1) NeoLemmix has different mechanics, starting with a different max fall distance, which creates backroutes or makes levels impossible. To emulate the traditional Lemmix mechanics, there is the CustLemmix player, but it should be fairly outdated by now and probably has none of the framestepping possibilites.
2) Traditional Steel and different OWW create differences in the game mechanics that will only confuse players. There is no way to tell that a level uses one of these options. So all levels should be updated to use one and only one set of game mechanics.
3) One cannot play these levels directly. Instead one has to load them into the editor and play them from there, which is quite a bit more work than for updated levels.
4) All the code for Traditional Steel and traditional OWW-handling has to be maintained in NeoLemmix. I am fairly sure that there are dozens of little bugs regarding these, that never got noticed. And honestly, I am only waiting for the NeoLemmix release where this completely breaks.
5) The Editor has to maintain all these settings as well, which makes for several ill-explained options that only make working with the editor more complicated: Various steel and OWW options, steel areas, ...
...Vanilla Lemmix comes with a permanently fixed specification -- anything different from L1 is a bug. ...Lemmix already supports different mechanics (Dos L1, Dos ONML, CustLemm and a few others), and it is a priori not clear which to take. Most of them probably use CustLemm (= almost ONML mechanics), because it supports both L1 and ONML styles.
3. As long as they're using normal style numbering (ie: 0~4 = orig, 5~8 = ohno, 9 = xmas) they should work. It's a bug if they don't.I thought more about them being .dat level packs, that first have to be extracted. Apart from that I know about some .dat's with a different style ordering.
Lemmix already supports different mechanics (Dos L1, Dos ONML, CustLemm and a few others), and it is a priori not clear which to take.
One matter that needs to be addressed is how to package the resulting packs - perhaps one NXP per author, with a rank per pack? (With obvious exceptions for those that are intended as fangame-type packs.)That was my plan as well.
1) Switch to Autosteel and remove all manual steel areas.
2) Switch to the new handling of OWW.
3) Remove empty space around the level.
4) Adapt falls of height 61-63pixels to make them deadly again (whenever I spot them).
5) Remove Fake objects and change invisible objects to visible ones.
6) Change all non-water objects to No-Overwrite, except if there is a strong reason not to do this.
7) Change time limits slightly, if the level is impossible otherwise (e.g. some of tseug's levels).
Anything missing on this list or changes that should not be made?
1. This is generally good, however there are some levels where this doesn't work as well. In such levels, often simply using "Simple Autosteel" can fix this. ....I would rather leave such levels out completely instead of mixing various steel behaviors. And I think most levels can be saved even with Autosteel, e.g. moving the decoration in Steel Works away from the border of the steel blocks.
2. [...] Just to be clear - using the one-way wall objects is still the recommended method; the option to have "steel" areas that place one way walls is more or less just there for Cheapo level import reasons, and has some significant disadvantages (most notably, that one way walls placed this way don't animate).I only planned to remove the One-Way Inversion setting as disabling this seems to be the standard in NeoLemmix.
5. There are some cases where the objects being fake or invisible is the whole point of the level ("Check Your Hints" from Holiday Lemmings and "The Phantom Exit" from MazuLems both come to mind here). If it doesn't appear to be the whole point of the level, then remove them or make them non-fake / visible depending on the situation (eg. if they're fake as a side effect of the Z>16 = fake mechanic, and probably weren't intended to be, the right change would be to un-fake them).I would rather leave out such levels, than annoying NeoLemmix players with bad level design.
7. [...] I would also suggest, on levels where time is not intended as part of the challenge (eg. relatively short levels with rather large time limits), just remove the time limits altogether.I am a bit hesitant about this. Very generous time limits do not harm players, and for levels where it would make a difference I don't feel like having enough authority to make this change to someone else's level.
5. [...] But if we're converting the levels - and ideally, the only criteria to exclude a level should be "there is no way for this level to work in NeoLemmix" (eg. those that rely on glitches) - then we shouldn't exclude levels or completely destroy their point just because we consider it "bad design". If I'm understanding correctly, the point here is to bring all the older content across to a newer engine; not to create a collection pack of good levels.I see your point. How about keeping the fake/incisible objects in levels that depend on them, but add a warning as a preview text to the level?
1. The one NXP per author is a good idea. However, there are authors who have made more than 15 CustLemm packs. JM made a total of 18 packs (and one VGASPEC level). Since NeoLemmix only allows for 15 ranks, are we going to create two separate NXPs for JM (i.e. Packs 1-15 in one player, packs 16-18+the VGASPEC level in the other)?
2. Should we also have Lemmini levels converted, especially since they also appear in the level database?
3. Off-topic but related: this was something I was going to suggest in another thread. Should we also have Fangame Traditional Lemmix Players converted into NeoLemmix NXPs?
1. The one NXP per author is a good idea. However, there are authors who have made more than 15 CustLemm packs. JM made a total of 18 packs (and one VGASPEC level). Since NeoLemmix only allows for 15 ranks, are we going to create two separate NXPs for JM (i.e. Packs 1-15 in one player, packs 16-18+the VGASPEC level in the other)?As far as I can see, this problem occurs only for JM (18 packs) and timfoxxy (17 packs). GigaLem would be over 15 packs as well, but as an active member here doesn't count for this project. Several other level creators conveniently stopped after releasing 14 or 15 packs ;).
2. Should we also have Lemmini levels converted, especially since they also appear in the level database?As far as I can see, most Lemmini levels are from Gronkling and grams88. Both are still active here, so this question is probably less important than one might expect.
I am wondering - if you're going to convert TimFoxxy's levels, should you use the ones in the database, or this one (http://www.lemmingsforums.net/index.php?topic=1681.0)? I believe the one in the link has more up-to-date levels, and there may be even levels in the link that do not appear in the database.The pack in your link contains more levels in original styles than the level packs in the database, but fewer ONML-style levels :-\. I haven't yet compared them to the VanClan level pack...
Crane's site, Garjen.com [or something similar to that?] has or had lots of old downloads and notes people wrote about their levels. At least ISteve and some others that I saw had notes. Those might be helpful.I already know of www.garjen.co.uk, but help is only available for Crane's and InsaneSteve's levels. Both are still moderately active one the forum, so their level packs have very low priority, if I update their levels at all.
There is at least one Lemmini author whose packs can be converted - Mariachi Skeletron Prime's. He's not active in the forum these days despite joining late 2014 (he didn't make an account for the new forum).2. Should we also have Lemmini levels converted, especially since they also appear in the level database?As far as I can see, most Lemmini levels are from Gronkling and grams88. Both are still active here, so this question is probably less important than one might expect.
For packs that have different authors for each level like this one (http://lemmings-db.camanis.net/levelpack/ag1zfmxlbW1pbmdzLWRichYLEglMZXZlbFBhY2sYgICAgNCQkQoM/) and this one (http://lemmings-db.camanis.net/levelpack/ag1zfmxlbW1pbmdzLWRichYLEglMZXZlbFBhY2sYgICAgNCMiAoM/), what should we do with them? Should we just create one NXP for each compilation pack? Also, in that link, Sculpture Maze already appears in one of Tumble Weed's packs, so I'm not even sure if we should leave that there. Training Course by Conway, I'm not sure if that appears in any other pack.My plan was to have one .nxp collecting all the contest levels and community packs. I think we can have an exception to the rule here and update even levels of people that are still active. Of course I will get their OK first before releasing the .nxp.
What should we do with the two levels by unknwon authors?Updating them with level author=unknown. Why do you think they need special treatment?
Regarding the Amiga packs: I am not sure how I can extract the single levels from these level packs. If I really have a lot of time at hand and don't know what to do with it, I might recreate the interesting levels by hand.
...he also published two other DOS packs under the name KillerMaster.I see ssam1221Lemmings.zip and LemmixPlayer_ssam1221.zip (which I already converted to produce the updated NeoLemmix pack). You talk about a third pack. Which one do you talk about?