jetsetdanny

I thought about "Manic Mixup" as well as an example of levels of difficulty. I would definitely agree here. However, I also relate to the word "level" being used for any kind of game where passing on to the next screen/game map/part of game map, etc. depends on solving the previous level (which may be a screen/game map/part of game map, etc.) successfully. "MM" is a perfect example of a game having levels in this sense. One screen (room, cavern) is equivalent to one level. Interestingly, in "Double Miner" I would say that there are 10 levels, but 20 rooms/screens/caverns, because the player needs to solve two rooms/screens/caverns before moving on to the next level. "Double Miner" is also an interesting test for Ian's definition of a cavern, because each pair of rooms consists of a "non-portal room" and a "portal room". You can move between them freely, but you can only progress to the next level of the game (the word 'level' comes in so handy here!) after collecting all of the items in both rooms, which activates the portal. So are both of these rooms caverns or not? I would only say that individually they are not levels; together each pair of rooms creates a level. Another consideration: speaking about 'levels' defined as I described at the start of this post, I believe the level of difficulty is irrelevant, or at least does not have to be relevant. The game can have a number of levels (in terms of this definition) that will have either the same level of difficulty, or a random level of difficulty (some levels are more difficult than others but not in any particular order - I would say MM is actually like this), or a rising level of difficulty, or, theoretically, even a falling level of difficulty, or some other pattern (like for example: a game where you progress through a zoo. First come screens featuring fish: easy level - moderate level - hard level; then come screens featuring birds: easy level - moderate level - hard level; then come screens features animals: easy level - moderate level - hard level, and so on). Admittedly, it is probably more common to find games where the difficulty level increases as the player progresses through the levels ("Jumping Jack" is a great Spectrum example that comes to mind, one of my non-JSW favourites) than where it goes down. But again, it happens in many games, but it doesn't have to happen to define what a level is. I would also agree that if someone talks about levels in JSW games, I would probably think about first of all about 'geographical' levels as per the game's map. However, this doesn't have to be the case either. Some games have so many "illogical" room exits (you leave room A and enter room B, but when you go back, instead of re-rentering room A you enter room C, etc.) that it may be very difficult to make a 'geographical' map of them. Or, even if the exits *are* logical, the game map can have such a shape that it would be difficult to talk about levels - which I think we subconsciously identify with the storeys of Willy's original mansion. But not every game map has such a mansion... Finally, one could also design JSW games that would have 'levels' as defined at the start of this post. A prime example of this would be "Party Willy (JSW128 version)" - you have to collect all of the items in the rooms that are equivalent to the 48K "Party Willy" Part 1 and do the mid-game toilet run to be able to start playing the rooms that are equivalent to the 48K "Party Willy" Part 2. In this sense, the game has two levels (although I wouldn't normally think of them as 'levels', but 'parts', because of the game's name). My general feeling is that in "Party Willy" you cannot really talk about an increase in difficulty level between the two parts (they are both very difficult). So it's an example of a JSW game that has 'levels', but they're not defined by increased difficulty. "Jet Set 40-40" is another example of a JSW game that has levels in the sense of having to complete one part of the game to be able to progress to the next part. In this case, the levels are also marked by an increased level of difficulty (the player has to collect four complete sets of items; once the last item of one set has been collected, the items of the next set will appear. The difficulty of the game will increase with each consecutive set of items, as more and more guardians threaten Willy's progress through his mansion and its surroundings).

That's a nice-sounding definition, although I think it might lead to using the words "cavern" and "level" interchangeably and always referring to MM games, as there are no such levels in JSW. However, it won't always work, I believe, for the following reason: In JSW64 and other advanced game engines you can have a MM-like room which Willy enters and can only leave via a portal after collecting all items in that room. However, such a room may be not a part of any longer sequence (like having to go through all of the original MM rooms before returning to the main, JSW-like part of the game map), it may be there on its own, as a kind of "detour" among JSW-like rooms. In this case, it would still be a cavern as per Ian's definition, but I don't think anyone would call it a 'level' (it would be a 'room' and a 'cavern', but not a 'level'! 😜).

Yes, I've experienced it too. It is an additional difficulty, and it is frustrating 😵.

Ian has provided a fixed version of "Ultimate Manic Miner", where both the Eugene Lair and some other issues are fixed. Attached are three playthroughs of the fixed "Eugene Lair" done using the modified file. I recorded them using the Rollback feature. To be honest, when one plays using Rollback, I would say it's not a particularly difficult challenge - when you die, you roll back and try doing things differently, either by improving your movements (e.g. when you see you just need to move a little bit more quickly to get things right) or by choosing a different way ('let's go right instead of left at this time') or timing ('let's not go for those items now, but wait until the horizontal guardian has passed'). Of course the Rollback makes all the difference - playing this room without its assistance would certainly be a nightmare. UMM fixed Eugene Lair 3.rzx UMM fixed Eugene Lair 2.rzx UMM fixed Eugene Lair 1.rzx

This distinction would be crystal-clear between the original "MM" and the original "JSW", but later games - like the ones based on the JSW64 game engine or Norman Sword's "Manic Jet Set Willy" blur it IMO. In the original "MM" the (activated) portal was the only way to leave the room, and in the original "JSW" there were no portals. However, in the later games you can have a room with a portal that takes you elsewhere, but you can also leave this room by "normal" means, going into one or more of the adjacent rooms. In this scenario the portals merely work as teleporters, to get you elsewhere instantaneously. I think it's questionable whether a room should be called a cavern only because it has such a portal.

Thanks, Ian, this is the kind of feedback for JSW Central I greatly appreciate! (and receive rarely) 👍. I have corrected the entry on JSW Central for "JSW64: Manic Miner" according to your suggestion (adding "in some circumstances"). On second thoughts, I also modified the end of this sentence to read: "the first time it comes Willy's way after the player entered the room" (instead of "after entering the room"), because I believe that "after entering the room" would actually refer to the guardian rather than to Willy ("the first time it comes Willy's way after entering the room" = "the first time it comes Willy's way after it entered the room", "it" referring to the guardian). I'm not 100% sure my feeling is correct here but I hope the modified version is OK. As for "caverns" having to be used when referring to MM games and "rooms" when referring to JSW games, I don't perceive this as a definite rule. "Rooms" are generic for me, suitable for both games. "Caverns" are more MM-specific, I wouldn't use them for a JSW game unless the room in question actually depicted (or was called) a cavern. That's just my personal feeling about it 🙂 .

Yes please, it will be appreciated!

Yes, I'll definitely do that. I will upload it right here. That's correct. My 'policy' for making the walkthroughs is to complete each game without losing any lives (unless necessary to collect an item or more) and doing it as efficiently as possible, resulting in a score in a MM game that will be as high as possible or the completion time in a JSW game that will be as good (early) as possible.* As a result, if there are rooms in JSW games that the player doesn't have to visit in order to complete the game, they may be omitted in my walkthrough. "May" (not "will") because it depends on whether going through this room/these rooms is propitious to completing the game as efficiently as possible. If it is, you will see them in the walkthrough. If it's not, they won't be showcased. The two rooms you've mentioned fall into the latter category and therefore are not present in my walkthrough. Nevertheless, I am grateful to Igor for this personal tribute (I am positive I'm "the Danny" it refers to 😉). The absence of the room in the walkthrough is a testament to the fact that I do stick to my 'policy' while creating the walkthroughs 😉 . * "as efficiently as possible" within reasonable limits. I do not strive to achieve the maximum possible scores, like the ones determined (scientifically and via a 'peer review' LOL) for "MM". They have not been determined for the other games, so I don't know what they are. And even if I knew, producing pixel-perfect walkthroughs would require an investment of significantly much more time and energy than producing just 'decent' walkthroughs. I would not consider this 'investment' justified.

Ian, thank you for the fix! 🙂 Regarding another video of a walkthrough of "Ultimate Manic Miner" on the JSW Central YouTube channel, generally speaking, I am not planning to do it and I *hope* I won't ever have to do it. The reason for this is that my strong policy (at this time, at least) is not to repeat videos of any games on the channel. I don't want to fall into the trap of feeling an urge to create a new video every time I improve a score in a MM game or the completion time in a JSW game or whatever. I also want to avoid games having parallel videos on the channel (and I don't want to erase old ones in order to make room for the new ones). I have already improved some scores in MM games and have not made any new videos resulting from these improvements. If a new version of a game is released, with the blessing of the original author, it will create a serious dilemma for me, because it would be a good reason to repeat the walkthrough and post another video. This is why I said I "hope" that this will not happen. I haven't had to deal with such a situation yet, because all of the games I have made videos of so far were released "long ago enough" not to have any further versions released. Another strong principle I have is to release final versions of each game approved by the original author, *unless* the game is incompletable and there is no clear hope of reaching the author to produce or approve a bugfix. In such case, I would go ahead and showcase the game with a third-party bugfix. Another rule is that I would not present an incompletable game (except for special cases, perhaps, like the artistic modifications of the original JSW - it remains to be seen what I will do with them). Please note I am talking about fixing critical bugs here, the ones that make a game incompletable, not just any bugs. You're right that your suggestion came too late for my video of "UMM" in that it has already been made. However, even if you had made it earlier, I couldn't have implemented it, because it would go against my principles: of the author's approval of the fix and of not bothering about non-critical bugs in gamma-released games. The situation could only have been different if the suggestion had been made earlier and if Igor had released an updated revision of the game before I set out to make the video. Incidentally, there *are* some problems with Igor's old games. "Jet Set Willy 5: ZX Heroes" shows there are 255 items to collect - and there are 256 in fact (Igor might have fixed it in the past, because I remember Andrew Broad mentioning that he was in possession of a later version of the game than the one that had been released publicly, but Igor certainly did not release a fixed version). Also, his "Frosya the Cat" / "Frosya the Cat" Light Version game is still incompletable (only its third and final incarnation, "Jet Cat Frosya", can be completed), and these first two "incarnations" are probably also worth presenting. I will face this problem in the next few months, when their turn comes for the JSW Central videos. I will probably prepare bugfixed versions and try to get Igor to approve of them before making the videos.

That was exactly my intention, in a positive, non-critical spirit 🙂 .

Yes, that's correct. "JSW64 Manic Miner: James Bond" is not the best example to consider, because its number of rooms is indeed specifically conditioned by the output of the movie industry. Having said that, the reality - and my main point - is that people have not been creating MM-style games with significantly more than 20 rooms/caverns even though, for many years now, they have had the possibility of doing just this, using one of the JSW64 game engines and JSWED. And this, I believe, suggests that it is not the 20-rooms-only limit that has prevented people from creating more MM-style games, but rather some other factors.

Where is that criticism? I don't see any in my previous post. Quite to the contrary, I said, "I do admit that having optimised, improved, overhauled game engines based on MM and JSW would be a great thing and a very welcome development - so thank you for creating all these optimisations and mind-blowing technical novelties, Norman Sword!" I would not say Spider was "extolling" JSWED in any special way. He wrote: "I think its party as there are tools (JSWED in particular) that allow the creator to redesign with relative ease (...)" (the rest of his sentence referred to something else). So he only stated that (rephrasing his sentence) "JSWED allows the creator to redesign with relative ease". It's just a statement of fact. It's true. JSWED does allow to redesign a MM or JSW game with relative ease. If someone did not agree with this, they would have to claim that JSWED does *not* allow to redesign games with relative ease. But such a claim hasn't been made. Irrespectively of how we qualify Spider's words, though, I would strongly support Spider and anyone else actually extolling JSWED, because I believe it has played an extremely significant role in the "JSW revival". It is a historical fact. It made it possible to create JSW, and later also MM games, for people who wouldn't have been able to create them otherwise (unless they were using another editor). It doesn't even matter if it's a good program or not. I believe it's good (functional, easy to use, user-friendly, etc.), but even if it wasn't, this wouldn't diminish its historical role over the years in the development of the MM/JSW editing scene. It has been there for a long time, available to anyone interested, and many people have created MM/JSW games thanks to it. And they are still doing it. And for some of them it has been a fulfilment of their dreams. This is a wonderful thing. I am speaking from my personal experience. When I started creating my first JSW game back in 2004, the original edition of "Willy's New Mansion", I was only able to do it thanks to using JSWED (it was version 2.0.3 back then). I definitely wouldn't have been able to create a JSW game (or modify the original JSW in any way) without an editor back then (and the older Spectrum-based editors I had had a look at were no good for me in comparison with JSWED; I wouldn't have used them). So if it hadn't been for JSWED, I wouldn't have become interested and then hooked up on creating these games. I wouldn't have joined the scene. It is very true to say that I am here because of JSWED (not only because of it, but I would say I wouldn't be here today if back then I had not started creating JSW games using JSWED). I still use JSWED for my JSW projects, also nowadays, when I'm able to add some custom modifications of the code (thanks to the extremely limited knowledge of the Z80 assembly I have acquired over the years). I perceive it as an indispensable tool. I understand it is not a tool at all for you, Norman Sword (you don't need it), and it may not be a tool for some other people who are as brilliant as you at coding (if there are any such people around 😉), because they wouldn't need JSWED either. But it *is* an indispensable tool for others, who want to create JSW games but wouldn't be able to do so by coding. And I believe this is something that calls for deep respect. Please note that I do believe that other things call for respect as well. I respect and deeply admire your ability to write code that is so much better than the original code Matthew Smith wrote (in terms of achieving the same or better results while using less memory, working faster, introducing novel elements, etc.). I believe your ability to code is awesome and admirable. I also greatly appreciate the fact that you explain parts of the code you write and offer it for others to use. This has been very helpful also in my personal experience, for various projects I have been involved in in recent years, and I am grateful to you for this. Now, just to explain my "defence" of JSWED. I guess it all depends on the context. I previously wrote, "Saying that "it is a very simple data editor" - while possibly true depending on one's point of view - does not seem to do it justice." I believe the word "simple" can sometimes carry negative connotations, particularly if it's used in a dismissive or belittling manner. Saying something is "very simple" can imply that it's too basic or unsophisticated, which might be perceived as negative depending on the context. If you did not use it in a dismissive way, then my "defence" was not needed. However, one could probably argue about the use of the word "simple" here from another perspective. In what way is JSWED "simple"? If you compare it to other existing editors, I think it stands out by the number of functionalities it offers. You could define an editor as "simple" because it can only allow modification of one game engine (MM or JSW or another one, but one only). You could define an editor as "simple" because it only allows to modify the room layout, but nothing else (not the guardian paths or sprites, for example). You could probably find some examples of MM/JSW editors being "simple" in this sense, but JSWED would beat them all, as it allows to modify various game engines (MM, JSW48, JSWII, JSW128, JSW64 and some of their variants) and to modify enough elements of the game (using its GUI) to create a "product" that most people would perceive as a new game (not just a version of the original MM or JSW). Is this "simple"? Anyone can decide for themselves, I guess. And one more thing, going back to your example "The same as I write this text in a simple editor that does NOT optimise MM." Why should a text editor optimise MM? That's an unreasonable expectation. As such, whether it optimises MM or not cannot serve as a basis to judge whether it's simple or not. Its ability to modify MM or lack thereof is irrelevant to the evaluation of its simplicity. I guess you are correct *if* you perceive JSWED as a "simple" editor *because* it does not optimise MM. But this makes sense only if you *expect* an editor to optimise MM. Then the judgement about the "simplicity" of an editor can indeed depend on whether it optimises something or not. But the underlying assumption - that it *should* optimise MM or whatever - is very questionable. It all depends on whether one expects the editor to optimise the code or not. I don't see a compelling reason why it should (it would be useful if it did, but I don't see any problem if it doesn't, provided it performs well its main function - allowing people to edit games easily).

My intuitive reply to the question that forms the subject of this thread - "Why was Manic Miner never properly optimised?" - would be: because people who would have been able to do it were not interested, and people who may have had interest in doing it were not able to. Not sure if by "code change" you mean any change to the game (including modification of room and guardian data) or to the game engine. That depends. On the list of games on JSW Central which I try to keep as up-to-date as possible, sorted by the game engines used, there are currently 22 MM games, 55 JSW48 games (plus 6 "advanced modifications" of the original and 5 "artistic modifications"), 18 JSW128 games and 24 JSW64 games, not counting those games that use completely different game engines. So the new JSW48 games account for less than half of newly created games (against the ones using the MM, JSW128 and JSW64 game engines), while at the same being the most numerous individual group of games. On the other hand, since more than 20 new games have been created using the traditional MM engine, I would not say that MM has been ignored. I'm not saying it's not the reason, but, honestly, I think the reasons are much deeper/wider than the number of caverns/rooms the game engine offers. If someone wants to create a new MM or JSW game, the initial question really will be (supposing both could be created equally easily): do I prefer to create a MM game or a JSW game? With all this entails, i.e. the gameplay, the freedom to move around the game or not, the time constraint or lack thereof, etc. The (128K) JSW64 game engine allows one to create a game - if one chooses to do so - that would play exactly like MM, but could have up to 64 or even up to 128 rooms/caverns (depending on the variant of the JSW64 engine used). Some games have been created using this engine that play exactly like MM (except for the ending, perhaps), for example the the DrUnKeN mAsTeR!!! "Clopit!" or Andrew Broad's "JSW64 Manic Miner: James Bond". However, "Clopit!" only has 12 rooms which are 'proper' MM-type rooms, and "JSW64 Manic Miner: James Bond" v. 1.1 only has 22 such rooms. So even though the JSW64 game engine (using 128K) allows to have up to 128 MM-type rooms in a game, these authors only used a fraction of that number, and I believe no-one has so far released a JSW64 game where the number of MM-type rooms would exceed 30 (even though the game engine allows up to 128 of them). So perhaps it's just that people generally prefer creating JSW-type rooms/games to creating MM-type rooms/games. Or a mixed kind, but with a numerical predominance of JSW rooms. IMPO, there is no need to mention JSWED in response to the question "Why was Manic Miner never properly optimised?", because it is unrelated. It is true that JSWED has no optimisation of code/data space in "Manic Miner". So it is unrelated to the original question. However, since it has been mentioned, and since it may be more relevant to the question of why people have created more games of one kind or another, or why people have created new games using an editor instead of modifying the code themselves, I feel I need to point out the following: JSWED is a great tool. It allows a person who has no knowledge of coding/programming whatsoever to create (on a PC) new Spectrum games using a number of game engines, both in 48K (the original MM, JSW and JSW II game engines as well as some variants like Henry's Hoard, Softricks modifications, Geoff Mode, etc.) and in 128K (the JSW128 and JSW64 game engines). This is a wonderful thing - it allows people who don't have a clue of how to modify the code create complete, brand new games. And many of them are of fantastic quality. I don't want to single out any particular one right now (for the sake of political correctness 😉), but there are some really great games out there created with JSWED, beautifully made and a joy to play. These games probably would not have been created if JSWED had not existed. So in that sense JSWED has played a huge role in the "JSW revival" and the development of the scene of fan-made games. Of course it's not the only editor out there, but it's pretty much the only one you can use on a PC. It's got a GUI that works very well, it's easy to use and user-friendly (IMO). And it's entirely free. Saying that "it is a very simple data editor" - while possibly true depending on one's point of view - does not seem to do it justice. Which is why I'm defending it 🙂 . Now, it all depends on the point of view, of what one values. I personally place the most value on new games that have been created - NOT small modifications of the original MM or JSW, but entirely new games, with new rooms, graphics, guardians, etc., which use the excellent game mechanics of the original or modified MM/JSW game engines, but present something new. Personally, I don't care if these games have been created using an editor or by manually changing the code/rewriting the game engine. For me, the player is the ultimate judge. From my perspective, games are created to be played. If the player likes, enjoys and appreciates a game, this is the most important thing. From my point of view, nothing else is as important as the player's experience. And players probably don't care how the game was made, they just want to enjoy the gameplay. Now, if someone places more value on the code being optimised/improved/rewritten/written anew, obviously games using editors, including JSWED, will have limited value for them. I can imagine that in this case, when it is the beauty/novelty/efficiency of the code that matters rather than the beauty of the game when played, any game with modified code may have more value than the best games made using editors. I understand and respect that, although I have a different point of view. People value different things and judge things, including games, accordingly. That's the way it is. And the last thing. I do admit that having optimised, improved, overhauled game engines based on MM and JSW would be a great thing and a very welcome development - so thank you for creating all these optimisations and mind-blowing technical novelties, Norman Sword! I would even admit it's more riveting to have them in good old 48K rather than 128K. However, this is not enough. It's not enough to write such a streamlined, optimised game engine (or two). To be truly great, they need an editor like JSWED, a PC-based, free editor that would allow anyone interested, including people who have no programming knowledge whatsoever, to make new games using these newly-created, optimised game engines. Only then could the scene really take off to a new level, with people creating games based on these new game engines with a PC-based editor. So my ultimate dream would be Norman Sword-optimised game engine(s) coupled with a JSWED-like editor for them. Will it ever come true??? 😉

I believe the various reasons you mention do point to it being 'back from the day'. It's new to me. But that doesn't mean much, because I focus on the Spectrum games, and while I read information like you have presented here with interest and have a general idea of versions for other platforms, I don't try to keep track of them or have them 'catalogued' in my mind in any way. But I'm sure others will tell if they've been aware of its existence before. In particular, Andy (Spider) is the person to say if he's seen it already, as he has presented versions for various platforms on these pages (including videos) and seems to be 'in the know' 😉 .

Thanks for this info, Richard! It's weird and amazing at the same time that today there are people who port 30- or 40-year-old then-mainstream games from (what most people would call) an obsolete platform to an obscure and even more obsolete platform, equally old platform. What a wonderful - and bizarre - world! 😉

Actually, I need to correct both yourself, Ian, and myself! (I let myself be carried by your erroneous and, in fact, slightly blasphemous suggestion! 🤪) Each of the 20 in-game tunes in "Manic Person" is 128 bytes long. If they were 'only' 64 bytes long, there would be enough spare space also for a custom font (1280 spare bytes versus 768 needed for a full font).

Ian, I never thanked you for answering my request and for all the information and code solutions you have provided! Thank you so much, it is all greatly appreciated! 🙂 👍 I remember once in the past I did have a look at the Jet Set Mini code, but couldn't make enough sense of it to be sure what you had done there. I probably didn't try hard enough (I didn't need a 256-byte-long tune 'seriously', I was only toying with some ideas). In any case, it's great to have everything explained plainly in this thread! So thanks again 🙂.

Exactly. Even with 64-byte-long tunes there was no room left for any extras. A suggestion was made after the game was released that it could do with a non-standard font. It was a very good suggestion, but unfortunately impossible to apply without far-reaching changes to the game engine that would optimise the code 'a la Norman Sword' and free up enough space to implement a new font.

That's exactly what happens in "Manic Person"!

In the projects I've been involved in, this mechanism (turning the tune on at a specific moment even if the player was playing with the music off) has only been used for the game's completion, when a new - 'victory' - tune kicks in upon reaching the toilet. I believe you actually provided the code to enforce this, Ian - for which I continue to be grateful! 🙂

The players have been swamped by the authors' prolificacy? This could be it... 😉

Thanks, Ian! I must say that now when I listen to the original 64-byte-long version of "If I Were a Rich Man" in other games (for example when recording their RZX walkthroughs), it seems very incomplete... Ian, in one of your projects, you applied a 256-byte-long in-game tune. Could you explain how you did it (from the technical point of view)?

Great minds... 😁 What's "IIWARM"? IIRC in my setup the note index is set to #FF when the tune is supposed to start from the first note, so that when the in-game music note index is incremented on the first pass through the code *before* the first note is played, it is incremented from #FF to 0 and so the first note is not missed.

You're most welcome! 🙂

2023 has been an exceptional year for the MM and JSW games for the ZX Spectrum 🙂. It saw the release of several brand-new games: "WiLLY iN ThE MiRRoRVeRSE" v. 2 was released by Carl Paterson on 10th February (this being the first public release of the game). The release of updated v. 3 followed on 8th December. "Jet Set Willy: Role Reversal" was released by Sendy (Alex Cornhill) on 11th March. "Manic Person" was released by Sendy (Alex Cornhill) on 7th October. "León Willy" was released by Pedro Magallares Ocaña on 10th November. "JeT SeT JnR aNd ThE CuRsE oF ThE PhArAoH" v. 2 was released by Carl Paterson on 22nd December (this being the first public release of the game). Furthermore, "Manic Miner 40th Anniversary Tribute" ("MM40th") was released by Bob The Polar Bear on 24th August. It could be debated whether it should be considered an entirely new game or a continuation of his project whose earlier 'incarnations' are "Manic-4-Noobs" ("M4N") and "MANIC-minor" ("M-m"). 2023 also witnessed some releases of new versions of games originally released in previous years: "Manic Jet Set Willy" v. 3.00 was released by Norman Sword on 1st January and v. 3.01 followed on 7th January. "AmAZiNG WiLLY" v. 3 was released by Carl Paterson on 22nd January and v. 4 followed on 2nd December. Furthermore, a minigame called "Jet Set Willy: Key Code Edition", based on the original "JSW", was released by Andy Ford on 24th/25th March. Finally, bug-fixed versions of "Manic Miner 128" (one based on the Software Projects edition of "Manic Miner" – originally created by Mihai Novitchi, the other one based on the Bug-Byte edition of "Manic Miner" – originally created by Bob Fossil) were released by Bob Fossil on 5th/6th May. I should also note that Sendy's "Strangel 2" is in its beta stage and, as a playtester, I can say it's an incredible game (using the JSW64 V game engine), which brings JSW gaming to a whole new level. The game has not been released yet, but it was effectively created in 2023. I do hope it will be released in 2024 (with some additional enhancements that I will be happy to contribute to as much as possible). I also believe that Jet Set Willie's first JSW game is also in its beta stage, also created this year which is just about to end, but I'm not sure how much info I can disclose about it - perhaps Willie will comment on it if he so wishes. All of these developments show that the MM/JSW-editing scene is still very much alive 😁. I just wish there was more feedback from the players - typically, except for some initial reactions after the game's release there is hardly any info if anyone has actually completed the game. There have been some exceptions, but, generally speaking, what I would call "solid feedback" has been scarce, which is a pity, because, as noted in some of the older Readmes, "the biggest gratification and encouragement for anyone designing free games is to know that someone else has played them!" Happy 2024 to Everyone! 😊