CCLP1 Speculation

[AdrenalinDragon]

If you new who it was (which obviously you do) then you would know the inside joke to whom I'm refering.

I speculate that J.B. is the CCLP1 Staff Cordinator.

Nice spelling.

I speculate that everything you say about CCLP1 is wrong.

[random 8]

I don't believe your logic possesses the force you believe it to possess.

Of course you don't. Otherwise what are we talking about?

The bottom line is that if you're making a change from inside the game that alters the gameplay significantly, it's not the same game anymore.

I find your modification "from inside the game" to be arbitrary. Wouldn't gameplay effectively be the same if we integrated a level editor into Tile World as opposed to leaving it external?

[lookatthis]

Do you know what J.B. rated Solve the Pyramid?... One Star!

K

[jblewis]

I find your modification "from inside the game" to be arbitrary. Wouldn't gameplay effectively be the same if we integrated a level editor into Tile World as opposed to leaving it external?

No, because it's still not part of the gameplay of the actual game itself. A fairer comparison would be if the entire 32x32 grid could be viewed at once while actively playing the game. Having an editor inside Tile World doesn't really change anything.

[mobius]

Then CC isn't the game for you. Try Chuck's Challenge instead.

I did. It is better. except I play very few chips challenge custom levels now because of this.

I think that he was talking about the fact that there is no ice block patch for TW2, and no patch for Lynx.

And, personally, I would not use TW3. TW1 works fine, so why upgrade?

well I'd say TW1 works good, but there are a few annoying glitches

Then it's not Chip's Challenge anymore. It's an entirely different game.

And it will have a storyline. An epic one.

I'm sorry but this just sounds a little ridiculous. How is it no longer chips challenge? Because it would no longer be painful and tedious? really?

But, btw, since it was mentioned; so what? Let it be a different game, the original game sucked. Everyone agrees it's filled with quite a few painful levels not to mention the fact of not having any kind of checkpoint system or the like.

And the whole thing with the level editor is arbitrary I still think, because people can use an editor currently to "cheat" or subvert normal gameplay anyway. Except it would be a lot nicer to NOT have to do this. I don't think refraining from changing the game is preventing people from cheating or whatever. They'll just use an editor or stop playing. And to be clear, I'm only talking about preventing the need for repeating already-made steps. Seeing the whole playing grid would change how the game is played definitely. But a type of save state system only serves to shorten the length of time playing. It doesn't PREVENT the player from playing a level again and again. Players still have to go through a certain area many times to complete it if they have difficulty forcing them to refine their skills.

I have to say, I'm still really baffled at all this aversion to this. Games are about having fun, not boring repetitive tedium. And most gamers, at least casual gamers would agree here. And I wouldn't like the idea of keeping this game accessible only a small number of hardcore players. I'm saying all this, after hearing a number of people tell me this is the reason they stopped playing chips challenge or didn't even bother with custom levels after hearing about it.

Take Portal as an example; when you die, it puts you right back where you were before you died. The game still has tons of replay value and I've never heard anyone say it's too easy.

And on this note; I predict that CCLP1 is not going to bring a ton of new players to CC like it's intended to. I'm sorry to sound so negative, but this is the just the truth as I see it. Hopefully I'm wrong.

[jblewis]

I'm sorry but this just sounds a little ridiculous. How is it no longer chips challenge? Because it would no longer be painful and tedious? really?

But, btw, since it was mentioned; so what? Let it be a different game, the original game sucked. Everyone agrees it's filled with quite a few painful levels not to mention the fact of not having any kind of checkpoint system or the like.

And the whole thing with the level editor is arbitrary I still think, because people can use an editor currently to "cheat" or subvert normal gameplay anyway. Except it would be a lot nicer to NOT have to do this. I don't think refraining from changing the game is preventing people from cheating or whatever. They'll just use an editor or stop playing. And to be clear, I'm only talking about preventing the need for repeating already-made steps. Seeing the whole playing grid would change how the game is played definitely. But a type of save state system only serves to shorten the length of time playing. It doesn't PREVENT the player from playing a level again and again. Players still have to go through a certain area many times to complete it if they have difficulty forcing them to refine their skills.

I have to say, I'm still really baffled at all this aversion to this. Games are about having fun, not boring repetitive tedium. And most gamers, at least casual gamers would agree here. And I wouldn't like the idea of keeping this game accessible only a small number of hardcore players. I'm saying all this, after hearing a number of people tell me this is the reason they stopped playing chips challenge or didn't even bother with custom levels after hearing about it.

mobius, you're shifting the goalposts here. The issue at hand isn't whether I or anyone else agrees with the original game's lack of a checkpoint system, or even whether or not implementing changes like a checkpoint system would prevent people from "cheating." The point is that implementing these changes would make the game a different game. Period. We wouldn't call Chuck's Challenge "Chip's Challenge" because the two games are different. We could debate what elements in Chuck's Challenge are responsible for this, but the bottom line is that two versions of Chip's Challenge were released with the blessing of its creator, and any addition we make that affects the gameplay, whether they be ice blocks or checkpoints, would make the game a different game.

Also, I understand that Tile World isn't technically CC either, but it was constructed to emulate CC, and with the exception of some rather obscure bugs, does so well without significantly altering gameplay. Those here who were around back when Tile World was initially released know that it was carefully constructed as an emulation, not "Chip's Challenge Plus" with bells and whistles that altered the gameplay.

Do I want checkpoints in CC? Sure. I totally agree with the idea for the reasons you listed. But if we were to do something like this, we couldn't call it Chip's Challenge anymore because checkpoints weren't a part of Chip's Challenge. Checkpoints may not seem to affect the gameplay at first glance, but they would certainly affect the amount of care with which we approach gameplay, as well as level design itself. I've been involved with a similar "retrofitting" project for another retro action/puzzle game, and the creator has opted for the production of an entirely new game with the same elements and similar graphics, as well as some new ones and a checkpoint system. It's been quite amazing to see how the checkpoints have brought about a surge in linearly designed levels, versus the more open-ended levels that characterized the original. I'd also like to submit that the tedium of CC and the lack of a checkpoint system are not typically taken into consideration by most designers when building levels, whereas they should pay more attention to the game for which they're designing and its limitations and shortcomings.

And on this note; I predict that CCLP1 is not going to bring a ton of new players to CC like it's intended to. I'm sorry to sound so negative, but this is the just the truth as I see it. Hopefully I'm wrong.

The purpose of CCLP1 is to include a legal alternative to CC1 when distributing Tile World, versus the much tougher CCLP2 and CCLP3. Will it bring "a ton of new players to CC"? I'd say that would be a nice bonus, and I would certainly hope for it, but for now, that first goal is what we're focusing on. Perhaps we can discuss distribution methods as a community after the set's release. The staff has had enough on its plate just putting the set together. It's worth noting, though, that CCLP3 seemed to be accompanied by a new wave of players after its release, even though it was monstrously hard - and that there are many CC players who are not active community members and would rather play the sets that feature the best levels (CCLPs) instead of taking the time to keep up with every custom set. A few of these folks also popped up around CCLP3's release. Perhaps with a more casual player-friendly pack of levels, more involvement will come as well.

[lookatthis]

I find your modification "from inside the game" to be arbitrary. Wouldn't gameplay effectively be the same if we integrated a level editor into Tile World as opposed to leaving it external?

Let me explain it a different way:

When designing a community-based game, different aspects are taken into consideration rather then how an Indie game is developed (But lets not go that far into the process). Basically with CC, all components of the game that was already installed to be placed in the game, are part of the game itself, meaning that any new elements that are placed in the game, when the official version is released, can legally change the game's purpose depending on what element is placed in. Things like the "Ice Block", for example, is considered as an update toward the game. It doesn't have any effect on what the game is truely about, it simply just adds a new feature to the game, to build on what made the game unique. A feature like the "check point system", drastically changes the game because its not an element to add on to gameplay, its an element that changes other aspects of the game, which is why it is invalid to be placed as an update. Chuck's Challenge, for example, can't use the title "Chip's Challenge 2", because aspects that were seen in CC1 were changed when comparing the two, the rewind feature especially.

Also, thanks J.B.

[random 8]

I may or may not add more later, but i just want to say this for now:

mobius, you're shifting the goalposts here.

There were never goalposts. He's making a new point, and there's nothing wrong with that (though maybe we should switch to another thread).

[quiznos00]

Random input after only half-reading everyone's comments: if someone wants to make a checkpoint mod, they should feel free to do so. But it should only be considered a mod by the distributors and should by no means replace the original game, and sets in the CCLPx series should be designed with the original game in mind. Whether or not the game you are playing is actually "Chip's Challenge" is irrelevant really. Just treat it the same way ice blocks are treated.

[IceyLava108]

Checkpoints could also be a revamped rendition of the rewind feature that appeared in Chuck's Challenge in the point of view or opinion of some, too. I would prefer to keep the CCLPs without any modifications such as this checkpoint system and let them remain traditional in the form of "you die, restart", and let checkpoints be used for cool new ways of level designing in the future of custom levelsets.