| (Discussion) 5th Annual SMWCentral Level Design Competition |
|
Forum Index - Archive - Old Contests & Events - (Discussion) 5th Annual SMWCentral Level Design Competition |
|
|
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 04:39:43 PM |
Link |
|
For curiosity, I tried Sarge's entry. I kind of like this one a bit more, except for the very 1st section and the really cheap traps.
Here's a video:
Sarge's entry
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-09 04:40:12 PM by Ripperon-X. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 04:45:35 PM |
Link |
|
Turbo Man - Swamp Marsh
This level made good use of palettes and had good level design however there were a few problems I encountered:
The player may not see this fish behind the tree the first time they jump in the water.
These vine jumps were a bit annoying to make. Thankfully it was only for a bonus.
 
Bit of a nitpick but wouldn't it make more sense if Mario came out of a pipe when he enters one?
 
This second Skull Raft disappears if the first one has not gone yet.
A spiny turned invisible here and I got hurt. That'll be either due to sprite limits or wrong sprite memory.
Other than that, I didn't see anything too bad. So good level overall.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-09 04:46:06 PM by MarioFan22. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 05:00:21 PM |
Link |
|
I played TRS' entry. It's pretty good. It has two problems though.
1. At the beginning, after getting the power-up, there's a platform you have to jump. There's a big chance you can get hit by one of the super koopas.
2. If you get a cape and perform a running jump from a long platform, you can skip quite a lot of the level. Other than that, nothing else.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-09 05:06:09 PM by Ripperon-X. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 05:03:58 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by SargeWell that still gives no one an excuse to claim that the second thwomp is invisible. I'm arguing with this because you are claiming that obstacles in plain sight, such as the second thwomp, are invisible and unfair. I'd be less defensive if it was something say, the third or fourth thwomp, but nope. You chose the second which is hiding behind a see-through fence.
I'll need to double check to make sure I never said the second Thwomp was invisible, but rather that it blatantly discriminates against Big Mario. But at the end of the day, the level is still bad and you should really consider the audiences you're targeting.
|
|
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 05:17:58 PM |
Link |
|
Ripperon-X Video pretty much proves what I said about the spikes, however I know that Sarge already noticed that and it's the only thing I wanted to add to that.
@Frozenfire, without playing the level itself, the video shows that the design itself is solid. Maybe I'm playing it tomorrow...
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 05:24:09 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by MarioFan22
UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUGH. I thought I fixed that. I tested this like 40 orso times and never did I encounter these problems - except for the pipe one, which, again, I had fixed.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 05:45:06 PM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by Ripperon-XI played TRS' entry. It's pretty good. It has two problems though.
1. At the beginning, after getting the power-up, there's a platform you have to jump. There's a big chance you can get hit by one of the super koopas.
Watching the video you posted, that was indeed bad sprite placement there. Placing them a few tiles to the right probably would have worked wonders.
Originally posted by Ripperon-X2. If you get a cape and perform a running jump from a long platform, you can skip quite a lot of the level. Other than that, nothing else.
I am aware of this, but I chalked it up to the whole "different playstyles" thing. The cape was added because 1) it makes it easier to navigate the platform scales, and 2) I didn't think most people would include capes in their levels for that very reason.
Also, note that both feathers are somewhat difficult to get (sort of). You're likely not going to get the first one because of the autoscroll (even though you did in the video  ) and that super koopa is likely going to take you by surprise, and the second one is 2/3 of the way through the level.
Also, I very much appreciate the feedback. 
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-09 11:27:16 PM |
Link |
|
|
Yeah, i'm in a simliar situation like ShadowFire. Can anybody please play this? Thanks. ;)
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 12:12:28 AM |
Link |
|
Hey, remember when I said I gave three levels so far 0/20 for Level Design? Yeah, well... make that seven.
You people need to stop throwing shit together in Lunar Magic and calling it a day.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 12:33:54 AM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by MrDeePayHey, remember when I said I gave three levels so far 0/20 for Level Design? Yeah, well... make that seven.
You people need to stop throwing shit together in Lunar Magic and calling it a day.
I haven't played the levels yet, but when level design ranks 0 in an entry, I know it's going to be bad.
So far, the worst entry I've seen in any level design competition is the last place entry in the Winter Level Contest. 0.5/60 overall.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 01:57:43 AM |
Link |
|
At this point, I'll just go ahead and say it:
Why so serious, MrDeePay?
Unless the levels you're talking about really are completely terrible, maybe you should ease up a little. To me, you've been seeming overly harsh and critical of half the levels that were brought up in this thread, and such negativity has been really bothering me for the past few days.
I'm merely suggesting to lighten up a bit.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 02:04:42 AM |
Link |
|
|
I think it's more that MrDeePay simply doesn't sugarcoat anything. He is completely and honestly blunt when it comes to his judgments. it won't sit well with everyone because we're used to being let down softly, but for those who are willing to accept such harsh criticism, I can only see it being helpful. In a way, such harsh and blunt criticism is a much better wake-up call than a softly worded criticism.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 02:38:10 AM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by TomPhantoOriginally posted by MrDeePayHey, remember when I said I gave three levels so far 0/20 for Level Design? Yeah, well... make that seven.
You people need to stop throwing shit together in Lunar Magic and calling it a day.
I haven't played the levels yet, but when level design ranks 0 in an entry, I know it's going to be bad.
So far, the worst entry I've seen in any level design competition is the last place entry in the Winter Level Contest. 0.5/60 overall.
Not trying to derail this thread or anything, but I'm actually curious as to where you found these results for 2011's WLC? I don't recall ever seeing them posted on this forum.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 04:11:11 AM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by GeminiRageNot trying to derail this thread or anything, but I'm actually curious as to where you found these results for 2011's WLC? I don't recall ever seeing them posted on this forum.
Well, they're here. In the one place you'd expect them to be.
Originally posted by FirePhoenixI can only see it being helpful.
Unless MrDeePay explicitly points out how absolutely everything in the level is completely and utterly horrible to the point of unplayability, the only thing I can see coming from a zero score is a massive backlash, not only from the contestants that receive them, but also others that find such a score unjust. Surely, if a level actually is possible to complete and has some substance to it, it deserves at least some kind of score.
I'm all for being blunt, but giving out zeros to things (some) people (probably) put (some) effort into just seems hateful. (That is, unless they are legitimately joke/unplayable entries.) But eh, my word probably isn't worth anything to anyone.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 06:53:38 AM |
Link |
|
Yeah, I think you're either too strict in judging level design or the levels that did get a 0 must have been utterly shit and pretty much unplayable. I haven't played most of the entries but from the ones I did play, the overall level design didn't seem to be too bad in any of them. I think using an arbitrary score system for judging is a pretty bad idea, but whatever.
Also, this is by far the most interesting LDC discussion thread I have read.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 07:12:47 AM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by Iceguythe levels that did get a 0 must have been utterly shit and pretty much unplayable.
Or Kaizo. In some cases, these were good levels, but not right for this contest. Kinda like how regular levels (like these ideally should be) are not right for a Kaizo contest. I don't know why someone would do this, but if someone submitted a regular SMW style level to a Kaizo contest, I think it would get a 0/X or something very low in the difficulty/design/whatever score. Different design philosophies.
A 0 does seem harsh, but we'll see the reasoning all in good time, I suppose. Will the scores come with comments too?
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 09:54:45 AM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by SokobansolverWill the scores come with comments too?
I don't remember if you were the one saying it was your first entry, but from the past contests, they give a note and a comment for each category, and there are three categories this year (level design, appearance and functionality).
Originally posted by MrDeePayYou people need to stop throwing shit together in Lunar Magic and calling it a day.
I laughed. Excuse me.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-10 09:55:16 AM by neosaver. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 10:14:08 AM |
Link |
|
Originally posted by MrDeePay
You people need to stop throwing shit together in Lunar Magic and calling it a day.
I'm gonna interject here for the first time with the simplistic comment... I agree. Simply for the fact that I've seen half-a-dozen posts of people asking what their levels are like because they openly admit they never tested their levels.
Honestly, if you're not going to test your levels, don't make them.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 10:14:52 AM |
Link |
|
Actually, what I've been doing is listing the score for each category and the total, and then writing almost a page of commentary (probably around 3/4 page on average). It gives me the flexibility to talk about what I think is important without having to fit everything into categories. Besides, a score by itself isn't really going to help anyone improve...
Also, if memory serves, I've tentatively disqualified around a dozen levels myself for various reasons, though I'm pretty sure around half of those were bad patches or something like that. If the reason was bad or unfitting design, I did write a bit about my reasoning, but I didn't explore every aspect of the level like I did for officially-ranked entries. For a couple of levels where the reasons were more technical, I gave a "pseudoscore" as well as some commentary. Of course, so long as my inbox doesn't become flooded with frivolous questions, I'd be fine with elaborating on some points, since like I said, I doubt I'll do a perfect job explaining everything the first time around.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Index - Archive - Old Contests & Events - (Discussion) 5th Annual SMWCentral Level Design Competition |
