What we lack and need the most. Icho's observations and planned future steps.

[IchoTolot]

As I am quite busy this month, I took a step back and observed the current situation. I made thoughts about this and tried to come up with a plan for myself for "what's next?". As a result, I also saw what in my opinion is underrepresented in NL and desperately needs more attention.

So what is it what we lack and need?

It's basically a combination of 2 things that are connected to each other: Beginner packs and proper maintenance of content!

The lack of easier packs in the new format version is known, but how did it come to this? We had an abundance of packs in old Lemmini/Lemmix/NL with relatively easy levels. Due to no maintenance at all or at least a lack of doing maintenance they are either forgotten, inaccesible, or completly outdated now. This results in new players coming in slower and are less likely to stick around.

Simply telling people to update packs won't cut it here. Either nothing will happen, or 1 update will roll out that will after time has passed be outdated again. Also doing it yourself only results in you getting all future work related to this pack.

As a result, what will be my future steps?

First of all, the NL community pack is coming along better now. Levels are slowly trickling in and everything is replay covered. But what to do againat the maintenance and new player issue?

Here I unfortunately must say as hard as it sounds: You can only count on a small number of people to keep packs functional. That's why I think the best strategy is to personally address the peoblem as I can then assure that the content is functional and up-to-date.

As countermeasures I plan on doing 2 things: A new NL-Introduction Pack and something I think about calling Lemmings Isolation.

The new NL-Introduction pack point should be clear: We need a new introduction pack for new players and the next thing for me to do should be to start working on that.

What's Lemmings Isolation? Well, it's simple: (NL Intro Pack ->) Isolation -> Reunion -> United. They together should form a difficulty curve, with Isolation being the easiest pack of the three. Players should have no problem jumping from the introduction pack to Isolation and work their way up. The introduction pack should teach them the basics, Isolation should bring in routine and experience, Reunion should make them veterans and United shall make them masters.


So my planned schedule for executing this plan is:

1.) Start with making the NL Introduction Pack beginning next month.
2.) While the Intro-Pack is in construction, all new harder or not fitting levels will go into United or already be gathered for Isolation.
3.) After the Intro-Pack is completed, begin working on Isolation.

As I said: New harder levels and also new shimmier levels will probably be added to United while working on the other projects.

As a result of all of this, I probably will put the NL-source-code reading on ice for now, as I think these areas are way more critical in the current state. Yes new functions are nice, but the content is lacking and lagging behind. And in a pinch, I still have the code ready to go.

I also plan on updating the manual when the shimmier is released, as this will require quite a few things to be changed in there. At last, over the next days the new contest should pop up.

[namida]

Just wondering, have you heard from Nepster lately? He hasn't been active on the forums for a while now, as far as I can see.

If he's not active, and you're focusing on content, I may need to look after at least getting the Shimmier / secondary-anims / 10 skills features into a stable version...

Regarding the introduction pack, I have an abandoned new introduction pack that I was working on for a while. I'll send it to you so, if you like, you can use it as a starting point (and if you don't want to, that's fine too). EDIT: If I can find it... it looks like I don't have it either in Git or in my NeoLemmix folder, maybe I lost it. EDIT: Nope, found it!

[IchoTolot]

I haven't heard from Nepster lately, but it is most likely the case that he is currently busy as well.

In regard to the started Intro-pack, I'll take a look at what you have there when I start.

[grams88]

Hi IchoTolot, Hi everyone

I wonder if we should think about preserving old packs or old format packs, that way it can last forever if you get my drift. Lets say for instance I remember someone on the forum talking about updating their level pack but updating it might cause them to maybe alter some of the levels in their pack, does that not create a lot of hassle itself. God forbid if we were to leave this world, who would be updating their pack, would there be a way of keeping a ten year old pack still fresh or even a 20 year old pack, i.e martin zurlinden pack might be near that mark. I wonder if there might need to be a way when you play a pack it automatically goes to the version the pack was really meant for and what I mean by this is when you first created the pack what version was that originally on.

That way a lot of the older packs will be remembered and kept in an achieve of some sort. I know it probably sounds like a long shot idea but it got me thinking, we need to think about the future and preserve things.

[Proxima]

grams88: I'm not sure what, in concrete terms, you are proposing we do.

We have an archive right here. For playing the levels, old versions of NL can be downloaded from the NL website.

About updating levels: the point is that while old packs can be played on old versions, for many creators and players that's not ideal. Some players don't want the hassle of keeping lots of versions and having to switch between them to play different packs; which in turn means that for creators, having their pack available only for old versions narrows its potential audience. Newer versions of NL have better quality-of-life features and (by and large) make for a more enjoyable playing experience.

Some old packs can't be updated without drastic changes, because they contain levels using deprecated features such as radiation and slowfreeze (or gimmicks, going even further in the past). Yes, deciding what changes to make -- whether to adapt levels, remove them or replace them with completely new ones -- is a hassle for the pack creator/maintainer; but some creators have decided it's worth doing so as to get the improved playing experience and wider audience. For packs whose creator has chosen not to update them, the pack doesn't disappear and can still be played.

If we're talking 10-20 years in the future, I believe that NL is likely to stabilise, and any content that does get updated to (or originally created in) new-formats will not need continuous updating to remain playable. We've already abandoned pretty much all the more problematic old features, so further culls are unlikely. The text-based format is good and I don't think there's likely ever to be a change into a third format.

For creators who are no longer around, such as Martin Zurlinden: we have to make some decisions on their behalf, and for packs that don't make extensive use of deprecated features, I think updating the packs to keep them playable on the latest version is more likely to be in line with the creators' wishes than automatically playing them on the version they were made on (which, in the case of MazuLems and many other old packs, is not old-formats NL, but other engines that predate NL altogether).

[Strato Incendus]

The lack of easier packs in the new format version is known, but how did it come to this?

I think I've suggested this earlier already: Self-selection .

The most motivated members on the forum, regarding programming, maintenance etc., have this high level of motivation because they're the most passionate Lemmings players. Since they deal with the game a lot, they're also on average the best ones at the game. Consequently, the levels they create are among the hardest ones.

Conversely, those of us who create less challenging levels often rely on different features to make our levels stand out and fun to play - artistically, thematically etc. Some of the things we've used in the past to achieve this goal were removed during the transition to New Formats, which in some sense may have given the more casual content creators the subconscious impression that the direction NeoLemmix is moving towards maybe isn't for them anymore.

Of course, there's nothing stopping new players from creating fresh, easy packs for New Formats, completely from scratch. When I started out creating levels for Old Formats, most of the packs already existing for Old Formats were too hard for me, including those which I consider on the easy side by now. For me personally, that was precisely why I spent more time creating levels than playing other people's packs - but I may be in the minority here .

For many others, it may work the other way round: They see the existing custom packs for New Formats, can't even beat them, least of all create levels of that difficulty themselves, and as a consequence, might not share levels they would have shared otherwise because they consider them to be crap.

I remember how many disclaimers I put into the release topic of my very first pack, Paralems, telling everyone how it's totally not in line with standard NeoLemmix philosophy and how, as a consequence, it does a lot of things that "purist" NeoLemmix players were going to hate. Other people simply might not take that "risk" in the first place, i.e. sharing an easy pack of which they think the core audience won't appreciate it.

Yes, you only get better by practicing, both with regards to playing and level creation - but how high you set the first hurdle to jump over is crucial when it comes to giving someone the movitation to continue.

[grams88]

Hi everyone

ahhh I spelt Archive wrong in my last post. (lol)

I was probably more thinking about it like for example if say you downloaded a pack it automatically goes to the NL version that was in place at the time the level pack was made. Would that not involve the person making the pack have to do some programming as they would have to program it in such a way. (I'm no programming expert so I have no idea how you would go about this)  As Proxima was saying about people having to keep the old NL versions a lot of people probably don't want that hassle.

I have to admit you guys have got an archive as Proxima was mentioning and I like the way we done it on the level pack website, I think that is Mindless's one where a lot of the old packs are found and many other places such as the link Proxima posted there.

I was thinking more about the future in relation to levels pack becoming forgotten, inaccesible, or completly outdated as IchoTolot was mentioning.

I think the Martin Zurlinden pack is a lot easier compared to the newer packs that are out now, great work from everyone.

[Simon]

This is really 3 issues now that should not be confused.

Easy pack. Make easy NL12 pack that is harder than tutorials. Icho already takes care and plans a project, Isolation, in the middle term.

Porting. Port NL10 packs to NL12. Icho's proposal is to let volunteers to this. This seems to be the correct approach. Normally, the author should maintain their work and has, by unspoken agreement, exclusive rights to publish modified versions.

If the author loses interest, community members should step forward to maintain and publish ports, taking certain liberties when NL10 levels aren't trivial to port. This is a service to both the community and to the original author. The most recent NL10 version by the original author should remain available. The original author may return and reassume maintainership.

In Lix, the content is overseeable at ~800 singleplayer levels across 4 big and many more small packs. I include most packs in the main download and maintain the proof collection for everything. NL is more decentralized, it shouldn't copy what Lix does.

Long-term preservation. You want to guarantee access to the NL10 and NL12 packs for 20 years. This is a separate issue than porting the NL10 packs to NL12. Proxima links to the NL pack list, but that is merely an index, not an archive. What happens if random authors' Dropbox links or Google drive links rot?

It's good that NL offers some packs for download already from within the installer/main pack. Does the NL site mirror these auto-downloadable packs? In general, should the NL website server mirror most packs and their replay proof collections? Should such mirroring merely be backup, or should it become the sacred central place to get packs? What happens if the pack author releases in quick succession and the (manual) mirroring is outdated? Very interesting problems.

-- Simon

[Proxima]

Good points. I'd like to add one more issue:

Accessibility of packs. Suppose I as a new player want to play some NL content. At the moment, there are two ways to do this:

(1) Go to the "Lemmings & Lix Fangame List" (linked above). First problem: it's unclear that this is the place to go. "Fangame list" doesn't say "place to find NL packs". Second problem: Opening the NL tab in the list brings up a list of all NL content, old-formats and new-formats jumbled together with no indication at all of which is which. Third problem: every pack's entry on the list indicates author, number of levels, and a bit of history. As a new player, the absolute most important thing I want to know to help me decide which packs to play is difficulty.

(2) Browse the "NeoLemmix Levels" subforum. At least here, old-formats and new-formats content are separated, and there's no ambiguity about where to look. Still, it's less than ideal that I have to click on each pack's topic to get information about that pack, rather than being able to get an overview. And again, a typical opening post tells me the number of levels, a little about the history, and some pretty pictures to advertise the pack -- but nothing about difficulty.

What I'd love to see is a really good "overview of NL packs" webpage that contains direct download links in addition to links to each pack's topic, and has each pack's author, year of publication, number of levels, and a difficulty rating (or maybe indicates the difficulty range). I accept that difficulty is somewhat subjective, so maybe find some way for the community to put our individual ratings together into a group rating?

On a side note, I'd like to point out that my pack GemLems is a new-formats pack on the easier end of the spectrum, and I want to port Lemmings Redux to new-formats as soon as I've finished watching the replays and deciding about backroute fixes.

[IchoTolot]

I've added some diffuculty estimaters to the content I am maintaining:

United: Hard-Extreme
Reunion: Medium-Hard
PimoLems: Medium
DoveLems: Easy-Medium

My format currently is: [Engine] Packname [Difficulty: Difficulty-Rating]

[Strato Incendus]

Since a lot of my earlier packs tend to have been on the easier side, I might chime in regarding my conversion plans .

The first thing on my list is definitely converting Lemmings World Tour. As I said though, that is on a halt until the 10-skills-panel is a thing.

I don't want to start converting something else in the meantime, because I think I'd get confused easily when jumping around between packs, trying to update them all at the same time.

That said, though, I don't believe I've used any Graphic Sets in Paralems or Pit Lems that weren't part of Lemmings World Tour, as well. So all the graphic-set conversions I did for World Tour should, as a side effect, allow me to also convert Paralems and Pit Lems in principle. Those two would probably fill this "gap" of easy packs quite nicely, at least to some extent.

Paralems is really easy and might be a great intro pack, since it includes remakes of Original Lemmings levels, but for the NeoLemmix skills ("Just fence", "Only gliders can survive this", etc.). However, I'm not sure how far playing this pack can actually take a new player, because it diverges from the core "puzzle philosophy" so much. It doesn't really do much with regard to making people aware of obscure solutions.

Pit Lems therefore would most likely be converted first after LWT, then - precisely because it's more challenging than Paralems. The reason it's called Pit Lems in the first place was a reference to Star Wars: Pit Droids (hence also the Star Wars font in the pack title), the very first game I played that described itself completely as a "puzzle" game (compared to Lemmings being an "action puzzle").

Lemmicks definitely won't be converted to New Formats, except for the select levels that re-appear in Lemmings World Tour. That's because for those levels, I've already figured out a non-gimmick solution. A lot of the other levels don't actually work without the gimmick in the first place.


All of my packs, as you probably know, include some amount of radiation and slowfreeze levels.

Lemmicks, as I just said, is out of the question.

Paralems has comparatively many levels involving zombies, including at least one where zombies need to walk into radiation and slowfreeze areas, as well as another level where you need to clone radiating lemmings. Cloning radiating lemmings can sometimes be replicated with enough bomber pickup skills - that is the way I converted a World-Tour level, "Ayo Technology" - but bombing and stoning zombies is something that was effectively removed together with radiation and slowfreeze.

Pit Lems barely has any zombie levels, and those that are there don't require them to interact with radiation or slowfreeze, as far as I remember. The issue with Pit Lems is that some of the best levels (including 2 of the 3 LOTY nominees) included radiation and/or slowfreeze. More precisely, at least one of them I can't even modify into a pickup-skills level, because that level itself already is part of the pack (the version with radiation and slowfreeze is the rerun of said level, "Controlled overload" vs. "The long way down").

The only other option would be to create a massive redux pack of my own levels, either combining all the non-radiation/slowfreeze levels from Paralems and Pit Lems, or simply creating a "Best of" collection of all the levels I still consider worthwhile. A "Best of" of all my levels in general however should probably also contain levels from Lemmings World Tour and Lemmicks... partly because I'm not sure whether just Pit Lems and Paralems together would provide enough material to work with.

It does sound like fun though to go over my old levels again and simply cherry-pick the best ones into a single combined pack .


When it comes to other people's packs, I think New Formats would greatly profit from having Arty's SubLems and nin10doadict's CasuaLemmings available.

CasuaLemmings was one of the first packs I attempted, because it was one of the few packs I even had a chance at solving. As a consequence, it was largely fun, also because it featured some slightly trolling, Paralems-like levels to loosen things up (with one of them even being explicitly inspired by Paralems ). But it also had some surprisingly difficult puzzles that stumped me out of nowhere. And those are precisely the ones that offer a new player the opportunity to grow and get better.

SubLems simply has what I would describe as a perfect difficulty curve. The beautiful architecture of most of the levels also does its part in preventing the pack from annoying the hell out of a new player.



Hence, that is definitely my main advice for IchoTolot and anyone else trying to deliberately design an easier pack: Start by simply trying not to annoy the player!

I think a good starting point for that would be our discussions about immediate turn-offs when seeing a new level for the first time.

When I see whacky terrain that just instantly looks like it's a mess to navigate through (best example: the dreaded "thin-terrain-pieces chaos maze"), or massive amounts of flow control without any possibility to contain the crowd (a popular device on "Hard-for-Flopsy" levels), I'm just willing to throw in the towel much more quickly than in a nice 1-of-everything level or so, with lots of connected terrain pieces (=not a builder fest). The latter type of level can then happily be challenging and obscure, having me wonder "okay, where does that miner go; how the heck do I get to turn this lemming around just one more time", etc.

If there's one thing to take away from this in short, I'd say "no flow control in easy packs". Keep in mind that original Lemmings actually never even teaches you how to properly contain the crowd in different ways than with blockers. Digger pits, cutting off the pioneer's builder-staircase behind him, sealing off the pioneer's basher tunnel, freeing a blocker by mining etc., all that is just stuff that some players figure out by themselves, and those who don't get stuck as early as the Tricky rank.

Crowd control as an overarching term is a necessary part of pretty much every level, and I think there are clearly three tiers to it:

Level 1: crowd containment with blockers (--> "Noob strategy" )
Level 2: crowd containment with digger pits & Co., usually enforced by requiring to save everyone, or simply not providing any blockers (--> Intermediate)
Level 3: flow control, i.e. no ways to contain the crowd at all, it's all about keeping them busy and timing things just right (--> Professional)

[Proxima]

I think a good starting point for that would be our discussions about immediate turn-offs when seeing a new level for the first time.

Except that that topic showed that we have a lot of differing opinions about what turns us off from a level. And if we're thinking about new players, how can we know what would turn them off when they are just getting to know the game?

For example: You list "10-of-everything" levels as a massive turn-off; but I think it helps new players to have more sandbox-like levels in which they can play around and find out what the skills do without being in any real danger of losing.

Crowd control as an overarching term is a necessary part of pretty much every level, and I think there are clearly three tiers to it:

Level 1: crowd containment with blockers (--> "Noob strategy" )
Level 2: crowd containment with digger pits & Co., usually enforced by requiring to save everyone, or simply not providing any blockers (--> Intermediate)
Level 3: flow control, i.e. no ways to contain the crowd at all, it's all about keeping them busy and timing things just right (--> Professional)

Aside from the fact that some levels don't have a crowd because there are only a small number of lemmings, there's a major consideration you've missed: some levels can have no way to control the crowd, but the save requirement is low enough that you can let the lemmings behind the worker die until the path is created. In GemLems, four of the first five levels are of this type.

[namida]

I would say those two situations fall outside the spectrum, or could be considered a Level 0 (no control required, not even blockers). This would also cover levels where lemmings are unable or unlikely to die so crowd control isn't needed, too, such as (to pick the easiest example imaginable) Just Dig.

Further to this, I'd say levels like Bitter Lemming also fall into level 1, where the terrain contains the lemmings and separating a worker is trivial (in this case simply by using a climber).

Of course, this doesn't account for difficulty points unrelated to crowd control.

[Strato Incendus]

Of course, this doesn't account for difficulty points unrelated to crowd control.

Sure! It's just that a lot of the more challenging levels show the tendency to make the crowd control part of the puzzle - meaning if you spend just one skill too many on crowd- or flow control, you can't get on with the actual solution. That's how these two challenges interact frequently.

Except that that topic showed that we have a lot of differing opinions about what turns us off from a level. And if we're thinking about new players, how can we know what would turn them off when they are just getting to know the game?

For example: You list "10-of-everything" levels as a massive turn-off; but I think it helps new players to have more sandbox-like levels in which they can play around and find out what the skills do without being in any real danger of losing.

I stand by my point that 10-of-everything levels don't teach the player anything. Except for how the skills work. And that's something that individual levels on the individual skills, such as "Just dig", can accomplish just as well, if not better. Moreover, teaching the individual skills isn't actually the challenging part. You could have all that in a single level, call it "Playground", akin to the Practice section in Lemmings 2. Those levels didn't even have an exit, i.e. they were unsolvable - their only purpose was allowing you to try out all the various skills.

What we're thinking about here, however, is how to get new players to the next level - quite literally - where they are being equipped with the necessary basic knowledge to merely have a shot at the harder packs out there. For that, you need to train the player's eye and mind to discover specific places in a level where a certain skill can go in, and often that insight arises from skill restriction. Most prominently: "Oh, crap, I don't have a blocker, how else do I turn the lemming around now?" Or "I don't have a bomber, how do I get rid of this blocker now?"

And 10-of-everything levels simply don't do any of that. They don't get you any closer to solving actual harder puzzles.

For clarity: I haven't beaten a single hard pack out there. But I have beaten the beginning 10-of-everything levels on all of them. Where did that get me? Exactly - nowhere .

Aside from the fact that some levels don't have a crowd because there are only a small number of lemmings

A crowd to me is any number of lemmings larger than one. In those levels with, say, 1 to 6 lemmings, where you often have to steer every single one of them individually along various paths, I'd regard that as a form of flow control. Characteristic trademark of this: All of them are moving pieces. There is no group of lemmings that you can just leave behind without having to worry about them.

there's a major consideration you've missed: some levels can have no way to control the crowd, but the save requirement is low enough that you can let the lemmings behind the worker die until the path is created. In GemLems, four of the first five levels are of this type.

I'd agree with namida here, that's level 0: no crowd control required. Unless the save requirement is very tight and you can barely create a splatform or similar before the allowed number of lemmings have died. Then it can indeed feel more like flow control again, just that, rather than worrying "how many can I let slip by here?", it goes right away to "how many can I let die here?"

Regarding GemLems: As far as I recall, you haven't released that pack in its completed state yet, so how would I know?

In most custom packs I've seen so far, having such a low saving requirement is more the exception than the rule - and, as far as I understand you, even in your pack GemLems, it seems to be especially prevalent on the lowest rank.

If however you can manage to create more of such levels than the average pack, where the question is how many lemmings can die before you construct the correct path, or where a different number of lemmings die depending on the path you choose, that would certainly help your pack stand out from the rest!

[Proxima]

I stand by my point that 10-of-everything levels don't teach the player anything.

I rebutted that point with a detailed examination of what the player learns from each Fun level. That's not just hypothetical; it's how I learned the game. And sure, it didn't put me in a position to cope with really difficult puzzles (even solving "The Steel Mines of Kessel" on Mac took me ten years after beating the rest of the game); but it did equip me with the knowledge I needed for the mid-Tricky levels where it stops holding your hand.

In short: if your point is that 10-of-everything levels aren't going to get the player from A to Z, then I agree, but I would respond that they have to get from A to B first, and once we're there we can think about the next step.

A crowd to me is any number of lemmings larger than one. In those levels with, say, 1 to 6 lemmings, where you often have to steer every single one of them individually along various paths, I'd regard that as a form of flow control. Characteristic trademark of this: All of them are moving pieces. There is no group of lemmings that you can just leave behind without having to worry about them.

Okay, but then levels with only a small number of lemmings can be very easy even though they would technically fall into your "flow control" classification, e.g. "Nightmare on Lem Street".

[namida]

Okay, but then levels with only a small number of lemmings can be very easy even though they would technically fall into your "flow control" classification, e.g. "Nightmare on Lem Street".

I think that's valid. Nightmare on Lem Street does indeed require either (a) crowd control, or (b) very good timing*, despite only having one lemming other than the worker. Perhaps the issue is that "crowd control" is a misleading name; "non-worker control" might be more suitable. (EDIT: Or not; I was thinking of its repeat, sorry.)

* With regards to the "very good timing", I'm referring to the solution where... (click to show/hide)

...you have the first lemming build the path, while the second floats down, bashes through the block, climbs up on the right while the first lemming is building over the 2nd gap, and lands on the first lemming's bridge.

[Strato Incendus]

I rebutted that point with a detailed examination of what the player learns from each Fun level. That's not just hypothetical; it's how I learned the game. And sure, it didn't put me in a position to cope with really difficult puzzles (even solving "The Steel Mines of Kessel" on Mac took me ten years after beating the rest of the game); but it did equip me with the knowledge I needed for the mid-Tricky levels where it stops holding your hand.

What you are saying here actually doesn't stand in opposition to what I said.

As you just outlined, the Fun levels can help to prepare the player specifically for the Tricky rank - as it should be. There are still things that they don't teach, like the three-builder-wall, digger pits etc., but if that's kind of the point of the solution of the Tricky to Mayhem levels in the first place, i.e. having to find this out, then it makes sense for the Fun levels not to spoil those things. In the context of original Lemmings as a standalone pack, this works.

However, we're talking about preparing players for the difficulty of custom packs here . And most custom packs fail spectacularly at what Fun accomplishes in this regard.

No wonder, because, as we agreed upon before, custom packs tend to exceed the difficulty of Mayhem even in the early ranks. Hence, I'm not saying this is an easy thing to do! But it does seem necessary in order to avoid a further division of the already small player base.



In the "Immediate turnoffs" thread, I pointed out how in my view, most 10-of-everything levels in custom packs are more akin to the Tame rank from ONML than to the Fun rank from original Lemmings. The Tame rank is infamous for its insignificance before the first somewhat challenging level hits the player out of nowhere in "Dolly Dimple" at the beginning of the Crazy rank.

That is precisely what you do NOT want, because that is what will make new players quit your pack. They will likely even feel somewhat "betrayed", because they were lured into the pack by these ridiculously easy levels, only to have the pack reveal its true face at the beginning of the second rank. And especially since the beginning levels were so easy, the players will most likely blame themselves and their own stupidity - how can it be that they suddenly have no clue how to approach a level, after the preceding ones were absolute cakewalks?

Packs that do this lie about their actual average difficulty by disguising themselves in a sheep's clothing of easy any-way-you-want levels.

I gave myself the nickname "he who usually only makes it up to rank 2" to joke about my own inability to solve harder packs, i.e. blaming it on my own stupidity indeed. But now we see the effects of something more systematic, in form of a widening gap between skilled players and casual players.

What was already kind of a weakness of original Lemmings - i.e. players who find out about three-builder walls, digger pits etc. get past Tricky, the rest don't - is multiplied in custom packs: There are people here who can solve almost anything, and people who can solve almost nothing - because nothing easier is there, at least in New Formats.

but I would respond that they have to get from A to B first

That is usually neither the ambition nor the task of a custom pack. Any new player can be expected to start with original Lemmings to get familiar with the skills, or, specifically, with a NeoLemmix introduction pack that actually shows you what all the new skills do, as well.

If you want those introduction levels to be part of your own pack, as well, great for you - I also like teaching players those things.

However, in order for that to work, you must, must, must adopt IchoTolot's ambition to have your pack be able to "stand on its own", as a standalone game. You cannot rely on other, easier custom packs to teach the player stuff in the meantime so that they will be able to beat your harder levels afterwards.

If you use your "Fun" rank to get the player from A to B, i.e. teach them about all the skills and game mechanics, then your "Tricky" rank must take them from B to C.

As however many custom packs feature this sudden spike in difficulty once the creator starts dishing out their "regular puzzles" after the any-way-you-want levels, you have A to B on rank one, whereas rank two takes you from, say, E to F.

Yes, there are people who can learn something from the levels on your second rank - but it's not the type of people you have just "created" with your rank one; it's a different type of player. The ones that have played other packs before and now take a shot at yours. Those people were probably bored to death by your rank one, because they don't need to get from A to B, they're long past B.


I actually enjoyed how nin10doadict did this in CasuaLemmings - he's also the one who made me use pre-level texts much more often than I would have done otherwise. You can tell he specifically set out for each level to teach the player one thing, and one thing only.

The main issue with open-ended 10-of-everything levels is that you can try almost anything, but you don't really have to do anything specific. And while it might be fine to have such a "playground" level either at the very beginning or the very end of a rank, so that the player can test out their current amount of knowledge of the skills, every further one of those levels that gets added in succession weakens the purpose.


In short:
Skill-restricted levels are the lessons. That's where you teach the player.
The 10-of-everything level is the schoolyard. That's where you send the player to take a break and toy around.

[Dullstar]

The problem isn't really the any-way-you-want/x-of-everything levels; the problem is poorly crafted difficulty curves.

The original game, as discussed preivously by Proxima, used any-way-you-want levels to introduce some of the game mechanics and allow the player to gain some familiarity with the skills before having to solve puzzles with them. One benefit of these levels over the tutorial levels that are designed simply to demonstrate the skills is that, even if the correct choices may seem obvious, start forcing the player to think a little about which skills to select in a safe environment where many mistakes can be recovered from, and the player doesn't have to think about skill conservation. Remember, in a demonstration level (such as Fun 1-7 in the original game), the player doesn't have to think about skill selection at all because they'll do the right thing simply because it's the only thing available.

However, many packs (notably including ONML) skip the part of the game where players are asked to solve simple puzzles. They're mostly treating the x-of-everythings as an obligatory scrap to throw at less experienced players before getting to the actual puzzles their creators wanted to design, rather than using them as a tool to build experience in these players. If a pack is going to skip directly from x-of-everythings to hard puzzles, then it should just skip those levels. Less experienced players would be better served by these packs being upfront about their difficulty.

[Strato Incendus]

However, many packs (notably including ONML) skip the part of the game where players are asked to solve simple puzzles. They're mostly treating the x-of-everythings as an obligatory scrap to throw at less experienced players before getting to the actual puzzles their creators wanted to design, rather than using them as a tool to build experience in these players. If a pack is going to skip directly from x-of-everythings to hard puzzles, then it should just skip those levels. Less experienced players would be better served by these packs being upfront about their difficulty.

Couldn't have said it better!

Indeed, even I enjoy the challenging type of X-of-everything levels - which is why I think they should come later in the pack, with at least one of the skills actually being accounted for. This happens a lot on the levels from NepsterLems, where you'll usually run out of builders, so the challenge lies in finding uses for the remaining skills to save builders.

[Proxima]

(We've wandered quite a bit off the original topic, so maybe the last few posts would be better merged into the original "The problem with 10-of-everything levels" thread. On the other hand, Icho started be saying we need more beginner levels, and this discussion is relevant to anyone wanting to design beginner levels, so maybe it can stay?)

Strato: So is Dullstar essentially right in saying that your problem is not with the quality of the 10-of-everything levels themselves, but the difficulty jump that follows? If so, then why on earth did you not simply say so? If you'd said that way back in the original thread, we could have had a much more profitable and interesting discussion. But when you say "Custom 10-of-everything levels tend to be Tame-like rather than Fun-like", that sounds like you're saying they have the same flaws as the original Tame levels -- no hazards or risk of failure; extremely simple solutions; no progression within the set.

Now, I don't know which specific examples you're thinking of, and doubtless you've played some packs I haven't and vice versa. But I can certainly point to custom packs with a first rank that's more Fun-like than Tame-like (in the above respects), e.g. Lemmings Plus I, or the Lix community pack (which has some limited-skills puzzle levels, but also has a lot of X-of-everything levels). I would say these are fairly good examples of easy X-of-everything levels done right.

The main issue with open-ended 10-of-everything levels is that you can try almost anything, but you don't really have to do anything specific. And while it might be fine to have such a "playground" level either at the very beginning or the very end of a rank, so that the player can test out their current amount of knowledge of the skills, every further one of those levels that gets added in succession weakens the purpose.

In short:
Skill-restricted levels are the lessons. That's where you teach the player.
The 10-of-everything level is the schoolyard. That's where you send the player to take a break and toy around.

No, this is wrong. As my examination of the original Fun levels showed, what X-of-everything levels teach well is coping with diverse situations (e.g. RR 99 and lemmings heading for danger; wide gaps with low ceilings; high walls to get up or down; terrain mazes with many hazards; etc etc etc). There may not be a specific intended solution, but there is a situation that you have to cope with (again, contrast the Tame levels, where the situation never changes from "some terrain is between you and the exit"). Every level that presents a new situation will result in the player learning how to deal with that situation; levels like Fun 19 that just rehash an old situation are meaningless filler.

Now let's look at that difficulty leap. Again, I haven't played all the packs you have, so I don't know if this really is a recurring problem with existing content; but regardless, let's consider how to avoid it in future.

After the player has gone through a Fun-like rank and learned how to cope with diverse situations with plentiful skills, there are a few things you can do next. One is to start with very simple puzzles where you only have a few skills and there is a specific intended solution -- such as "It's lemmingentry, Watson" and "From the Boundary Line". (Those particular levels do have some surplus skills and allow other solutions, but that's not relevant here -- I'm just using them to illustrate a type of level.) Another possibility is to keep X-of-everything and increase the difficulty and complexity of the situation, as in "Bitter Lemming" and "Lemming Drops". Another is to do X-of-everything but omit a useful skill, as in "Heaven can wait (we hope)". And of course, you can include all of these types of level, as original Lemmings does.

I'm not sure exactly how to wrap up this post, but I hope this is at least useful food for thought for anyone wanting to make some easier content

[IchoTolot]

I don't mind the topic wandering off.

My goal was to state my future plans, my thoughts about what we need the most currently and how my plans try to satisfy that need. That was achieved.

The secondary goal was to start a discussion what other people think about how we can satisfy that need, or if there are any other needs. And you delivered excellent popcorn material.

The only way to top that would be if any new projects emerge from these discussions or ongoing projects receive a boost in ideas as a result.

[Strato Incendus]

Strato: So is Dullstar essentially right in saying that your problem is not with the quality of the 10-of-everything levels themselves, but the difficulty jump that follows? If so, then why on earth did you not simply say so? If you'd said that way back in the original thread, we could have had a much more profitable and interesting discussion. But when you say "Custom 10-of-everything levels tend to be Tame-like rather than Fun-like", that sounds like you're saying they have the same flaws as the original Tame levels -- no hazards or risk of failure; extremely simple solutions; no progression within the set.

Why I didn't stress the difficulty spike earlier? It simply took some time for me to make up my mind on that and figure this out consciously, i.e. become aware of the connection between early X-of-everything levels and sudden difficulty spikes .

In fact, part of the credit for me realising this goes to you: for pointing out the difference between "Fun X-of-everything levels" (literally) and "Tame X-of-everything levels". Or more accurately, I created this distinction, but based on the fact that you defended specifically the X-of-everything levels from the Fun rank against my criticism, by showing to me what you can learn from these specific levels in Fun.

From playing custom packs, however, I did perceive the correlation that the chance of an early custom X-of-everything level being more akin to a Tame- than a Fun level is very high. And while the difficulty spike following a long series of X-of-everything levels isn't guaranteed either, such a level structure definitely makes a (usually unintended) spike more likely, as well.

And yes, especially the Lemmings Plus-packs are guilty of that, most of all the earlier ones. Later Lemmings Plus-packs, I think starting around LPIV or so, began with easy puzzles right away. If I remember correctly, namida actually made a survey about precisely that: How the forum members wanted future releases in the Lemmings Plus series to continue and what the early ranks should look like.

I haven't played the Lix community pack all that much, because I don't really play Lix in general. Maybe that pack is an exception?

Another is to do X-of-everything but omit a useful skill, as in "Heaven can wait (we hope)".

That is indeed something I suggested in my "case-against-X-of-everything levels" thread as well: Reduce or remove one of the skills, probably the most powerful one. Or, as I said in this thread, take the Nepster approach, where it looks like you have an any-way-you-want amount of every skill, but actually, due to the shape of the terrain, some skills end up being more scarce than others.

Looks like, while you are always happy to defend the Fun X-of-everything levels, I will do the same for the X-of-everything levels from NepsterLems. Though the latter usually tend to be on the tougher side . And even though Nepster himself has stated he doesn't actually like this level-building style anymore, I still consider it a masterpiece when you can pull such a thing of, and I still regard "Final Frustration" as the prime example of a great, challenging X-of-everything level.

[namida]

Later Lemmings Plus-packs, I think starting around LPIV or so, began with easy puzzles right away. If I remember correctly, namida actually made a survey about precisely that: How the forum members wanted future releases in the Lemmings Plus series to continue and what the early ranks should look like.

Lemmings Plus IV was a roughly even split between X-of-alls and easier puzzles, with LPV and LPVI leaning even more towards easier puzzles (but still including a few X-of-alls). Lemmings Plus Omega II nearly entirely does away with X-of-alls, having only one level that's a true traditional-style X of everything level (which even lampshades this in the title: "There had to be ONE...") - and even this mixes some NL skills, including the Fencer which was new at the time, instead of just using the traditional 8 - plus one more that has such a skillset but is a rather unique concept and doesn't at all play like such levels usually do; aside from those two, the early levels are all relatively simple puzzles. Lemmings Plus Alpha has no such levels at all (unless you count "Expedition", but that's a To The End style level which isn't really anything like the traditional X-of-alls), although LPA is aimed purely at the high-level players so doesn't really have anything in the way of easy levels - just some levels that aren't quite as hard.

Lemmings Plus I definitely went too far with the X-of-alls, I'll accept that. By the end of the second rank, the player has encountered maybe 4 or 5 levels that aren't X-of-alls; and the first few levels of the third rank are X-of-alls too (although the second one only gives 2 builders instead of 20 - something that barely matters if you just want to beat the level, though it becomes significant if going for 100%).

[mobius]

I'm just adding here that I have been working on my (old) level pack and I'll probably be releasing it within a few weeks or so (maybe sooner even). And it's by now of easier difficulty overall; than most packs these days. Actually it was a bit on the easy side even for when I first made most of the levels around 2012-2013.

"proper maintenance of content" is something that I won't promise. As to backroutes of my old levels, most of them have been long since fixed to a good point and to any new ones I probably won't care. Beyond that I'm likely not going to update the pack for any breakages due to changing game physics or graphical changes. If anyone wants to take over that job at that time they are welcome to.

[mobius]

I'm just adding here that I have been working on my (old) level pack and I'll probably be releasing it within a few weeks or so (maybe sooner even). And it's by now of easier difficulty overall; than most packs these days. Actually it was a bit on the easy side even for when I first made most of the levels around 2012-2013.

"proper maintenance of content" is something that I won't promise. As to backroutes of my old levels, most of them have been long since fixed to a good point and to any new ones I probably won't care. Beyond that I'm likely not going to update the pack for any breakages due to changing game physics or graphical changes. If anyone wants to take over that job at that time they are welcome to.

I think I'll be waiting until the version update complete with the shimmer among other things is here to update and release my pack, for several reasons. Just in case anyone was curious.