Another juicy one! Nice to see
OK, lots to reply to here, so I'll be as concise as I can. I'm pretty sure I know how I feel about this, but there are some very good points being made here on both sides.
We have other skills that are similar, like fencer/laserer.
I'm seriously considering culling the Fencer for just this reason, but... it probably won't happen for a while, and will be very much dependent on what sort of
new made-for-SLX content gets released over the next year or so.
I can say the stoner is always the biggest obstacle with changing the packs over for me. Adding the stoner back will make conversion faster and easier
Let's discuss the finer points of NeoLemmix backwards-compatibility
here. Meanwhile, if there is a good reason to bring back the Stoner for
new content which sits well with SuperLemmix's feature set, then that's a better angle to come at it from.
Many levels requiring the stoner/stacker interaction can't be replicated; the freezer/laserer will often laser far too much and the fencer won't create a step in the freezer block.
One thing is that you can't do the Stacker/Stoner trick to make a large step
All of these are fiddly, finicky interactions which
require framestepping to execute. I'm
glad SuperLemmix makes this sort of thing difficult or impossible, because it means that hopefully we'll see less of it going forward!
Some level packs aim for a creepy vibe ... and the stoner adds a nice element to those levels
Good point here, the Stoner does play better into a spookier aesthetic. The Kill All Zombies talisman in SLX invites zombie/death-themed levels, so... yes, I can see how the Stoner could be a good fit in this regard.
nor can a Miner clear an ice block on flat ground with a single swing
Use a Stacker instead? Or, create a level based on the fact that the Miner alone can't clear it?
Incidentally, the Miner
can be used to rescue the Frozen lem with a single swing
The fact that the Stoner is sacrificial too adds an element of strategy too
Can you elaborate on this? Yes, it's sacrificial, but how does that play into "strategy"? Either the skill needs to be used, or it doesn't. Whether or not it costs a lem is not necessarily strategy-related.
it's nice to have plenty of tools in the toolbox.
There does come a point where it just feels like bloat, though, and it's diminishing returns. Sometimes, being more limited can make creativity easier.
Having rattled off that particular cliche though, I do generally agree that more is better. The Stoner can be considered for a comeback, but I'd need to see better reasons than "existing content" and "it's better to have it and not need it".
as some have pointed out there are some mechanics that don't work as well when it's replaced with the freezer
I'm glad you said this, because it's helped me to realise one of the things that's irking me a little bit in this topic:
the Freezer, I would assert, ought no longer to be seen as a "replacement" for the Stoner; it's already very much evolved into a skill in its own right.
Some reasons: the shape is totally different and much less fiddly to work with, it's non-sacrificial and yet it does take the lem somewhat out of action in a similar way to the Blocker (except it can be stopped in mid-air, unlike the Blocker),
it's zombie-proof, and - one of the things I'm proudest of with the latest update - it can be used to stop a Timebomber in midair (no other skill can do this)! Furthermore, since it can be assigned in midair, it's another way to get a lem down from a height, providing it can later be rescued.
There are
some similarities to the Stoner, though - it can be used to nudge Swimmers downwards (an update that was made, incidentally, not because it broke an existing level, but because it improves the skill generally), and it is a relatively immediate "Blocker"-type skill that can't be climbed over. There's more to the Freezer than that, though, and to be honest I'm excited to see what kind of levels might be created that make use of its surprising versatility.
If anything, the freezer is best suited to fresh and newly created levels instead of existing levels in existing level packs and shaking that world up
Yes, this. Excellently put
radiation and slowfreeze
I'm not too familiar with these features to be honest...?
NL encourages players to make use of framestepping and fine control, and encourages developers to allow for the range of tools that are available. SLX encourages "classic mode" and a playstyle based on that of the original games.
...
My suggestion to WillLem would be to call a halt to new content for now and encourage more testing of levels to make sure that all packs available on the SLX board can be completed in Classic Mode.
This is pretty much exactly my feeling here. If people want to port NL content over, I won't stand in the way, but nor will I go out of my way to support it and certainly won't make significant changes in SLX to make sure it works.
And yes, I strongly advocate the notion that
if a level can't be played and completed in Classic Mode, it's not a good fit for SuperLemmix. For the upcoming 2.4 release, the DMA levels have all had a "Play in Classic Mode" talisman added to them, and I'd keenly encourage designers to make use of this feature in their own levels.
I would also advice to specifically make packs suited for SuperLemmix core philosophies.
...
Giving SLX its own identity is worth much more than trying to port over everything.
Always nice to be agreeing with Icho after our many disagreements over the years!
Yes, we need to be clear on this: NL levels are made for NL - they can be more puzzle-focused
not only because the player tools allow for this, but also
because their use is actively encouraged in order to make more obscure and challenging level solutions possible.
SuperLemmix has not entirely turned away from this, either - the same tools are still available (apart from projection shadows, I always thought that was taking the "picture puzzle" thing
way too far) - but, it makes more sense to lean into the unique feature set (Classic Mode, more execution-focused skills such as Grenader, Timebomber, Freezer), embrace SLX for what it is, and aim to
make interesting levels which do not rely on the helper tools.
We want to play a few old packs, and play a few new packs too. I even like having some of the new features in the older packs.
Yes, this is mostly the reason why I would port any previous content over: either to remix it to include the new features, or to re-frame it in a "have a go at playing this pack in a more traditional style" package. Classic Mode and Timebombers allow very early packs such as
GeoffLems and
NepsterLems to be played almost exactly like L1, which is an exciting prospect.
SuperLemminiToo gets close to this experience, but still has framestepping and optional insta-bombers (the latter of which is actually the source of several large bugs which ended up putting me off the engine entirely).
The less skills I have available the more builder-heavy my own levels get and unique skills help with this.
There are currently 24 available skills. From a level design POV, I'd encourage you to have a play with what's there - you might be surprised at what's possible!
I am not making a big statement about the stoner though, but simply adding it for conversion purposes I would call a flawed idea - I would suggest maybe making an extra "where do you want to go with SLX" topic though and see where you all stand!
Not a bad idea, I think a few people on the forums might benefit from a more general discussion about where SLX is headed. It's already way more than I imagined it would be, so it's more than surpassed the "Will doing everything he's always wanted to do" phase of its development - discussion can absolutely be had about the engine's future, for sure.
I don't understand why there is a need or rush to port everything over to SLX ASAP
Agreed. I'm far more excited about seeing new levels than ports.
I'm guessing it's about having
something to play in SuperLemmix whilst new content is thin on the ground, which I suppose is inevitable. Once 2.4 is released and stable, I'll likely get back to making level packs; new ones that explore SLX's features are very much needed.
In short, if I ever want to return to execution-based engines or have timed bombers, I always have Lemmini/SuperLemmini for that! Yes, SLX has this with classic mode
Classic Mode is
way more than just "being like Lemmini" - it affects more aspects of the gameplay than you might think (if you haven't tried it yet), and is far closer to the experience of playing Lemmings on the Amiga than in Lemmini. Just sayin'
Also, you can rewind in SLX (even in Classic Mode), which you can't do in Lemmini. Rewind mode is designed with real-time play in mind, so it can't be used for making precision edits like with framestepping, but it allows a player to undo a mistake without having to replay from the start.
With that said, I'm fully expecting that it will take a while before SLX develops any sort of consistent "user-base", and that's mostly a good thing because it means we can develop it more fully before people start committing large amounts of content to it.
So , what if someone is not interested at all on the Classic mode , but they are very interested on the Spearer and Grenader skills , for example , and they want to use them a lot for the pack they will make, but they want their pack , to contain , a lot of very technical and demanding puzzles, that will not be possible on the Classic mode at all?
Excellent question. I'd say that of course such levels can be made for SuperLemmix, since the helper tools which make more precise and frame-perfect assignments possible do still exist on this engine (and will continue to do so).
However, so far every single level I've made requiring Grenaders and/or Spearers (admittedly, there haven't been many) can be played in Classic Mode. I would hope that "playable in Classic Mode
and technically difficult" becomes something of a standard for the harder, more challenging levels to aim for.
And again - the moment a player has to
rely on helper tools to complete the level, as opposed to use them for the sake of making gameplay easier, the level has crossed a line into "picture puzzle" territory, which SLX is aiming to turn away from (but not outright discourage or prevent).
As all good topics tend to do, this one kind of got away from itself a bit with the subject matter. I'd say that the following pretty much sums up where I'm currently at with bringing back the Stoner:
- I'm not outright against the idea of bringing the Stoner back, but I need better reasons than "existing content" and/or "it would be nice to have it even if we don't need it"
- Stoner skill applications that require framestepping to execute are, IMHO, reasons not to bring it back!
- It's more likely that I'd want to encourage a period of SLX-focused level creation and see where we're at after a certain amount of time has passed, before considering reinstating culled features
- SuperLemmix has the potential to develop its own unique identity and purpose, and we should seek to explore that potential as a community so that it can coexist with the other available engines as an interesting and compelling alternative - this is more important than rushing to make sure that every previous pack is playable
- With that said, I'm not going to discourage the porting of existing content (if only because it's good to have something to play whilst fresh content is in short supply), but nor am I going to do anything to actively support it unless it would improve SuperLemmix more generally
I hope that's fair. More than happy to discuss this further, the topic will stay open.
