[SUGGESTION][EDITOR] Multiple backgrounds for tilesets

[GigaLem]

Im kinda at a stand still with FP tilesets if I want to upgrade them
As of this post, the editor only supports 1 background per set
so since i dont want to have this happen with the sets
"giga_dragon1, giga_dragon2, difference is background"
I have two ways of going about this

1.when you insert a background into the editor and there is a background already in the level, the other background with replace the currently existing one
or
2.make background be another "insert" option, like "Insert terrain, Insert object, Insert steel" but be "Insert Background"

and because fp stages usually have 2 or more backgrounds per stage, im adamant about upgrading ATM

[namida]

Currently, backgrounds aren't placed in a level at all. If you use a graphic set that has a background, the level has a background.

"giga_dragon1, giga_dragon2, difference is background"

As I mentioned in chat, I strongly advise against trying to use workarounds of any nature as it will complicate things in the future, both for you (maintaining the graphic sets) and for people who've made levels using your sets; just make do with one until a change is made in NeoLemmix to support more.

But this workaround is especially bad - there's no need to create two identical sets with different backgrounds since NeoLemmix now allows multiple sets in a single level. There's no stable editor release that supports this yet, but there is an experimental one that does; the way it works is that whatever graphic set is active when you save the level becomes the level's "primary" graphic set, and things such as brick / minimap colors and the background are determined by the primary set.

[Nepster]

I am still doubtful whether multiple background images are useful:

Claim 1) Plaformer games have different needs than IRS^* games regarding background.
- In IRS games every single pixel counts, while it suffices to know the rough shape of the terrain in platformer games (at least for the garden variety of them).
- Usually you don't have to plan anything in advance and can hop around a lot in platformers without the level becoming impossible. So finding platforms can actually be part of the game content. IRS games on the other hand almost always require knowledge of all terrain parts even before being able to start solving the level. In particular finding terrain is certainly not why a player plays an IRS game.
- Moreover the background in platformers quite often stays fixed, while the terrain in front scrolls.
All three factors reduce the need of contrast between background and terrain in platformer games, while we need a lot more contrast in IRS games.
Corollary to Claim 1: Avoid copying backgrounds from platformer games without heavily modifying them to ensure a good contrast between terrain and background.
^*IRS = Interactive Rodent Simulation = Lemmings-like games

Claim 2) The current background images in NL styles tend to be too bright and distracting.
IchoTolot criticized the background in "Jade Creek from Freedom Planet" and Simon was annoyed by the background in the first version of zanzindorf's contest level. I tend to agree with both assessments. The best background image was the one namida experimented with: The menu background added to the dirt style. But even this reduced the constrast between terrain and air a lot.
Corollary to Claim 2: The currently available content does not make a strong argument to keep - nevermind extend - the background image feature.

Claim 3) Multiple background images make recognizing terrain even harder
With one background image repeating itself, the player soon knows how the background should look like. With multiple background images, one never knows whether a change in color or theme is due to existing terrain pieces or due to a different background images.
Consider the example image for "Thermal Base from Freedom Planet": To the right of the exit there are huge "windows" between steel pillars. Do they consist of solid terrain or are they background? (I tend to solid...)
Or consider the example image for "Battalio from Freedom Planet": If there wouldn't be so much other terrain in front of the green building with one-way-arrows not extending onto the green stuff, I would have thought it would be solid terrain. And is the air-ship to the right of the green building solid or not? On the one hand, it certainly looks like a special terrain piece that puts a few obstacles in the way of lemmings walking over it, but on the other hand it seems a bit too dull compared to other terrain.
What do all three examples have in common? All these terrain/background parts appear precisely once in the levels. If the background image would automatically be repeating itself, then I could easily compare the respective parts with other parts of the level and make a reasonable guess. But with multiple background images, I am left to try walking there and see what happens...
Corollary to Claim 3: Multiple background images have the tendency to make recognizing terrain even harder, if they do not use the same color theme.

[namida]

Backgrounds are a primarily artistic feature, and artistic stuff sometimes means sacrificing visual clarity. I don't know that I want to limit such an option too much; rather, a solution that can work for both the kind of players who want impressive visuals and the kind of players who want clear physics is ideal.

Here's the first attempt at a solution to suit both players. Backgrounds remain working as is. Want very clear visibility of terrain, without any background interfering?

Hit the appropriate hotkey (default: T) and this happens. You can even configure whether the display mode toggles when the key is pressed, or the alternative mode is active while the key is held. (Default is the latter.)

There is room for improvement here. The first thing to come to mind is instead of one solid color, it should be a checkered pattern with two different colors, to make it easier to judge distances. The other question would be if some kind of similar effect should apply for objects - even if it's just displaying their trigger areas without any special indicators of what type.

(The level used in the sample image doesn't have a background, but on levels that do, the background is removed while in the alternate mode.)

Another possibility is having a user-side "disable backgrounds" option. I'm not sure if this should override background colors too (since for example, in the crystal set, physics would actually be /less/ clear if it does remove the background color), or only images.

EDIT: Just to be clear, this option is not in any currently-released version (whether experimental or stable). It's something I've added for the next update.

[namida]

Improved version, with alternating pixel colors so distances can be judged more easily.

[Simon]

Giga: Your tilesets and backgrounds look beautiful, I loved the screenshots. Yet I don't want backgrounds or decoration during play.

namida: Checkered terrain, clearly separated from checkered steel: Excellent idea.

I believe disable-decoration and reveal-physics are two separate boolean options. I advise against mingling them in a single three-way option. I believe that I never want bgs, but occasionally toggle reveal-physics during play.

Show trigger areas in reveal-physics.

-- Simon

[namida]

I believe disable-decoration and reveal-physics are two separate boolean options. I advise against mingling them in a single three-way option. I believe that I never want bgs, but occasionally toggle reveal-physics during play.

My intent was to have these as two seperate options. While the clear physics mode is not remembered between levels (this could be changed if people feel strongly enough that it should be), the "Disable backgrounds" setting would be.

Show trigger areas in reveal-physics.

Any proposals on how this should be done without interfering with the clarity of terrain display?

[IchoTolot]

I believe that I never want bgs, but occasionally toggle reveal-physics during play.

Well for tilesets which have dark tiles I bet you definitely want a bg     Or have fun playing L2 Shadow levels with a black bg again.

There are good and bad bgs:  Good bgs help you recognise stuff better and improve the visual side of levels. I would hint at the shadow background again for the recognisable side and L3 biolab for the visual effect.   If the bg is not too similar to the terrain they are a great addition. Bag bgs make you question what is part of the level and what's not.

To always turn bgs off can also lead to distance the level from what the author had in mind and decrease the value of the level as a whole. As I value presentation (decoration and music) to be a great part of the level. It should be valued as well as a good solution! + It is also dangerous to turn them always off: You may run into cases like L2 shadow rage about the tileset and then discover that there was actually a way to make stuff better recognisable and avoid all the raging.

[namida]

^ This is why I was wondering whether the disable background option should disable all backgrounds, or only background images (while leaving background colors intact).

[Simon]

for tilesets which have dark tiles I bet you definitely want a bg

Yeah, a light bg color on dark tiles is OK. I want strong contrast between tiles and air.

To always turn bgs off can also lead to distance the level from what the author had in mind and decrease the value of the level as a whole. As I value presentation (decoration and music) to be a great part of the level. It should be valued as well as a good solution!

I value the command-line. Should everybody use the computer like I do?

Apart from this, there is a deeper cultural problem.

In Germany, there were GEZ Schergen. If you didn't pay for state television, they would visit you and suggest that you register for the montly payment, or register you themselves. And peddlers travel from door to door, selling washing machines, household equipment, and internet service provider contracts.

The user-side solution was to never answer the doorbell, unless you expected someone particular.

The more severe an extreme case is, the higher I will want my defenses up against anything similar. The bees and Giga's bgs are well over the threshold. The L2-Shadow stars are slightly below, but other things in the L2-Shadow set are above the threshold again.

-- Simon

[IchoTolot]

I value the command-line. Should everybody use the computer like I do?

Apart from this, there is a deeper cultural problem.

In Germany, there were GEZ Schergen. If you didn't pay for state television, they would visit you and suggest that you register for the montly payment, or register you themselves. And peddlers travel from door to door, selling washing machines, household equipment, and internet service provider contracts.

The user-side solution was to never answer the doorbell, unless you expected someone particular.

The more severe an extreme case is, the higher I will want my defenses up against anything similar. The bees and Giga's bgs are well over the threshold. The L2-Shadow stars are slightly below, but other things in the L2-Shadow set are above the threshold again.

I don't really care for the deeper cultural problem here. I only care about the lemming level case.

I personally don't want to destroy the scenario the author had in mind for me to experience. I want to give that a fair chance. If this comes out unfair on the playing area I still can turn things off later for it, but first let's see what the author had in mind.

Also I whish for my stuff as well that the user experience it first as I had it intended for them. I have made a lot of thoughts about it and it is nice to see it beeing apprechiated.

For me I find it disrespectful to not give the other authors intention a fair chance. But that's my personal attitude.

[mobius]

I am still doubtful whether multiple background images are useful:

Claim 2) The current background images in NL styles tend to be too bright and distracting.
IchoTolot criticized the background in "Jade Creek from Freedom Planet" and Simon was annoyed by the background in the first version of zanzindorf's contest level. I tend to agree with both assessments. The best background image was the one namida experimented with: The menu background added to the dirt style. But even this reduced the constrast between terrain and air a lot.
Corollary to Claim 2: The currently available content does not make a strong argument to keep - nevermind extend - the background image feature.

Claim 3) Multiple background images make recognizing terrain even harder
With one background image repeating itself, the player soon knows how the background should look like. With multiple background images, one never knows whether a change in color or theme is due to existing terrain pieces or due to a different background images.
Consider the example image for "Thermal Base from Freedom Planet": To the right of the exit there are huge "windows" between steel pillars. Do they consist of solid terrain or are they background? (I tend to solid...)
Or consider the example image for "Battalio from Freedom Planet": If there wouldn't be so much other terrain in front of the green building with one-way-arrows not extending onto the green stuff, I would have thought it would be solid terrain. And is the air-ship to the right of the green building solid or not? On the one hand, it certainly looks like a special terrain piece that puts a few obstacles in the way of lemmings walking over it, but on the other hand it seems a bit too dull compared to other terrain.
What do all three examples have in common? All these terrain/background parts appear precisely once in the levels. If the background image would automatically be repeating itself, then I could easily compare the respective parts with other parts of the level and make a reasonable guess. But with multiple background images, I am left to try walking there and see what happens...
Corollary to Claim 3: Multiple background images have the tendency to make recognizing terrain even harder, if they do not use the same color theme.

Clam 2) Just because something hasn't been done well  [in some people's opinion] doesn't mean it can't be done well.* I agree that a lot of the backgrounds that have been made in the past for NL and more for Lemmini have been too bright and distracting.

Another matter of making the background easier to distinguish is making it simpler; a complex background is more confusing. Dark, simple, maybe even a blurry effect (not sure this can be achieved effectively with small images) can make excellent backgrounds and accent the level well without becoming the least bit distracting.

Lemmings Revolution actually is a decent example° There are many background color/textures to the levels which mostly contrast the level nicely+ the outside area (there are 4 types of these) with rather complex features (like a town) but they're removed from the play area so they don't distract.#

°minus the minor stuff overlapping the game play area; everything else about it is excellent. Yes, this game also features a good example of the worst possible background image: something blocking view of the level completely.

Claim 3) If the background(s) is significantly enough different enough from the terrain so telling the difference is super easy (as I believe it should be) then this won't matter. If you come to a new level, with a new background; if the above is true it should be just as simple as playing a level with new terrain you've never encountered before. Speaking of which, it's still true, imo, that some of the newer terrain sets have STEEL which is not super easily recognizable immediately. I can't remember off hand which they were.

Basically I agree with most of your points here; but like I said above; just because it's done that way, doesn't mean it can't be done another way? So why say 'no more than one background image just because you don't like the current examples'?

*I don't mean to insult anyone's effort on making graphics. Lately everyone who's made new graphics look very beautiful

#It occurs to me again this is one of the things Revolution does really well; maybe why I love the graphics of that game so much. For starters they are very subdued, easy on the eyes, relaxing to look at. And even in that realm, there are quite a few good contrasting terrain/background


EDIT: another idea; which I'm sort of sure has been talked about before and probably shot down, was a background which moves at a slower speed than the foreground. They of course; may get more confusing to some people. But it would differentiate the background from the foreground every time you scroll. I'm not super-in favor of this idea, but just mentioning it.

EDIT: I want to add that if any changes are made; I'd greatly appreciate the automatic background system removed. If someone doesn't want to use a background; they shouldn't have to just because it exists. They should be added by the editor; either as an object as-is or as a separate function within the editor. And some way of dealing with the vertical aspect of an images is needed too. As I understand it; currently background objects wrap horizontally but not vertically? I think they should wrap this way too; for levels that might be taller than 160.

And I just realized something else: if the automatic background function is kept, how would that work now that terrain mixing is introduced?
--After testing; it seems that it will take the background of whatever terrain set is picked last.

[namida]

As I understand it; currently background objects wrap horizontally but not vertically? I think they should wrap this way too; for levels that might be taller than 160.

No idea where you got this from. The background tiles in both directions.

EDIT: another idea; which I'm sort of sure has been talked about before and probably shot down, was a background which moves at a slower speed than the foreground. They of course; may get more confusing to some people. But it would differentiate the background from the foreground every time you scroll. I'm not super-in favor of this idea, but just mentioning it.

This would be tricky to implement, but if there's strong enough demand I'm open to doing so.

And I just realized something else: if the automatic background function is kept, how would that work now that terrain mixing is introduced?
--After testing; it seems that it will take the background of whatever terrain set is picked last.

Yes; this is because the one that's selected in the Level Properties window becomes the level's primary graphic set; which determines things like brick color and indeed background. In fact, the intent is to change this setting to "Primary graphic set" specifically; but in order to do that, I first need to rewrite the terrain / object selection boxes to allow choosing from other sets there.

[GigaLem]

One last thing topic, not to go off topic but, is it possible to move the background, like not have a big level just so you can focus on this piece of the level with the back ground fitting?
Unless that is possible already

[namida]

One last thing topic, not to go off topic but, is it possible to move the background, like not have a big level just so you can focus on this piece of the level with the back ground fitting?
Unless that is possible already

Not currently possible, but I can implement it in the future.