[SOME CHANGES] [DISCUSSION] [PLAYER] Sides of levels?

[namida]

Edit by Nepster: Currently planned behavior for V1.44: Bottom, right and left edge deadly; top solid.

So - it's been discussed before but, how should the sides of the levels work? Current behaviour is that left / right / top are steel, and bottom is a bottomless pit.

Some packs have used the "Deadly Sides" gimmick on every level because the author prefers their levels to work that way.

Most likely, the Deadly Sides gimmick will be culled if the gimmick cull does go ahead, so I think this is also a good time to consider what should be the one consistent behaviour of the level sides.

[IchoTolot]

I think that the current way is the best way here:
Sides + Top solid       Bottom endless-pit

And i think this is WAY more logical than making every side deadly. 

Lemmings die when they fall in a pit and not when they reach the ceiling or the walls. And yes I count the three level edges as those!

Also so many things will break with a change for literraly no real improvement and I find deadly sides highly irritating.

[Nepster]

If we wouldn't already have lots of levels for NeoLemmix, I would argue as follows: There is no inherent reason any side should be solid or non-solid.
With the same reason as for the sides, one might argue that the bottom should be steel as well, because just why should it be any different than any other side? If one wants it deadly one could just place water there.
On the other hand, one might argue, that there is no reason why any of the sides should be walls: The lemmings world might just continue there are the lemmings are just wandering outside the reach of the player.

Considering practical aspects: It is much easier to add steel sides (which would even be directly visible to the player!) than adding traps on all sides, which in the case of the gimmick is not even obvious to the player.

But given that currently most levels use solid sides as default, I see how it might be a huge amount of work to adapt all of them (though I wonder how many of them make actually use of solid sides?). This might be the strongest argument for keeping the sides solid.

And for the record: I find solid sides highly irritating . They are only another way backroutes may sneak in.

[IchoTolot]

Considering practical aspects: It is much easier to add steel sides (which would even be directly visible to the player!) than adding traps on all sides, which in the case of the gimmick is not even obvious to the player.

Well to simulate deadly sides: Simply increase the level size so you have bigger gaps at the edges.
And I must say sometimes big steel edges look just plain bad especially if you have "regular size" levels and you have to add vertical scrolling just for a steel ceiling.

[mobius]

I argue to go with the practical aspect and make all deadly sides.

I admit when designing most of my levels I’ve put steel or walls around the edges [if it was appropriate] partly in case you ever changed this feature and partly because I think it looks better and makes more sense: It’s something the player might not know either way so better to be sure.
Maybe it was partly because I used to make levels for Lix but I just think it looks better too. I've always thought lemmings climbing up the side or just hitting and turning looked weird.

[Simon]

tl;dr: Would advocate for all 4 edges to be a deadly void. Levels that rely on either side edge behavior should be redesigned. I haven't checked existing levels, which are the strongest counter-argument.

Treating 3 edges with one rule, and the bottom edge with a different rule, that's inconsistent. An inconsistent design needs very good reasons for its defense. Nepster is right how there is no clear standard rule for either edge, but simplicity and consistency are arguments to treat all 4 edges the same.

Lemmings turning at the edges feels weird. Yes, when lemmings reach a wall, they should turn, but we don't see any walls at the edge.

Lemmings walking out of player's reach is weird, too, but less weird to me than turning at thin air. The bottomless pit doesn't have this problem: No matter what is deep down there, the lemmings would splat anyway.

It's harder to (turn mandatory walls into void) than it is to (place steel near the void). Ignoring existing levels, I'd propose deadly edges. This isn't the strongest argument on the table. Nepster is right how there is surprisingly little rightness in either choice.

Maybe allowing to reach the edges is bad level design in the first place. Last time Icho was here, he has shown me a one-screener in the cavelem styleset. The one-screener had extra steel near the right side, because the solid right side was important. Icho has not relied on the steel edge. The level was clear and honest.

Likewise, even if we have deadly edges, instead of relying on them, we should enlarge the level or put a trap.

And yes I count the three level edges as those [walls]! And i think this [bottom deadly, other sides steel] is WAY more logical than making every side deadly.

Why do you count the edges as walls, even though you don't see anything there? I will accept "because it feels right to me".

But then -- why do you find it logical/natural/... that the bottom edge kills, yet the side edges don't kill? What makes the bottom edge so special?

And I must say sometimes big steel edges look just plain bad especially if you have "regular size" levels and you have to add vertical scrolling just for a steel ceiling.

Nobody will add steel to the ceiling, no matter how we decide. The ceiling is the least concern.

At most, we might have to put climber-blocking terrain in a few places.

-- Simon

[Gronkling]

If neither option is preferred by a majority of people, it may be best to just allow it be an option. Possibly put an indicator on sides that are deadly.
I personally prefer steel edges, but this seems to be completely divisive. To me a steel edge feels like it can be used in a lot more different ways than a trap edge, and feels a lot more natural to me (I can't really explain why that is though). Being punished for building too close to the top of the screen also seems rather annoying.

[Simon]

Being punished for building too close to the top of the screen also seems rather annoying.

Yes! If we go for a deadly void, it should only kill what's completely outside. Being killed for being only close to the void, that sucks.

If we go for steel edges, I'd advocate to make them more visible. Maybe allow terrain to override this visible edge.

-- Simon

[ccexplore]

Treating 3 edges with one rule, and the bottom edge with a different rule

But then -- why do you find it logical/natural/... that the bottom edge kills, yet the side edges don't kill? What makes the bottom edge so special?

One word: gravity.

I think the setup with the bottom edge being deadly and the other edges being walls/ceilings is kind of modeling after the real world, where a "bottomless" pit (which is really just a very deep bottom) is "automatically" deadly by virtue of gravity, while most obstacles in the other dimensions are inert solid walls/ceilings unless hazards are explicitly placed.  Obviously you don't want to take this model strictly (eg. a strict reading implies floaters should survive a bottomless pit), but I think it is the underlying pinning for the intuition leading to the deadly-bottom-other-edges-walls mental model.

Boundaries are arguably weird by definition anyway.  Real world physics don't come with built-in boundaries; any boundary behavior, whether an obstacle-like versus hazard-like, implies the existence of something that is actually causing the boundary behavior.  In my mind it is just as mysterious for the boundary to be solid as it is to be deadly.  Arguably the only boundary behavior that's truly natural is toroidal scrolling.  Anything else is just something the player needs to learn.

The official lemmings franchise has been remarkably inconsistent with regards to boundary behavior.  In Lemmings 1 the underlying code definitely specifies the "wall-like" behavior, but the right boundary used by the game mechanics appears to be unreachable in many versions (PC unreachable, maybe Amiga, Genesis definitely reachable) relative to how far right you can scroll.  Lemmings 2 switched to the "all-deadly" behavior.  Revolution went with toroidal scrolling in the horizontal direction.  I don't quite remember how the top and bottom behave especially wrt to lemmings that have switched gravity, but I want to say that the top boundary is not automatically deadly to a normal-gravity lemming?

Having all edges deadly do have some other advantages besides more consistency (though that's not always the overriding factor--even in Lix, some behaviors like flinging are granted temporary immunity to the top edge for example).  For example if the physics is ever expanded to support multiple gravities (eg. the lemming's gravity is not fixed to one direction), the inconsistency of singling out a "bottom" edge (or have a boundary's "bottomness" vary by lemming based on their gravity) would become a lot more glaring.

I can understand that having to depict a solid boundary visually can ruin the look, and switching to all deadly may require changes to many existing levels.  On the other hand, how many levels truly would be difficult to change to accommodate deadly boundaries without adversely compromising solutions and visuals?  I'm not really convinced there are that many that would truly posed difficulties.

Ultimately I have little stake in this since I don't have any NeoLemmix levels, and having dealt with many lemmings games and clones that have different take on this (to say nothing of other video games), I've come to expect that boundary behaviors have be learned on a per-game basis, and that fortunately like Simon said, good designs usually try to avoid forcing you into boundary behaviors, at least for intended solutions.  The important thing is to have the boundary behavior be relatively consistent and discoverable.  I think I can probably even be okay with having behaviors vary from level to level (though again, it's hard to dismiss the suspicion that wall-like boundary levels can probably be converted to hazard-like boundary levels), as long as there's some easy to learn indicator somewhere in-game showing the type of boundary in effect for the level (and maybe this is taught early on via a tutorial level or something).

Likewise, even if we have deadly edges, instead of relying on them, we should enlarge the level or put a trap.

I do like having all obstacles and hazards be visible in principle.  I think it's just a little tough to adhere strictly to this especially when it comes to the top boundary, especially if you want to achieve an outdoor look visually.

[IchoTolot]

Treating 3 edges with one rule, and the bottom edge with a different rule

But then -- why do you find it logical/natural/... that the bottom edge kills, yet the side edges don't kill? What makes the bottom edge so special?

One word: gravity.

I think this is the best explanation for my thought process.

Lemmings die when falling into a pit (= bottom level edge). Lemmings are stopped by walls/ceiling (= other edges). I see the level edges as a "solid steel boundary" and not as a deadly "electric fence".

And I will use the words: "It just feels right to me." 
In most other games "I" played the level edges are not deadly so encountering deadly edges is unnatural. The bottom is a logical exeption, because of the gravity point (----> "Mario" is an example i can think of that uses a pit at the bottom)

[Nepster]

Well to simulate deadly sides: Simply increase the level size so you have bigger gaps at the edges.
And I must say sometimes big steel edges look just plain bad especially if you have "regular size" levels and you have to add vertical scrolling just for a steel ceiling.

If you have a big level, adding some empty space to both sides is totally fine and fits. But if you have a level fitting within one screen (i.e. 320x160px), adding 90 pixels of empty space to both sides is just wrong: Now over one third of the level is just there to keep the player away from the steel edges. Take as an example "Everclimbing Lemming" (Black Hole 17) from NepsterLems.
Some other like "Small Steps for Lemkind" (Comet 7) would need walls of continuous traps on both sides to prevent building to one side, blocking and then building back. Granted, this might fall under "bad level design", but it shows that increasing the size is not always the solution.

Regarding your second point: Steel borders need not look bad (depending on the level), usual terrain suffices most of the time and quite often you don't need to cover the whole border with terrain (just the relevant parts).
And I have yet to see a level where you have to add vertical scrolling and steel at the ceiling to make the level work.

Likewise, even if we have deadly edges, instead of relying on them, we should enlarge the level or put a trap.

If you really thinks so, quite a few levels in the Lix lemforum level pack need to be modified. Quickly skimming through Hopeless I see like 6-7 levels where solid edges can be used to backroute levels or at least simplify the solution.


I support the suggestions from Gronkling and ccexplore to make this an option. But I would make it an option in the Flexi Toolkit allowing to fix one behavior for a whole level pack, instead of a per-level basis. This way players can rely at least on some consistency.
As an in-game way to show the boundary behavior, why not color the edges of the minimap green if the edge is solid and red if the edge is void (or deadly)? Alternatively one might change the backgound color of the minimap for those parts outside of the actual level.

[IchoTolot]

I know a level from PimoLems ("Lemesis") which would need a steel ceiling. ("Going Up" from the original could also be a canidate).
I've not actively used the solid edges a whole lot as I mostly put quite a lot of decoration there. Nightmare 30 would be a canidate which uses the solid edges and a bunch of PimoLem levels. Another full check-through would be the case though and more stuff that need to be fixed would follow.

I can see the advantage of full deadly sides in Nepsters case and the more I follow the discussion I see the big mess in general we've gotten into by allowing 2 options in the first place.
The few deadly pixels overhang is sth which also bothers me. The deadly edges function as I understand them that  the outter ~8 pixels will be deadly instead of just the last one. It is still weird as hell in general seeing Lemmings get burned when they got near the edge.

If the deadly sides remain as an option there must be a way to notify the player though.
Or the "one-screeners" with them enabled can rely on a "decoration zone" instead of just empty space.

[Nepster]

I know a level from PimoLems ("Lemesis") which would need a steel ceiling. ("Going Up" from the original could also be a canidate).

Do they really need steel at the top? Would not adding some usual terrain wall of 7 pixels work as well and look much better?

The few deadly pixels overhang is sth which also bothers me. The deadly edges function as I understand them that  the outter ~8 pixels will be deadly instead of just the last one. It is still weird as hell in general seeing Lemmings get burned when they got near the edge.

I agree with everyone that deadly sides should only kill lemmings once they really hit the edge of the level and not before that.


And here is just another suggestion how to deal with this problem: Add to every style some kind of continuous trap like the vertical and horizontal red laser traps in Lix (found in geoo/construction). Then level designers who want deadly sides may frame their levels with this trap. It wouldn't be the the nicest-looking option, but at least this makes the deadly sides visible to players, does not require new options and uses only existing object types.

[IchoTolot]

And here is just another suggestion how to deal with this problem: Add to every style some kind of continuous trap like the vertical and horizontal red laser traps in Lix (found in geoo/construction). Then level designers who want deadly sides may frame their levels with this trap. It wouldn't be the the nicest-looking option, but at least this makes the deadly sides visible to players, does not require new options and uses only existing object types.

This "could" be the solution!

I like this idea, but maybe in some tilesets it can look kinda unusual ("Outdoor" or "Dirt" with laser beams ). Maybe match the color of the tileset (or builders) with them.

EDIT: Maybe the deadly edges option adds 8 pixels of map to each side and puts a laser beam in there automatically -----> lesser hassel for designers

[Simon]

I see the level edges as a "solid steel boundary" and not as a deadly "electric fence".

I don't see the edges as an electric fence either. Lemmings die when outside of player's range, not because they're grilled by the edge. The current NL burner edge doesn't feel right. The egde should do as little as possible.

My Feeling: open edges > steel > electric fence.

It is still weird as hell in general seeing Lemmings get burned when they got near the edge.

100 % agree!

One word: gravity.

other games "I" played the level edges are not deadly so encountering deadly edges is unnatural. The bottom is a logical exeption, because of the gravity point (----> "Mario"

In Jump'n'runs, gravity pulls you towards the bottom, where you're killed. To go towards the edge, you must want to go there, by steering towards the side. At the edge, the character ignores input towards that side.

Gravity in Lemmings, too, pulls you towards the bottom. But lemmings walk uncontrollably towards sides. You have to be active to prevent them from walking somewhere! The sides attract lemmings like the bottom does.

In Lemmings, it is natural to walk outside of the level. There is no magical barrier that prevents what lemmigns would do on their own. And while we might return in the real world upon hitting an obstacle, the lemmings get stuck.

But I would make it an option in the Flexi Toolkit allowing to fix one behavior for a whole level pack

Pack-dependent options open a new can of worms. What is with playtest? What is with standalone levels? Is the complexity warranted, even though authors have been consistent within a pack?

The per-level option is not as bad as it is now, should the boundaries get visual hints.

Always the same > option per-level > option per-pack.

Edges are weird, no matter what they do. I care about consistency. Let's not be coy. If we evade a decision, the players will suffer.

We're not in a hurry to decide, and can sleep over this for a week.

Likewise, even if we have deadly edges, instead of relying on them, we should enlarge the level or put a trap.

If you really thinks so, quite a few levels in the Lix lemforum level pack need to be modified. Quickly skimming through Hopeless I see like 6-7 levels where solid edges can be used to backroute levels or at least simplify the solution.

I'm okay with a few explicit hazards. I was speculating that edge reliance is bad design, but I'm not sure.

I agree that explicit hazards can be ugly. Like ccx, I don't want to require traps. When you have levels with large open areas, I agree that the void looks nicer than a load of traps.

Regarding your second point: Steel borders need not look bad (depending on the level), usual terrain suffices most of the time and quite often you don't need to cover the whole border with terrain (just the relevant parts).

Yes! Normal terrain suffices often and looks good.

Then level designers who want deadly sides may frame their levels with this trap

EDIT: Maybe the deadly edges option adds 8 pixels of map to each side and puts a laser beam in there automatically -----> lesser hassel for designers

I like this push for explicit edge behavior. I don't like mass traps.

When you want a void, the traps look horrible, and don't produce the right feeling either.

When you want steel, terrain or steel looks okay, and match what you perceive.

Once again. The edges aren't an electric fence. When edges are deadly, the lemmings get lost in the void outside of the level. The edges do as little as possible!

-- Simon

[IchoTolot]

Ok, I looked over the "breaking levels" situation in my case and the result is:

Deadly edges aren't really a big problem for existing levels, but.........a deadly ceiling would shake up the existing level world.

In my case I would have to change 4 levels in Reunion + Pimolems in case of deadly edges. Only 3 of them, because they really use the ege (the other one just for user-friendlyness).

A deadly ceiling would pretty much mean hours and hours of work, because of searching all over and making mostly climber walls save again + replay fixing (big part is user-friendlyness here). Also some levels use holding pits which are restricted through the ceiling.
I've counted over 28 levels in Reunion alone that would need work to be done if the ceiling would be deadly.
Furthermore: A few levels have Lemmings walking nearly under the ceiling (worst case onlx 3 pixels of height visible of the Lemming). If the sensitiviy would be too high here even more work would be created.

So all in all, even if I find the solid sides more logical (not more user-friendly)... I could live with deadly edges, but I have to strictly veto against a deadly ceiling
I must say the arguments for those deadly edges are good and yes even if they are unnatural to me they can make sense!
The ceiling is prob the most logical side to be solid in the first place and I highly suggest that it stays solid! (for the sake of the existing content)

[Simon]

Thanks for the exhaustive checks!

I haven't meditated yet about open edges, closed ceiling. It sounds viable, especially in light of many levels relying on the closed ceiling. Let's meet on Saturday and take a detailed look.

-- Simon

[Nepster]

I like this idea, but maybe in some tilesets it can look kinda unusual ("Outdoor" or "Dirt" with laser beams ). Maybe match the color of the tileset (or builders) with them.

EDIT: Maybe the deadly edges option adds 8 pixels of map to each side and puts a laser beam in there automatically -----> lesser hassel for designers

Adding 8 pixels ouside the level area completely unnecessarily turns lots of levels into ones with vertical scrolling. Adding them inside reduces the level area. So a big NO to the suggestion in the edit.
And I would be careful to match the colors to the style: E.g. this made the pickup-skills very hard to distinguish in the rock style.

My Feeling: open edges > steel > electric fence.
[...]
Once again. The edges aren't an electric fence. When edges are deadly, the lemmings get lost in the void outside of the level. The edges do as little as possible!

Interesting that you care so much more about the fluff explanations than about the actual game mechanics. I agree that thinking about the edges as an electric fence is unnatural, gut game-wise the only difference is whether the burning animation is displayed or not.
I prefer open edges as well, but ultimately it is pretty irrelevant to me how the death of a lemming is displayed, as long as the cause is clear.

The per-level option is not as bad as it is now, should the boundaries get visual hints.

What visual hints do you propose?
a) Do colored edges of the minimap suffice in your opinion (as I suggested some posts ago)?
b) Do you want visual hints directly in the level screen? If yes, then how does this differ from placing laser traps at the border of the level?

I could live with deadly edges, but I have to strictly veto against a deadly ceiling

I could live with a solid ceiling as well. Solid ceilings tend to create far less backroutes than solid edges, so turning deadly ceilings solid will not break many levels.
From a purely game mechanics point of view, this might work pretty well. However the explanation of this behavior would become even more problematic: Consider a dirt level. Why should the (empty) sky be solid, but not the edges?
Additionally it still does not solve the issue how to tell the player which sides are deadly and which are solid.

[IchoTolot]

I could live with a solid ceiling as well. Solid ceilings tend to create far less backroutes than solid edges, so turning deadly ceilings solid will not break many levels.
From a purely game mechanics point of view, this might work pretty well. However the explanation of this behavior would become even more problematic: Consider a dirt level. Why should the (empty) sky be solid, but not the edges?
Additionally it still does not solve the issue how to tell the player which sides are deadly and which are solid.

Idea that addreses 2 problems:

Make the minimap more useful + addressing the player with the status of the edges

The outer frame of the minimap could be colored: Red (+ maybe with skulls) = deadly edge     steel (or maybe black/yellow construction colors) = solid edge

Edit: Combine this with a level in the Introduction pack that uses the edges/ceiling + entry in the manual
        Explanation wise in dirt: We've got rodents in space, the medieval times, factories.....   not everything is 100% logical here

[namida]

It sounds like, mechanics-wise at least (explanation-wise can be "because that's how it is" if it needs to), we're mostly in agreement that the top should remain solid, and the bottom should remain deadly.

The sides aren't quite so universal, but it doesn't seem that too many levels would be affected by a change. Off the top of my head, I can think of that "In The Frenz-zone" (which has been now removed from LPIII) uses an electric object down one side, this was in response to level resizability rather than the edge mechanics in and of themself, but it's still due to wanting a deadly edge (without empty space on the side of the level, now that that was no longer required) in that one case. On the other hand, some other levels would be negatively impacted by it, most notably LP Omega's "The Final Tower" which, while an edge-free solution is possible, it can be a lot trickier than using the edges; and it may also make 100% impossible.

I had been thinking about the idea of clearly-indicated per level options of "wrap", "deadly" or "solid", which can be set for each edge (obviously, "wrap" would have to be set on both opposing sides). But I'm not sure how I feel about doing that...

[Minim]

I don't think "wrap" would work for the sides. Otherwise players may discover backroutes if wrap was kept on, and thus the editor having to waste time modifying the backrouted level. I see LPIV's Ten-Lem Mission as a prime example.

I personally like the idea of keeping the sides and the ceiling solid, just because I thought it would be cruel for lemmings to die just because they reached the edge or the top of the level; but as this topic is fairly controversial, I won't go further than that.

[Proxima]

It sounds like, mechanics-wise at least (explanation-wise can be "because that's how it is" if it needs to), we're mostly in agreement that the top should remain solid, and the bottom should remain deadly.

That seems rather premature: only IchoTolot has said the top should remain solid; Simon and Nepster have said they could live with it but don't prefer it.

I'm definitely in favour of deadly bottom and lateral sides: the main reason I dislike solid sides is that it allows the player to do silly things like this (13:00 in the linked video). I don't feel as strongly about the ceiling, because it doesn't let you do strange-looking things like that, but at the same time I have an intuitive feeling that if the sides are deadly because the lemming heads out of the level area and is lost to your control, the ceiling should be too. Then again, the idea of keeping the option available, and using the sides of the minimap to indicate which is applicable, seems reasonable.

[607]

I don't think we'll agree on this, so maybe providing both options would indeed be the best "solution".

[IchoTolot]

I don't think we'll agree on this, so maybe providing both options would indeed be the best "solution".

Too much options would create high inconsistancy and confusion for the player.

Regardless of the solid/deadly discussion a solution must be found to the "how to tell the player" problem. May it be the minimap frame or even around the play area.

The more i think of it and going through all the levels ----- deadly left/right sides seem more beneficial to me.     
Most of the time I just had to make them save from abusal (backroute prevention) and nearly never implememted them in the level. Hell I even went this far today and made my packs independent from the solid edges.
And none of my single levels used them as well.
 
The ceiling is different..i always used it as a limitation for climbers or even holding pits and there would be a lot of climable walls which would be deadly if the players aren't very carefully with their climbers.

However, Simon and I are meeting up this saturday and have another talk and I show him the situatiuon (together with some lix testing and bolognese)

 

[ccexplore]

the main reason I dislike solid sides is that it allows the player to do silly things like this (13:00 in the linked video).

But why would that be specifically any sillier than walkers turning around?  I would assert that those who want solid lateral sides not only wouldn't find the behavior silly, but actually very much expect that behavior, as otherwise the solidity of lateral sides won't actually serve much purpose solution-wise.

I do agree that solid sides mechanics are more proned to creating backroutes.  I don't think anyone can dispute that part--a lemming that gets killed typically doesn't help enable additional solution routes to a level.

we're mostly in agreement that the top should remain solid

If we're considering making the lateral sides' behaviors be adjustable per-level, I feel like so should the top.  It's the bottom edge that I think is the only one we can say people are truly in agreement, and that's mainly thanks to the role of gravity setting expectations (expectations that really only works because the game currently doesn't offer the ability to change a lemming's direction of gravity).

[namida]

Obviously, most users are already familiar with the solid-edge behaviour. Nepster's latest experimental version in this post has a deadly sides behaviour; please try this out if you haven't already.

[mobius]

A deadly ceiling would pretty much mean hours and hours of work, because of searching all over and making mostly climber walls save again + replay fixing (big part is user-friendlyness here). Also some levels use holding pits which are restricted through the ceiling.
I've counted over 28 levels in Reunion alone that would need work to be done if the ceiling would be deadly.
Furthermore: A few levels have Lemmings walking nearly under the ceiling (worst case onlx 3 pixels of height visible of the Lemming). If the sensitiviy would be too high here even more work would be created.

So all in all, even if I find the solid sides more logical (not more user-friendly)... I could live with deadly edges, but I have to strictly veto against a deadly ceiling
I must say the arguments for those deadly edges are good and yes even if they are unnatural to me they can make sense!
The ceiling is prob the most logical side to be solid in the first place and I highly suggest that it stays solid! (for the sake of the existing content)

I'm very surprised to hear this; I wouldn't expect as much problems with the ceiling as with the sides.
When you reference holding pits which are restricted through the ceiling; do you mean a pit that reaches the ceiling and the ceiling stops the climbers? I think of maybe one PimoLems level like this... When referring to lemmings walking near the ceiling, so that most of their body is not visible, I would agree that I think whether solid or not, this should be allowed, but I say I personally don't like a level mandating this kind of thing in the first place [might I reference a certain level called Technoir...]

I would vote for letting all this be on option, simply for the benefit of existing levels.
 

[namida]

I would vote for letting all this be on option, simply for the benefit of existing levels.

I know I considered the possibility of an option in the past, but at this point, I'm going to say an absolute no to that. Currently, the standard behaviour is that the sides (except the bottom) are solid; some authors have wanted deadly sides bad enough that they use the Deadly Sides gimmick on all their levels. With gimmicks being removed, it's the best time - and perhaps the only really suitable time - to discuss whether the edge behaviour should be changed. But ultimately - whatever it ends up being, it will be consistent across every level.

[IchoTolot]

I'm very surprised to hear this; I wouldn't expect as much problems with the ceiling as with the sides.
When you reference holding pits which are restricted through the ceiling; do you mean a pit that reaches the ceiling and the ceiling stops the climbers? I think of maybe one PimoLems level like this... When referring to lemmings walking near the ceiling, so that most of their body is not visible, I would agree that I think whether solid or not, this should be allowed, but I say I personally don't like a level mandating this kind of thing in the first place [might I reference a certain level called Technoir...]

I would vote for letting all this be on option, simply for the benefit of existing levels.

Mostly it are climber walls, but a lot of them and I mean even the walls which are not needed, but could cause the player trouble, because I don't want to punish the player for using a climber ever so slightly different especially in the early ranks.

Obviously I vote for deadly, as it prevents backroutes from happening + doesn't make it nessesary to stratch out a level as much to keep the player from abusing the walls + using the sides actively in a intended solution is kinda dirty.
But here I have to say even with deadly walls they should not actively be used as a "deadly wall" as I mentioned in another thread. They should interfere as little as possible in a level. If the player tries to build a bridge out of the main area they should still punish him, but using them to compress the level size to a minimum is not the correct way here I think.

Also making your levels independent from the solid sides isn't much work I can assure you, möbius 

Example from "Return of the tribes" currently the sides are solid, but as I know Nepster this will change:


Here sth like a little water pit left and right would indicate directly that the climber cannot go to the sides, instead of relying on the deadly sides. This would make the level slightly bigger, but I think it is worth it.

And now an example from my single levels to show the opposite case:

 
Here I originally planned to use the solid side, but Simon convinced me that a steel wall is much more honest.

This is still one of the most inconsistant behaviors across all Lemnming games and as a designer you should not rely on them regulary as part of the solution.

I originally wanted to make a "level design" topic about the not using the sides stuff and I still may do so, but for now this should work

[Dullstar]

Originally I was leaning towards solid sides, but I think it would be better to make them deadly.  If you want solid sides, it's not difficult to put steel on the sides of the level and comes with the added bonus of not being misleading.

HOWEVER, I think the ceiling should be solid.