The update seems great so far, made a quick test level to see the new disarmer sprite in action - looking good! Thanks for including this

A couple of (probably daft) questions:

1. All of the "orig" styles are no longer in the "styles" folder, it would seem... (I downloaded the one attached to the OP). Do I need to copy these across from 12.6.5, along with any others missing from 12.7.1? At the moment, all the levels are made up of grey and black chequered tiles and won't actually load.

2. There is no longer a "panel" folder in "styles>default". Has this been moved elsewhere?

Cheers,

-WillLem

Here is the complete set of hi-res xmas sprites! I know you're not doing anything with these straightaway, but they're here. Feel free to have a gander and let me know if any changes need to be made.

-WillLem

P.S. All the best for the 12.7.0 release tomorrow! Looking forward to it

EDIT: I've made a couple of changes today (11/11) and re-uploaded the pack.

Quote from: WillLem on October 30, 2019, 06:51:19 PM

Backwards framestepping. A great feature which saves a lot of time replaying a level from the start each time you make a mistake.

This is far from a trivial task, since it requires remembering the state of every frame, or at least the difference between each frame, which SuperLemmini does not do. Still, I will look into adding it, but don't expect it to be in the next version.

Fair enough, I'm very much a beginner (currently learning Java and Python) so I'd have no idea how to do this myself at the moment. How about, in the meantime, adding a restart button to the panel? Like in NeoLemmix, it could restart the level instantly into replay mode and save time having to nuke-then-view-replay when a mistake is made. I've attached graphics I made for this, including for the xmas mod, if it would be easy enough to implement (see attached PNGs).

Quote from: WillLem on October 30, 2019, 06:51:19 PM

User hotkeys/mouse button configuration. This would be a very welcome feature if possible.

Yeah, I'll try to add this to the next version.

Quote from: WillLem on October 30, 2019, 06:51:19 PM

A levelpack creator, right there in the levels menu. Since importing external levels is already possible, it would be even better if there were a way of compiling levels into a pack, complete with difficulty rankings, music selection, and other stuff generally associated with making a simple level pack. The current method for compiling levelpacks is way too difficult and frustrating if you don't know what you're doing (which I really don't!). The PackToolKit for NeoLemmix is kind of what I'm imagining, but integrated into the main GUI (I've attached a picture of what I mean - the creator itself could be a separate mini-application, but launched from within the level selector).

I should be able add this.

Great stuff! Looking forward to seeing these, particularly the levelpack creator.

Quote from: WillLem on October 30, 2019, 06:51:19 PM

Compatibility with the latest NeoLemmix Editor, or - a SuperLemmini level editor capable of saving levels as .ini, .lvl and .nxlv. This might be a whole other project... I'm currently taking beginner lessons in Java so I might be able to get on this myself before too long. Maybe.

NXLV level support is planned, but isn't guaranteed to be in the next version. I'm not quite up to speed on the format right now, but I'm pretty sure it references objects and tiles by name rather than number, so I would need to think about how to work with that.

This would be great as it would be possible to effectively make NeoLemmix and SuperLemmini levels at the same time, plus the whole inventory of nxlv packs currently available in NeoLemmix would be available to play in SuperLemmini (well, those that use the standard graphics sets or that provide hi-res graphics, at least). Plus, Namida is planning a hi-res update for NeoLemmix which should mean that, in theory, more hi-res content will be produced.

I'm not really sure how any of it works at a coding level tbh, although I am willing to learn so that I can understand the magic a bit better and have a better idea of what it is I'm suggesting/requesting...

Quote from: WillLem on October 30, 2019, 06:51:19 PM

A "SuperLemmini" title graphic on the main menu screen, to distinguish it from the original Lemmini. I'd be more than happy to design one for you if you like.

If you can make a new logo, I'd love to see it!

See attached prototype!

Thanks for considering my feedback and requests.

All best,

-WillLem

By "LVL" format, do you mean DOS Lemmings format (grab a copy of Holiday Lemmings 94, you can use DATPacker to unpack the LEVELxxx.DAT files), or NeoLemmix LVL format (try the NeoLemmix source code git repo; check the branches for older versions - although I'm not sure exactly when I started including these in the repo).

Despite the same extension, these formats are not the same. You can tell which a file is by the filesize - DOS LVL files are always exactly 2KB. NeoLemmix LVL files towards the end of the old-formats era can be any size, while earlier ones will usually be exactly 10KB.

I mean NeoLemmix .lvl format.

Sometimes, when 1.43 doesn't want me to open a particular .ini file (or if no .ini file exists for a particular level), I can open the equivalent .lvl file instead and choose NeoLemmix from the style menu. I can then save it and open it in SuperLemmini, which automatically generates a .ini file which can then be opened in 1.43 (as long as the graphics sets are there)!

Or, if anyone knows how to make it so that my copy of 1.43 can find the "xmas" tilesets, this would solve the problem and I wouldn't need to use the workaround (which involves sourcing .lvl versions of the xmas levels).

I'll have another look at it later today, but if anyone has any ideas in the meantime (that turn out to work) there's a virtual Mars bar in it for you*

Cheers,

-WillLem


*Disclaimer - By this, I mean I will send you a picture of a Mars bar**. No actual chocolate will be provided in exchange for services rendered in regards to this matter. Thank you for noticing this notice.

**Disclaimer addendum - I won't actually send anybody a picture of a Mars bar for helping me with this, but I will send good thoughts. Thank you.

Quote from: WillLem on November 05, 2019, 12:52:35 AM

I agree with IchoTolot that upscaling might look a bit odd... I think it might be simpler to make it so that if a user chooses high-res mode, they only have access to content that has high-res graphics created for it (and vice versa). This would encourage creators to provide custom graphics in both resolutions in order to reach maximum people.

That sounds like a bit of a content maintenance and user experience nightmare, to be honest. Users who select the high-res mode might be confused as to why some levels disappear when they select it, while content creators would have to either give up styles that lack high-res versions or pester people to change their graphics settings in order to play their levels. There's few enough original styles as it is anyway, as the vast majority of custom styles are game rips. Forcing people to provide two sets of graphics in order to avoid having their style cause issues with the player will exacerbate this problem as well as create bloated style downloads: high-res graphics necessarily significantly increase the size of the style, since now there's two copies of everything, but styles created in low-res may simply be upscaled to prevent the game from hiding levels from high-res users, resulting in a style that is at minimum twice (plus probably extra because the second copy has 4x the pixels) as big as it needs to be if the game could simply upscale the graphics itself.

Good point, well made. In that case, probably best to go with up/downscaling (as is Namida's preference anyway) - as mentioned in my post, I'm for whichever method is easiest for everyone.

Quote from: namida on October 04, 2019, 07:48:17 PM

Matters still under discussion between RC and stable
- Neutral lemmings - do we want a count to be displayed when mousing over?

Any further input on this? It seems that aside from the person who initially mentioned this, no one's too fussed about it. (Of course, this feature can come later, so it's not critical to decide now.) It would be a bit of extra work to get this done, so while I'm happy to do it if there is enough interest, I'm not going to do it if there isn't.

SL does this. It's a fairly useful feature, but if it's a lot of work then NL already has plenty of Lemming selection/control features which would make this one simply a pleasant add-on.

Thanks for the shout-out regarding the sprites; I had fun making these, it'd be great to see them in use!

I am obviously in 100% support of this happening, I think that NeoLemmix is a very capable Lemmings engine and offers some exciting new features which enhance and re-imagine the classic game of Lemmings. When I switch from SuperLemmini to NeoLemmix there's always the feeling that whilst the engine itself is more capable, the graphics just...aren't as pleasing, which is a shame because some users have created excellent custom content.

However, as I've mentioned in numerous other posts, there are things which make NeoLemmix way better (continued support, framestepping, in-game skill previews, in-game clear physics, the list goes on...) hence the reason I'd fully encourage a visual uplift.

To address your questions, and speaking as someone who knows very little absolutely nothing about developing and maintaining software, but who knows a lot about art, music, enjoying a good game of Lemmings and making things look pretty:

- Should graphic sets remain required to provide low-res copies of graphics, or should it be acceptable to provide only high-res ones (and NL downscales these for players using low-res mode)? Or perhaps, should it be required for terrain (due to terrain directly impacting physics) but optional for everything else? (My thought: Downscaling is fine, as long as it's a custom-implemented algorithm and not reliant on the graphic library's downscaling algorithm.)

I would suggest that this is down to the user/creator - if they want their content to be played by as many people as possible, they should provide both high and low-res graphics. Not only would this be simpler from an engine point of view (I can imagine), but it would give the creator full control over how their content will look to the end-user.

- If a user is playing in high-res mode and encounters a level that some / all components of don't have high-res versions, should NL fall back to low-res, or try to upscale the low-res pieces? (My thought: Upscale.)

I agree with IchoTolot that upscaling might look a bit odd... I think it might be simpler to make it so that if a user chooses high-res mode, they only have access to content that has high-res graphics created for it (and vice versa). This would encourage creators to provide custom graphics in both resolutions in order to reach maximum people.

- If a user is playing in high-res mode and specifically custom lemming sprites that are in use don't have high-res versions, what's preferable as a fallback: upscaling of the equivalent low-res sprites, or use of the default high-res sprites? (My thought: Again, upscale.)

Again, I would keep each mode exclusive so that content from one mode won't work in the other unless there is an equivalent graphic.

In addition to all of the above points, I would say that the priority should always be to keep things as simple as possible for everyone concerned. If it would be easier to simply upscale/downscale graphics in either scenario, then - of course, go with this option!

- Is it important for the editor to support high-res mode? This would be a lot of work to implement. (My thought: No. Editor is fine to remain low-res.)

Would this mean that the Editor couldn't be used to create hi-res content? Or would it work similar to creating a .lvl level in 1.43 and then saving it as a .ini - the Editor automatically chooses the correct equivalent graphics for the resolution? If the latter, this is absolutely fine as a way of getting levels made.

Just out of interest - if NeoLemmix Editors in the past have been more than capable of handling multiple formats and resolutions, why the shift towards restricting the format? I can imagine it's to keep things simpler...

Let me know if there's anything I can do to help with any of this. I'm currently working on:

- Hi-res Xmas sprites (these are nearly done, I'll send a pack over soon)
- Hi-res NeoLemmix-exclusive elements (buttons, pickup discs, splitters... if anyone has a list of these that'd be helpful in compiling them)
- Hi-res panel/buttons (these will have the chunky cartooniness of the Windows ones but the more crisp, familiar style of the DOS/Amiga ones - see my current low-res custom panel for an idea of what I'm aiming for. I'll create "clicked" versions of these as well in case you want the option to have tactile buttons). It would be good to back-and-forth these with someone to get a final version that everyone's happy with.

All best,

-WillLem

Invisible stuff would be much more of a game-altering gimmick like the double-speed in "Introducing SUPERLEMMING" in my opinion.  And seeing other examples of gimmicks that had existed (eg. the ones namida once added to NeoLemmix, back before it was even called NeoLemmix), I would also argue invisible stuff is amongst one of the least creative and least interesting gimmick even for people who like game-altering gimmicks here and there.

And in any case, the original game designers also have the sense to not repeat a gimmicky concept, except maybe "We All Fall Down" if you consider that a gimmicky level--and I think most agree that it's pretty superfluous to repeat it 4 times anyway--it'd be plenty effective enough to do it once in Fun and again in Mayhem.  Whereas it sounded like you were very much planning to repeat the same invisibility gimmick over multiple levels.

OK... just to discuss the point, I think that there's nothing wrong with a well-used invisible element in a one-off level, which is what my intention was (I'm unsure where you got the impression that I would repeat the idea over multiple levels - to be fair, my previous post specifically states that the idea was intended as a "one-off gimmick level").

The level was made entirely for fun and in good spirit, not intended to troll at all. OK, so it was a bit of a cheesy idea, but I figured it would at least get a chuckle from one or two people, maybe... OK, maybe not!

If you think the way I decided to use invisibility is not particularly interesting or creative, then that's fine - opinions are opinions. However, I don't agree that the concept in and of itself is not interesting or creative; it's how it gets used. Having said that, I'd probably agree that, for the most part, invisible stuff is best left as easter-eggs or side-quests, rather than the main game solution.

Anyway, if people on this forum don't like the idea or are bored of it now, that's fine, I can go along with that. But I still believe that it's possible to come up with an interesting and/or creative way to use any game element (including invisibility) - otherwise I wouldn't be spending time making Lemmings levels! I hope that I get better at it as time goes on...

If these levels are good levels in and of themself, make the invisible parts visible. If they're bad levels and the only reason they exist is the invisible stuff gimmick, get rid of them - the invisible stuff doesn't make them better, it makes them worse.

The golden rule is - a player who's familiar with the graphic set your level is using, should be able to take one look at your level and know exactly what's solid vs not solid, what's steel, what will kill their lemmings, etc. 9 times out of 10, invisible parts violate this rule.

---

You're not alone in thinking that invisible / hidden elements are fun. Almost everyone does when they first start creating levels - myself included back when I started. And that's where the problem lies - it is indeed an interesting concept when it's done once. It's just annoying when you encounter it for the 100th time. And most of us here have had those first 99 encounters by now...

OK, OK, I get it - I'm new and you guys have probably seen it all before! I've chalked this one up to experience and redone the levels. In my wisdom, I do understand that part of joining a forum is accepting the accepted standards, and only questioning them if it's useful to do so. In this case, I think it probably isn't!

I guess I should thank you all for encouraging me to think a bit more about the levels I'm making. Since this conversation started I've ditched a couple of other levels that could perhaps have been regarded as troll-ish and changed up a few elements of others. All part of the learning process.