look at a skill/state and determine from first principles whether or not it's likely to be able to exit, as opposed to the current situation of "Some skills can exit, some can't, but for each skill you could make some arguments as to why the trigger area should affect it and some arguments as to why it shouldn't, so the only way to figure out if it can exit or not is to try it and then memorize the result." This is needless complexity.

Quote from: Proxima (emphasis mine)I grant that the existing special case for floaters/gliders weakens this argument, in that if we already have two states with a weird special-case rule for exiting, it's not a huge leap to go from that to one more; but conversely, that strengthens the argument for taking that special case out. If newcomers discover "A, B and C can exit, while X, Y and Z cannot", then they have no way of knowing whether the special case will or will not apply to P, Q and R. Trying to solve puzzles without knowing the rules is a surefire recipe for frustration.

Unfortunately, I don't think this is something that can be fixed without content breakage. I don't think that necessarily means we shouldn't address it, though.

I'd also like to add something that I think is a flaw in how we do these debates: we love talking about content breakage, but we rarely delve deeper than "some content will break." How much content, and what would be required to fix it? I'd be much more concerned about changes that completely break level concepts as opposed to inconveniences where the main correction difficulty is just in identifying the broken content.




I also think that allowing the jumper in the exit is likely to detract more than it is to add, and I will use the same reasoning I used for the spearer and the grenader. Levels where you just park your cursor in [spot] and then click, click, click, click, click, click, click, click, click, click like a hundred times are not fun to play. If I wanted a button masher I would play a different game. The grenader and spearer saw a ton of this usage, which IMO is even less interesting than "here's a giant gap and a bunch of builders, you know what to do." The jumper-into-the-exit also encourages this while not offering anything that can't already be done using the skills Icho describes.

namida

Just wanting to make it very clear that what benefits / drawbacks any change might have for challenges - including speedruns - will not be a factor in any decision that is being made, and indeed, will not be a factor in any physics decision, ever. (Now on the other hand, UI decisions are another matter, and there could definitely be room for at least somewhat supporting challenges / speedruns there.)

Quotebut we rarely delve deeper than "some content will break."

I don't know how many people actually do so, but I have always encouraged using RC builds to test out these changes, because if the breakage would be too severe, that is the time to revert the change - before it goes stable.

Of course, if the change makes it to RC (or often, even to experimental), it's probably already past the point where "is it a good idea?" is the main question, and now it's "is there any last minute reason why we shouldn't go ahead with this?", so perhaps a special experimental build is in order... but that needs a defined rule, first.
My projects
2D Lemmings: NeoLemmix (engine) | Lemmings Plus Series (level packs) | Doomsday Lemmings (level pack)
3D Lemmings: Loap (engine) | L3DEdit (level / graphics editor) | L3DUtils (replay / etc utility) | Lemmings Plus 3D (level pack)
Non-Lemmings: Commander Keen: Galaxy Reimagined (a Commander Keen fangame)