The Lemmings Remake Level List Order

[STT]

I've already stated my reasons on why I think most of the levels should be existing favorites, so I will ask you then: What is the purpose of the remake in your mind, and why should the large majority of levels be newly created?

A large majority of new levels so that it isn't just a craming together of heaps of old ones. But, I really am not fussed about it the ratio, just so long as its not completley old levels.

To tell you the truth, I'm not completly fussed which levels go in, and what order, etc., let the majority decide that. Just so long as there's some from everyone and some of those are fresh ones.

The purpose of the remake is to be a fresh lemmings game, differnet from Orig and Ohno, and not mearly a ramming together of levels that have been floating around since the creating of lemedit.

This thread is mainly to start the putting together of levels. If we start now, I rekon we could be done by christmas.

BTW I've got a new level to add, and that'll be all from me (I know you guys have heaps of better ones):
STT09
Mind you, it is a glitch one.

[Tim]

Even though I am a recent member of the forum, Im not sure if any of my levels in my pack should go into the lemmings remake at all. Maybe?

I guess that since I uploaded my pack in the past week, they shouldnt be on there, and most of you wouldnt have even started trying out my levels yet.

Ok I guess i have answered my own question.

Tim.

[EricLang]

I think the actual starting of STT is very important. There has been a lot of talk.
What I am confused about: is it a CustLemm project or is it a LemmixPlayer project?

[Tim]

Ok, I shouldnt really be trying to participate in this remake. It looks like I wont be able to play the finished pack or contribute any levels, as all of my levels are created from LemEdit using Windows 98, and are all clean levels (no glitched ones).

Plus I have no idea what the LemmixPlayer, LemmixEditor or Cheapo Packs are at all.

Dont worry about me then, everyone. Im just a new member lost in space

[EricLang]

LemmixPlayer is a Lemmings clone for Windows.
LemmixEditor is a leveleditor which could replace LemEdit.
I wrote these programs to avoid using dos-box or using dos-mode while keeping all Lemmings-fun.

[Fleech]

Tim, check out this thread for info on the Lemmix editor. I've no idea if it runs under Windows 98, but it's certainly worth looking at if it does.

Regarding what levels get used, I don't think any set ratio needs using. If a level is good enough it should be considered, new or old. The whole point of this is to provide people who have no idea what LemEdit, Lemmix, .dat packs etc are with an easy way to play some new levels, isn't it? People will create new levelpacks whether this gets done or not, so IMO it makes no sense to shove in a load of new levels just because people here may have already played many of the old ones. If you're on this forum the chances are you're going to play any new packs that get released anyway, so including loads of them just for the sake of it seems pointless to me.

It seems no-one is really sure who this is intended for. People who already play custom lemmings levels, or people who don't but might like to if they had a nice, shiny, best-of package to play with (which may very well include several newer levels)? It's surely the latter? :huh:

In either case, nice one STT for getting this all up and running. I'll start playing through a few packs and see what I can find.

[Shvegait]

The purpose of the remake is to be a fresh lemmings game, differnet from Orig and Ohno, and not mearly a ramming together of levels that have been floating around since the creating of lemedit.

Well, if someone has never played these "old" levels before, then they are "new" to them, right? There are a lot of great levels out there, and I'm sure the community would be able to find some great ones that are "old" but that even you haven't played yet :tongue: If the purpose is to distribute this is a package for people who have never tried customized Lemmings, I don't see how using "old" levels is bad.

This thread is mainly to start the putting together of levels. If we start now, I rekon we could be done by christmas.

Sorry I've been sounding antagonistic, it's great that you are taking this initiative. I was just trying to point out some potential problems and help iron those out before we get too entrenched in the selection process.

[STT]

Well, if someone has never played these "old" levels before, then they are "new" to them, right? There are a lot of great levels out there, and I'm sure the community would be able to find some great ones that are "old" but that even you haven't played yet :tongue: If the purpose is to distribute this is a package for people who have never tried customized Lemmings, I don't see how using "old" levels is bad.

Yeah, I kind of relised that when I was typing it...  :tongue:.

Sorry I've been sounding antagonistic, it's great that you are taking this initiative. I was just trying to point out some potential problems and help iron those out before we get too entrenched in the selection process.

How about a different selection progress? The current system (1. Upload and ask for aplace, then 2. Move/Cut) does has its flaws, and I concur with that.

I propose another one. You nominate the levels you want it. They are then rated by someone else in a similar fashion to the Custlemm Level List Game. It is also rated out of difficulty (out of 8) for both glitched/normal levels. Then the levels are grouped according to their difficulty, (i.e, 1/8 -> early BASIC, 2/8 -> late BASIC), and so on. Same with the gliched ones. (1/8 -> early WHACKY, 8/8 -> final               
ABSURD). Then we assign level numbers to them. You like?

An example (though you shouldn't do your own levels!)

STT05: Killer Bubblebath
(screen maybe?)
Save 77/80  (can't remember)
Tools: 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 (now I know I've got alzimers)
Good: Not immedatly obvious solution, not extreamly long either. Fair share of each tool is used.
Bad: Loots of building.
== Overall dificulty rating 4/8

So this level would go into late PUZZLING.

[Shvegait]

Yeah, now we're talkin  :wink:

Oh, and you raise a good idea with the Level List style reviewing. As a starting point for the old favorites, we already have reviews for so many levels in the old Custlemm Level List thread (in the archive). Since these packs were chosen mostly based on community interest, it should be a good place to start, though of course there are many levels worthy of consideration that were not reviewed during that time (also including selected levels from authors with many packs). But it could be a good place for people to look for nominations at this early stage. Just a reminder that Mindless is preserving those posts!


There's one other thing I thought I'd bring up before we get too far in. What will be the rules for nominating and incorporating levels from authors who do not or no longer frequent the forum? Transplanting them directly should be no problem, as of course credit would be attributed and that's it. However, it is a tricky situation if some of these levels are high-quality minus some backroutes. I don't think it would be right to modify these levels. Of course they could be left as they are if the backroutes are not blatant, or they could just be rejected if so. I don't expect this to be a huge issue, but it is something to consider...

[STT]

I'm thinking we reanylise each level as several have/will be been altered for the remake.

And I'm also thinking we each nominate our own levels. That way he have no issues with people not wanting their levels in, modifications, etc.

[TOG]

Perhaps this has already been stated, but I didn't see it.

In what manner are we supposed to nominate our levels?

[Shvegait]

The wiki is a nice idea, however it's a bit unorganized to use.

I'm working on a little database to manage nomination. Basically how it works is to nominate a level you would post the level in .lvl format. You don't need to post the name, number of lemmings, etc. as this can be easily parsed from the .lvl file (also minimizes errors). Although it doesn't have the ease of use of .dat files (being able to just rename them to try out the levels), it makes more sense from the point of view that one level = one level file... since DATs can have many levels in them...

When posting a level, you will have to provide some data though, such as the author's name, and the source (meaning where you originally got it from, if it's a DAT pack. e.g. "Garjen00.DAT Level 1"). If you don't know how the author wants to be credited, just use their handle; it can be changed later. But keep it consistent how any one author is credited. For multiple authors, list them all.

You can also, if you wish, post a picture of the level (.PNG). Or maybe just a link to the picture. Since the level pics are hosted on the same server that the database would be, it would make sense just to link them than to re-upload them. Or maybe use the URL when the picture exists on the server, and upload the file when it doesn't.

Each level will have an associated number of nominations and vetos (or thumbs up, thumbs down, yes or no). Posting a level means you automatically give it a thumbs up. (Else, why are you posting it?) You can also, of course, view other posted levels and give them a thumbs up or a thumbs down.

You can also vote on each level for the difficulty rating. We can use STT's idea of 1 to 8, where each rating spans 2 difficulty points (for non-glitch levels). The average difficulty rating is used.

For glitched levels, there would be a flag you can check for specifying "glitch" so that it keeps the levels separate. Of course this can be hard to determine in some cases, but use your judgment.

Oh, and most importantly, each level will have an associated space for making comments. Please justify your choices, especially vetoes.

Most of the data can be edited after being input. So you could update the .lvl if a backroute was removed, then update the picture, change your vote, change your vote on the difficulty, etc.

Finally, there would be a bunch of queries you can perform, such as sort by # nominations, sort by # of comments, sort by difficulty rating, sort by author, simple data compilation (# levels per author, # levels in each graphics set, # levels in each difficulty rating if the numbers are used as appropriate), etc.


Would people use such a system? It won't be very difficult to set up, but I don't want to force this method on anyone. I think we need a little more organization than we currently have, though.

[geoo]

That comes pretty close to my imagination. In fact, I just was going to post my suggestions when I read your posting.
I quite like the idea of adding *.lvl files for each level, despite this taking quite some time to do when adding the levels; but I see the advantages. Of course, it's also eaier then to check for double entries, and new levels can be easily submitted.
For the source of a level, I'd say that the pack and the number should be entered in separate fields, that way, pictures could be assigned automatically if already existent on your server. Alternatively, 'raw level file' could be checked.

Except for the automatic approval when adding the level, I would make adding and voting two separate procedures. That way, it would be more clear and levels you didn't vote yet could be marked somehow. For points to vote on, the difficulty 1 - 8 is of course very important; additionally the complete approval/disapproval as deciding factor which levels get in as you already said, and I'd suggest a separate voting on 'how much do you like that level overall', in case there are far too many levels for one ranking on the difficulty scale tied with approvals, to determine which levels have to be put out if they cannot be shifted just one difficulty ranking lower of higher either.

For authors, I'd prefer a dropdown list to choose the author instead of manually typing in the name. That way, there won't be any problems with multiple names; if an author is missing, he could simply be added to the list. Also, there couldn't be fake authors then as the added authors can easily be verified. A problem would be more than one author then, but this is a rather rare case and could be handled individually I think.
For adding levels, I'd also like to see an option 'all added levels by author: ' then, that way you can add many levels from the same author without having to select the author every time.
For glitches, apart from yes/no there could also be an option 'borderline case' if it is abiguous.

For safety however, to avoid double (dis)approval or voting, it seems to be necessary to create sort of accounts which have to be verified first; having accounts like this one the other hand would also have some other advantages: possibility to change votings and entries again, displaying already voted levels...

Other than that, I obviously really like that solution as it gives a much better organized method to suggest, vote and order levels. And after all, depending on the total amount of submitted levels, we could decide whether to make separate Lemmings/ONML remakes or only one with all styles.

I'd btw like to make a special graphics (Pushover) level for whatever difficulty rating as I really like the graphics and they'd be not too hard to apply for lemmings.
I've btw looked through a good load of levels already and not even having checked all levels, I'm already at about 60 levels which I find quite good for the remake. Maybe I should increase my criterions, but there are just so many good levels out here...

[Shvegait]

Hey, great points. Yeah, there will definitely be an account system. I wasn't going to get into all the details unless people are interested. It will probably be set up where you register, similar to on the forums, but then you need to be approved by an admin before getting access.

Adding and voting will be separate. That would be a good query to add, see all levels you haven't voted for yet.

Separating pack name and level # and using them in conjunction to find a picture on the server if available is a great idea.  :smiley: (Of course if the level didn't come from a pack, you can leave these fields blank.)

How much you like the level overall, hmm... This seems redundant with the Yes/No vote. It makes sense to use one system, either Yes/No or a rating system, but not both. I feel that there might be a bit of tension if we open it up to a rating system, as more subjectivity is involved (I mean, it's easy to have a reason for Yes vs. No or No vs. Yes, but for a "4" vs. a "5"?). Keep in mind that you can like a level but still vote No on it, if you don't think it would fit well in the remake, or for other reasons (one example, the level is redundant, meaning it is solved in a way similar to another level, but the other one is maybe better. This is of course mostly for the higher difficulty levels, as many easy levels can be solved in multiple ways, but I think you see what I mean). We have the comment section to discuss the levels, and I think on the borderline cases we will be able to come to a consensus through discussion. We can also use other factors if need be, such as how many levels an author would have if a level were accepted (for example, if an author only has one level nominated, all things being equal theirs should get priority over an author who has ten levels nominated, for variety), graphics set balance, etc.

The authors dropdown is a nice idea. I actually considered it for consistency, but wasn't sure about how to handle multiple authors. But as you said those are rare cases and can be handled individually.

Glitch: Yes, No, Maybe - sounds good.

I'd btw like to make a special graphics (Pushover) level for whatever difficulty rating as I really like the graphics and they'd be not too hard to apply for lemmings.

Something to bring up here. We need a convention for determining which level will use which special graphics set. Makes sense to do #0 for the first difficulty, #1 for the second, etc. #4 for the first glitch set, #5 for the second glitch set. I think we decided on one special graphics level per rating, so this should work. Anyway, this is a detail that can of course be easily changed as needed.

I've btw looked through a good load of levels already and not even having checked all levels, I'm already at about 60 levels which I find quite good for the remake. Maybe I should increase my criterions, but there are just so many good levels out here...

Wow, nice. The more, the merrier.  :smiley: Don't worry about refining your criteria at this point, that will happen when we really need to narrow down the levels and will be heavily based on the context of the levels in relation to other levels, rather than maybe how one level stands on its own. The first stage is just to build up the pool of levels that we can pick from.

Knowing that you are working through this already, I'll try to get this up as soon as I can. It won't have any frills, and will still take a little to get up and running, but I'll be working on it.

[STT]

Shvegait, have you started on making this system yet? If so, then two thumbs up. (if not then one up anyway for working on it.)

I've converted my levels to .lvl format and ironed out quite a few errors. I've even added two more levels.

STT00
STT01
STT02 - Tweeked Skills
STT03
STT04 - Tweeked Skills
STT05 - Tweeked Skills + Raised Save Rq.
STT06
STT07 - Tweeked Skills
STT08 - Tweeked Skills
STT09 - New (glitch level)
STT10 - New