Banner
Views: 845,197,177
Time:
35 users online: 7 up, Alex_X8, BabaYegha, Batata Douce,  bebn legg, ChrillePan, FrozenQuills, FYRE150, GbreezeSunset, Green Jerry, HammerBrother, Idunno, Infinity, Juanx2007, labia_priest, lx5,  MarioFanGamer, Miscalc, MrDeePay, Narcologer, NaroGugul, NathanWarford, Nint, Rykon-V73, SamuM6pdt, SAMYR DUTRA ARAUJO, Sariel, SimFan96, Sparkle-And-Syro,  Tahixham, ThatDamnCatgirl, TickTockClock, TSian7, Vawlpe, VecchiaZim - Guests: 68 - Bots: 92 Users: 46,483 (2,728 active)
Latest: Juanx2007
Tip: Don't put a coin over a question block. It will create an invisible solid block above the ? block if the block is hit first.Not logged in.
Hacks Section Difficulty Rework Suggestions Thread
Forum Index - Important - Announcements - Hacks Section Difficulty Rework Suggestions Thread
Pages: « 1 2 »
Okay so, first of all, let me apologize for not doing something about this sooner or giving an update or something, but lately (read: last 3 months or more) I've been kinda swamped in stuff to do between a bunch of IRL things.
My mental state has also not been the greatest partially due to said IRL things. So that has prolonged stuff even longer than they should've been. I'm gonna finally pick up some of my slack.
Starting tomorrow 18th of March, I'll be writing and trying things up to make the proposed changes as well as prepare a mockup of what things could look like after those changes, I'll also talk to admins and other staff about this to ensure everyone is on the same page. Expect a post in a week or so explaning what will be changed and how. Hopefully everything goes smoothly and I hope we can all be happier after said changes. After posting the mockup I'll obviously try and gather feedback if anyone has some.

Sorry again for the delay with this, I really wanted to get this done sooner but bigger stuff has held me back on it, however, since I'm stuck at home I'll have more time to act on it and finally finish this project.

Thanks for the patience guys.
Thanks for the updates!

--------------------
O que você precisa é de um retoque total.
Hi Atari,
Sorry for being late on the topic (found the thread just now) but I felt like leaving my two cents here in case it's still welcome.

First off, I am greatly in favour of 'Kaizo: Light' hacks being clearly separated from hacks that were intended to be played with savestates in the middle of a level or with TAS scripts or frame advance (currently Kaizo: Hard and Kaizo: Pit), since the differences in their level design styles typically lead to them feeling like completely different sub-types of the 2D platformer genre in general. Moderators are currently doing a great job at separating Kaizo: Light from Kaizo: Hard/Pit (and 'Standard') hacks, however these moderation standards have not always been the same in the past and as a result we currently have roughly about 15 (old) hacks listed as Kaizo: Light that would definitely not have been listed as such with todays moderation standards. I know this is being worked on by the moderation team and I know this is not the exact issue of this thread, but I do like to stress that relabeling these hacks under Standard: Hard or Very Hard (and perhaps a new 'Puzzle' category) should go before any potential future difficulty relabeling of kaizo hacks.

I feel that the majority of the kaizo community is unhappy with with current labeling of 'light' vs 'hard' in kaizo. 'Light' vs 'hard' are labels that most people associate with difficulty, rather than what it really is - a genre distinction. 'Kaizo: RTA' vs 'Kaizo: Tools' would be a much clearer distinction.

As for difficulty ratings within the current Kaizo: Light category, I am against any further subcategorization here. As you stated, this is highly subjective. Everyone would agree that Robfather World is easier than Elephants and Snakes and Crocodiles, but if we want to clearly distinguish between difficulty categories, we need clear guidelines on how to do so, and I can only see a bigger debate arising as a result of this than the one we're having now. Moderators would be the most objective agents to analyze hacks in this regard since they've played many different hacks, but then again they might be biased because of their long-time experience with them and overall high skill level as a result of that. The alternative would be a community-based difficulty rating system similar to the 5-star one we currently have to rate the quality of the hack. However, this 5-star system is currently not being used much at all, with the great majority of hacks having 0 up to less than a handful of ratings (while in the meantime their download counts aren't low at all). If somehow a difficulty rating would be magically much more popular than the quality rating system, it would still be greatly skewed towards the expectations and therefore skill level of the player. A player who would try Akogare Mario World as their second hack after Quickie World 2 would rate it much higher in difficulty than someone who has played Elephants, Search For Salmon and Precision86 would rate it. I think the hack descriptions on this site as well as people's stories on Discord/Twitch etc. should provide adequate information for new players on roughly how difficult a hack is.

Please don't stress yourself working on this, but I'm looking forward to this issue being resolved some time in the future; hopefully we can reach some sort of consensus in the community.
Originally posted by katun24
Hi Atari,
Sorry for being late on the topic (found the thread just now) but I felt like leaving my two cents here in case it's still welcome.

First off, I am greatly in favour of 'Kaizo: Light' hacks being clearly separated from hacks that were intended to be played with savestates in the middle of a level or with TAS scripts or frame advance (currently Kaizo: Hard and Kaizo: Pit), since the differences in their level design styles typically lead to them feeling like completely different sub-types of the 2D platformer genre in general. Moderators are currently doing a great job at separating Kaizo: Light from Kaizo: Hard/Pit (and 'Standard') hacks, however these moderation standards have not always been the same in the past and as a result we currently have roughly about 15 (old) hacks listed as Kaizo: Light that would definitely not have been listed as such with todays moderation standards. I know this is being worked on by the moderation team and I know this is not the exact issue of this thread, but I do like to stress that relabeling these hacks under Standard: Hard or Very Hard (and perhaps a new 'Puzzle' category) should go before any potential future difficulty relabeling of kaizo hacks.

I feel that the majority of the kaizo community is unhappy with with current labeling of 'light' vs 'hard' in kaizo. 'Light' vs 'hard' are labels that most people associate with difficulty, rather than what it really is - a genre distinction. 'Kaizo: RTA' vs 'Kaizo: Tools' would be a much clearer distinction.

This I agree with 100%

Originally posted by katun24
As for difficulty ratings within the current Kaizo: Light category, I am against any further subcategorization here. As you stated, this is highly subjective. Everyone would agree that Robfather World is easier than Elephants and Snakes and Crocodiles, but if we want to clearly distinguish between difficulty categories, we need clear guidelines on how to do so, and I can only see a bigger debate arising as a result of this than the one we're having now. Moderators would be the most objective agents to analyze hacks in this regard since they've played many different hacks, but then again they might be biased because of their long-time experience with them and overall high skill level as a result of that. The alternative would be a community-based difficulty rating system similar to the 5-star one we currently have to rate the quality of the hack. However, this 5-star system is currently not being used much at all, with the great majority of hacks having 0 up to less than a handful of ratings (while in the meantime their download counts aren't low at all). If somehow a difficulty rating would be magically much more popular than the quality rating system, it would still be greatly skewed towards the expectations and therefore skill level of the player. A player who would try Akogare Mario World as their second hack after Quickie World 2 would rate it much higher in difficulty than someone who has played Elephants, Search For Salmon and Precision86 would rate it. I think the hack descriptions on this site as well as people's stories on Discord/Twitch etc. should provide adequate information for new players on roughly how difficult a hack is.

Please don't stress yourself working on this, but I'm looking forward to this issue being resolved some time in the future; hopefully we can reach some sort of consensus in the community.

Now I think you've got some solid points here, but I have to disagree for two main reasons. The first is that looking at non-kaizo hack difficulty categories (easy, normal, hard, and very-hard) shows that moderators are in fact capable of distinguishing between hacks with varying difficulty, which certainly takes a degree of subjective reasoning, and I'm sure the same could be done for kaizo.

I think the skill of a player can be disregarded when we look at playtime comparisons. For example, I'm way worse at kaizo than ldad. Let's say I take 20 minutes to beat a quickie world 1 level, 50 minutes to beat an Akogare level, and 5 hours to beat an Elephants level. Then at the same time, ldad beats the same quickie world 1 level in 5 minutes, the same Akogare level in 25 minutes, and the Elephants level in 2 hours. He's better than me, and the levels were easier for him, but the bias doesn't matter because the time comparisons still stand. Each hack falls into a nice category of kaizo: easy kaizo, regular kaizo, and hard kaizo.

Second point is that dode has already managed to rank many kaizo hacks with a difficulty rating and didn't seem to have too much difficulty, so we know it's possible already. It's just a matter of translating it successfully into the site's smw hack section scheme.

I also want to make the point that this work wouldn't just be to satisfy our collective OCD when viewing the hack section. There is a real problem with difficulty not being portrayed in the slightest for kaizo hacks. Every day, there is at least 1 person (either on twitch or discord, or sometimes in the forums) asking for an "easy" kaizo hack to practice their skills. They have to ask because it's extremely unclear from the hack section. There's a massive amount of kaizo hacks and no one knows if they're about to play a baby kaizo or a storks unless they ask around. Sometimes, the description will state the difficulty, but that's quite rare.

It goes the other way as well. Experienced players appreciate the difficulty rankings because it lets them sift through the hundreds of hacks on the site to play the hard and very-hard hacks they enjoy. With kaizo, you can't do that. Again, you gotta ask around.

The rankings exist to help players navigate the site and download the hacks that they want to play and will suit them best, so I think it's worth making the system better.
This table contains all the suggestions, the section that they plan on acting on, if more than one person supports/suggested that change and if they are feasible on the coding side.
After making this table, I'll start thinking about a way to reorganize stuff if we have to do and I'll finalize a decision on what to do in a week or 2.


Suggestion Section More than one person said this Feasible on the coding side
Instead of 1 difficulty, we have 2 difficulties that suggest how the difficulty curve works, alternatively, just what are the difficulties of the easiest and of the hardest levels. Or leave the second difficulty as optional for hacks with a normal difficulty curve Every No Easy (as two independent fields)
Moderate (displayed as one field)
Type and difficulty should be separated, one label that says the type (Kaizo, Standard, Troll, Pit) and the other one that says the difficulty, like "Easy, Hard, Very Hard" etc. Every Yes Easy (as two independent fields)
Complex (if the possible difficulties depend on the type)
Number based difficulty, 1 being very easy and 6 being hard (also suggested to be 1-10 instead of 1-6) and then attach to that a type (as the suggestion before, basically making the difficulty and type totally detached from one another, and possibly adding a "Puzzle" type. Image showing the possible ranks: IMAGE Every Yes Easy
Possibly rename kaizo light to kaizo RTA. Kaizo Yes Easy
Add a checkbox to indicate that a hack is kaizo. Just simply a "Yes" or "No" thing while keeping the difficulties shared between kaizo and not kaizo (Easy, Normal.. Etc) Kaizo No Easy
Ranking hacks should be done by comparing them with each other to partially eliminate the "subjective" side of the difficulty Every No N/A
Instead of having a difficulty curve with 2 difficulties just have 1 difficulty that's the "main" difficulty of the hack, maybe implement the difficulty with some simbols. Image showing the proposed simbols: IMAGE Every No Moderate/Complex
Yes, I'm here again, I'm not sure if someone still cares but...
Things are going a bit slow here for a couple reasons.
Mainly because this quarantine has been hitting me really hard lately. There's stuff going on in my life that I choose not to disclose here but that has left me pretty demotivated to do stuff, both moderation, generale site work (such as this), and other non-site related stuff. Last 2/3 weeks have been pretty rough.
I'm really sorry again for the delay. Hopefully I can get this done but this time I'm not giving any ETA because I genuinely don't know when my moon will give me a break to work on this with the right amount of willpower and attention that it deserves.
My two cents:

Ideally, I'd like to be able to use the category/difficulty scheme to find hacks similar to hacks I know that I already enjoy and are at a difficulty level I can handle. Right now the category selector is pretty much useless for that in Kaizo and Puzzle hack realms. Obviously "Kaizo Light" being "any kaizo hack anyone's ever beaten RTA" means there's no filtering internal to that category, so that's right out, and there is no puzzle category at all. So there's two points I'd like to make:

1. The "light" and "hard" category split for Kaizo hacks makes sense, but the names could probably use work, since there seems to be perpetual confusion among stream viewers about this point. (Renaming the categories to "Kaizo RTA" and "Kaizo TAS" would work.) I'd split the "light" category into 3-4 sub-categories/difficulties, with "easy" being the beginner kaizo hacks like QW2 and friends, "hard" being things like GPW2 and Storks, (and possibly a "medium" in between if there can be agreement on where to draw this line), and "extreme" for hacks which were made back in the "kaizo is meant for savestates" days but have technically been RTA'ed by a handful of people.


2. Puzzle hacks should have their own category. Notable well-known puzzle hacks such as Keytastrophe Rebirth Remix and the MLP series of hacks can be moved over by staff all at once upon creation of the category, lesser known ones can be moved by their own creators or upon request as people point out older mis-classified hacks over time. The "puzzle" category should be for hacks which are almost entirely puzzle-oriented; I think we pretty much all have a decent handle on what this means. A puzzle kaizo trap or a single puzzle level in an otherwise traditional/kaizo level wouldn't get a hack moved over. I'd also support an "RTA/TAS" split or similar difficulty scheme here, for similar rationale as Kaizo: just because I enjoyed Keytastrophe Rebirth Remix doesn't mean I have any desire to put up with the nonsense that is MLP2.
Originally posted by Atari2.0
Yes, I'm here again, I'm not sure if someone still cares but...
Things are going a bit slow here for a couple reasons.
Mainly because this quarantine has been hitting me really hard lately. There's stuff going on in my life that I choose not to disclose here but that has left me pretty demotivated to do stuff, both moderation, generale site work (such as this), and other non-site related stuff. Last 2/3 weeks have been pretty rough.
I'm really sorry again for the delay. Hopefully I can get this done but this time I'm not giving any ETA because I genuinely don't know when my moon will give me a break to work on this with the right amount of willpower and attention that it deserves.


Yeah I was actually wondering what the progress was a few days ago, but take all the time you need for personal things.

--------------------
NewPointless
Just want to post that I support the idea of 2 separate difficulty fields to represent the difficulty curve.
I want to also lend my 2 cents and say that I like the idea of 2 seperate difficulties to represent difficulty curve for standard hacks. However, when it comes to Kaizo, I also agree with what some have said about the partial subjectivity of its difficulty.

To that point, I'd suggest naming the current Kaizo: Hard category Kaizo: Tool. I'd then tackle Kaizo: Light with a 4-point scale for Kaizo: Easy (Anything beginner-friendly, easy to approach - the Quickies and Robfathers and Baby Kaizo Worlds), Intermediate (Most hacks would be here, everything from Akogare to Invictus), Hard (The GPW2s and Storks and Search for Salmons) and a fourth, special category.

The fourth category would be for hacks like tjb's Midair Mastery, ArisenDead's Kaizo Dark/Kaizo Consistency and other hacks that would fall under 'Kaizo: Hard' in current rules but are and still 'RTA viable'. In other words, levels that include midair shell jumps and other super-high-level technical maneuvers of that sort.

I'm not sure what I'd personally name that fourth difficulty (perhaps just Super Hard?), but I believe it has a need to exist, as currently those hacks are probably going to go mostly ignored by anyone who doesn't know of them through word of mouth, simply because they're in the 'Kaizo: Hard' category.
I like the idea of a (start) to (finish) difficulty rating rather than a singular rating that's widely suggested in this thread (I have not read more than a few responses so forgive me if this suggestion has already been made.) Either hand-in-hand with or apart from that, I think that the community would best collectively determine the hack's difficulty by being allowed to chime in after commenting in the same way a quality rating is left. I would reduce the number of difficulty categories and use a template such as:

(1) Easy
(2) Normal
(3) Hard
(4) Ultra-hard
(5) Impossible!

and change search criteria to an inclusive system with checkboxes to check for a range of difficulties. (Let's say I want easy and normal, I can choose those two and see those two, and it will show everything rated 1.0 to 2.9.)

Microanalyzing difficulty to capture every kind is going to lead to no unanimous conclusion and this issue will be revisited again. One remoderation was taxing enough. The strain of a second would be unbelievable, especially with how steadily stuff gets added to the queue and how many of those tend to be Kaizo. This will repeat ad nauseum.

This suggestion I think would remove all that pressure and give a democratic GameFAQs-style difficulty overview.

-Display the median of each rating both numerically and verbally. For something really close to the next rating up, I would say for display the verbal difficulty as if it were a range (e.g. 1.0-1.7 is Easy, 1.8-1.9 Easy-Normal, 2.0-2.7 Normal, 2.8-2.9 is Normal-Hard etc.) and the subjectivity of Ultra-hard and Impossible leaves room for the wide interpretation that could be had of Kaizo hacks or what is regarded now as a very hard hack. Whereas a casual player would find a Kaizo hack 4 or 5, a Kaizo regular may think of it more as a 2 or 3, and I think it'd organically even out to what it should be if there was a healthy mix of players in the community who actively play SMW hacks. Exaggerated ratings would also inevitably be assimilated by honest critical ratings. It may encourage more feedback from lurkers, and more engagement in the community is not a bad thing.

-Allow the viewer to show a graph to compare how people rated the difficulty in the form of some drop down. (On the side, it would be cool if people could see how many people voted x stars for ratings rather than only seeing the average, just for the sake of data analysis.) So this way, you get to see both the median and mode of ratings.

Since joke and troll are not really difficulties, I would say create tags to make them searchable by niche. Kaizo and Pit should be defined in tags to still be searchable, as they too are genres, and as time has revealed, Kaizo is not merely one difficulty but a genre that covers a number of things between hard and impossible and is defined by all these tight maneuvers, quick reflexes, and sometimes glitch exploitation; Pit is the Kaizo subgenre that is maximally difficult and requires tools.

So in summary:
- Users give rating-like input, gated by having to leave a comment
- Moderators just retag applicable hacks, not having to replay them all
- Verbal explanation gives a simplistic difficulty rundown, while numerical difficulty rating gives a weighted rundown
- Median and mode expressed so users can see how everyone felt about the hack in both the generally and individually

Just look above you...
If it's something that can be stopped, then just try to stop it!
The main issue that I have with all the blanket 1-5 difficulty scale proposals is that we host multiple styles of hacks ("Regular hacks", "RTA Kaizo hacks" and "Tool-based Kaizo/Pit hacks") with significantly different player bases and fundamentally different expectations of difficulty. That is, a difficulty scale that tries to encompass all styles of hacks at once ultimately will fail to be useful to anyone.

For a concrete example: Item Abuse is objectively a much more difficult hack than Bits and Pieces. A universal difficulty scale would thus place Bits and Pieces far below Item Abuse. For the respective audiences of these hacks, however, the distinction goes the other way around: The "average pit player" considers Item Abuse to be quite easy: On specialized difficulty scales for pit hacks, it's usually seen as a 1/5. Meanwhile, Bits and Pieces is one of the hardest non-kaizo hacks that we host and is usually considered to be somewhere between 4/5 and 5/5 for a non-kaizo hack.
Rating Item Abuse as harder than Bits and Pieces is undesirable as Item Abuse isn't really "harder" than Bits and Pieces. Instead, they simply belong to different hacking styles and their difficulties are incomparable.

My proposed solution to this problem is to categorize hacks into hacking styles (In current terms, these would be "Easy-Very Hard", "Kaizo: Light", "Kaizo: Hard", "Pit", "Troll", maybe others) and add 1-5 difficulty ratings for each hacking style individually. This would allow players to easily search for hacks of their desired subgenre while still quickly allowing them to get a sense of relative difficulty within that genre. I think that this is what a difficulty rating should ultimately accomplish.

Regarding names: Renaming "Kaizo: Light" to "Kaizo: RTA" wouldn't increase clarity to new members as it simply replaces some jargon with different jargon (and with RTA being a nowadays obsolete speedrunning term from the early 2000s I wouldn't even say it's *better* jargon). Renaming "Kaizo: Hard" to "Kaizo: TAS" would be even worse as the latter is an accurate description of pit hacks! Instead of renaming categories I propose that we offer an quick explanation of the difficulty names to new users. The only explanations on the site for these terms are currently:
- In the glossary, buried somewhere deep within the F.A.Q. and they are not even defined separately there
- On the hack submission page, buried within "Kaizo-specific guidelines"
I suppose that moving the definitions somewhere more accessible (maybe a tooltip when hovering over the difficulty names?) would increase clarity enough to the point where this discussion is no longer needed.
Here are my thoughts as someone who primarily plays kaizo::hard and pit hacks. I'm a big fan of adding a difficulty rating that people can vote on. This gives newer players some indicator which hacks to play first and it allows veteran players to decide whether they want to play a challenging hack or a more relaxing one.

However, I would absolutely separate the genre of a hack (kaizo::light, kaizo::hard, pit, troll, ...) from the difficulty. For one, merging the two would render the difficulty scale meaningless. But more importantly, the genres are separated not only by their difficulty, but also by their design philosophy:
- pit hacks consists of 1 (or 2) long levels. They are tailored towards optimized TASes (and videos thereof) by having a high trick density, little downtime and an often claustrophobic look. Playing these requires and reinforces a precise low-level understanding of the game mechanics.
- kaizo::light hacks focus on execution skills (reaction time, tapping a button for 2 frames, ...) and finding consistent setups for easy but non-trivial jumps. They are separated from "very hard" hacks by their linear there-is-only-one-solution type of level design. As you're playing these without savestates, it is generally frowned upon if it's unclear how you pass a section (consitently).
- kaizo::hard hacks use tools to remove the manual execution part in favor of more thinking. Save states give you a lot of attempts at the individual obstacles, which makes figuring out intriguing setups a lot of fun. In some sense, this setups are "micro-puzzles". Compared to pit hacks, these focus more on cool looking sections with weird game mechanics, rather that difficult sections that push these mechanics to the limit. In particular, this hacks don't have to be difficult if they show off something cool. As a consequence, a high level understanding of the game mechanics often suffices and these hacks are not made for optimized TASes.

For example, Item Abuse and MintGreenYoshi's Challenge are both easier than SMW Skill Challenge and Mario Must Die 3, but their design clearly labels the former as pit hacks and the latter as kaizo::hard hacks. This design based split also avoids having to reclassify hacks due to difficulty creep.

Finally, the label kaizo::TAS doesn't fit kaizo::hard hacks. As explained above, it's pit hacks that are built with TASes in mind, not kaizo::hard hacks. In fact, most TASes are made with lua script + frame advance, but playing kaizo::hard hacks requires non of those (savestates, rewinds and 50% slowdown suffice in most cases).
(Pit is a much better label than kaizo:TAS for pit hacks, but I don't think that's up for discussion.)
Maybe adding a '?' icon next to the "Type" column header that links to an explanation page would help? You could then also link this page somewhere in the "Type" row of the "Filter Results" UI.
About Kaizo, a difficulty rating by the players would help. Kaizo:Light is too broad and there are HUGE differences between Quickie World 2 and Responsible World.
The most accurate way to differentiate is to make people vote for the difficulty. It would still be relative to people's skill, but when you have 20 or 30 votes, it's still more accurate than one person, the creator, deciding what difficulty it is.
So you'd still have only one category, Kaizo:Light, but then you'd have actual differences between difficulties.

--------------------
Super Mario Pants World
Luigi's Lost Levels
New Super Mario Pants World
Originally posted by Romano338
About Kaizo, a difficulty rating by the players would help. Kaizo:Light is too broad and there are HUGE differences between Quickie World 2 and Responsible World.
The most accurate way to differentiate is to make people vote for the difficulty. It would still be relative to people's skill, but when you have 20 or 30 votes, it's still more accurate than one person, the creator, deciding what difficulty it is.
So you'd still have only one category, Kaizo:Light, but then you'd have actual differences between difficulties.


I personally think this isn't a bad idea- having people vote on difficulty and marking it as the average vote (with outliers excluded) would be an excellent system to have- perhaps in addition to a moderator-judged difficulty rating (akin to Critic Rating vs User Rating on stuff like Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes)

That said, doing all this in addition to a seperate difficulty rating for the hardest section in the hack is obviously a bit of a tall order to ask, and would make a lot of informational clutter. It's certainly a tough balance.
wrt YUMP 2:

Originally posted by JUMP Team
This hack actually starts out as a regular hack and turns into kaizo as the game goes on. If only there were some way to reflect this in the difficulty ranking.


--------------------
NewPointless
I'm late to the discussion of YUMP 2, but all I can contribute is that at least 90% of the levels exhibit kaizo elements even though it's supposed to be a parody, and as such, tagging it as Kaizo: Light is appropriate.

--------------------
O que você precisa é de um retoque total.
Now that I think retrospectively on this, I think there should be some room in the difficulty reworkings to account for genre-blending. yump2 isn't the first instance of this (see many old japanese hacks, compact world).

My revised suggestion would be to have a sort of numerical ranking of hacks to show how hard the game is on average, and then have a tag field where difficulty can be applied. This would allow hacks to have multiple tags if they mix and match a lot of different styles (i.e. yump2 would have the tags kaizo, very hard, puzzle, and joke). Then visitors could sort the tags to find things they want. This would probably require overhauling the current tags to make them more streamlined.

Having some way to display the tags on the actual hack page without clicking on the hack would probably help, and the tags would have to be a dropdown rather than a fill-in. Non-kaizo mods would still be able to see which hacks don't have the kaizo tag when filtering.
Originally posted by GbreezeSunset
Now that I think retrospectively on this, I think there should be some room in the difficulty reworkings to account for genre-blending. yump2 isn't the first instance of this (see many old japanese hacks, compact world).

My revised suggestion would be to have a sort of numerical ranking of hacks to show how hard the game is on average, and then have a tag field where difficulty can be applied. This would allow hacks to have multiple tags if they mix and match a lot of different styles (i.e. yump2 would have the tags kaizo, very hard, puzzle, and joke). Then visitors could sort the tags to find things they want. This would probably require overhauling the current tags to make them more streamlined.


I agree completely on taggable genres, but I think that multiple difficulties should be selectable. It would be the same code and would address the major issue of hacks with wide difficulty curves.

I've gone into detail on this earlier, but I just wanted to chime in that I agree with the idea.

--------------------
NewPointless
I agree completely with Gbreeze. Although YUMP 2 is by definition a kaizo hack, the option to mix tags that vary depending on the difficulty would be nice. Kinda goes in encounter with what I suggested before.
Multiple difficulties wouldn't be a bad idea as well, but people just need to be cautious to not pick difficulties that don't match the hack at all (i.e. "Hard" and "Medium" tags for a "Kaizo: Light" hack). It's at the moderator's discretion.

e: good going

--------------------
O que você precisa é de um retoque total.
Pages: « 1 2 »
Forum Index - Important - Announcements - Hacks Section Difficulty Rework Suggestions Thread

The purpose of this site is not to distribute copyrighted material, but to honor one of our favourite games.

Copyright © 2005 - 2020 - SMW Central
Legal Information - Privacy Policy - Link To Us


Menu

Follow Us On

  • YouTube
  • Twitch
  • Twitter

Affiliates

  • Super Mario Bros. X Community
  • ROMhacking.net
  • Mario Fan Games Galaxy