Super Mario Bros. X Forums

smb3 styled graphics are overrated

Musicality_Minister45 wrote:bc it is a big part of how people judge levels, your level pretty much needs them to be good

Well would you rather play a level that has no decor in it and looks empty as hell, or a level that has decor that actually makes it feel alive?

Musicality_Minister45 wrote:BGOs are overrated

This.
Moreover, its overflow is rather a flaw than mark of quality.

I think that aesthetics in general are overrated, not necessarily just BGOs. Aesthetics has its place in a level, but far too often I've seen people focus almost entirely on looks and they end up making a sucky level as a result.

Pop Yoshi Bros wrote: Am I the only who misses the old levels system? (separate the levels for categories instead of make a thread with the levels)

I liked the old level system, though having them in one thread per user also works*
*If people actually did that

arcade999 wrote:smb3 styled graphics are overrated

Exactly. I want to see more SMB1 and SMW.

Zha Hong Lang wrote:I think that aesthetics in general are overrated, not necessarily just BGOs. Aesthetics has its place in a level, but far too often I've seen people focus almost entirely on looks and they end up making a sucky level as a result.

I guess that is true. Gameplay is definitely the most important part of a level, and therefore the one you should focus on the most. Aesthetics are definitely the least important, so should have less focus.

Electriking wrote: I guess that is true. Gameplay is definitely the most important part of a level, and therefore the one you should focus on the most. Aesthetics are definitely the least important, so should have less focus.

Ideally, aesthetics should be treated as a tool like any other to help induce the designer intended experience. It can be as important as gameplay, or more important even, depending on the experience you want to convey. The problem isn't people focussing too much on aesthetics, it's focussing too little on gameplay for what they're trying to achieve.

Hoeloe wrote:Ideally, aesthetics should be treated as a tool like any other to help induce the designer intended experience. It can be as important as gameplay, or more important even, depending on the experience you want to convey. The problem isn't people focussing too much on aesthetics, it's focussing too little on gameplay for what they're trying to achieve.

As a designer, one must focus on what he or she is trying to achieve. If I wanted to submit a picture for the Perfect SMBX Screenshot Thread 10, then I would make it as beautiful as possible, even if there was no real gameplay. On the other hand, solely creating a stage with nothing but the ground and enemies isn't very convincing. There must be a balance.

I think looks are peharps the most important thing in SMBX.
How are you going to play a level if your player doesn't have a sprite?

HackPlayer7 wrote:How are you going to play a level if your player doesn't have a sprite?

Obviously, the lack of a player sprite is below the "threshold" of what is acceptable. But once that threshold is passed, focusing on looks becomes less necessary. (think diminishing returns.)

crazybenjamin wrote:

HackPlayer7 wrote:How are you going to play a level if your player doesn't have a sprite?

Obviously, the lack of a player sprite is below the "threshold" of what is acceptable. But once that threshold is passed, focusing on looks becomes less necessary. (think diminishing returns.)

Actually it fully depends on what you're going for. Games like Thomas Was Alone don't even use character sprites.

I wasn't talking about the look. I meant having a player you cannot see at all in a 2d platformer

HackPlayer7 wrote:I wasn't talking about the look. I meant having a player you cannot see at all in a 2d platformer

Then you made a rather stupid point. Literally no-one was talking about not displaying anything to the screen at all.

Hoeloe wrote:

HackPlayer7 wrote:I wasn't talking about the look. I meant having a player you cannot see at all in a 2d platformer

Then you made a rather stupid point. Literally no-one was talking about not displaying anything to the screen at all.

It was a joke.

HackPlayer7 wrote:

Hoeloe wrote:

HackPlayer7 wrote:I wasn't talking about the look. I meant having a player you cannot see at all in a 2d platformer

Then you made a rather stupid point. Literally no-one was talking about not displaying anything to the screen at all.

It was a joke.

It wasn't funny tho

Electriking wrote: It wasn't funny tho

That doesn't mean you have to take it seriously

here's something truly Controversial, & everyone would want my head on a dirty stick for saying this:

If SMBX 2.0 beta 4 has Ryu Hayabusa from Ninja Gaiden as a official playable character, then so many newbies of the SMBX community would make episodes for the ninja character, due to him being more broken for 2 reasons:

• He can climb up walls, like in the 2-D Ninja Gaiden games

• The freaking Windmill Shuriken will be the most broken weapon in SMBX history, only if the 2.0 staff decided to add Ryu in beta 4

There are no more characters being added in Beta 4 and at this point hasn't been considered for the future. Also even if there was, why would the mechanics implemented be broken?

Pop Yoshi Bros wrote:My (probably) controversial opinion:

Am I the only who misses the old levels system? (separate the levels for categories instead of make a thread with the levels)

the new system basically mix every level into a single subforum, and you almost have to PRAY while clicking on something for it to don't be a terrible newbie level with a boring desing/1x1 pixel/made for 38A, but never mentionned in the main thread/etc

MarioRPGExpert93 wrote:ere's something truly Controversial, & everyone would want my head on a dirty stick

• He can climb up walls, like in the 2-D Ninja Gaiden games

• The freaking Windmill Shuriken will be the most broken weapon in SMBX history, only if the 2.0 staff decided to add Ryu in beta 4

Even if they would add Ryu, I doubt they would add his abilities.

I mean if you want something to be added to basegame, you need to have a solid reason why. That's very clear-cut, no controversy necessary.