Quote from: Simon on August 23, 2026, 09:42:29 PMIn DOS Lemmings 1's We All Fall Down, I now believe that digger-digger cancelling isn't possible in a way to produce a permanent staircase. Your 2-digger solution is thus NeoLemmix-only.

Those are not the only two platforms! Digger cancelling is possible on Amiga, Mac, Genesis and SNES (although Genesis doesn't allow RR changes while paused, and I believe that means WAFD requires 3 diggers minimum).

Flopsy filed this after a discussion that his level loading was slow. He said that some Lix levels took 5 seconds to load on cold disk cache, and similarly NL levels took a while to load. This can be mere coincidence, or it can point at a real connection.

Debugging idea: Introduce artificial delay in level loading or in tile loading. E.g., every tile loaded freshly from disk should make its loading thread sleep for 100 ms, or do some absurd extra file I/O like logging numbers from 1 through 10,000. Maybe the delay helps with reproducing this bug?

-- Simon

Jingles or other sound effects can help. Fireworks/party streamers/ticker tape/confetti. 'CONGRATULATIONS!' in big green letters. A Lix holding a trophy for a win. A Lix crying for a loss

Quote from: Simon on August 23, 2026, 09:24:47 PMLemmings 3 happens to implement what you're considering. Solutions from an action replay don't count ("learner mode") for progression. Feature is meticulously implemented, but you're not supposed to use it until you've proven your worth. Reaction by Kieran:

Quote from: kieranmillar on July 17, 2023, 10:54:20 PMusing the replay feature makes the solve not count (why oh why did they do this? Idiots)

They did this because using the replay system to solve a level was probably considered cheating (or at least contradictory to the spirit of the game as it was intended to be played) by the developers. Otherwise, of course they wouldn't have implemented it in this way.

Part of the original challenge of Lemmings was to be able to solve the level in one single playthrough. If you could do that, you'd beaten the level good and proper, fair and square. And, of course you could pause the level to take a moment to set up your next action, but all assignments had to be made in real-time: that was a legitimate and enjoyable part of the challenge. I can't be the only player that thinks like this.

Anyway, RetroLemmini has already sacrificed some of this by having a replay system. So did Windows '95 Lemmings (which also allowed assign-whilst-paused). And yet, it never felt like it was getting in the way or completely ruining that aspect of the game because it wasn't used for fine-tweaking.

Most of the time when playing in RetroLemmini (which is currently my preferrd engine for actually playing Lemmings), I click to cancel my previous replay because I want to mostly do the solution over and don't care about sacrificing a few assignments; a fresh start is preferable. Again, I cannot be the only player who thinks like this.

Conversely - when I'm playing in NeoLemmix/Lix, I use backwards framestepping, of course - why wouldn't I. But, it makes the game feel totally different. Specifically: there are no real-time stakes at all. Nothing I do really matters because I can just skip back and redo it immediately. It feels like I'm editing a video clip rather than playing a video game. This is fundamentally a different way to play, and it matters.

Is that closer to the holistic argument you were hoping for? I'd be happy to unpack my thoughts on this further. And make no mistake: I would never want the player assists to be removed from Lix, NeoLemmix or even SuperLemmix. I just want to be very careful about adding them to RetroLemmini.

Flopsy has reported that this bug is still present in NLCE.

Help welcome.

Looking at the video again, this is a repeat of this bug in SuperLemmix. I never did figure out exactly what was causing it because it's impossible to test for. It happens randomly, and there are no definite steps that will cause it to happen. I can click many times in the Level Select menu and not duplicate the reported behaviour.

So, unless anyone has any debugging suggestions, this might be another one we just have to live with.

Lix 0.10.33

I played a singleplayer level with save requirement 20/20. I put one blocker, saved the 19 other lix, then nuked the blocker and announced to the livestream viewers that I had won the level.

No! The end-of-level screen should look sufficiently different after a loss than after a win. Maybe winning needs a big green checkmark that flies into view and smacks onto the table of statistics. This is obviously kitsch, but it shows the degree of difference that we might want. Ideally, I'd show the button for the next level on the end-of-level screen, still. Or should there be an extra button first to click that makes the next level appear as a button on the end-of-level screen?

Or: Nuking a lost level shouldn't end the map. But how should people quit the level with the mouse then ...

Winning looks like losing, what an embarrasing UI fail. The most fundamental aftermath of a game (singleplayer or multiplayer) is immediate clarity of whether you've cut the mustard or not.

-- Simon

In Lix, since version 0.10.12 from June 2023, you can choose to always be in insert mode. (By default, you're only in insert mode when the tweaker is open.)

I configured Lix to always-insert. Then I played Flopsy's yet-unreleased levels (easier ones from SEBLems and Gotta Go Fast) for almost 3 hours on livestream. I got confused at least once, IIRC even a second time. Both times, I didn't have the tweaker open. How exactly did I get confused? I'll have to re-watch the 3-hour vod and tell you in detail. This is the playtest that I promised.

For now, I can't yet fully recommend to make it a single mode. I didn't change the Lix option defauls yet, either. In Lix 0.10.34 from yesterday, the default is still that you're in insert mode if and only if the tweaker is open.

I'll still have more to answer from all your posts.

-- Simon

Congratulations!

In DOS Lemmings 1's We All Fall Down, I now believe that digger-digger cancelling isn't possible in a way to produce a permanent staircase. Your 2-digger solution is thus NeoLemmix-only. The best in DOS is to send a few lemmings at once  through a single digger hole in progress. Some DOS releases have the wrong fall distance where the level becomes a 0-skill solve.

Yes, zoom into the relevant details as you explain them.

Scrolling was a tad wild. Consider to scroll ... hm, not necessarily less, but ... more peacefully and deliberately, overall. It can be hard to follow otherwise. Give the audience a second to catch up after scrolling and zooming. Explain during the stable view. Wild pointing with the mouse is perfectly fine during a stable view.

Looking forward to the show!

-- Simon

Lemmings was good in 1991 despite lack of action replay, not because of lack.

I'll rob you for $5000 and give you back $2000 as a reward for not telling the police. That's a good reward, $2000, it's a lot more than $1000. This is why I wrote: instead of punishing/locking. Different feeling.

Lemmings 3 happens to implement what you're considering. Solutions from an action replay don't count ("learner mode") for progression. Feature is meticulously implemented, but you're not supposed to use it until you've proven your worth. Reaction by Kieran:

Quote from: kieranmillar on July 17, 2023, 10:54:20 PMusing the replay feature makes the solve not count (why oh why did they do this? Idiots)

What I really hoped to see was a holistic argument. Why do all those design decisions make the best possible whole? I'm sure that, yes, you can continue to tell me nice stories about every individual choice however it turns out. X is easy to implement, Y easy to understand, Z is already implemented so it would be more work to cut it and some users would act up, W is optional control feature and we'll continue to support both yes W and no W, ..., but why is this exact collection of choices/features the overall best-suited?

I'm not even arguing that you have to implement rewind at all costs. Maybe drudgework is exactly the right cost for what you envision. Unlikely but possible. Unlikely enough to seek alternatives.

-- Simon