What is Direct Drop?Essentially, this:
(https://i.imgur.com/oipJSqT.gif)
Midair exiting is also of interest here:
(https://i.imgur.com/tTYQXuj.gif)
Which Lemmings (1991) Ports/Engines Feature Direct Drop?| Port | Direct Drop for Exits | | Direct Drop for Traps | | Midair Exits | | Midair Traps |
| Amiga | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| Apple Mac | No | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed |
| Atari ST | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed |
| DOS | Yes | Yes | No | Yes |
| PC-98 | Yes | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed |
| SEGA MegaDrive/Genesis | Yes | Unconfirmed | No | Unconfirmed |
| SEGA Master System | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed |
| SNES | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| Sony PlayStation (2/PSP) | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed |
| Windows '95 | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| ZX Spectrum | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed | Unconfirmed |
For clones, the info here refers to the latest stable version:
|
| Clone | Direct Drop for Exits | | Direct Drop for Traps | | Midair Exits | | Midair Traps |
| Lix | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| NeoLemmix | No | Yes | No | Yes |
| SuperLemmix | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
Which Lemmings (1991) Levels Can Be Solved Using Direct Drop?List of L1 (Amiga port) levels for which a DD solution is possible (i.e. the entire quota of required lems to pass the level can be dropped into the exit from an otherwise unsurvivable fall distance). If the DD solution is therefore a backroute, this is noted with an asterisk*:
L1 levels for which a Direct Drop solution is possible
Fun 5 You Need Bashers This Time
Fun 8 Not As Complicated As It Looks
Fun 9 As Long As You Try Your Best
Fun 10 Smile If You Love Lemmings
Fun 11 Keep Your Hair On Mr. Lemming
Fun 12 Patience
Fun 14 Origins And Lemmings
Fun 16 Don't Do Anything Too Hasty
Fun 17 Easy When You Know How
Fun 19 Take Good Care Of My Lemmings
Fun 20 We Are Now At LEMCON ONE
Fun 21 You Live And Lem
Fun 22 A BEAST Of A Level
Fun 23 I've Lost That Lemming Feeling
Fun 24 Konbanwa Lemming San
Fun 25 Lemmings Lemmings Everywhere
Fun 26 Nightmare On Lem Street
Fun 27 Let's Be Careful Out There
Fun 28 If Only They Could Fly
Fun 30 Lock Up Your Lemmings
Tricky 1 This Should Be A Doddle
Tricky 4 Here's One I Prepared Earlier
Tricky 5 Careless Clicking Costs Lives
Tricky 6 Lemmingology
Tricky 7 Been There, Seen It, Done It
Tricky 10 There's A Lot Of Them About
Tricky 11 Lemmings In The Attic
Tricky 12 Bitter Lemming
Tricky 13 Lemming Drops
Tricky 14 MENACING!!
Tricky 16 Luvly Jubly
Tricky 21 All The 6s
Tricky 22 Turn Around Young Lemmings
Tricky 25 Cascade
Tricky 26 I Have A Cunning Plan*
Tricky 28 Lost Something?
Tricky 29 Rainbow Island
Tricky 30 The Crankshaft
Taxing 2 Watch Out, There's Traps About
Taxing 5 The Prison
Taxing 8 The Art Gallery
Taxing 10 Izzie Wizzie Lemmings Get Busy
Taxing 12 The Ascending Pillar Scenario
Taxing 14 Hunt The Nessy
Taxing 16 Mary Poppins' Land
Taxing 17 X Marks The Spot
Taxing 18 Tribute To M.C. Escher*
Taxing 20 Walk The Web Rope
Taxing 22 Come On Over To My Place*
Mayhem 14 Pea Soup
Mayhem 17 Stepping Stones*
Mayhem 22 A BEAST II Of A Level
Mayhem 23 Going Up...
Mayhem 25 Have A Nice Day
Mayhem 28 Mind The Step
Existing Forum Discussion on Direct DropNeoLemmix - 2.00 "Disable direct drop" and "Timed bombers" options (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2251.msg53343#msg53343)
NeoLemmix - [NO-CHANGE] [DISCUSSION] [PLAYER] Direct Drop on traps and teleporters (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2549.msg56304#msg56304)
NeoLemmix - [FIXED] [BUG] [PLAYER] Falling OHNOER'S can direct drop into the exit (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2968.msg60933#msg60933)
NeoLemmix - [DISCUSSION][PLAYER] Game mechanics in general (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2526.msg55961#msg55961)
It's also briefly mentioned in these topics:
NeoLemmix - Proxima's Reviews (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=4744.msg93801#msg93801) (a review of
Lemmings DD)NeoLemmix - Immediate turn-offs (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=3926.msg90415#msg90415)
NeoLemmix - [DISC][PLAYER] Midair exit rules (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5496.msg91020#msg91020)
NeoLemmix - First Note: Don´T Make it (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6522.msg100789#msg100789)
SuperLemmix - SuperLemmix Discussion Topic (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6151.msg97893#msg97893)
SuperLemmix - [FEAT] New Exiting Mechanics (Direct Drop, etc) (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6173.msg98114#msg98114)
SuperLemmix - [DISC] NeoLemmix>SuperLemmix Levelpack Compatibility (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6315.msg98680#msg98680)
SuperLemmix - [SUG][PHYSICS] Refine Builder terrain checks (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6782.msg102855#msg102855)
Tech & Research - Glitches in Lemmings (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=1382.msg37044#msg37044)
Should Direct Drop be allowed?It's debatable (see above links to existing topics, in which the subject is discussed at length).
My own opinion on this is simple:
1) Since the goal of the level is to guide the lemming(s) to the exit,
interaction with the exit should always be allowed as long as the lemming has made contact with the exit, regardless of fall distance or any other factors. This should always have been an intended mechanic, and never regarded as a bug, especially since:
2)
If falling lems can interact with other triggered objects (traps, teleporters, etc -
excluding water and fire, which are continuous rather than triggered),
then they should also be allowed to interact with exits. Any ports/engines/clones which feature one behaviour and not the other are therefore inconsistent.
(https://i.imgur.com/fLIKU6B.gif)
I think historically, one of the considerations for ditching direct drop in modern engines was that it had the tendency to cause backroutes in custom levels. There isn't really much of a reason for level designers to use direct drop as a feature, so with the backroute consideration it's more of a nuisance.
Regarding your table of where it works, isn't there at least some engine where direct drop only works if the exit trigger area is on terrain (so the lemmings go home instead of splatting, but they would fall through an exit that's in mid-air)? So I think it's more nuanced than "it either works or it doesn't".
Quote2) If falling lems can interact with traps, water, fire and other objects, then they should also be allowed to interact with exits. Any ports/engines/clones which feature one behaviour and not the other are therefore inconsistent.
Comparing permanent traps (like fire and water) to exits in this context feels like comparing apples and oranges. Many triggered trap on the other hand are quite similar.
Should triggered traps allow for direct drop? Arguably that depends on the design of the trap. For example, it makes sense for the ONML rock chameleon to catch lemmings in mid-air. It makes little sense for the 10-ton trap to squish lemmings in mid-air. Even without exits in the mix, you have to make a call which will feel weird for some traps (unless you want to introduce different trap types, which would be a whole new rabbit hole...).
Thanks for the comments, geoo.
Quote from: geoo on July 01, 2024, 08:27:13 AM
one of the considerations for ditching direct drop in modern engines was that it had the tendency to cause backroutes in custom levels
This is something I could debate at length, but I'll try to keep it concise. The supposed tendency for direct drop to cause backroutes doesn't, in my opinion, override the principle that trigger contact should result in interaction. The lem meets the exit trigger before they meet the ground; from any point of view (level design, programming, gameplay, etc), this meeting should be meaningful.
Quote from: geoo on July 01, 2024, 08:27:13 AM
There isn't really much of a reason for level designers to use direct drop as a feature
I completely disagree (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5307.msg88715#msg88715) :lemcat:
Quote from: geoo on July 01, 2024, 08:27:13 AM
Regarding your table of where it works, isn't there at least some engine where direct drop only works if the exit trigger area is on terrain (so the lemmings go home instead of splatting, but they would fall through an exit that's in mid-air)? So I think it's more nuanced than "it either works or it doesn't".
Good shout, I've added these columns to the table. Hopefully, we can fill that table in and see which ports behave in which ways. It'd be interesting to see the variety of interactions across the varous ports. I have ready access to Amiga, PS2 and Windows '95 Lemmings. I could fire up the Genesis and SNES emulators as well (if nobody else beats me to it).
Quote from: geoo on July 01, 2024, 08:27:13 AM
Should triggered traps allow for direct drop? Arguably that depends on the design of the trap. For example, it makes sense for the ONML rock chameleon to catch lemmings in mid-air. It makes little sense for the 10-ton trap to squish lemmings in mid-air.
Yes, in-game aesthetics begin to become important. We see that the exit has "steps", and so the lemming must ascend those steps. This adds weight to the "lem must land safely first" argument.
However, exits can have a variety of designs (especially now that we have custom content), as can traps. So, it seems best to decide on a physics system which applies to all objects, to some extent regardless of aesthetics. Whatever the decision, if a 10-ton trap
can squash lems in midair on any given platform/engine, lems should definitely be able to exit in midair on that same platform/engine.
So, in order of preference:
1) Direct drop and midair interaction (applied to both exits and traps)
2) No direct drop and no midair interaction (applied to both exits and traps)
3 onwards) Any other combination
Quote from: WillLem on July 01, 2024, 01:42:05 PMI could fire up the Genesis and SNES emulators as well (if nobody else beats me to it)
Genesis does have direct drop -- it's pretty well-known because of how blatant some of its direct drop backroutes are:
(http://www.neolemmix.com/levelimg/extra/0301.png)
Mac Lemmings does not.
Quote
| Clone | Direct Drop for Exits |
| NeoLemmix | No |
I'm sure you're aware, but it's technically a yes/no for NL depending on the player version. Yes for NL versions before 1.43n, no for this and all NL player versions beyond that.
As for the rest of the Dos row, I'm sure it's a straight "yes" for all of them. I can confirm later on by posting again ;)
Quote from: geoo on July 01, 2024, 08:27:13 AM
isn't there at least some engine where direct drop only works if the exit trigger area is on terrain (so the lemmings go home instead of splatting, but they would fall through an exit that's in mid-air)?
Quote from: Proxima on July 01, 2024, 02:21:09 PM
Genesis does have direct drop -- it's pretty well-known because of how blatant some of its direct drop backroutes are
Turns out it's Genesis / MegaDrive (and possibly others that are still unconfirmed) that behaves this way - so, DD on terrain but no midair exit access. I've updated the table with this.
Also added SNES info.
Quote from: Proxima on July 01, 2024, 02:21:09 PM
Mac Lemmings does not.
Added this for exits - do you happen to know about the other columns?
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 02, 2024, 06:20:34 AM
I'm sure you're aware, but it's technically a yes/no for NL depending on the player version. Yes for NL versions before 1.43n, no for this and all NL player versions beyond that.
Interesting to know, but for the purposes of completing the table it seems best just to keep it to the latest stable and/or supported version of each.
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 02, 2024, 06:20:34 AM
As for the rest of the Dos row, I'm sure it's a straight "yes" for all of them. I can confirm later on by posting again ;)
Good shout, let me know your findings! :)
Tested, and for Dos it's Yes for everything except midair exits. However, like NL, floaters can exit midair. Fallers will simply fall past the exit, again just like NL.
Quote from: WillLem on July 02, 2024, 12:55:37 PM
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 02, 2024, 06:20:34 AM
I'm sure you're aware, but it's technically a yes/no for NL depending on the player version. Yes for NL versions before 1.43n, no for this and all NL player versions beyond that.
Interesting to know, but for the purposes of completing the table it seems best just to keep it to the latest stable and/or supported version of each.
Fair enough. In that case, I would put (New Formats) or something like that after NL ;) Same thing with your level sides topic, since you will recall that the edge behaviors are different depending on the NL format/player
Personally, when it comes to the old games/engines , I liked that they supported direct drop.
But when it comes to the modern engines , my opinion , is strongly against direct drop.
And the reason for that , is because the modern engines allow the creation of very tall levels. And especially the levels that are really tall , while having relatively small width ( compared to their height). These levels, have the biggest potential to be affected by direct drop. And the existence of direct drop has the potential to be detrimental to their gameplay and solution.
Imagine spending a lot of time, to build a really, tall level, with the exit , on the bottom part of it.
And also having , a pretty complex, nuanced , and hard to find path , that the player needs to find , in order to lead the lemmings to the exit. But the player instead , just casually finds a backroute on your level , that allows them , to use direct drop to their advantage, and suddenly, you see the all lemmings your level contains , to casually falling from 1500 pixels height , to the exit, and just casually exiting, after having fallen, from the height, that I've just described!
And just putting terrain above, above the exit, is not always the best solution. What if If I want , in a very tall level , in an engine that allows direct drop , to have some floaters landing normally from very large height, on the exit , and exiting , while at the same time, not allowing normal lemmings do the same?
In comparison, if I want to simulate direct drop, in a very tall level , in an engine, that doesn't have direct drop enabled , I can just, put an updraft , just above the exit, so I will have direct drop , perfectly simulated , and the lemmings, safely falling from a very large height to the exit. In the previous scenario, that I described, in the engine that has direct drop enabled, I don't have that luxury.
In short , very tall levels, are one of my favourite types of levels. But these levels may have their own needs , that may be different, compared to the needs of more regular levels.
That's why imo , having direct drop disabled, may benefit them more, than having direct drop enabled.
And that also makes the discussion and comparison , between older ports and engines , mostly meaningless imo! How many of the older ports/engines contained levels , that are over 1000 pixels tall?
Also when discussing how the physics should work, I think gameplay and puzzle quality, should take priority, over consistency between different mechanisms.
Consider the actual visual representations of objects, i.e. how they are presented to the player, not how the game sees them internally.
Water and continuous traps such as fire don't represent an inconsistency regardless of how direct drop is handled. For example, suppose you enter a fire: it doesn't matter if you walked into it, fell into it, flew, whatever: by occupying the space you are getting completely roasted. The experience is probably not going to be particularly good for your health, to say the least. If you fall into water, you are in the water now; falling will not cause you to pass through it.
Many triggered traps, on the other hand, involve an object that doesn't really pose an active threat to your health until the trigger has been activated. Most of these traps appear to be something along the lines of pressure plates, but you could imagine a variety of mechanisms. A pressure plate would only activate if you stepped on it. A tripwire, on the other hand, can be triggered by passing through the space. While the game implements them all the same, it wouldn't necessarily be unreasonable for individual traps to have different rules about whether fallers should be able to trigger them. On the other hand, it's not really needed, because the game is consistent about how different types of traps are placed. Most of them are always placed on the ground, but for example the pillar spike trap is always attached to a wall (and thus its trigger area is mid-air). Because of this, allowing them to work mid-air is quite convenient: it means the spike traps can share code with the other traps, and since the other traps are going to be on the ground anyway, it doesn't really meaningfully change their behavior (if they fail to trigger the trap mid-air, then they just immediately trigger it when they land). Similarly, direct drop into a trap generally doesn't change things much; the lemming is dead either way and the only real difference is what goes on the death certificate. While you could certainly make a level relying on the behavior (a triggered trap can only kill one lemming at a time and splatters are already doomed, thus a trap triggered by a splatter is effectively wasting its time), none of the official levels do (nor do they really contain direct drops onto traps at all, unless you intentionally go out of your way to make it happen). Arguably for most traps the most logical behavior would be for a mix of the two where the lemming splats but the trap is still triggered regardless.
The visual design of exits is basically a building with stairs, and in official levels. I mean, judging from the door, it looks like there's a portal too, but it looks more like the sort of portal you would have to walk into, rather than one that sucks you in. The animations and boing sound effect also seem to communicate more that the Lemmings actively leap into the exit, rather than passively get sucked in. Thus, this suggests direct drop is probably an oversight rather than an intended feature: because the exit doesn't appear to be sucking them in, how exactly would it break a fall?
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 02, 2024, 01:48:12 PM
Tested, and for Dos it's Yes for everything except midair exits.
Thanks for the info, I've added this to the table.
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 02, 2024, 01:48:12 PM
Fair enough. In that case, I would put (New Formats) or something like that after NL
I don't think that's necessary tbh. By not specifying anything, it's reasonable to assume we're referring to the most recent stable version.
If it becomes necessary due to further discussion, then I'll add version details for clarification. Otherwise, we can leave it as it is.
Quote from: Turrican on July 03, 2024, 04:07:00 AM
when it comes to the modern engines , my opinion , is strongly against direct drop.
...
And the reason for that , is because the modern engines allow the creation of very tall levels
...
Imagine spending a lot of time, to build a really, tall level, with the exit , on the bottom part of it.
And also having , a pretty complex, nuanced , and hard to find path , that the player needs to find , in order to lead the lemmings to the exit. But the player instead , just casually finds a backroute on your level , that allows them , to use direct drop to their advantage, and suddenly, you see the all lemmings your level contains , to casually falling from 1500 pixels height , to the exit, and just casually exiting, after having fallen, from the height, that I've just described!
Ah, the old "it breaks my level" argument. Difficult to really discuss that because yes, you're right, in that very specific scenario your level would be broken.
But that doesn't mean the entire engine physics should be tailored to that one specific scenario.
Also, a valid counter-argument might be that it actually
isn't as easy as you might think to backroute a level using direct drop. I've done tests across various platforms so far, and in most cases it's really quite difficult to contrive a direct drop scenario when the level isn't specifically set up for it. If a player has worked hard to find a route that facilitates a direct drop solution, why shouldn't they be rewarded for finding that solution?
We have 3 currently-maintained custom engines, 2 of which don't support direct drop, 1 of which does. I'd say that's fair enough in terms of level design options!
Quote from: Turrican on July 03, 2024, 04:07:00 AM
In short , very tall levels, are one of my favourite types of levels. But these levels may have their own needs , that may be different, compared to the needs of more regular levels.
The uncomfortable conclusion here is that Lix or NeoLemmix are probably better suited to those types of levels, then! For contrast, here are a few examples of level types that aren't supported by Lix or NeoLemmix (but
are supported by SuperLemmix):
- Levels requiring lemmings to exit in midair (without providing Floaters or Gliders)
- Levels featuring Ballooner, Grenader, Spearer, etc (i.e. the new SLX-exclusive skills)
- Levels allowing Shimmiers to transition to Climber
- Timed Bomber levels
- Superlemming levels
- Levels that require release rate management (supported by NL but not Lix)
- "Classic"-style levels intended to be played without player assists (technically supported by all, but SLX actively encourages this type of level and provides features to directly support it, whereas the others don't)
- As of the upcoming 2.8, levels in which 2 teams of lemmings each have their own dedicated exit!
The list could go on... Hopefully you get the point - i.e. what one engine provides in terms of level design possibility, another doesn't. That shouldn't necessarily be seen as a bad thing, it's just part of that engine's personality. We're actually quite lucky in this community to have so much choice!
Quote from: Turrican on July 03, 2024, 04:07:00 AM
And that also makes the discussion and comparison , between older ports and engines , mostly meaningless imo! How many of the older ports/engines contained levels , that are over 1000 pixels tall?
One type of level design doesn't render an entire topic meaningless. There are many reasons why Forum users might be interested to see, at a glance, which ports behave in which ways.
It might be meaningless
to you specifically, but that doesn't mean the topic shouldn't exist, or doesn't provide value to other users.
Quote from: Turrican on July 03, 2024, 04:07:00 AM
Also when discussing how the physics should work, I think gameplay and puzzle quality, should take priority, over consistency between different mechanisms.
The problem with this is as I've outlined above:
there are infinite gameplay and puzzle possibilities, especially with a game as complex and nuanced as Lemmings; it all depends on the many possibilities that custom level design presents. Why should one design be favoured over another when it comes to deciding on engine physics? The answer is that
it shouldn't. Decide on the physics first, then design levels to suit the engine.
Or, if you disagree, how do we decide which gameplay/puzzle elements should determine physics, and which shouldn't?
I suppose it comes down to personal preference. I personally would always want to be able to drop lems directly into the exit. That represents good gameplay to me - it makes sense, and I would expect it to happen (and did, when I was playing on Windows 95 - it came as a surprise to me when I went back to Amiga and it didn't happen!)
Quote from: Dullstar on July 03, 2024, 09:04:38 AM
Water and continuous traps such as fire don't represent an inconsistency regardless of how direct drop is handled
Yes, I realise that. By "traps" I mean triggered traps, not water or fire objects. I've updated the OP to clarify.
Quote from: Dullstar on July 03, 2024, 09:04:38 AM
direct drop into a trap generally doesn't change things much; the lemming is dead either way and the only real difference is what goes on the death certificate
This is probably the only reason why there is an argument to be had, in fairness. DD for exits results in an entirely different and potentially game-breaking* behaviour. For traps, it makes no difference to the actual lemming themselves - although, it does momentarily disable the trap for other lems: a reason in favour of keeping direct drop for traps, perhaps.
*i.e. game-breaking either way: a level that needs direct drop is broken in the absence of direct drop, as much as the reverse is true. I'd still advocate for the engine providing consistent physics than trying to fix the level, though.
Quote from: Dullstar on July 03, 2024, 09:04:38 AM
Consider the actual visual representations of objects, i.e. how they are presented to the player, not how the game sees them internally.
...
The visual design of exits is basically a building with stairs, and in official levels ... The animations and boing sound effect also seem to communicate more that the Lemmings actively leap into the exit, rather than passively get sucked in
With any given exit design, I would expect to be able to drop lemmings directly into it from above, regardless of fall distance.
I don't so much imagine that the exit sucks the lemming in as imagine that the exit itself is an entirely "safe zone" for the lemming: regardless of how they access that area, it prevents death and allows the lemming to be saved. Maybe the steps have anti-splat pads on them (another way to simulate DD in NeoLemmix).
This is really 3 topics rolled into one: Physics research across engines, interpretation across engines, and design of SuperLemmix. I'll focus on the research here.
The distinction between mid-air exiting and grounded exiting isn't perfect. It's better to distinguish
- by lemming activity first,
- possibly by activity transition if research points us to it,
- and only by lemming groundedness if we can't explain it purely by activity.
Reason: In DOS Lemmings 1, the knowledge (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6782.msg102868#msg102868) is that fallers don't exit, splatters don't exit, but fallers-turning-into-splatters may exit during this exact physics update. The groundedness is irrelevant for exiting; it merely prompted the faller to splat. Strictly, this irrelevance of groundedness is unverifiable by experiment; Occham's razor tells us to consider it irrelevant until we know better. At the very least, the groundedness wouldn't allow splatters to exit either after the splatter has missed his one-frame chance to exit.
More activities of interest:
- Floating. IIRC, floaters in DOS Lemmings 1 exit in mid-air outright. The devs prevented fallers from exiting, but not floaters. NL behaves the same, floaters exit mid-air, but fallers don't. What do floaters in Amiga L1 do?
- Climbing. DOS Lemmings 1 climbers are inside the wall, thus grounded (which I claim irrelevant), but otherwise similar to floaters (can't assign most skills). Can they exit mid-climb? I expect that climbers can indeed exit in DOS Lemmings 1.
- Drowning lemmings after they have started to drown. In DOS, they don't exit. But they move. On which engines can you drift horizontally into an exit as you drown?
- Drowning lemmings exactly during transition from falling to drowning. This will be interesting in DOS Lemmings 1: Like faller-to-splatter, it's a transition between two un-exitable activities, and we already know that faller-to-splatter may exit.
- Burning lemmings, exactly during transition.
- Theoretically, one can investigate hoisters, blockers, ..., but I feel that that these provide bonus knowledge only. They're not as crucial when you want to apply the knowledge later to interpretation or design. They're also harder to test, e.g., in DOS Lemmings 1, you'll have to move an exit trigger area onto a blocker via a falling oh-noer.
-- Simon
Quote from: WillLem on July 03, 2024, 03:28:41 PM
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 02, 2024, 01:48:12 PM
Fair enough. In that case, I would put (New Formats) or something like that after NL
I don't think that's necessary tbh. By not specifying anything, it's reasonable to assume we're referring to the most recent stable version.
If it becomes necessary due to further discussion, then I'll add version details for clarification. Otherwise, we can leave it as it is.
I personally would still put in some kind of parenthetical or footnote regarding the engines. Yes, it may be clear to people like us that the most recent stable version is in a way implied, but others might not assume this for whatever reason. You want to be as specific as you can whenever possible, even on the off chance there may be a slight ambiguity. Direct drop for NL, for example, was dropped from way back in v1.43, the final major update of very Old Formats NL. It's not like it was dropped starting with Old Formats NL or even starting with New Formats. So really, what I'm suggesting is maybe put an asterisk next to "clones" or something in the OP and something brief like what you wrote in your post or something like, "these assume the most recent stable version of the engines." This would cover all the engines, not just NL ;)
Let's just say I like being complete and very specific, it's just the way my mind works :P
To add to direct drop, I remember the time when I first played Icho's Lemmings Reunion pack on Lemmini I tried to do such a solution to one of Icho's Lemmings Reunion Castle levels, only to find to my surprise and chagrin that it doesn't work! It came about simply because I remember playing one of Conway's custom Dos packs which absolutely requires it given the level setup and the tools provided (I can't remember if it was a one skill level, but I remember it's from a very high spot with the exit all the way at the bottom) and therefore forces the player to discover that direct drop is possible on Dos. I thought it was pretty clever of me to come up with this idea as I couldn't see any other way to do the level at the time, so naturally I thought it would work on Lemmini too. Nope, no levels in that pack on that engine require it, especially as it's not present on Lemmini anyway. It was solvable, I just simply hadn't found the solution at the time I thought of direct drop, which I eventually did find a non-direct drop solution after working it out some more.
As another example unrelated to playing Lemmings on modern engines, whenever people say they went to San Diego for college/university in my home state of California, I always ask them, "which one, UCSD or San Diego State?" People always assume the former whenever people just say San Diego, I guess due to the prestige of the UC system, but these two are very different schools. Therefore, it's possible that the latter was meant instead when people just say San Diego. This is why if you're aware of two such institutions existing then clarification is needed, either by the person saying the full name of the school in the first place, or telling you the school's name after you've asked which one.
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 04, 2024, 10:58:10 AM
I personally would still put in some kind of parenthetical or footnote regarding the engines
OK, I've added a line to clarify that we're referring to the latest stable version for all clones.
Quote from: kaywhyn on July 04, 2024, 10:58:10 AM
I remember playing one of Conway's custom Dos packs which absolutely requires it given the level setup and the tools provided ... and therefore forces the player to discover that direct drop is possible on Dos
Levels that
require direct drop (DD) are actually remarkably difficult to enforce. Gronkling was able to "backroute" quite a few
Lemmings DD levels by getting the lems to the exit some other way than the intended DD solution.
As a backroute method, DD itself is not actually all that useful in a lot of cases. The table in the OP (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6787.msg102884#msg102884) of
Lemmings (1991) levels that can be completed using DD shows that only a small handful of these solutions are actually backroutes: in most cases, the level is open-ended enough that using the DD solution isn't really a backroute, as such, and is more often than not far more diffcult to achieve than the regular straightforward solution.
Those who condemn DD as backroute-prone should take another look at it. It can be difficult or even impossible to set up a DD solution when the level isn't specifically set up for it. Tall or otherwise vertically-oriented levels might seem particularly prone, but even then a difference of a single skill can be enough to prevent unwanted DD.
Quote from: WillLem on July 04, 2024, 08:59:58 PMAs a backroute method, DD itself is not actually all that useful in a lot of cases. The table in the OP (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6787.msg102884#msg102884) of Lemmings (1991) levels that can be completed using DD shows that only a small handful of these solutions are actually backroutes: in most cases, the level is open-ended enough that using the DD solution isn't really a backroute, as such, and is more often than not far more diffcult to achieve than the regular straightforward solution.
This is obviously not a good test, since original Lemmings has a majority of open-ended levels where backroutes (of any type) are not really an issue. Whether you like it or not, a majority of forum members do care about puzzle levels and avoiding backroutes that trivialise the puzzle.
A better test would be to transfer a usermade pack made in a non-DD environment to a DD environment and see how many backroutes open up -- and ideally do this for several packs, since results for a single pack might be skewed by aspects of the individual author's design style.
Or, you know, you could assume that those of us with 20 years' experience of building levels in DD environments know what we're talking about ;P
Quote from: Proxima on July 04, 2024, 11:11:05 PM
A better test would be to transfer a usermade pack made in a non-DD environment to a DD environment and see how many backroutes open up
Good shout. I probably won't have time to check this myself anytime soon but I agree that custom content is probably what people are more interested in here.
If I do manage to get time to look at a full pack (or several packs), I'll post the results in this topic.
Quote from: Proxima on July 04, 2024, 11:11:05 PM
Whether you like it or not, a majority of forum members do care about puzzle levels and avoiding backroutes that trivialise the puzzle.
As do I. I spent a whole evening fixing backroutes for 1 level in
Lemminas Origins recently! Just because I advocate for other types of level design doesn't mean I'm anti-puzzles, I just think that there needs to be a balance.
Quote from: Proxima on July 04, 2024, 11:11:05 PM
Or, you know, you could assume that those of us with 20 years' experience of building levels in DD environments know what we're talking about ;P
Really, you're playing the time card? :eyeroll: Well... OK, but I'm only replying to this because it's you!
I don't doubt that anyone who's contributed to this topic so far (and the various topics linked to in the OP) knows what they're talking about, nor do I regard any of the arguments as invalid. Just because I disagree with you doesn't mean I assume you don't know what you're talking about.
Quite the contrary, in fact: the better an understanding I have of the counter-arguments, the more valid my own viewpoint feels. It seems that the community decided to dismiss DD as a bug/source of backroutes, rather than attempt to tap into its gameplay potential. I'm now simply promoting the opposite viewpoint because it's what seems right to me.
FWIW, I've clocked up 5 years' experience of my own (including making my own version of NeoLemmix!). Not that it should matter
at all when it comes to discussing game physics; having an opinion for 1 year or having an opinion for 20 years doesn't make the opinion more or less valid. We've tried things one way for a while, let's try it another way.
Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2024, 06:57:33 AM
This is really 3 topics rolled into one: Physics research across engines, interpretation across engines, and design of SuperLemmix.
It's inevitable that SuperLemmix would be mentioned, since it's currently the only clone featuring DD as an intended mechanic. That said, I'm trying to keep the topic more generally about DD as a game mechanic rather than necessarily talking about its implementation in SLX.
Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2024, 06:57:33 AM
Reason: In DOS Lemmings 1, the knowledge (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6782.msg102868#msg102868) is that fallers don't exit, splatters don't exit, but fallers-turning-into-splatters may exit during this exact physics update.
It's very likely that all early engines which feature DD do so unintentionally, as a bi-product of incorrectly handled physics. Conversely, the fact that so many of the ports feature DD indicates
some possibility of it being intentional in at least one of the ports. Either way, some players may be used to it and - as kaywhyn attests - possibly even look out for it, and regard it as a legit mechanic.
I unfortunately wasn't around for a lot of the early Forum discussion, but I absolutely would have advocated strongly for DD being kept as a "happy accident" that makes the game more playable (IMO). Thankfully, we have an opportunity to open the discussion up again and give it a try. I don't think it will prove to be as problematic as some people theorise.
Those who think it's backroute-prone: can you share one of your own levels that can be backrouted using DD (i.e. without adding extra skills or changing anything about the level)? Also share a replay of the intended solution, if you can*. Thanks.
*
To be clear, I'm not going to try and backroute-fix your level as a counter-point, I just want to see some actual examples of what we're dealing with.
In the meantime, here are some examples of levels for which the DD solution is particularly difficult to execute, especially with Timebombers.
Yes, they're OG levels (not custom levels), but it should at least illustrate how contrived these solutions can sometimes be, using way more skills and techniques than the intended solution requires.
The third of these (Come on over to my place) is the only one which is arguably a "backroute", and is considerably more difficult than many of the other solutions to this level.
That's a nice 100% direct drop solution to Come on over to my place, but don't forget that DOS only requires... I think it's 80%?
Quote from: WillLem on July 04, 2024, 08:59:58 PM
OK, I've added a line to clarify that we're referring to the latest stable version for all clones.
All rightie, thanks. Looks great! :thumbsup: Though maybe "unless otherwise noted" would had been better to start it off :laugh:
Quote from: Proxima on July 05, 2024, 03:56:36 AM
That's a nice 100% direct drop solution to Come on over to my place, but don't forget that DOS only requires... I think it's 80%?
Correct, the save requirement for Taxing 22 on Dos is indeed 80% :P
Quote from: WillLem on July 05, 2024, 01:36:39 AM
I unfortunately wasn't around for a lot of the early Forum discussion, but I absolutely would have advocated strongly for DD being kept as a "happy accident" that makes the game more playable (IMO). Thankfully, we have an opportunity to open the discussion up again and give it a try. I don't think it will prove to be as problematic as some people theorise.
What do you mean by more playable? What are the advantages or the potential you see in Direct Drop?
Quote from: Forestidia86 on July 05, 2024, 07:04:30 PM
What do you mean by more playable?
One of the most fun times I've had on the Forums so far is when I took part in this challenge (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=4516.msg78171#msg78171) with Minim a few years ago. I also love doing Skills You Can't Live Without (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=4614.msg79406#msg79406) with Proxima. A common theme of both of these challenges is to find as many different ways to solve a level as possible. With this in mind, anything that opens the game up for repeated play value and/or increases the chances of finding alternative solutions is an attractive prospect.
Forum content has mostly distilled the game down to "single-solution picture puzzles" - levels that are potentially solvable without even actually playing the game (I even recall someone saying they solved a level using a text editor! :forehead:)
Whilst I
completely understand wanting a level to be solvable only by its intended solution, and I concur that this is a popular level design type for many good reasons, it certainly shouldn't be the
only represented example of level design in a community as creative as ours is. There are so many other possibilities that a game like Lemmings can offer (DD being one of them), and I'm up for exploring as many of them as possible.
Quote from: Forestidia86 on July 05, 2024, 07:04:30 PM
What are the advantages or the potential you see in Direct Drop?
Great question.
This (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5307.msg88715#msg88715), for a few examples (I can't vouch for the quality of that pack as I made it a few years ago now!)
The average DD solution takes a certain amount of skill and tenacity to get right, and it's something I feel could make for an interesting and inspiring level design feature: rather than limiting the skillset, give the player plenty of skills but enforce the DD solution. The example above is a full pack of such levels, but the norm could be that a pack might contain a small handful of DD levels dotted throughout to add a bit of spice and variety.
Or, they can be an alternative solution, perhaps.
Lemminas Origins (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6695.msg102123#msg102123) features a number of levels for which the talisman is a DD solution: it's solvable in other ways, but finding the DD solution awards the talisman.
That's probably the main advantage I see with it: a DD solution can still be a challenge without necessarily placing other restrictions on the level (such as time, skillset or save requirement). I suppose an eventual goal of mine is to make a non-trivial pack of levels which don't always rely on restrictions to skillset to provide the player with a challenge. DD is just one way to achieve this.
Quote from: WillLem on July 06, 2024, 02:44:59 AM
they solved a level using a text editor! :forehead:
I solved it in my head, then wrote a script to generate an NL replay for it, then verified in NL that the replay was a solution, then submitted (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5845.msg94840#msg94840) the replay and the script.
Quote from: WillLem on July 05, 2024, 01:36:39 AM
Quote from: Simon on July 04, 2024, 06:57:33 AM
DOS Lemmings 1
unintentionally, as a bi-product of incorrectly handled physics.
I unfortunately wasn't around for a lot of the early Forum discussion
I'm investigating engine behavior, not classifying it as bug. You started a nice table, and I'd be happy to see more entries filled. I'm criticizing your table for distinguishing the wrong things.
(https://www.lixgame.com/etc/dos-l1-floaters-exit.gif)
This is from DOS Lemmings 1, and clearly we
can enter midair exits. Your table says that we
cannot directly drop into midair exits in DOS Lemmings 1. I recommend that you distinguish by activity of the lemming, not by groundedness of the exit nor of the lemming.
It may help you to define direct drop in the first place. You've said "it's basically this" and posted an example gif. Fallers don't exit in DOS L1 even when the exit is grounded, they must start splatting first, yet you say that DOS L1 has direct drop for grounded exits. Floaters enter midair exits, yet you say that DOS L1 has no midair direct drop. What
is direct drop?
Do you have an Amiga or emulator ready to run Amiga Lemmings 1? What happens when floaters pass a midair exit on Amiga L1?
-- Simon
Quote from: Simon on July 06, 2024, 11:40:14 AM
This is from DOS Lemmings 1, and clearly we can enter midair exits. Your table says that we cannot directly drop into midair exits in DOS Lemmings 1. I recommend that you distinguish by activity of the lemming, not by groundedness of the exit nor of the lemming.
...
Floaters enter midair exits, yet you say that DOS L1 has no midair direct drop. What is direct drop?
Direct drop is when a faller or splatter can exit. Floaters don't count, since this costs a skill and therefore can't be relied upon from level to level unless enough Floaters are provided. And nobody, myself included, wants to have to assign Floaters to every lemming just to get a DD or midair exit solution to work.
So, at least for the purposes of this topic, Direct Drop can be defined as
contact with the trigger having been made vertically from above, either in midair or from an unsurvivable fall height. Skill action, lem state and any other factors are irrelevant.
"Floatable midair exit" could be its own entry into the table, then, but I've opted not to include that because DD ought to apply to any lemming in order for it to be considered a baseline mechanic. For discussion completion, though:
Quote from: Simon on July 06, 2024, 11:40:14 AM
Do you have an Amiga or emulator ready to run Amiga Lemmings 1? What happens when floaters pass a midair exit on Amiga L1?
Floaters can midair exit on Amiga:
(https://i.imgur.com/kMZfJIg.gif)
Updated the OP with a midair exit gif for clarification.
It should be noted that, strictly speaking, {falling into a grounded exit from an unsurvivable height} and {falling into a midair exit} are different mechanics, and can be handled differently by allowing the Splatter, rather than the Faller, to exit (as Simon has rightly noted).
However, since the common theme between them is "trigger contact has been made vertically from above", and ports tend to be consistent about trap / exit triggers in terms of their interactability via DD or in midair, we can use the term "direct drop" to refer to both conditions (at least for the purposes of this discussion).
The compelling factor is contact with the trigger, then, rather than lem state or exit position.
Quote from: WillLem on July 06, 2024, 02:19:33 PM
The compelling factor is contact with the trigger, then, rather than lem state or exit position.
Floaters enter the exit trigger from above, too. ;P Anyway, you wrote that floaters are special and we shouldn't care about them here, that's good with me.
You also wrote that you're interested in fallers and splatters only. That's good enough for the research: When a faller can enter without splatting, you get midair direct drop. When a faller-to-splatter or a splatter outright can exit, you get grounded direct drop.
Thanks for showing the Amiga floaters.
-- Simon
Quote from: Simon on July 06, 2024, 09:13:26 PM
Floaters enter the exit trigger from above, too. ;P
Sure, but if we consider the two questions "did the lemming contact the trigger from above?" and "are they a Floater?", if the answer to the first question is "yes" then we can investigate further for DD regardless of the answer to the second question. In fact, if the answer to the second question is also "yes", then a case can be made for it not being DD at all, at least in the case of grounded exits.
Quote from: Simon on July 06, 2024, 09:13:26 PM
When a faller can enter without splatting, you get midair direct drop. When a faller-to-splatter or a splatter outright can exit, you get grounded direct drop.
Yes, that's a good way of putting it.
Quote from: Simon on July 06, 2024, 09:13:26 PM
Thanks for showing the Amiga floaters.
Very welcome. I find it best to show rather than tell, as much as possible.
Well, Simon's questions regarding Floaters have turned up something very interesting in the research. Here's a flowchart determining whether an exit action could (or not) potentially be considered as direct drop:
(Green line = yes, red line = no)
(https://i.imgur.com/qSxodQD.png)
The question of whether or not the lemming is a Floater is in fact instrumental in determining whether an exit interaction is direct drop: it's the last thing we check before deciding, and the answer must be "no" DD to be correct.
EDIT: The "midair" question needs to come before the "safe distance" question
EDIT 2: The "midair" question needs to lead straight to the "Floater" question if the answer is "yes"
Quote from: WillLem on July 06, 2024, 02:44:59 AM
This (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5307.msg88715#msg88715), for a few examples (I can't vouch for the quality of that pack as I made it a few years ago now!)
The average DD solution takes a certain amount of skill and tenacity to get right, and it's something I feel could make for an interesting and inspiring level design feature: rather than limiting the skillset, give the player plenty of skills but enforce the DD solution. The example above is a full pack of such levels, but the norm could be that a pack might contain a small handful of DD levels dotted throughout to add a bit of spice and variety.
Acording to the description of the linked level pack you could still make these levels without having DD directly by using certain gadgets. This leaves the decision for designers if they want to allow for DD or not.
Lix has similiar gadgets and even skills that can reset fall height. Having DD might restrict possibilities to create puzzles using these skills.
Quote from: Forestidia86 on July 07, 2024, 07:55:58 PM
Acording to the description of the linked level pack you could still make these levels without having DD directly by using certain gadgets. This leaves the decision for designers if they want to allow for DD or not.
In fairness, if I was going to make a level for which DD was the intended solution, I'd probably use the updrafted exits anyway, because they have a larger and more forgiving trigger area than the regular exits.
Allowing DD as an intended mechanic means that it's
always a possibility, not just when the level designer intends it to be. Some people count that as a strong argument
against having DD in an engine, whereas I count it as a strong argument
in favour of it.
QuoteDrowning lemmings exactly during transition from falling to drowning. This will be interesting in DOS Lemmings 1: Like faller-to-splatter, it's a transition between two un-exitable activities, and we already know that faller-to-splatter may exit.
Burning lemmings, exactly during transition.
You can't have two different trigger areas on the same pixel in DOS. I suppose theoretically, if you could inject a change exactly between when it checks for each type of trigger area... (maybe by using a debugger and inserting a break inbetween?)
Quote from: Proxima on July 04, 2024, 11:11:05 PM
A better test would be to transfer a usermade pack made in a non-DD environment to a DD environment and see how many backroutes open up
Had a look at
Mike's Lemmings (SuperLemmix Edition) (https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=6215.msg98406#msg98406) today. This pack was originally created for NeoLemmix (plus, several of its levels were for other engines, and have been converted to new-formats NeoLemmix), but has a SuperLemmix-specific conversion.
As far as I can tell from a detailed look at each level, its intended solution, the available skillset, and my existing experience with finding and creating DD solutions, none of these levels can be backrouted using DD.
I'll have a look at
GeoffLems next, and possibly
NepsterLems if I get around to converting that one (currently likely).
Coming back to this:
Quote from: Dullstar on July 03, 2024, 09:04:38 AM
Consider the actual visual representations of objects, i.e. how they are presented to the player, not how the game sees them internally.
At present, it's possible to design a swirling vortex and have it be an exit. It's also possible to design an exit with steps and a doorway. Which design should the physics match?
In an environment that allows a range of custom styles and endless design possibilities per object, it very quickly becomes absurd to make decisions like "exits shouldn't be accessible in midair", because someone might design a mid-air exit. Conversely, we also shouldn't
only allow exiting in mid-air, because someone might design a ground-based exit (as in the OG styles). And to flip the argument itself, if someone designed an exit that was mounted to the side of a wall, we wouldn't suddenly decide that only Climbers should be able to exit!
The point is that it seems far better to make decisions based on
the effect of the trigger area, rather than
any one of an infinite number of visual design possibilities. So, we decide "for each interaction, exits remove the lemming and increase the rescue count by 1"; no further decisions about exit behaviour need to be made. We have a simple, easy to grasp, consistent concept that's applied gamewide and doesn't rely on a list of factors.
Does it matter, then, what exits look like? I guess I'm arguing that it doesn't, but only because they
can look like anything in the context of an engine that allows custom style creation.
But, perhaps that doesn't really answer Dullstar's comment. For that, let's take it right back to the OG styles, and tackle the question of "physics = appearance" head-on.
The OG exits are all grounded, all have a doorway, and most also have steps. Can safe interaction in midair and via DD be justified with these designs?
For midair situations, the steps themselves provide something for the lemming to "land" on - Jumpers, Reachers, Fallers, Gliders, Floaters, and indeed any other lemming state should be able to physically interact with the steps.
For DD, unsafe fall distances are trickier to justify, admittedly, although my instinct remains that safe interaction is correct. I guess I imagine that the exit itself provides anti-splat properties (in the same way that an anti-splat pad or an updraft does), or that the doorway pictured
is some sort of vortex which draws the lemming in (or at least resets the fall distance at the point of contact). Maybe exits are just "magic", and allow the lemming to defy gravity simply by being in the immediate vicinity! 8-)
Here is, some additional input , about the direct drop topic. First of all , I am not against direct drop by itself. I had used it in the past for various solutions in games and engines , that supported it, like Lemmix. And I have posted also , some of these solutions in my youtube channel , and also, I am completely fine, with the current situation of having engines that support it like Superlemmix , and engines that don't support it, like Neolemmix or Lix. The reason , that I am opposed to this feature , on this thread, is because , I don't want it , to become, the new community standard , for the reasons , that I have mentioned in my previous post , in this thread.
So, the following days , after that post , I did some testing , on various levels from various levelpacks ,and I created , a number of "what If" backroutes, which are practically , how these levels, would be played , and solved, if Neolemmix allowed direct drop. I also saved , the replays of these. Initially , I didn't want to post these replays , but I've decided to post them here, because they cover various types of backroutes, that can become possible , because of direct drop, and also, these replays , will be useful , for anyone , that will decide at the future, to convert a pack , that contains any of these levels to Superlemmix.
Here are the levels. Comments about their backroutes are in the spoiler tags :
Revenge of the Lemmings 2022 - Armaggedon 5 - Getting Stuck in a Cave : Spoiler
Completely different to the , intended solution , and it completely ignores the lemming at the lower part of the level.
Spoiler
This is a characteristic example , of the type of backroute , that I don't want to see in custom levels. It commpletely skips , the whole puzzle.
Spoiler
Another characteristic example . It skips the entire puzzle.
Spoiler
Another backroute , which skips the entire puzzle
Spoiler
This solution skips , the entire part of the puzzle on the right part of the level.
Spoiler
This backroute skips the last part of the intended solution , and also a very clever trick at the beginning of the solution.
Spoiler
Another characteristic example . It skips the entire puzzle.
Spoiler
It skips the last part of the intended solution.
Spoiler
It skips entire parts of the intended solution.
Spoiler
This backroute skips the part of the intended solution , that takes place on the lower part of the level.
Spoiler
This backroute skips the part of the intended solution , that takes place on the lower part of the level.
https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=1922.0
The linked post , also contains links , for the replays of the intended solutions.
Revenge of the Lemmings 2022 : https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5963.0
The linked post , also contains a link , for the replays of the intended solutions.
Lemmings Reunion : https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=2175.0
Lemmings United : https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=4131.0
Lemmings Quartet : https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=5796.0
Clammings : https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=3642.0
The zip file of the pack , also contains replays of the intended solutions.
Casualemmings : https://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=4710.0
About my pack : When I converted my pack to Superlemmix , I had already , an idea about which levels had even a small possibillity to be affected , and I took the needed meausurements. There is also , a possibility , for these levels , to be impossible to be backrouted with the use of direct drop, even without these measurements , but in practice , you never know!
QuoteAt present, it's possible to design a swirling vortex and have it be an exit. It's also possible to design an exit with steps and a doorway. Which design should the physics match?
Probably the one that was used in L1, was used in the L1 spinoffs, was used in L2, was used in L3, was used in L3D, was used in Revolution, was used in the overwhelming majority of fanmade content... the fact that it's technically possible to make a completely different graphic (as is the case for any possible graphic; you could make a fire trap that looks like a pickup skill
technically if you wanted to, doesn't mean it's a good idea, let alone that it's an argument for giving fire objects pickup-like behaviors) doesn't override this huge base of tradition.
I say this as the creator of one of the very, very few styles that did actually at one point use an intentional, designed-for midair exit (namida_sky).
Based on the analysis, it's very, very clear at this point that direct drop was a glitch in the official games. It's a bit less clear whether it was intended or just overlooked in Cheapo, but Cheapo is not an official game, even if it did have a very significant impact on the direction of fan content, and at any rate it was generally treated as a glitch among the community in the Cheapo days (and from a progamming point of view, this makes sense - I can definitely see how, if there wasn't already the existing background of direct drop having been discussed and regularly exploited in challenge solutions, a lemming
falling onto an exit trigger is something that wouldn't cross a dev's mind). It really feels like your constant revisiting of it is based purely on "let's make more stuff happen, and justify it later" (which yes, is something I was also very guilty of during the earlier days of NL) than actually considering whether it adds value and/or makes sense.
TL;DR (this is a long one!)
Thanks everyone for your patience and for indulging me in this discussion so far, I understand that it must be frustrating to go over old threads again, and I appreciate the opportunity to add my voice to the discussion at this late stage.
@Turrican - I highly doubt the community standard will change anytime soon! And, changing the accepted standard is certainly not the point of this thread. I'm just interested to discuss and research the possibilities of DD and offer an alternative perspective on it, that's all. Thanks for your valuable input and for the replays, please can you also post a zip of the levels themselves? :lemcat:
Quote from: Turrican on July 18, 2024, 09:16:42 PM
I am completely fine, with the current situation of having engines that support it like Superlemmix
Honestly, I think I needed to hear this. As much as I want SLX to be a true representation of my own ideals, I also do want people to like it. It's impossible to please everybody, but I'd also be disappointed if something like DD put people off even giving it a try.
Not that I have to worry about that in your case; you've converted a pack of levels, which I very much appreciate! :lemcat:
Quote from: Turrican on July 18, 2024, 09:16:42 PM
The reason , that I am opposed to this feature , on this thread, is because , I don't want it , to become, the new community standard
Maybe I underestimate my influence on the Forums, but... I highly doubt that DD would
ever become the community standard, having been so comprehensively rejected previously. What's far more likely (and what I hope) is that it will be accepted
specifically in SuperLemmix as an alternative, whilst continuing not to be a feature of NeoLemmix, Lix and others which are far more likely to continue to follow the community standard.
This topic is more about simply researching the mechanic itself, exploring both the possibilities
and potental problems of it, and re-opening the discussion I didn't have a chance to take part in previously, rather than an attempt to redefine the community standard.
Perhaps your concern is that I mentioned in our Discord PM that I don't want to suggest potential backroute fixes for DD (even though I can think of plenty!) because I don't want to perpetuate the idea that DD is something undesirable that needs to be fixed. I should be clear that I was specifically referring to its implementation in SuperLemmix, and more specifically in response to Jeremy's suggestion that we make a special exit for it that doesn't allow DD. Implementing such a feature reinforces the message "DD is bad, here's a way around it if you don't like it". Instead, I'd rather continue to promote the idea that DD can be an interesting game mechanic, particularly for challenges, talismans and alternative solutions (all of which are game elements I hope to bring to the fore in SuperLemmix). I think that there is very little chance of SLX replacing NL as the community standard, but it may certainly attract speedrunners, challengers, and players who prefer the more traditional gameplay style. This represents a small proportion of players in an already very small community, so the threat to the status quo is relatively low, if existent at all.
NeoLemmix is very likely to remain the community standard for the forseeable future - someone would have to come up with something pretty darn special to outright replace it, and discussions around game physics, etc would likely resurface and be re-evaluated at that time anyway. Or, in the scenario that I'm called upon to help with NeoLemmix development after its final release,
I absolutely would not make controversial changes to the physics, I would respect its development history and maintain the status quo regardless of my own preferences.
It seems worth making the above clear at this point, since there has been talk of me making further contributions to NL development, and I really don't want the community to worry that I would do anything to upset its gameplay mechanics, which I'm aware result from years of careful tailoring. As long as namida is active on the Forums, I would likely never do anything without his specific approval anyway, and if he's unavailable I'd go to Icho and Simon next, as these are people I know namida trusts.
Hopefully, with that said, we can continue to discuss DD without any such concerns.
Quote from: Turrican on July 18, 2024, 09:16:42 PM
So, the following days , after that post , I did some testing , on various levels from various levelpacks
Thank you for sharing these! You've been quite thorough - am I correct in assuming that these are the only levels you found in those packs which have DD backroutes? My own research has turned up 3 in 120 (or 1 in 40) levels that can be backrouted using DD; I wonder if your research also reflects this figure.
Also, could you add a zip of just these levels to your post for quick access? OK if not, I can download the full packs if needs be. Again, thanks for doing this valuable research! :thumbsup:
Quote from: namida on July 18, 2024, 09:25:12 PM
the fact that it's technically possible to make a completely different graphic ... doesn't override this huge base of tradition.
Fair point, but the fact is that we
can now make exits look like anything. Whilst that doesn't necessarily mean that physics
must be reconsidered, or that any such reconsideration is necessarily a good idea, it does at least provide the opportunity to reconsider them with arguably good reason.
And I say
that as someone who almost exclusively uses the OG styles in levels, and is a strong advocate of traditionalism in the Lemmings game! ;P
Also, I did specifically address the OG exits in my previous post (i.e. the visual designs of these exits make sense for midair exiting (definitely, because steps) and direct drop (in my opinion)).
Meanwhile, the decision was taken to not allow Jumpers to exit in NeoLemmix, so I'd ask why not, if the images clearly show steps that can arguably be "landed" on? Or, to state more explicitly what I'm getting at here, why should visual design be a consideration for Direct Drop but not for Jumpers?
Quote from: namida on July 18, 2024, 09:25:12 PM
Based on the analysis, it's very, very clear at this point that direct drop was a glitch in the official games.
I have very little doubt that it was, but we aren't always necessarily concerned with following the blueprint set out by the original games (including what should or shouldn't be considered a bug), that's something we can in fact all agree on.
Having said that, I'm aware that DD has been discussed at length on its own merit, which brings me to your final comment:
Quote from: namida on July 18, 2024, 09:25:12 PM
It really feels like your constant revisiting of it is based purely on "let's make more stuff happen, and justify it later" (which yes, is something I was also very guilty of during the earlier days of NL) than actually considering whether it adds value and/or makes sense.
It's fair to call me out on this because I do bring it up a lot, but I was late to the party and never had a chance to add my voice to the conversation. Honestly, I'm grateful that people are responding to this topic and indulging me. Other Forums might have shut it down as a dead topic, so the fact I'm being given allowances here isn't lost on me, I assure you.
And yes, it seems that DD has been discussed extensively, and its bug status wasn't the only deciding factor in its eventual removal from NeoLemmix - this is a good thing. However, I still think there's room for challenging the narrative that it's definitely a problematic game element; I believe it both makes sense and adds value, and that's really what I'm hoping to demonstrate with this topic.
Hopefully Turrican posts these levels he's found, and I'll definitely give them a look and assess the damage for myself. I absolutely do trust experienced Forum members, engine developers and level designers in their opinions on what's right and wrong based on prior research, and there's lots I've conceded over my few years here on the Forums so far. But, there are some things I need to actually see for myself before I can fully understand the other side of the argument, particularly if it's something I'm invested in and feel strongly about.
Full disclosure, it's probably an ADHD thing - I get super excited about an idea and, as you've quite rightly pointed out, I just want to see it in action first and then probably do feel the need to justify/discuss it later. I understand if that's sometimes frustrating for people who've very much "been there, done that", and I appreciate your patience - for me, this is an interesting and stimulating discussion!
I have attached a zip file with these levels.
As , to how I found them, I just browsed these packs for levels that had open spaces above their exits , and if the skillset looked suitable , I tried to backroute them. It was relatively quick browsing, which didn't cover the entirety of these packs. Also , some of these levels , I had played them at the past , so I knew , that they would be able to be backrouted , this way.
Yeah, I should be very clear that I have zero intention of forbidding such discussions, regardless of how I personally feel about either the subject itself or the repeated discussions on it. If no one wants to engage, they're always free to not respond or even read it, after all.
Quote from: namida on July 10, 2024, 09:48:26 PM
QuoteDrowning lemmings exactly during transition from falling to drowning.
Burning lemmings, exactly during transition.
You can't have two different trigger areas on the same pixel in DOS.
inject a change exactly between when it checks for each type of trigger
Ah, thanks, it's enough for my research to know that you can't become drowner and exiter in one frame (without injecting things with a debugger). No need to study the code to handle a mid-update change of trigger areas. I'll allow the code to rely on the normal invariants of the program. Reason: My angle of research is less to understand DOS L1 instruction-by-instruction, but to guess what the devs thought essential.
Mindless already told me last month that drowners and exploded lemmings can't exit. You reminded me that DOS L1 has only one trigger area per location, therefore you can't become burner-into-exiter within one physics update either. This covers most direct drop potential around dying lemmings. The single possible known one is faller-to-splater-to-exiter within the same physics update.
I don't know if a burner might exit on a later physics update. You'll have to replace the fire trigger with an exit trigger, using the bug where a falling ohnoer restores his saved trigger area elsewhere. I believe that this won't turn the burner into an exiter. I don't have time to research this; if I catch Mindless, I'll ask him.
-- Simon
To further elaborate on that - you can't have a mix of different trigger types (or two objects of the same type, in cases where the individual object matters, ie: traps) in the same 4x4 area (as in, 0,0 to 3,3 must be a single type; 4,0 to 7,3 must be a single type, etc; etc; not all trigger areas must be 4 pixels away from other ones). This includes "none" - you can't have a grid-aligned 4x4 area where the top half is a trigger and the bottom half is not - and blocker fields, including the "neutral" area inbetween the force-left and force-right, also follow these rules + exclude other triggers (the way that blockers near objects is handled is the cause of the moving-trigger-areas bug you mentioned).
This is the source of the bug where exits would sometimes appear to not function depending on their exact vertical position in custom levels - the trigger area gets grid aligned and moved upwards slightly (and as such, if you place a builder near the exit, you can actually still use it).