Forums for SMBX
https://www.supermariobrosx.org/forums/
https://www.supermariobrosx.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=79&t=16271
whereValtteri wrote:I have already expressed why the requirement exists.
what are you implying herePixelPest wrote:It's still dishonesty and why should someone untrustworthy receive moderating capabilities?
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 forumsAeroMatter wrote:what are you implying herePixelPest wrote:It's still dishonesty and why should someone untrustworthy receive moderating capabilities?
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.
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.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.
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.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.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.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.
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.
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 littleSupershroom wrote:PixelPest's demotion is a pity
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.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.
You're twisting his words.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 allAeroMatter 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.AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
Merlin wrote:You're twisting his words.AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
That's pretty much what he's saying.JupiHornet wrote:that's not what he's saying at allAeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."
No.Syndrilevosse wrote:At this point I'm pretty sure you're only here to make a deal out of nothing.AeroMatter wrote:"You shouldn't have to read to get what people are trying to tell you."