'lo. You probably haven't heard of me (except maybe on discord), but I come from the badlands so it's fine if not.
I took it upon myself to obtain, identify, and flesh out (not flush out) every little SMW pile within easy reach, good or bad. I am not a smart man with programming and data analysis skills, but with a spreadsheet of >500K cells, millions of various files ripped just in case, and some crusty .bat scripting, I was able to cobble together something out of it over time, culminating in what I hope preserves a fairly substantial portion of all SMW hacks released.
If you want to identify unknowns from your collection, you can see if I have it by link testing with the (de-headered) rom's SHA-1 hash. Conversely, I have some unknowns I'd greatly appreciate help in identifying, at the bottom of each list category. Additionally, I am missing some entries in past SMWC contests, detailed here, if you by chance have any.
If you have something I do not and want it thrown into the catalog, please PM me with the original release files in a zip/rar/7z archive, other resources you would like included on the page (docs, youtube vid, screencaps, etc) and any supplementary identifying information such as author and original file date.
For greater scanning and auto-naming needs, I have the means but not the permission to divulge on this site. I won't respond to requests for removal; if I have it, you released it. Grand scheme, this is all fun and games.
My only question is does this have any way to differentiate full hacks from demos
In a sense, it's like judging a book by cover. So many demos never graduated to completed status, I chose to give them equal representation by not differentiating, Unless it was explicitly stated in the title or description. When there are multiple versions, I do provide a demo tag when it's made clear that it's the difference between them. For the most part, I adopt the version phrasing given by the author.
These are just the hacks that aren't hosted on SMWC, aren't they
Any and all hacks, wherever they're from, even here. If you guys didn't delete so many, I'd be over 20000 entries. Q/Q is meagering.
If you didn't do this with a programming magic I can't think how did you do lol
Batch scripting is underneath programming with actual languages, but it can get the job done with the right collection of commandline utilities, and that's half the battle if you can't make your own. I automated as much as I could, and for the image saving from LM I also set up some keyboard macros to run on a slave laptop overnight. I had to do a LOT of debugging (mostly race conditions) and put in some failover routines, so I have much respect for those who can jump in and build off APIs while convincing the rest of the world it's a clean job.
There's other small wrong things
Thanks for the notes, I'll make the changes and they'll be reflected in the next push.
this, it wasn't made by me
It's lost on me how I arrived at that, but with fresh look I was able to tie the dead dropbox link for KarateKid5 to omegazeroINFI. There is a string of credits in the message box texts that mentions everybody but him, so I assume that's for the resources he used. For now I'll keep it marked anonymous.
My 2011 secret santa level was this one
So, I know Lucas (CK Crash) stored the anonymous entries but did not make them. This is an edge case where the outputted info on the page does not accurately represent ownership, because I did not write a function to prevent stating where the hack came from when I specify in sheet that there is no valid author. "Produced By" was more of a "Provided By" in this situation. As you see in the category list, its canonical entry name did not include Lucas as the author. Now that I know you made this hack, that whole problem can go away. 👍
I'd be really impressed if you had a rare hack of mine called Super Mario World: The Lost Levels from 2003.
do you have Anikiti's Mario X World 1 through 4, because they're not in the JP section.
I have a bunch named "MarioX World" in the Adventures section, since I think they are sufficiently de-regionalized with their native English writing.
are all hacks curated in such a way where you can at least complete them or aren't completely messed up? Like crashes and level 0 shenanigans
The contents were not formatted to fit your screen. They are provided as is, with no warranty or guarantee of usability implied. Blame the man downstairs. Where I felt heavy corruption has occurred, I marked with a [BAD] tag. For problems assumed to be caused by addmusik incompatibility, I marked with [BAD-emu] to indicate there is hope it can be played on another emulator such as ZSNES. For level 0 errors, that can occur in an otherwise perfect rom if the author set an exit wrong, so from a technical perspective I can't fault the rom for that, but rather the level design, and give it a pass on integrity.
What is the Adventures section supposed to stand for?
Whether it meets my minimum arbitrary amount of necessary refinement to be thought of as such, factoring in length, customization of overworld, graphics, storyline, messages, etc. If the author tried to de-vanilla the experience and made the appearance of at least one world worth of content, I call it a new adventure. I'm sure many can be argued one way or another, but because of that, I'll have to ask that people don't put much stock in the categorization. You'll find bad adventures and great general hacks if you try to.
Edit: Maybe it's just me but you might want to rename the Dev Aids section...
What if I did name it for that reason? Would you hold it against me in the morning? Yes. The correct answer is yes.
all that seems to be missing is the very first demo
I regret to say I probably don't have it if SMWC removed it shortly after being approved. I have no auto-downloader in place, so what gets deleted here before I can take a look is gone forever, unless I receive it later through someone else's donation pile, then I can try to connect the dots. Many such piles have been given through another site where a magical being works much more enthusiastically at collecting. Just unfortunate timing, I suppose.
you have this hack in your database
Don't judge my methods. What matters is now you can resume work on it. (I honestly don't know which hack you're referring to, but maybe it was in your filebin?)
in the 2010 M2W2V, Burning Land is listed as level 05, although it's actually level 18
There is an automated process to label the level IDs in the page by using a namelist dumped by LM. You can access a levels.txt for each entry on my site. The name BURNING LAND was given to both IDs, so it appears by both on the page.
For backgrounds to be selected, I chart the name of the first visitable level of each hack, then use a script that gives the ID of the matching level name for permanent assignment. If more than one ID matches by name, I compare them visually to assign the correct ID. Sometimes, I have intentionally chosen the 'wrong' ID if it follows a boring pipe screen or mini cutscene that leads to it, but I maintain the originating level name for reference. This is where I can control the aesthetics a little, so sometimes I will.
Ninja Boy, I know you have hundreds, if not thousands of hacks squirreled away for your channel. Would you consider putting up any you think need saving? Though as you see, I don't discriminate, and would take a rotting carcass if given the opportunity.
A disruptive, non-humane entity with insufficient sensitivity to the premise that actual receptive beings are trying to enjoy their limited time with fun distractions without some rando's garbage interpretation of reality being used as justification to make it end.
Basically, he is a bully. He has violated the only golden rule a good person needs (DBAD), becoming a damper on our existence. I resent him for that.
85a79d9c is correct for a PRG0 rom with normal header.
2e87e518 is the CRC for a "tagged" PRG1, with 128 bytes appended to advertise a specific rom site which won't be mentioned. I'd rather they never existed because they stick their name inside every rom thinking they can get away with it, messing with hash validation.
I don't know what 2fb5c055 is (headered or not), which isn't a good sign. It's standard PRG1 with 128 bytes appended, assumedly to reveal its dump date, 12/11/2004.
The SMBV patch was created in reference to 2E87E518, the tagged PRG1. This is obviously not the ideal. Try re-creating the patch with the standard PRG1 at least, since there is literally nothing different between the two other than the non-mapped 128 bytes glued to the end.