TL;DR (this is a long one!)
Thanks everyone for your patience and for indulging me in this discussion so far, I understand that it must be frustrating to go over old threads again, and I appreciate the opportunity to add my voice to the discussion at this late stage.
@Turrican - I highly doubt the community standard will change anytime soon! And, changing the accepted standard is certainly not the point of this thread. I'm just interested to discuss and research the possibilities of DD and offer an alternative perspective on it, that's all. Thanks for your valuable input and for the replays, please can you also post a zip of the levels themselves?
I am completely fine, with the current situation of having engines that support it like Superlemmix
Honestly, I think I needed to hear this. As much as I want SLX to be a true representation of my own ideals, I also do want people to like it. It's impossible to please everybody, but I'd also be disappointed if something like DD put people off even giving it a try.
Not that I have to worry about that in your case; you've converted a pack of levels, which I very much appreciate!
The reason , that I am opposed to this feature , on this thread, is because , I don't want it , to become, the new community standard
Maybe I underestimate my influence on the Forums, but... I highly doubt that DD would
ever become the community standard, having been so comprehensively rejected previously. What's far more likely (and what I hope) is that it will be accepted
specifically in SuperLemmix as an alternative, whilst continuing not to be a feature of NeoLemmix, Lix and others which are far more likely to continue to follow the community standard.
This topic is more about simply researching the mechanic itself, exploring both the possibilities
and potental problems of it, and re-opening the discussion I didn't have a chance to take part in previously, rather than an attempt to redefine the community standard.
Perhaps your concern is that I mentioned in our Discord PM that I don't want to suggest potential backroute fixes for DD (even though I can think of plenty!) because I don't want to perpetuate the idea that DD is something undesirable that needs to be fixed. I should be clear that I was specifically referring to its implementation in SuperLemmix, and more specifically in response to Jeremy's suggestion that we make a special exit for it that doesn't allow DD. Implementing such a feature reinforces the message "DD is bad, here's a way around it if you don't like it". Instead, I'd rather continue to promote the idea that DD can be an interesting game mechanic, particularly for challenges, talismans and alternative solutions (all of which are game elements I hope to bring to the fore in SuperLemmix). I think that there is very little chance of SLX replacing NL as the community standard, but it may certainly attract speedrunners, challengers, and players who prefer the more traditional gameplay style. This represents a small proportion of players in an already very small community, so the threat to the status quo is relatively low, if existent at all.
NeoLemmix is very likely to remain the community standard for the forseeable future - someone would have to come up with something pretty darn special to outright replace it, and discussions around game physics, etc would likely resurface and be re-evaluated at that time anyway. Or, in the scenario that I'm called upon to help with NeoLemmix development after its final release,
I absolutely would not make controversial changes to the physics, I would respect its development history and maintain the status quo regardless of my own preferences.
It seems worth making the above clear at this point, since there has been talk of me making further contributions to NL development, and I really don't want the community to worry that I would do anything to upset its gameplay mechanics, which I'm aware result from years of careful tailoring. As long as namida is active on the Forums, I would likely never do anything without his specific approval anyway, and if he's unavailable I'd go to Icho and Simon next, as these are people I know namida trusts.
Hopefully, with that said, we can continue to discuss DD without any such concerns.
So, the following days , after that post , I did some testing , on various levels from various levelpacks
Thank you for sharing these! You've been quite thorough - am I correct in assuming that these are the only levels you found in those packs which have DD backroutes? My own research has turned up 3 in 120 (or 1 in 40) levels that can be backrouted using DD; I wonder if your research also reflects this figure.
Also, could you add a zip of just these levels to your post for quick access? OK if not, I can download the full packs if needs be. Again, thanks for doing this valuable research!
the fact that it's technically possible to make a completely different graphic ... doesn't override this huge base of tradition.
Fair point, but the fact is that we
can now make exits look like anything. Whilst that doesn't necessarily mean that physics
must be reconsidered, or that any such reconsideration is necessarily a good idea, it does at least provide the opportunity to reconsider them with arguably good reason.
And I say
that as someone who almost exclusively uses the OG styles in levels, and is a strong advocate of traditionalism in the Lemmings game!
Also, I did specifically address the OG exits in my previous post (i.e. the visual designs of these exits make sense for midair exiting (definitely, because steps) and direct drop (in my opinion)).
Meanwhile, the decision was taken to not allow Jumpers to exit in NeoLemmix, so I'd ask why not, if the images clearly show steps that can arguably be "landed" on? Or, to state more explicitly what I'm getting at here, why should visual design be a consideration for Direct Drop but not for Jumpers?
Based on the analysis, it's very, very clear at this point that direct drop was a glitch in the official games.
I have very little doubt that it was, but we aren't always necessarily concerned with following the blueprint set out by the original games (including what should or shouldn't be considered a bug), that's something we can in fact all agree on.
Having said that, I'm aware that DD has been discussed at length on its own merit, which brings me to your final comment:
It really feels like your constant revisiting of it is based purely on "let's make more stuff happen, and justify it later" (which yes, is something I was also very guilty of during the earlier days of NL) than actually considering whether it adds value and/or makes sense.
It's fair to call me out on this because I do bring it up a lot, but I was late to the party and never had a chance to add my voice to the conversation. Honestly, I'm grateful that people are responding to this topic and indulging me. Other Forums might have shut it down as a dead topic, so the fact I'm being given allowances here isn't lost on me, I assure you.
And yes, it seems that DD has been discussed extensively, and its bug status wasn't the only deciding factor in its eventual removal from NeoLemmix - this is a good thing. However, I still think there's room for challenging the narrative that it's definitely a problematic game element; I believe it both makes sense and adds value, and that's really what I'm hoping to demonstrate with this topic.
Hopefully Turrican posts these levels he's found, and I'll definitely give them a look and assess the damage for myself. I absolutely do trust experienced Forum members, engine developers and level designers in their opinions on what's right and wrong based on prior research, and there's lots I've conceded over my few years here on the Forums so far. But, there are some things I need to actually see for myself before I can fully understand the other side of the argument, particularly if it's something I'm invested in and feel strongly about.
Full disclosure, it's probably an ADHD thing - I get super excited about an idea and, as you've quite rightly pointed out, I just want to see it in action first and then probably do feel the need to justify/discuss it later. I understand if that's sometimes frustrating for people who've very much "been there, done that", and I appreciate your patience - for me, this is an interesting and stimulating discussion!
