So I have a color changing background in the digital tileset (The one for Cyber Track zone) that has 32 smooth transitioning frames but when i tested it, It didn't animate, I'm sure it has something to do with the background and how its programmed but im not entirely sure
They aren't meant to. If there's enough interest I can look at changing this, but it's not a bug, it's what's meant to happen.
Animated backgrounds could be cool. I'd be down for that.
for example lik someone's background could have twinkling stars
i dont want moving backgrounds, how distracting! non moving ones are bad enough
Isn't it what clear physics mode is for, if you don't want things like backgrounds? Maybe I'm wrong and there isn't a way to just hide the background altogether.
Obviously one can go overboard and end up with something really annoying but that's a matter of restraint. You can argue that if a player is willing to see a background image in first place, then animation at least makes it more obvious that something is background rather than getting confused with regular terrain.
Ultimately this feels no different than animated decorative objects that do not affect lemmings. Not sure if those current exists in NL but animated background would not be all that different?
I want a solid color for bg, no fluff. Non-terrain decoration is a nuisance, whether animated or not. I want to tell the game permanently to hide bg and deco. Designers can then make gently animated bgs and I won't care.
NL doesn't yet offer this switch (show no-effect yes/no) because exit tops are still separate from exits. What an infuriating design burden. Everybody must see exit tops! Oh my, they happen to be the same subclass type flag as fake terrain. Let's force fake terrain down everybody's throats because that must be the lesser evil.
NL offers to hide backgrounds, but that option doesn't do entirely what I want.
Clear physics is important, but ugly. You clarify unclear tilesets with it, then go back to regular view.
-- Simon
Doesn't NL already have this? What about the moving bees from the honeycomb tileset??
Quote from: GigaLem on April 19, 2017, 03:16:22 AM
for example lik someone's background could have twinkling stars
this is a nice idea.
Is it only for the styles that were based on Lemmings 1 and ONML that still have the separate exit tops? While exact reasons likely lost to history, it is almost certainly the case that it was done that way in the original games solely as a storage-saving measure. Even Lemmings 2 stopped doing that anymore.
Point being, if it is confined to a few specific NL styles, maybe we can special case it to treat the few known exit top objects differently just for those few styles.
Quote from: möbius on April 20, 2017, 12:49:27 AM
Doesn't NL already have this?
"This" hides moving bgs, but not decoration.
I want "this" to hide everything no-effect.
-- Simon
Quote from: ccexplore on April 20, 2017, 12:49:55 AM
Is it only for the styles that were based on Lemmings 1 and ONML that still have the separate exit tops? While exact reasons likely lost to history, it is almost certainly the case that it was done that way in the original games solely as a storage-saving measure. Even Lemmings 2 stopped doing that anymore.
Point being, if it is confined to a few specific NL styles, maybe we can special case it to treat the few known exit top objects differently just for those few styles.
Not specific, unfortunately.
NL has locked exits with a separate animation for tops and door. Implemented with exit tops. The game can't distinguish these tops from the fake terrain that causes endless horror.
-- Simon
I like how this topic was about backgrounds images animating and somehow it got turned into (another) rant against backgrounds in general and fake terrain and animating exit tops. That was sarcastic; as in; I don't like this.
Quote from: Simon on April 20, 2017, 12:50:42 AM
Quote from: möbius on April 20, 2017, 12:49:27 AM
Doesn't NL already have this?
"This" hides moving bgs, but not decoration.
I want "this" to hide everything no-effect.
-- Simon
By "this" I meant moving background images. I thought the bees were that, apparently they are not. Maybe they are just an object.
We know you hate backgrounds and anything that might distract gameplay (something very subjective)
I agree with möbius here that turning every single discussion into a rant calling everything horrible that doesn't confirm to ones preferences is not the right way.
After thinking a bit I've come to a conclusion:
I myself am a bit too harsh to the hidden trap topic as well and should simply stick more to criticise and point out where they pop up with no additional rant to decrease the occurances of these. Lemmings is not and should not be the clean as a lab experience in every single aspect -- levels have their edges and corners that not everybody will like. Some tolerate them, some despise them and others like them.
This is the case with big levels, tiny levels, trap levels, levels with decorative objects, glider levels, Hard for Flopsy levels, precise levels.........endless list here. The only variance is that the percentages of people in the three grounps (like, neutral, dislike) shifts. Making the time easier for the ones that despise them (see clear physics) is a good way though. An additional switch to turn off the decorative objects should do the trick. Anymore ranting and raging after that I would call overreacting.
The clean lab....That's what I fear Lix singleplayer has already become with the removal of VRR, timers and the fact that still no music is there. A clean lab that has no roughness and edges and lacks in ambience therefor. Everything scaled down to a tiny clean level with no tolerance for decoration, surrondings and personal notes. Everything that's not 100% confirm with the basic core elements is gone -- this can be a very bad thing.
Maybe this statement should have gone in a new topic of it's own against rants and for living in peace with all the aspects of Lemming level design and celebrate diversity. :P
But now to the actual topic:
I can see animated backgrounds as a possible hassard, but as you already have the ability to turn them off I think allowing them is alright. If you don't like a background turn it off and I will do that as well to the ones that do not live in harmony with terrain and are just a major distraction.
I like the twinkling stars idea as well. But I would like turn sth off like Aty's rain effect he uses on some levels ;)
Quote from: GigaLem on April 19, 2017, 03:16:22 AM
someone's background could have twinkling stars
I feel that namida's approach to this in his LemPlus Space style is more suitable for stars: Make them (moving) background objects with random start frame. This offers a lot more freedom than a fixed twinkling star background.
On the general topic: Already with the static backgrounds one has to be very careful to keep them in subdued colors and to properly distínguish them from actual terrain. I fear that this problems becomes even more prominent with animated backgrounds. Something like GigaLem's original suggestion might work, if using dark colors and if the color change isn't done too fast - one might even need more than 32 frames just to change between two colors. A lot of other ideas will likely only annoy and distract players.
Therefore I am not sure, if we need an extra code just for the few cases where one wants to have animated background. Especially as we have dedicated background images mainly to speed up rendering. But we won't have this advantage with animated backgrounds. So style designers might as well just add the backgrounds as movable background objects. ("Movable" is imporatant, so that people like me may play the level without the backgrounds!)
Once we move to the new file-type version of NeoLemmix, we will even be able to resize such objects. So level designers will no longer have to put lots of copies of this object in their level, but can just use one resized one.
Quote from: möbius on April 20, 2017, 01:03:48 AM
By "this" I meant moving background images. I thought the bees were that, apparently they are not. Maybe they are just an object.
The bees are moving background objects, and can be hidden by the appropriate setting.
Sorry but I have to go off topic
Can't say I was pleasantly surprised of the reactions of this thread, but I will agree with Icho here.
If people can't have a edge that gives them their shine, it'll make Neolemmix & Co. really boring.
No one is perfect, no level is perfect, you shouldn't force perfection into a level, just stride for it.
Which is one of the reasons why I take so long to make level, I have to think about something Fresh, and unique.
---I was in a grumpy mood the other night and I'm sorry that I came across pretty harsh.
Anyways, my main thing is just because something was done poorly in the past or has (even a lot of) bad examples doesn't mean it can't be done right. I just am getting a little tired of new ideas somewhat consistently getting shat upon here. I admit all ideas are not great and maybe even most ideas aren't good. But they should be given a fair chance.
-----
so as with any background; if it's animated it just kind of goes without saying, imo, how they should be done but again, this is rather subjective. I know how I would design something like this but at this point it seems rather pointless to go into detail. Becaaaaaaaaaause it seems that people just keep doing it their way anyway regardless of many multiple suggestions/rants to tell people to do it a different way :P Which I'm not saying is right or wrong...
----
I *think* I might prefer Nepster's suggestion of using objects). Using objects would at least give you more freedom for being artistic.
Quote from: Nepster on April 20, 2017, 03:59:48 PM
Quote from: GigaLem on April 19, 2017, 03:16:22 AM
someone's background could have twinkling stars
I feel that namida's approach to this in his LemPlus Space style is more suitable for stars: Make them (moving) background objects with random start frame. This offers a lot more freedom than a fixed twinkling star background.
Quote from: möbius on April 20, 2017, 01:03:48 AM
By "this" I meant moving background images. I thought the bees were that, apparently they are not. Maybe they are just an object.
The bees are moving background objects, and can be hidden by the appropriate setting.
wait what??? I'm so confused now. I have not yet used this feature yet. If I get time soon I will look into this because obviously I'm missing something. IfIf this already exists, then why is there even an issue of moving backgrounds not being possible?
Quote from: IchoTolotturning every single discussion into a rant calling everything horrible
Quote from: GigaLemCan't say I was pleasantly surprised of the reactions
If people can't have a edge that gives them their shine
Quote from: möbiusjust am getting a little tired of new ideas somewhat consistently getting shat upon here.
???
I've always approved animated backgrounds. You put them in the levels and I hide them.
The rant goes precisely against how the game organizes backgrounds/decorations/... and how its options cannot capture important player needs. Not against animated backgrounds.
Quote from: möbiussomehow it got turned into (another) rant against backgrounds in general and fake terrain and animating exit tops.
Yeah. It's a separate issue. Sorry for mixing it with this thread's suggestion. The game's many similar types confused me.
-- Simon
Sorry, GigaLem. It was not my intention to upset you. So please let me try to explain my point in a hopefully more neutral way:
Why do we have background images?Apart from automatic paving, background images are just moving background objects (which should better be named as move
able background objects) without animations nor the ability to move around. So why do we have these two different types of objects? Graphic style designers and level creators could do everything (almost) equally well if all background images would be turned into movable background objects. But players of said levels want that the game runs smoothly even for large levels with lots of objects and on an old computer. As backgrounds have to be drawn on the whole level, i.e. on a very large area, they tend to create a lot of work for the computer. So we tried to optimize the drawing procedure and it turned out that it can be optimized very well, as long as the background is static, i.e. does not change from frame to frame. So to be able to use this optimization, background images were created that deliberately do not have all the features one could imagine.
As a graphic style designer: If I have a sprite for a background, what object type should I use?No trigger object, a.k.a. decoration piece:
- If the piece is an exit top.
- If you want to trigger more rants by Simon. ;P
Moving background:
- If your object has any kind of animation.
- If your object should (have the ability to) move around in the level.
- If your object should only appear a few times on the screen or if you want to give the level designer the frexibility to put it whereever they want it.
Background Image:
- The rest: If your object is not animated, and the background should be paved with this image.
I hope this helps you to decide what kind of object to use. So, GigaLem, please add your color-changing background as a moving background object. :thumbsup:
But moving background are not the same as animated backgrounds. Moving backgrounds have to move in a straight line or not at all, whereas animated backgrounds can have subtle back and forth movements, flashing lights, etc. that cannot be obtained with moving backgrounds, and making too many "decoration" objects is not nice either as this adds a lot of menial work for level designers, and would deter people from making levels in that graphic set.
Moving backgrounds may have an animation (e.g. the stars in namida's Space style). So they
can have subtle back and forth movements, ... You just can't do it with a static image and setting a movement in the level editor, but have to set the animation already when creating the style. ;)
Quote from: Colorful Arty on April 21, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
...and making too many "decoration" objects is not nice either as this adds a lot of menial work for level designers, and would deter people from making levels in that graphic set.
Currently this is true, but when we (hopefully soon) move to the new file-type version, you will be able to resize background objects. So the workload of level designers is to place one object in the level and set its size correctly, instead of selecting the correct background image. I think we can ask this of level designers.
Quote from: Colorful Arty on April 21, 2017, 04:58:16 PM
But moving background are not the same as animated backgrounds. Moving backgrounds have to move in a straight line or not at all, whereas animated backgrounds can have subtle back and forth movements, flashing lights, etc. that cannot be obtained with moving backgrounds, and making too many "decoration" objects is not nice either as this adds a lot of menial work for level designers, and would deter people from making levels in that graphic set.
I was gonna say the same thing
The main problem with having it as moving background is that i have to place it myself over and over and over again, where as a animated background does it for you without slowing neolemmix down
Quote from: GigaLem on April 21, 2017, 07:04:56 PM
The main problem with having it as moving background is that i have to place it myself over and over and over again, [...]
Sorry, but this is the best solution we can currently offer you. For future improvements that tackle exactly this problem (and are already coded), please see the second half of my reply #19.
Quote from: GigaLem on April 21, 2017, 07:04:56 PM
[...]where as a animated background does it for you without slowing neolemmix down
This is simply not true: An animated background will either slow down NeoLemmix or will require two to three times as much memory as the current NeoLemmix version.