Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
lookatthis

lookatthis scores

Recommended Posts

I always wanted to see people obtain bold scores of my levels. The first five I got for lynx is:

 

1. 141

2. 62

3. 72

4. 137

5. 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far I just took a quick look at this set, but it looks really good! I could see some of these levels doing well in CCLP1 voting, if only it had come out in time...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The set is actually intended for CCLP4. Due to the fact that it contains bug manipulation, block sliding, and other CCLP3 shenanigans. Try any level in the 50s and you'll see what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I was just looking at this set in the editor, and it definitely looks like great CCLP >3 material. Love the aesthetics in several of the levels, though some of the mechanisms and concepts (even outside "Questionable Ethics") look lifted from other sets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must admit Questionable Ethics wasn't at all in my liking, mainly because I just took concepts from CC1 that I thought would be interesting to see how it would turn out in just one level, but their are others that I loved working on such as Ultimate Sacrifice, Fallout Shelter, and Irrational Proportions that I think could make easy candidates for CCLP4. Also this is my first set and the only 60 levels that I ever designed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe one day, when I finish the four LPs I've still got in progress. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This set looks like a LOT of fun. I may LP this set, as I plan to make my return to CCLPing after the summer  :)

 

Also this is my first set and the only 60 levels that I ever designed.

 

If you mean this, then kudos to you! I hope you plan to make a whole lot more levels than just these 60 in the future!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may extend my set to 149 levels, but I am currently out of level ideas at the moment. Its hard to expand variety.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you plan on giving your set an actual name? lookatthis.dat makes it sounds like it only shows 1 level or something lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Well, I thought the name was good. It makes players wanna look to see what its all about, but I guess you can call it Lats Set or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just updated the set to Version 1.3. Their won't be any more updates after this point onward. Also, has anyone got anymore scores. I'm noticing that I am the only one who posted some.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good news, I updated my set to version 1.5. Bad news, your score for level 5 (If you completed it) would change when downloading the update.

 

Some feedback would be nice. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't worry, you haven't been forgotten. It's just that with the CCLP1 voting going on, new sets are getting a little bit less attention than they would otherwise. Your levels seem pleasant enough to take a quick look though, so here are some lynx scores for the first few:

 

1. 142

2. 62

3. 80

4.157

5. 31

 

-Miika

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to see everyone's time scores, why don't you upload this set to pie guy's site?

 

Anyway, here's my first five lynx scores:

Level 1: 140

Level 2: 62

Level 3: 80

Level 4: 143

Level 5: 30

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't want my set to be at multiple locations to download, only if its linked to here then thats completely fine by me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I uploaded a new version to my set. I would have uploaded it earlier if it wasn't for me being so busy with real life crap. Anyways, I am planning to create a second set of 60 levels more later in the future that tries to focus on completely different concepts then the ones in my first set.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really liked the first ten or so levels of your first set, but then things started to get a bit complicated. I appreciate complex levels, but it's tiring when all the levels require tons of work. If you could do more of those simpler levels, that would be great! :)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may do that for my next set. Only because I designed levels with CCLP4 in mind thinking that people would appreciate levels in that criteria. But I could definitely promise you an easy set of levels sometime in the future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit @ reply two posts down: that's not at all what I meant, but clarifying is obviously a waste of time so I won't bother bumping this discussion by replying.

Edited by James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Considering CCLP4 is years from major production (i.e. closing of submissions/start of official testing), I'd say designing levels well that impress (in some way, maybe not much compared to some levels seen today) the community are good candidates, but don't worry about it much until further down the road (if CCLP4 even becomes a thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The overwhelming consensus has been that CCLP3 had too many complex, difficult levels. This is not to say that this type of level is bad, nor is it to say that any future CCLPs will not feature levels of this type, just that "modern levelset construction theory" - to give it a formal name - focuses on a variety of level types: small and big, easy and difficult, simple and complex, etc.

 

"Designing levels with CCLP4 in mind" doesn't have to mean any more than just designing good levels, period.

 

You just described my set their, though you might not get the broad picture. I have seen this community since CCLP2 was released, so I know what to expect. Difficulty has nothing to do with good level design and I respect that. People in this community have different opinions about this though so I'm not going to go into detail. I was only saying my plans that others have recommended for me to do. Thanks for the unneeded information by the way.

 

Considering CCLP4 is years from major production (i.e. closing of submissions/start of official testing), I'd say designing levels well that impress (in some way, maybe not much compared to some levels seen today) the community are good candidates, but don't worry about it much until further down the road (if CCLP4 even becomes a thing)

 

I'm not worried and never was. One reason why I design levels for CCLP4 so early is because that is what starts its process of being a real CCLP. It also helps others get inspired by levels with exceptional level design and feel the need to design ones of their own. That is also the basic reason why JoshL4 got popular. Though in absolute fairness, you are perfectly right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is also the basic reason why JoshL4 got popular. 

 

I'm not sure exactly what you mean by this but I'll try to answer to that. I will admit, yes I got inspired by some levels in your set for JoshL4, but there is a reason why there's a "4" in the set name. A lot people of the community are pretty familiar with my work when it comes to level design.

 

Also, with the whole theory of CCLP4 having levels of higher difficulty. I really don't understand why everyone gets on each other's case about "assuming it'll be more complexed than CCLP3". If you honestly think about it, it would make sense to assume that. CCLP2 was a little more difficult than CC1 with the introduction to invalid tiles and such, as goes with CCLP3 being way more difficult than CCLP2. 

 

So assuming the same with CCLP4 isn't necessarily a bad thing. It's only common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just trying to say every levelset on this site has inspiration, I was just using your set as an example.

 

Although, if people continue to argue about CCLP's, this may cause the community to have to resort to smattering, like the previous one I was with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just trying to say every levelset on this site has inspiration, I was just using your set as an example.

 

Although, if people continue to argue about CCLP's, this may cause the community to have to resort to smattering, like the previous one I was with.

 

I agree that nobody wants to see vituperative discussions, but rather a smattering of common sense and understanding. It will be interesting to see how CCLP4 turns out, considering that once CCLP1 is done, we already have the mass of levels published (and reviewed!) to make the next set for non-beginners.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Edit @ reply two posts down: that's not at all what I meant, but clarifying is obviously a waste of time so I won't bother bumping this discussion by replying.

 

I understood what you meant, but I hate to see you in denial about a perfectly reasonable post that tends to cover everyone's interest in a interesting way.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it very hard to believe that you know what I meant when I myself could not even understood what I meant upon re-reading my post. I didn't want to bump the discussion by replying, but apparently editing a post does that anyway, so I might as well post a brief one. (A larger reply, which could be interesting and touch on a lot of topics, is unfortunately still something I would consider a waste of time for many reasons).

 

You just described my set their

I wouldn't know. I have not downloaded your set. I have downloaded <1% of all custom sets in existence. I don't play custom sets. I based my comments almost entirely on this post by you:

 

"Only because I designed levels with CCLP4 in mind thinking that people would appreciate levels in that criteria."

 

where "that criteria" referred to Miika's post about complex levels that require tons of work. If you polled people 3-4 years ago and asked them what they wanted in CCLP4, this type of level would be at the top of the list (see: CCLP3 voting results). If you polled people now and asked them that same question, this type of level would actually now carry a bit of a negative stigma and would not be rated nearly as highly. Unfortunately I can't point to much concrete evidence in support of this, but this is the overwhelming view that I've seen expressed by players of all types in various CC discussions. (I'm mainly thinking of the main CC skype chat room, which is by my own estimation nearing 500,000 total messages.)

 

That's all I was trying to say.

 

though you might not get the broad picture. I have seen this community since CCLP2 was released, so I know what to expect.

Then we are both 10+ year veterans of the community. I don't like the implicit superiority contained in this message (although you could argue the same for my previous post in a different way). There are some players who have only discovered our community just this year and yet have more coherent and reasonable viewpoints on community and game issues than most veterans do.

 

You do not know what to expect just because you have been here for a long time. Neither do I. Neither does anybody else. Not only is it impossible to ever know what to expect in a community like this, but if it *was* possible, it would be possible based on a high level of interaction with the community on a daily basis, not based on how long it has been since one first discovered a CC website. Authority and knowledge are not rooted in join dates.

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find it very hard to believe that you know what I meant when I myself could not even understood what I meant upon re-reading my post. I didn't want to bump the discussion by replying, but apparently editing a post does that anyway, so I might as well post a brief one. (A larger reply, which could be interesting and touch on a lot of topics, is unfortunately still something I would consider a waste of time for many reasons).

 

Actually, someone else pointed this out for me. Editing a post does not show up on the main page, only the post that used up space in the thread does. 

 

I wouldn't know. I have not downloaded your set. I have downloaded <1% of all custom sets in existence. I don't play custom sets. I based my comments almost entirely on this post by you:

 

"Only because I designed levels with CCLP4 in mind thinking that people would appreciate levels in that criteria."

 

where "that criteria" referred to Miika's post about complex levels that require tons of work. If you polled people 3-4 years ago and asked them what they wanted in CCLP4, this type of level would be at the top of the list (see: CCLP3 voting results). If you polled people now and asked them that same question, this type of level would actually now carry a bit of a negative stigma and would not be rated nearly as highly. Unfortunately I can't point to much concrete evidence in support of this, but this is the overwhelming view that I've seen expressed by players of all types in various CC discussions. (I'm mainly thinking of the main CC skype chat room, which is by my own estimation nearing 500,000 total messages.)

 

That's all I was trying to say.

 

I don't know specifically what levels Mikka had trouble on (which is why I ask her about it in the chat room). It was a form of generalization, so someone could of felt good among themselves when completing it. Personally speaking, none of the levels should be hard to complete, but obviously they would take some thought though. The fact that you can't pull out concrete evidence from your case probably suggest something  ;)

 

Then we are both 10+ year veterans of the community. I don't like the implicit superiority contained in this message (although you could argue the same for my previous post in a different way). There are some players who have only discovered our community just this year and yet have more coherent and reasonable viewpoints on community and game issues than most veterans do.

 

Well, I'm not enjoying how someone could get all over you like gravy getting on mashed potatoes, but I have to handle it, don't I? Some people who have discovered this community, not long ago, get intimidated or threatened and either have left or still is in this community today. Other communities, such as metanet or steam, welcomes all members as a open community and restricts critics before they occur.

 

You do not know what to expect just because you have been here for a long time. Neither do I. Neither does anybody else. Not only is it impossible to ever know what to expect in a community like this, but if it *was* possible, it would be possible based on a high level of interaction with the community on a daily basis, not based on how long it has been since one first discovered a CC website. Authority and knowledge are not rooted in join dates.

 

Oh its possible, but not in the way you said it. Judging by the technology we have today, we could easily improve this community in the way we want. Shaping it to the community we always dreamed to have. Saying that this community has restrictions and that we can't do something about it is idiotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not completely sure what this discussion is even about, but here are some comments i want to make:
 

I don't know specifically what levels Mikka had trouble on (which is why I ask her about it in the chat room).


*him ;)
 

The fact that you can't pull out concrete evidence from your case probably suggest something  ;)

 
He said he can't point to much concrete evidence. He did manage to point to the Skype conversations and the CCLP3 voting results.
 

Other communities, such as metanet or steam, welcomes all members as a open community and restricts critics before they occur.

 
We're not an open community? I was never aware.
 

Saying that this community has restrictions and that we can't do something about it is idiotic.


There's that implicit superiority again. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just love how this thread took a complete toll just because the possible future CCLP4 was brought up.

 

That's all I have to say for now. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He said he can't point to much concrete evidence. He did manage to point to the Skype conversations and the CCLP3 voting results.

 

I was talking about my set their, not what you mentioned.

 

There's that implicit superiority again. :P

 

You misinterpreted my post above.

 

I just love how this thread took a complete toll just because the possible future CCLP4 was brought up.

 

That's all I have to say for now. 

 

I suppose people would be in a high demand for it I guess. Although, it is quite ironic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was talking about my set their, not what you mentioned.

If you meant concrete evidence from your set, then you worded yourself poorly. There is no indication in James post that he was specifically looking for "concrete evidence" in your set:

 

I wouldn't know. I have not downloaded your set. I have downloaded <1% of all custom sets in existence. I don't play custom sets.

[...]

If you polled people 3-4 years ago and asked them what they wanted in CCLP4, this type of level would be at the top of the list (see: CCLP3 voting results). If you polled people now and asked them that same question, this type of level would actually now carry a bit of a negative stigma and would not be rated nearly as highly. Unfortunately I can't point to much concrete evidence in support of this, but this is the overwhelming view that I've seen expressed by players of all types in various CC discussions. (I'm mainly thinking of the main CC skype chat room, which is by my own estimation nearing 500,000 total messages.)

The fact that you can't pull out concrete evidence from your case probably suggest something  ;)

----------

 

You misinterpreted my post above.

If you are going to say someone has misinterpreted something you said, it is a good idea to follow up with a clarification of what you meant, rather than leave the other person guessing.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can I just ask something here?

 

What's all this arguing and to put bluntly, crap leading to? Honestly, I'm just completely lost about the whole thing, even after re-reading the whole discussion thrice.

 

This thread is just completely off topic now as it was merely for others who have played lookatthis.dat or whatever the set is called now, to post their scores, in which case only few have done. 

 

If you want to argue about CCLP4 or whatever, take it somewhere else. Please.

 

(inb4 you got yourself involved in it now)

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you meant concrete evidence from your set, then you worded yourself poorly. There is no indication in James post that he was specifically looking for "concrete evidence" in your set:

 

Like Josh said, this thread was originally for scores, specifically for my set. Obviously James does not play many custom sets (Its just how he is). Its a way of motivation to get back to what this thread was originally about. I don't like arguments, probably just as much as you do.

 

If you are going to say someone has misinterpreted something you said, it is a good idea to follow up with a clarification of what you meant, rather than leave the other person guessing.

 

Saying something like this is even lower then my standards. The two people who voted this post up must really have dark thoughts about me. However, I will be positive about this because I mostly always am. First off, theirs no guesswork, following the posts backwards would easily lead to what I was trying to say. If you still can't find it then here it is:

 

Oh its possible, but not in the way you said it. Judging by the technology we have today, we could easily improve this community in the way we want. Shaping it to the community we always dreamed to have. Saying that this community has restrictions and that we can't do something about it is idiotic.

 

No matter how good or bad a community is, it can always improve. Knowing Tom, he'd always take our thoughts into consideration and decide among himself what would take a good turn for this community as a hole. Second, (to be announced).

 

Can I just ask something here?

 

What's all this arguing and to put bluntly, crap leading to? Honestly, I'm just completely lost about the whole thing, even after re-reading the whole discussion thrice.

 

This thread is just completely off topic now as it was merely for others who have played lookatthis.dat or whatever the set is called now, to post their scores, in which case only few have done. 

 

If you want to argue about CCLP4 or whatever, take it somewhere else. Please.

 

(inb4 you got yourself involved in it now)

 

"The right man in the wrong place, can make all the differences in the world"

 

~Legacy Team

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Josh said, this thread was originally for scores, specifically for my set. Obviously James does not play many custom sets (Its just how he is). Its a way of motivation to get back to what this thread was originally about. I don't like arguments, probably just as much as you do.

That's fine. I'm just saying you weren't clear earlier. And you're right, i'm not really enjoying this discussion either.

 

Saying something like this is even lower then my standards.

A discussion won't go anywhere if the participants do nothing but say "You're wrong." I consider it each person's responsibility to make his or her own case, rather than have other people figure it out for them. I fail to understand how this is "low". If my statement came off as harsh or sarcastic, i apologize - that was not my intention.

 

However, i now understand you do not wish to continue this discussion here, and i can respect that.

 

First off, theirs no guesswork, following the posts backwards would easily lead to what I was trying to say.

I doubt that, considering i didn't understand your statement about concrete evidence. Plus, from the words of J.B., what may be obvious to the designer may not be obvious to the players. Of course, he was talking about Chip's Challenge levels, but it applies here as well.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt that, considering i didn't understand your statement about concrete evidence. Plus, from the words of J.B., what may be obvious to the designer may not be obvious to the players. Of course, he was talking about Chip's Challenge levels, but it applies here as well.

 

I never stated anything about concrete evidence and even though I agree with 96% of what J.B. says, the same facts will always apply. Obviously, he was talking about CC levels, but does it apply here? In a way, yes. Even though its easy to agree with him, the same would have been said for other sets.

 

The only reason why I don't plan to close this thread is because most people have missed the main idea of it, but possibly had no clue what they meant when they said concrete evidence. This showed me that the case started by James had no purpose. Their was never anything resolved by this. When he brought that statement up without actually taking a minute or two to look through that set in the editor, then their is nothing he could of said that would actually support that case on my quote.

 

If you actually want to support evidence, in a third party discussion, then here is your concrete evidence:

 

http://cczone.invisionzone.com/index.php?/files/file/270-60-minutes/

 

(I don't mean literally)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never stated anything about concrete evidence and even though I agree with 96% of what J.B. says, the same facts will always apply. Obviously, he was talking about CC levels, but does it apply here? In a way, yes. Even though its easy to agree with him, the same would have been said for other sets.

 

The only reason why I don't plan to close this thread is because most people have missed the main idea of it, but possibly had no clue what they meant when they said concrete evidence. This showed me that the case started by James had no purpose. Their was never anything resolved by this. When he brought that statement up without actually taking a minute or two to look through that set in the editor, then their is nothing he could of said that would actually support that case on my quote.

 

I don't know how your harder levels would fair in future CCLP votings, but from what I've seen in voting, probably not too good. The downside I've noticed is after CCLP3 was released, people started to see huge flaws in those levels, despite them being very well designed, but really only for experienced players of the game or people who look at a map to work out what they are doing. We've developed a term called CCLP3-esque levels in CCLP1 voting, and I guess we all keep forgetting that newcomers play custom levels too, and they need to judge their quality too. Guesswork is usually frowned upon nowadays and having hot blocks or large amounts of randomness. I guess we've just evolved to a point where we try to make levels appropriate for everyone with MS/Lynx compatibility. Who knows though? If the next CCLP is an "anything goes" like CCLP3, you still may have a shot with getting some levels in. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, so I've now played the next ten levels too, for a total of twenty levels (or a third of the set). I kind of feel like I want to take back a bit of what I said earlier. These levels don't require "tons of work" but would rather fit quite nicely in the middle section of a CCLPx. Looking in an editor, the levels seem to keep getting a bit more complex towards the end, but not CCLP3-140s crazy. I'm sure a few of the levels in this set will make it into the next big project we all work on together.

 

And to keep with the thread's topic, the only level I tried to optimize so far after the first five:

 

#11: 70 L

 

-Miika

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how your harder levels would fair in future CCLP votings, but from what I've seen in voting, probably not too good. The downside I've noticed is after CCLP3 was released, people started to see huge flaws in those levels, despite them being very well designed, but really only for experienced players of the game or people who look at a map to work out what they are doing. We've developed a term called CCLP3-esque levels in CCLP1 voting, and I guess we all keep forgetting that newcomers play custom levels too, and they need to judge their quality too. Guesswork is usually frowned upon nowadays and having hot blocks or large amounts of randomness. I guess we've just evolved to a point where we try to make levels appropriate for everyone with MS/Lynx compatibility. Who knows though? If the next CCLP is an "anything goes" like CCLP3, you still may have a shot with getting some levels in. :)

 

That's interesting. Its like people adapted into someone completely different and has, in some ways, found a more proper way of judging what makes a good level. Although, that is not the same with all veterans. Others that have been with this community for a while, still enjoy levels that make them think very hard to solve it. But whats really strange about it is that we aren't the only community doing this. That's right, you read that correctly. Here it is:

 

http://forum.droni.es/index.php?sid=20f534e09650651e631ed3345a004729

 

This community is very different from our's in many ways, but goes through the ideal same process as we do. The way we've adapted, voting, etc. How could this be? Well, I don't know. Maybe its just comes down to the way human beings think or that its a simple way of making us stronger then others. 

 

Anyway, in terms of CCLP4, I think it might be best to have levels starting from CCLP1 difficulty, all the way to the peak of CCLP4 difficulty. Lets face it, CCLP3 started out somewhat harsh and ended but completely harsh. But then when their were some breathers like "Marooned", it proved to be easier then "Entrance Examination". If you were to plot the data on a scatter plot when comparing CCLP3 levels with difficulty. The line of best fit would only touch about 80 percent of that data. However, if we have newcomers joining he community now, they could as well easily vote against having a CCLP4 in the future.  :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This community is very different from our's in many ways, but goes through the ideal same process as we do. The way we've adapted, voting, etc. How could this be? Well, I don't know. Maybe its just comes down to the way human beings think or that its a simple way of making us stronger then others. 

 

At the end of the day, I think it's just the basic human tendency to run rampant when given a bunch of freedom / abilities / power / etc. and then coming to the realization that just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day, I think it's just the basic human tendency to run rampant when given a bunch of freedom / abilities / power / etc. and then coming to the realization that just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should. :)

 

(Y)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Level 53 in my set is unfortunaly impossible in lynx due to the bee facing the trap toward the thin wall. I've spent about an hour trying to fix it and had no success doing so. My goal is to keep the two parts of the level the same without changing anything that would affect the concept. If anyone has any ideas on how to go about fixing this, help is much appreciated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since Lynx lacks the controller and boss glitch, the bug can exit a trap only in the direction it's facing. I suggest a west force floor south of the bug.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Random 8, I released the final version of my set just so you all know.

 

In other news, Michael wants be to release a TWS file for this set, I don't know if I might yet, but maybe if their is a high demand for it (I doubt that there will be though).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael asked to see a solution to the final level, so I made this video. The time on it can clearly be improved if someone wants to. Not all the chips were required but I couldn't decide which ones not to get.

 

http://youtu.be/nUkb2PJ9pOo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Miika! :) Also, after watching the video, I noticed that you used a different route from what I used. I didn't realize that their would be multiple solutions to this level. But because the others are sort of evil, I'll update the level while keeping this one intact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In other news, Michael wants be to release a TWS file for this set, I don't know if I might yet, but maybe if their is a high demand for it (I doubt that there will be though).

 

I strongly think you should do this. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I strongly think you should do this. 

 

I can, but I'm not sure if its possible to convert it. You see, the tws file is labeled as "lookatthis-ms.dat.txt.tws". I had email it to someone to see if it worked, but in the end, their level times got reset. Regardless, I'll do by best to get it up as soon as this issue is delt with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Random 8, I released the final version of my set just so you all know.

 

In other news, Michael wants be to release a TWS file for this set, I don't know if I might yet, but maybe if their is a high demand for it (I doubt that there will be though).

If you send that file to me (valeosote at hotmail), I might be able to help.

 

Also, nice job Josh on starting the LP :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, nice job Josh on starting the LP :)

 

Thanks! This set is very fun to play! I'm eager to see what the later levels are like :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks! This set is very fun to play! I'm eager to see what the later levels are like :)

 

Glad you see you liked the first 8 levels! Also, yeah some of the levels do have a tight time limit, though from a creator prospective I would of completely not of realized that. Anyway, thanks for the feedback!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad you see you liked the first 8 levels! Also, yeah some of the levels do have a tight time limit, though from a creator prospective I would of completely not of realized that. Anyway, thanks for the feedback!

 

No problem! Just prepare yourself for more feedback, as I'm trying to provide as much as possible. :)

 

Also, recording episode 2 soon!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since this set has been out for a while, I feel like saying some interesting stuff that you may not even know about this set:

 

Level 5 is the only level where it is possible to touch the border.

 

Level 49 has two blocks that are not even needed to complete the level. (This is only true in one of the two rulesets)

 

Every hint is reachable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...