Page 6 of 7

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:03 pm
by Aero
Valtteri wrote:I have already expressed why the requirement exists.
where
PixelPest wrote:It's still dishonesty and why should someone untrustworthy receive moderating capabilities?
what are you implying here

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:06 pm
by PixelPest
AeroMatter wrote:
PixelPest wrote:It's still dishonesty and why should someone untrustworthy receive moderating capabilities?
what are you implying here
That if someone does something dishonest, such as calling levels their own when they aren't, they shouldn't be a Level Judge due to the power they have in that positionof the existence and states of topics in three forums

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:08 pm
by Enjl
the conclusion to draw from this happening is:
the current system encourages dishonesty

like drawing that line isn't hard nor is it farfetched
unless I'm proven wrong I have no reason to believe mrdaniel would've been dishonest if it wasn't for this system and him never having made levels before and doubting his ability

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:11 pm
by Shadow Yoshi
Enjl, that entire argument is farfetch'd and you know it.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Aug 20, 2016 6:13 pm
by Aero
it really does, mrdaniel's reviews were well received and he knows what to look for in a level unlike what i've already seen from the new lj team. i don't like his scoring but that's my crusade, but honestly this lj app thing has been one failure after another. why not try listening to people instead of trying to protect your little groups.

EDIT: going off what enjl said, ninja'd by joey

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 1:27 pm
by Cedur
Alright, a couple of stuff.

First, Aeromatter: If you're really eager to become LJ, you should make your reviews a bit more comprehensive. There's a difference between a simple comment on a level and an official review / judging. The latter ones necessarily come in with a certain degree of effort to write. Other people said this already but I'm just showcasing the difference by some random SM63 level I once judged.
random comment wrote:You've got a nice idea for this level but within 25x25 space it's rather cramped. Some exit doors are confusing, and the central segment with many random doors to choose served no purpose, and there's some problematic camera cutoff within the last two rooms. Overall, most gameplay challenges are fun and there's a nice amount of coins. Your tiling shows effort, however, you should try to pay attention for less strong contrasts and interaction with water. I give this a solid 7.5/10.
random judging wrote:GAMEPLAY: 7.5/10 On the first playthrough, it was still confusing to see where there are the exits of the doors which lead right into water. Especially you could have swapped the positions of the first two doors, that would be more intuitive. The larger rooms with the many small blocks, bullet bills and later the bouncing area were fun, and the amount of coins was satisfyingly high :3 But there were also a few slight problems with the flames in the left-middle room, since with an invisibility cap, you could be stuck on the flames without falling down to the red coin.

The central segment with the many doors was rather pointless. It was not much more than a retarding momentum, and the two pairs of doors had no clue to which one would bring you further – lucky enough, you couldn’t die from choosing the wrong one twice. All what these rooms did is taking space away, space that you would have needed urgently because at the last two rooms on the bottom, the camera cuts off the half bottom tile and you’re partially walking blindly, especially on the right side there could be an annoying death on the finish line, and grabbing the last mushroom is even more audacious.

GRAPHICS: 4.25/5 Such an amount of background tile mish-mash can quickly be too much ... especially at the places with water, a bit more free space and less camouflaging effects of doors would do well. There’s also a strong contast in the center between brown tiles and icy tiles. Otherwise, foreground tiling and item arrangement is well-executed.

OTHER: 3.25/5
+0.5: quite a good amount of effort, despite being partially misleading.
-0.25: one block in the first room can squash you into the room above.
Note: Avoid signs stating the obvious like “Oh god .... flames in icy citadel?”.

TOTAL: 15/20 This suffered a bit from unsufficient testing, too much camouflaging and an unlucky room arrangement. If you hold on the enjoyable concepts (the larger rooms, the amount of coins), you can certainly do better next time.
Anyway, if you don't wish to give a precise score out of 10, it's at least advised to leave a comment in the way of "it's pretty good" or "it's a bit poor, it needs some work overall". Numbers aren't meaningless.

Now, more importantly, about people who ask why LJs are supposed to moderate the levels forum - in fact the reason is pretty much the same as before, but of course this means that we should pay attention to avoid abuse (moderating really isn't that hard if you're not taking any biased actions), and set up some guidelines such as backing up a larger post before it's deleted. Either way, PixelPest's demotion is a pity, hopefully he comes back soon. Right now we're down to two and that's clearly too less to handle the work. We need more LJs in general, I guess. Also MrDaniel, should you read this, you're also welcome to make another attempt with levels of your own.

Speaking of this, I'm not totally fond yet with the requirement of making own levels for your application, I guess it could be eased. Obviously, one should know what the engine allows for and what it doesn't allow for, but that could also be teached via some written document instead of teaching this to yourself by designing yourself. If one knows the limits and possibilities of the engine and if they're showing a good judging style through your reviews, they should be good to go.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 1:54 pm
by Aero
Supershroom wrote:
random comment wrote:You've got a nice idea for this level but within 25x25 space it's rather cramped. Some exit doors are confusing, and the central segment with many random doors to choose served no purpose, and there's some problematic camera cutoff within the last two rooms. Overall, most gameplay challenges are fun and there's a nice amount of coins. Your tiling shows effort, however, you should try to pay attention for less strong contrasts and interaction with water. I give this a solid 7.5/10.
random judging wrote:GAMEPLAY: 7.5/10 On the first playthrough, it was still confusing to see where there are the exits of the doors which lead right into water. Especially you could have swapped the positions of the first two doors, that would be more intuitive. The larger rooms with the many small blocks, bullet bills and later the bouncing area were fun, and the amount of coins was satisfyingly high :3 But there were also a few slight problems with the flames in the left-middle room, since with an invisibility cap, you could be stuck on the flames without falling down to the red coin.

The central segment with the many doors was rather pointless. It was not much more than a retarding momentum, and the two pairs of doors had no clue to which one would bring you further – lucky enough, you couldn’t die from choosing the wrong one twice. All what these rooms did is taking space away, space that you would have needed urgently because at the last two rooms on the bottom, the camera cuts off the half bottom tile and you’re partially walking blindly, especially on the right side there could be an annoying death on the finish line, and grabbing the last mushroom is even more audacious.

GRAPHICS: 4.25/5 Such an amount of background tile mish-mash can quickly be too much ... especially at the places with water, a bit more free space and less camouflaging effects of doors would do well. There’s also a strong contast in the center between brown tiles and icy tiles. Otherwise, foreground tiling and item arrangement is well-executed.

OTHER: 3.25/5
+0.5: quite a good amount of effort, despite being partially misleading.
-0.25: one block in the first room can squash you into the room above.
Note: Avoid signs stating the obvious like “Oh god .... flames in icy citadel?”.

TOTAL: 15/20 This suffered a bit from unsufficient testing, too much camouflaging and an unlucky room arrangement. If you hold on the enjoyable concepts (the larger rooms, the amount of coins), you can certainly do better next time.
Anyway, if you don't wish to give a precise score out of 10, it's at least advised to leave a comment in the way of "it's pretty good" or "it's a bit poor, it needs some work overall". Numbers aren't meaningless.

Now, more importantly, about people who ask why LJs are supposed to moderate the levels forum - in fact the reason is pretty much the same as before, but of course this means that we should pay attention to avoid abuse (moderating really isn't that hard if you're not taking any biased actions), and set up some guidelines such as backing up a larger post before it's deleted. Either way, PixelPest's demotion is a pity, hopefully he comes back soon. Right now we're down to two and that's clearly too less to handle the work. We need more LJs in general, I guess. Also MrDaniel, should you read this, you're also welcome to make another attempt with levels of your own.

Speaking of this, I'm not totally fond yet with the requirement of making own levels for your application, I guess it could be eased. Obviously, one should know what the engine allows for and what it doesn't allow for, but that could also be teached via some written document instead of teaching this to yourself by designing yourself. If one knows the limits and possibilities of the engine and if they're showing a good judging style through your reviews, they should be good to go.
Operating under the assumption that posts will be deleted means there is bad moderation. Really really bad moderation. Also if you want your "pretty good" and your "it's a bit poor" actually read the review and draw your own conclusion.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2016 2:18 pm
by PixelPest
Supershroom wrote:PixelPest's demotion is a pity
No it isn't. I chose to step down so I could de-stress for a while and hopefully let all of the chaos going on settle down a little

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 12:53 pm
by WindyDelcarlo
AeroMatter wrote:Also if you want your "pretty good" and your "it's a bit poor" actually read the review and draw your own conclusion.
A level judge's rating is supposed to be a clear indication of what's going on. You shouldn't need to decipher a comment and hopefully get what they were trying to tell you; it should be a thing you can quickly look over and have an answer while still being able to find out what you've done right and wrong.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 2:16 pm
by Aero
"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 2:44 pm
by CynicHost
AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
You're twisting his words.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:12 pm
by JupiHornet
AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
that's not what he's saying at all

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Tue Aug 23, 2016 11:22 pm
by Danny
AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
At this point I'm pretty sure you're only here to make a deal out of nothing.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 12:01 am
by Aero
Merlin wrote:
AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
You're twisting his words.
JupiHornet wrote:
AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
that's not what he's saying at all
That's pretty much what he's saying.
Syndrilevosse wrote:
AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
At this point I'm pretty sure you're only here to make a deal out of nothing.
No.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2016 2:42 am
by JupiHornet
He was saying that level reviews shouldn't be too cryptic, so people actually know what they mean without having to think too much about them. Obviously you'll still have to read them.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:04 pm
by Aero
11:02 PM - Valtteri: look dude i'm not promoting someone who keeps bitching about the group and wants it deleted lol

I told you guys there was bias.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:29 pm
by Mivixion
If by "biased" you mean we don't want to promote people with a bad attitude, then sure

Everything could be better in some way, but not everything you suggest is 24k gold.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:46 pm
by Shadow Yoshi
That isn't bias.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2016 11:48 pm
by Aero
That's your opinion, Mivixion.

I submitted what was asked for and I guess the whole discussion earlier in this thread about my reviews was pointless because that's not why I was turned down then too. Cool.

Great work.

Re: Level Judge Application

Posted: Sun Sep 04, 2016 5:48 am
by underFlo
You act like all that Level Judges do is review levels but that's simply not the case. They also moderate and I can see why Valt wouldn't trust someone who seems to have a personal vendetta against Level Judges with local mod powers.