Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 01/02/2012 in Blog Comments

  1. 4 points
    "Okay, this was mostly just on principle." I think this is an extremely poor sentiment (though I don't disagree with the rating itself).
  2. 3 points
    Lynx and CC2 collision detection are pretty much the same, and they both run at 20 ticks per second (except for electricity in CC2, which is processed 60 times per second, and force floors, which are...weird). The biggest differences I can think of for collision detection are that, in CC2, items don't give you as much protection, you can die from "block-slapping" monsters, and Chip isn't swapped with the first monster on the monster list when the level is loaded. The latter only serves to create inconsistency, as something like this can illustrate (the bottom chip is obtainable, the top isn't).
  3. 3 points
    Most of what I have to say is pretty much summarized in the above comment. However, there are two points I will agree with you on: "Am I really not trusted to figure out how to dodge the enemies 2 seconds into Starry Night, or experiment on puzzles?" I do agree that the hint stating how to dodge those enemies in Starry Night wasn't exactly necessary. We didn't get a hint explaining how to dodge the ones in Torturechamber (which was a lot harder too!), so why was it left in for Starry Night? At level 86, I would have thought the player, new or not, would at least get the idea on how to dodge enemies like that. "...since certain members of the community will denounce anything that takes them more than one attempt to beat." It's good to hear I'm not alone on this. After CCLP3 and CCLP1, I feel most members of the community don't have as much patience with the game anymore. Expecting to solve every level on the first try doesn't make the game fun, it makes it redundant. CCLP3's puzzles were outstanding in their own way, that required a restart or three to finally get the solve. Though I feel the last 5 or so levels of CCLP3 pushed this too far, especially with Old Frog and Suspended Animation, which wasn't the best ending in my opinion. CCLP1... well it was obvious from the start there would be little to no extremely hard levels there. CCLP1 in some aspects is boring and too easy. But then again, I am not new to the world of CC. About CCLP4... it won't wait till the next decade - late 2017/early 2018 would be an ideal time to expect it. We hope to deliver levels that are harder and require more thought to solve, but also remain fun. The highest difficulty to expect it to have would be around the same as the mid 120s/early 130s from CCLP3. But not all levels will meet this, there will still be some simpler levels. Just to give you an idea.
  4. 3 points
    Inb4 this turns out to be Michael.
  5. 3 points
    And may I just say that Cornering II (Level 32 of Omicron) is a horrible level
  6. 2 points
    It has been nice having you around here, Chipster, and I hope you enjoy whatever comes your way next. Hope to see you around here from time to time; most people never truly quit CC anyway, they just take extended breaks I think one of the reasons you got no responses is that you already posted something like this earlier (and people already tried to convince you to stay back then). I mean no disrespect by this at all, but the way you wrote multiple long drawn-out posts could easily be interpreted as attention-seeking and almost "boy who cried wolf"-ish. I myself had a pretty visceral negative reaction to this post until I sat down and thought about it. Don't think it's because people don't care about you, though. Once a member of the community, always a member of the community.
  7. 2 points
    To second what Josh said, the community is still active. Not only does a lot of discussion take place on Skype, but most people are busy with CCLP4 voting and so everything else to do with the game is on the backburner right now (and thus there's nothing really to post about). On another note: if you're bored with both the CC Zone awards leaderboard and custom levels, you could always try your hand at the actual CC leaderboards for a new experience that you might enjoy (That also goes for you, whoever else ends up reading this comment. Yes, you! There's a reason people have been improving their CC scores for over 20 years: it's fun!)
  8. 2 points
    So you're gonna leave before CCLP4 is out? That's a shame. I'm also extending JoshL6 to 149 levels that I hope to have done by the end of the year so you'll also miss out on that as well as some other CC2 updates maybe, if they ever happen. CCZone has died down quite a bit yes but that's not really a good enough reason to just leave, unless it's temporary. No matter how dead this site is or how busy I will ever be, I will always come on every day just because I appreciate the game and love the community and vice versa. Maybe if you got Skype and were added to the CCBBC Skype group you'll realize the community isn't as dead as you think.
  9. 2 points
  10. 2 points
    Voting is scheduled to start tomorrow.
  11. 2 points
    I've been wanting to make a post about this for a long time. Here are my thoughts on the subject. MS is perhaps my least favourite ruleset, because it's just so full of glitches. Like you, I especially hate slide delay. Boosting can also be a pain in some levels. Perhaps the only levels I prefer in MS are so called "insane levels". When I first started playing in Lynx, I was absolutely annoyed at the animations, although I got used to them and now I like them. Perhaps the only problem I find with it is splash delay, and explosion delay. So Steam is probably my favourite ruleset. It's also got wall slapping, which makes blue wall levels a whole lot less frustrating, and shorter animations. Also, CC2 supports some tile combinations that were invalid in Lynx, such as objects on locks or water, which gives the designer more freedom without having to worry about ruleset compatibility. There are a few annoying things with CC2, such as the recently discovered force floor bug (it completely ruined one of my level ideas) and I find block slapping harder than in Tile World, but overall I think it's better. Thank you for posting this.
  12. 2 points
    As someone who rejoined the community shortly before the release of CCLP1 and played through it in its entirety the day after release, I guess I'll offer some counterpoints. As a result, I didn't really have any CCLP1 hype other than it was another community set with, presumably, some of the most fun levels out there. And to me, it was, and created its own hype! "I was hungry for a new puzzle game" I think this is the root of the issue. CCLP1 didn't set out to be brutally difficult with its puzzles, it set out to be a fitting introduction. Going in expecting to be stumped repeatedly was a setup for disappointment: a valid reason, sure, but if you wanted high solving difficulty the end of 60 Minutes or most of thinker's levels fit the bill. "(as opposed to the awful, buggy and somehow popular 5fps port)" I can see where the complaints come from but I like the discreteness of each move: I think it works well for a puzzle game. "CCLP1 presents a medley of about 80 levels which were all designed for the level 15 slot. No individual level was actually bad, however by level 100 I noticed that the set I was playing through hadn't reached Tossed Salad difficulty yet." Looking through the set, I wouldn't say the difficulty curve is quite that gentle, but it's definitely more gentle than it needs to be. The first somewhat tricky level comes halfway through at Funfair (which isn't to say there's nothing tricky before this, but they're more on the small scale. I got stuck at Double Diversion for much longer than I should have). Mughfe is definitely past Tossed Salad in difficulty, however, and I think if that's where the curve started picking up the difficulty issue wouldn't be one. I'd even put Chip Suey at around equivalent, and it's in the same slot! "I remembered back to the strategic dodging on Digger and Blobdance; the creative puzzles Four Square and Catacombs; and Blobdance and On The Rocks, which dared to be difficult. Due to an excessive focus on beginner-friendliness and "fair" design (can it be beaten it in 1 try), CCLP1 is simply boring." Given Blobdance being there twice, I assume that you meant Blobnet the second time. Digger has a counterpart in Dig and Dig which is far simpler, and I'll acknowledge it's inferior. Blobdance -> Blobs on a Plane, and Blobdance made the mistake of going too far. Blobnet and On the Rocks are some of the worst points in CC1's difficulty curve (along with Nuts and Bolts: a trial by fire is not a good introduction), so though they dared to be difficult, I'm not convinced that's a good thing, especially as their difficulty comes from tedium and inexperience.Four Square and Catacombs have no direct comparisons, but CCLP1 has quite a few creative concepts executed very well that to me, despite the easier difficulty, kept my interest throughout. "After the early-game snoozefest, however, the set becomes a lot better, and I enjoyed most of the triple digit levels. If only the set had reached this point sooner, and I see no reason why it didn't" Honestly, it kind of did! I'd say the that point stops at Colors for Extreme, and though there are a fair amount of breather levels interspersed throughout, it kept a variety of gameplay that CCLP3 lacked near the end. And I loved solving CCLP3! "One thing's for sure: if I ever play that Chips Challenge set, it's because I want a challenge. Something with a difficulty peak that puts CCLP3 to shame." There's not enough difficult levels out there for CCLP4 to surpass or even reach CCLP3's difficulty peak..but CCLP4 will probably end up a step above CCLP2 on the scale. "in the decade before it gets released." Decade? Have you no faith in the CCLP4 staff? I can't imagine CCLP4's release date coming later than the end of 2017 at this point. In closing... "I know I'm being harsh. But this is just how I personally felt about the set." And that's totally fair and I can see where some of your points come from, and they're definitely valid points in some cases. But I think there's some dissonance with actual and percieved difficulty of CC1/CCLP1 levels, along with expecting tougher levels than were presented giving a more jaded outlook on the set. Taking CCLP1 entirely as a puzzle, it's not very good. As a game, it's a ton of fun and had a lot of fresh concepts. As a puzzle game? Well, it tends more towards game than puzzle, but after all: so did CC1.
  13. 2 points
    "I am by no means a master of knowing how the wind turns, so I don't pretend to know how the community feels in five years, or what the next community project should really be." Thanks, Miika. This pretty much sums up my feelings on all of this. I think it all comes down to understanding the audience. I remember a time about ten years ago when the community was generally more concerned about locating and exploiting as many bugs in MSCC as humanly possible after the release of the MS-only, invalid-tile-laden CCLP2, with levels aplenty demonstrating these obscure behaviors until the search was exhausted. I don't think anyone really expected the surge of interest in Lynx play that followed CCLP3's release, but that sort of shift in focus seems to happen when a new official set is released, and the makeup of the community is changed over the years. Will CCLP1's release inspire easier, more manageable levels, at least when compared to CCLP3's? I don't know. In some ways, I hope so. New custom sets like JoshL5, The Other 100 Tiles, and the like seem to be already heading in this direction for the most part. But this is why I'm not eager to dive head-first into a project like CCLP4. At least not yet. We don't know what kind of levels will be released and submitted for it, especially after CCLP1's release, nor do we know what people will be around to contribute to it. Anything can change, particularly with respect to community preferences after a new official set is released. People will come. People will go. Perhaps we'll reach a point where we can determine what characteristics permeate the general trends in level design and decide the kind of set that best represents what these levels offer, but I don't think that time is now. Personally, I believe that the CCLP series's target audience, at least generally speaking, will always include the folks who don't have time to play the game day in and day out and would rather taste the best the community has to offer instead of every custom level set in existence. We test and vote on these levels so they don't have to. It's for this reason that after CCLP3's release, I've come to the conclusion that CCLPs should not include obscenely difficult levels, even if they may feel like a walk in the park to us veterans who spend a lot of time playing custom levels. My honest opinion: CCLP4 and beyond should remain at around CCLP2's difficulty level. A few thoughts on some of the other ideas here: Veteran Pack: Love the concept. Don't know what to call it, but a smaller set outside the CCLP series that highlights the most deserving extra-difficult levels would be fun for a certain audience. CCVP, maybe? CCLP3 for dummies: I remember in your thoughts about "Old Frog," you mentioned that each of the rooms could easily be its own level. This set could do something similar: break entire maps down into simpler versions, much like the Mission: Possible and Mission: Impossible levels in DanielB2, and provide easier "excerpts" from long campaign levels. CCZone-1: Another stellar idea. Like you said, it should probably wait a few more years, but it could definitely work. I think we would need to have a few more competitions encouraging easier (not necessarily smaller) levels and levels that utilize only a handful of game elements, though. Perhaps we should also make sure that competitions based on a template are represented only by the winning level. CCLP0: This one really intrigues me - for two reasons. During CCLP1 voting, I noticed that a lot of extremely simple levels that seemed like they would've been ideal for very, very early positions in the set were quite heavily voted down. Because of this and the much greater amount and variety of more difficult levels that were voted highly, this very simple difficulty tier wasn't quite as well-represented in the set. Perhaps a lot of voters found the levels pointless or "filler," which is understandable. But to a newcomer who has never seen the game, I don't think this would be the case if the level was well-designed and allowed them to play around with concepts taught in the tutorials. The good news is that at least for the most part, the difficulty curve of CCLP1 is fairly comparable to that of CC1. However, I keep coming back to the war stories told by CC1 players during the early days of Richard Field's CC site and Alice Voith's Chips Plus site. I mean, Richard's solution guide thanked other people for providing him with solutions to levels like Block N Roll and I.C. You! It was a monster challenge for the uninitiated. Thankfully, CCLP1 has resolved a lot of the annoyances, like extremely long block-pushing levels, but a set that's even gentler serving as an introduction to the game might not be such a bad idea. I know I've decried Chuck's Challenge for being far too easy with its tiny, contained levels, but that's mainly because it was positioned on Kickstarter and elsewhere as a "spiritual successor" to Chip's Challenge, in which case it has fallen quite short in a few areas. But the easiness of the game has reportedly been difficult for its newcomers. From that perspective, I can understand why its learning curve has been as gentle as it's been (and hope that more difficult challenges are on the way). A similar set for CC that caps off the difficulty at 3.5 out of a scale of 5 wouldn't be so bad, though I'd hope for greater variety with respect to size and playing length.
  14. 2 points
    For CCLP4 details, come to me
  15. 2 points
    From what I understand, this guy is making a levelset that has 11 levels. He throws random tiles in the level until he runs out of inspiration. He will submit levels for CCLP4 and thinks Michael should be part of the staff. He found an old Windows 95 computer and is now interested again in Chip's Challenge. But I am probably wrong.
  16. 2 points
    I'm getting this urge to try making re-creations of all these levels based on their descriptions. I might even do it.
  17. 2 points
    With regard to #1, I might as well say that I fully support this project.
  18. 2 points
    One star for hating on Flareon, Dave. That level took a long time to make playable.
  19. 2 points
    Å, vad jag längtar tills jag ocksÅ har en liten son eller dotter som jag kan visa detta fantastiska spel!
  20. 1 point
    some excellent suggestions there! Here's my own ideas (some original; some taken from other games). Some are good; some may be dumb, some may be pretty radical. alterations to existing elements: Up to 8 colors (red, green, yellow, blue, orange, purple, black, white, gray) of keys/doors/toggle walls/toggle bombs Rover: needs some major overhauls but I don't have good ideas on improvements; other than it might be very interesting to be able to pre-program a specific path the rover takes, almost like having another player automatically doing things in the level. Have more enemies that can pick up and use items! NEW TILES: black hole: everything except ghosts are killed in black holes. All blocks disappear forever in them. Chip can only walk over black holes with the hover boots cracked floor: has up to four types: this floor can be walked on once, 2, 3 or 4 times until it breaks depending on how cracked it is. black hole is underneath the floor> it turns to this after being stepped on. Enemies follow all the cracked floor rules except ghosts Maybe you can put other things (like fire) under cracked floor? cracked ice: works similar to cracked floor but has same properties as ice and water is underneath spikes: kills ants, centipedes, walkers, balls and blobs. Can be turned on and off with a button. Chip can also walk over them safley with the hover boots lava/Volcano: similar properties to fire but all blocks except stone blocks will be destroyed in it. Enemies except fireballs die in it. A Volcano spews lava from it and the lava will spread around the level somewhat similar to the way slime can be spread. tortoise: a moving monster which is NOT an enemy; works like a moving turtle but never sinks. Chip can ride a tortoise across water and (maybe) other obstacles. boat/train: objects allowing chip to cross water/tracks & safe from enemies but doesn't have free movement; must follow a set path. Boat is "docked" at land (so it's not an item like flippers, same for train). Coin Door: door to be opened only with a coin (item to be picked up). Door can be passed only once per coin. ricochet block: pushing on it will push blocks and enemies adjacent to it away. These can be linked to interesting effect (from the game Enigma) swap block: swaps places with adjacent tile when pushed on (literally any tile other than floor) puzzle piece block: blocks with different symbols that fit together and form bigger blocks. These larger "tetris"-piece-like blocks can be moved as one unit. Currents: a current in water pushes chip and enemies and some blocks (beside stone blocks) in a set path. mail system: items dropped into the mail tile get sent (with button press) to other mail station. Items must be picked up before placing more. Multiple levels Ability to walk 'ontop' of walls or canopies by using a staircase or something similar or multiple layers/levels? New types of blocks: wood/plastic/stone/metal With different interactions, most notable: wood is destroyed in water and everything plastic can float in water (pushed around like on floor) dirt blocks turn into gravel in lava metal blocks become stuck to force floors stone blocks block just about everything like currents and cannot be destroyed by bowling balls or lasers. magnet: pushes or pulls on metal blocks with switch. russian nesting blocks: 3 or 4 blocks which all must first be pushed together into one to have effects like hold down a button or other things. ITEMS: hazmat suit lets chip walk on slime (does not erase it) soap chip erases slime by walking on it. hover boots lets chip walk over spikes and black holes magic satchel increases inventory (to 8 slots) (this item does not sit in inventory as normal, but is separate) hammer allows chip to destroy blocks (cannot move them while carrying hammer) (someone, I think Chipster, had this idea on discord): item that lets you place or change wires during game somehow. ENEMIES: octopuse: shoot ink in laser like fashion (something like the Chuck's challenge enemy) walker 2.0 movements: like blob, speed: like walker or normal enemy Chessmen: For a long time I had the idea of enemies that follow movement patterns of chess pieces like the knight but if you think about it this seems pretty tricky to impose and maybe not that interesting.
  21. 1 point
    I'm glad I was able to playtest C1059-2.dat for you. Unfortunately, I don't stop by CC Zone as much as I used to, otherwise I would have responded sooner. I've found that even though I haven't been playing CC as much now as I was a couple years ago, I still love the game and I don't think I could actually leave the game completely. In any event, I hope you'll stop by from time to time.
  22. 1 point
    Hi Chipster! I always enjoyed your input on things. If you need to step back from CC, that's understandable, but remember that you are always welcome back. I hope you drop by when CCLP4 comes out and maybe tell us how you are doing. Have a good 2017 and beyond! -Miika P.S. Nobody replied in three days during the holidays? Not many had a chance to see your post
  23. 1 point
    I once had a dream about a person I only knew over the internet and never saw in person so Idk where his face came from in my mind. Anyways, it's not crazy, and I wish it were more active to
  24. 1 point
    We all have times in life when we can't be as active as we'd like. One of the cool things in CC is that is often brings people back, even if just for a short stay. So don't worry if you have to focus on other things when it's wise. On the other hand, if you do know something like that is coming up, a brief good bye statement is also appreciated, but not required. I fear we will be seeing you around for years to come P.S. I also only play CC.
  25. 1 point
    Thank you both. I'll be checking out JoshL6 early next month.
  26. 1 point
    It's perfectly understandable that you were busy, Chipster. We all have times in our lives where we don't have much time to do what we like to do and it's just natural. I didn't mean to make you feel like you had to explain your absence because of my comment, that was more of a fact that you're one of the very few members to post actively on CCZone, which I wish most of us would do again. About your CC2 set, don't worry about what you had planned out. You can always continue with that goal if you want to! No hard feelings about ignoring JCCLP2, a lot of other members did actually and it's honestly not that great of a set. I do recommend you check out JoshL6 when you have the chance, as that has been massively updated, as well as some of the new content my CC2 set holds. No rush though. Glad to have you back here!
  27. 1 point
    You don't have to apologize for your CC2 set not having 200 levels, Chipster. You have the largest set at the moment anyway But welcome back!
  28. 1 point
    This was a good read, thanks for posting it! Makes me want to go back to the set and replay some of the levels. I'm glad I could be of assistance for the Cloner's Maze.
  29. 1 point
    Thanks Josh for your feedback! It's so nice to hear that something we put a lot of time into is doing at least something right and even more importantly is still fun. Currently we have released the first version of CCLXP2 and a "game play update" that was meant to allow reporting scores on levels without fearing further updates. However, your comments on a couple of levels do make me think if we should still issue some small changes (which wouldn't affect reported times) when we get to updating the ccx file and other documentation. Glider and Fire: the choice to not change levels when they were already solvable in Lynx was costly on some of the levels, like this one. In the end, we did edit some of those levels as well so maybe here too we could at least remove a few of the gliders at the end. That's only reasonable, but mirroring the level is still too different when the original kind of worked already, unlike Time Bomb. At the other end of the spectrum, Ranger Denmark was flipped even though the original worked, but this is justified by the flipped version playing much more like the original in MS. The other main level that was solvable but left unchanged was Run-a-Muck. In both these we tried to add a hint in the ccx file, but perhaps that was not enough to avoid all the frustration. At least we made small changes to Cloner's Maze One-Block Sokoban *: Maybe we could do something about getting stuck on the teleport due to splash delay. No clear best solution jumps right at me, but let's give it some thought. Yet Another Puzzle LX: I would have considered making the race easier for Chip had I thought of it. Now it's a bit too late as it would change the times reported for the score boards. As I write this, more replies and comments on other levels come to mind, but I eventually plan on writing my own thoughts on all the levels (including a response to Chipster's review), so I'll stop here. Hopefully someone is still playing this set when I get around to it I like how you comment on a few levels we didn't touch, bringing out how different they felt in Lynx compared to MS. Those differences are what interested me in this project from the beginning. (That, and how some levels needed only the slightest changes to make them work.) I didn't imagine at the start that we would get a version for all the levels! One person couldn't have done it alone, and I am glad you were part of the team! Your contributions (plus this review) were valuable, so a big thank you! -Miika
  30. 1 point
    The evil mirror level 18 glider room can be fixed just by removing thieves directly on way to exit. Otherwise solvable I think.
  31. 1 point
    How big is your screen? You can try forcing a bigger window by going into the game and selecting Edit->Preferences...->"2X" in the bottom drop-down menu and then restarting the game. It may not be that much better but at least you can see.
  32. 1 point
    Well I finished all 200 levels as well and while there aren't many custom levels I don't think that's a reason to lose interest... And as far as I know, not that many people plan on going back to CC1 styled levels for a long time. Though I will agree the editor window is annoying to work with.
  33. 1 point
    Why did you lose interest in it? I do agree CCLP4 should be a CC1 set but going back to CC1 entirely is kind of boring. If CC2 didn't release when it did, I would have stopped designing levels and quit CC eventually because of how boring it was getting.
  34. 1 point
    That was fun read, thanks! Man I need to view my old maps again, I forgot about some of those maps. Yeah Many Left is my most favorite level I ever made, too bad it didn't make it in CCLP3.
  35. 1 point
    Has anyone noticed that the blog name "Ed Levels Gin" is an anagram of "Level Design"?
  36. 1 point
    Who said we were turning the tables?
  37. 1 point
    I love how this blog post has more comments than any other, and soon the amount of text within these comments will exceed the length of the blog post.
  38. 1 point
    I'll be looking forward to the more of your blogs, Ida!
  39. 1 point
    Levels that uses concepts in a way someone could use them in real life. For example, think about Investment from CCLP3. Part of the concept is to evaluate what bombs need to be exploded to get more blocks to complete the level, but in reality, it could be interpreted as making a bank account, depositing money into it and letting it build year round. However, realism does not have to be a concept, it could also be the environment, textures, or anything that does not appear supernatural. Sorry for the confusion. ~lookatthis
  40. 1 point
    What do you mean by "realism"?
  41. 1 point
    I think all of the game elements have the potential to be used for good. But that's just it - they are tools that are only as good as how they're used.
  42. 1 point
    Hey, the voting is based on a rather loose set of guidelines to begin with, obviously people are going to impose their own expectations, opinions, and previous experiences on their voting. If the staff were to tell us which levels were good and which levels were bad, there wouldn't be much point in voting would there? (: What one person thinks is a great level, another may despise. Similarly, one person's idea of a "good reason" may not pass as a "reason" at all with another. We all submitted these levels into a public domain and should be prepared to take criticism for them as well as praise from the rest of the community. I'm not trying to offend anyone (although I know I will), but if you aren't prepared to take criticism, don't ask for other people's opinions.
  43. 1 point
  44. 1 point
    I agree with u on all of these... except Flareon... Are u trying to tell me that you HATE POKEMON!?!?!? I mean let's see you try making a mural level that's actually playable! Nothing personal, just trying to defend the #1 level I want in CCLP1 The least you can do is give a GOOD reason to give it a 1 rating... In fact you may as well have not mentioned it AT ALL!
  45. 1 point
    Unless this is a bad joke, you have sunk to his level.
  46. 1 point
    Guys, these are just 10 he wants to see in CCLP1. I don't think he's meaning this as his top 10 favorite ones.
  47. 1 point
    I really want to see Josh Lee's Frozen Labyrinth and Flareon
  48. 1 point
  • Create New...