Banner
Views: 852,411,067
Time:
31 users online: 7 up, Akaginite, AnasMario130, AnEvilGhost,  Anorakun,  Atari2.0, chickaDEE Magazine, Counterfeit, Doopu, Green Jerry, GunRat, HamOfJustice, Heraga,  idol, JabuJabule,  JamesD28,  Katerpie,  KevinM, Kusrry, LucasMegaStriker,  MarioFanGamer,  MiniMawile303,  Nameless, OrangeBronzeDaisy, PedroHrodrigues, TCgamerboy2002, Thiago678, VecchiaZim, wilber95, Yoshi Master, Zandro - Guests: 61 - Bots: 109 Users: 47,001 (2,529 active)
Latest: GunRat
Tip: Check the Documents section. Tutorials and other useful information can be found there.Not logged in.
I disagree with this removal log
Forum Index - Valley of Bowser - Moderation Questions - I disagree with this removal log
Pages: « 1 2 » Thread Closed
https://smwc.me/1529323

Originally posted by Dakras Hayashi
I can't even tell what's meant to be solid and what's not with this tileset. Not only is it inconsistent with perspective and outlines, but it's generally ugly overall and clashes with itself somehow.


Quote
I can't even tell what's meant to be solid and what's not with this tileset.



Video of the original game and how it uses the tileset - https://youtu.be/ob648xBCMEw?t=2027

What it shows - That theres a clear conveyance of what is solid and not-solid on how the stage design uses it. Even among other levels in that game that opt for that perspective best exemplified by that town level you can tell what is interactable from what is décor. Additionally the in-game sprites of the character and NPC are rather similar in perspective to SMW's Mario having a 3/4ths view.

Now for an example of a SMW hack using that tileset well in the following: Seawar Mario World (Japanese hack, only hack on-hand to illustrate my point)







Seawar Mario World's implementation of the tileset is not at all dissimilar to how it works in the source game. The floor graphic is solid and conveys its solid, the blinds are obscurity décor, statues are large, shaded like a solid figure, and placed in way that is an obstacle, bamboo are spikes. With the drums one should be using a bounce block to properly use it. So your point of "can't even tell what's meant to be solid and what's not with this tileset" already is p filmsy bc the idea of using rips is as much as possible in the adapation process to your SMW hacks to generally maintain tile behavior consistency with how they are used in the original game.

Next point
Quote
Not only is it inconsistent with perspective and outlines, but it's generally ugly overall and clashes with itself somehow.


Not really, the graphics are generally consistent with each other and show a mastery of pixel art seen within that game system. And as per your point with perspective on the tileset, I can think of a few instances of other rips in the section from different games using the similar foreground perspective with the one removed -

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=22005
https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=21204
https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=14795 https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=15866

I understand SMWC has the right to maintain quality standards in their sections but if we were to reject graphics that use that kind of perspective, start with the ones linked if you think that kind of perspective have limited usability. :/

--------------------
On Pixel Art Requests: I generally do not accept work unless I either have the time, if I see your project worth my time to contribute towards, and that is usually me doing the approaching to you on that.
-I also do not accept speculative work as I do have various art I made on-hand with me.
-I am more receptive to equivalent exchange of resources in which case, you can DM me wherever I have an active presence on for the details.
-Other times I'm availible for your project is C3 request threads I may run.




i also want to bring up the point of rejecting things based on the quality of the original work..which is senseless and dumb. its not up to smwc moderators to decide whether content from a game being ripped from is "acceptable" or not (barring things that blatantly violate nsfw/etc policies, but that should be an incredibly rare circumstance at most). sure, for original works that can and should be improved by their authors, it makes sense to moderate them in such a manner. thats not the case with existing games; whether it be music, graphics, or whatever, you cannot expect a ripper to update someone elses creations themselves and especially not just completely lock it out of the section because a moderator doesnt like it. if the rip is a bad rip, thats different grounds, but thats not the case here

--------------------
soundcloud / bandcamp / twitter / battle of the bits / buy our album
The tileset overall is not consistent in perspective, not that it uses that perspective. It isn't consistent with outlines either, compare the lanterns to the ground tiles. Only the red parts of the ground (which look weird as-is) and the lanterns have some sort of outline, which make everything else look weird compared to it. The weird screen thing looks solid to me as well, and I wouldn't think it's meant to be walked through. Even looking at videos of the original game's rip it looked off to me.
My 2 cents is that it's not just the perspective, but plain usability overall. Looking at those screenshots, I -really- have a hard time telling what's solid. Even the off-perspective part of it just blends in to me. The background makes it worse, since contrast-wise it blends in a lot more. Usability is incredibly important, and personally I feel something that is deemed unusable, even if it's 100% accurate, isn't fit for the section. To compare to other removals, we don't accept backgrounds that eat up all the BG and FG slots because it makes it literally impossible to use a foreground at all. Perhaps the example level could've done better, but looking at the video to me the original game doesn't do a great job of it either.

Why are some solid surfaces at the angled perspective but some are dead-on? Sure it's a little subjective but the fact that the tileset has 0 internal consistency to what "solid" is supposed to look like makes it hard. The linked comparisons -do-, even if I wish the Super Adventure Island one had more contrast between the background part. The Kirby one uses the odd perspective to its advantage, everything not-solid actually looks like part of the background, and the tile 100 equivalent uses a different bottom part than the grey cement block equivalent.

--------------------
theres no such thing as "unusable". one of the benefits of having large sections of available resources is that people can find even the most weird and wild things and get creative with them. just because on the surface something looks strange doesnt mean it cant be used well and should thus be completely excluded from the site. there are far, far stranger submissions on the site than this, and they all have a purpose, even if it's maybe a limited one.

--------------------
soundcloud / bandcamp / twitter / battle of the bits / buy our album
For what it's worth, I was thinking about using it at some point.

Edit: I've also used quite a few bg's that take up all the bg and fg slots, there's quite a few ways to get around it and it's quite often that hackers use these resources for creative means.

I also played seawar mario world and, while that hack uses some wild graphics, I thought the rips that were used were quite charming and really added to the "hacky" atmosphere.

I'm of the opinion that graphical rips should be judged based on technical quality of the rip, not the literal quality of the actual tileset itself. This tileset could certainly find use. Regarding subjective quality, that shouldn't really be a concern in rips, but if it was, I think this tileset looks quite nice. That, and aesthetic quality isn't always something that can be judged standalone. A lot of resources really shine within the creative context of what they're being used for. I know that's a hard thing to judge when moderating submissions, but it's something to keep in mind.
Originally posted by Teyla
Usability is incredibly important, and personally I feel something that is deemed unusable, even if it's 100% accurate, isn't fit for the section. To compare to other removals, we don't accept backgrounds that eat up all the BG and FG slots because it makes it literally impossible to use a foreground at all.


Yes, but there's some inconsistencies about the graphic section itself. So, I don't agree with this speeach of usability. I even saw hacks with "realistic" backgrounds and even If I find odd, I respect the decision of the author of using that kind of asset.

The background below, ripped by Ayami, uses a lot of EXGFX, and yet was accepted. Not that it shouldn't, but it contradicts what you say about using a lot of slots.

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=20043

Also, there's this foreground that Zampari ripped. I find it very cool, but not so much practical. Very specific at best.

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=20428

How about another example? This excellent rip from Brutapode89 uses a lot of graphics, and I find the perspective a little odd to be used in levels, but it was accepted. Only FG3 is free.

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=20975

Also, the foreground that I ripped doesn't eat too much graphical slot. I don't understand your point. Yes, three palettes are a lot for a foreground, but, BG2, BG3 slots are free and there like 4 palette rows free.

And I avoid using more than three palettes in my backgrounds. I try at best, using one or two. It's not my fault, I work hard in optimizing what I post in this site.

And while I agree that my sample level wasn't that great, I don't understand the reason of rejection. I did everything that was asked : Map16, EXGFX, palette, palmask, and I even avoided to use the status bar colors. Maybe the sample level was terrible, but I can make a new one showing how this tileset works.

If the problem is the main ground of the tileset, I could make like the Halberd foreground, where Mario is above the ground itself, but that would cause some issues with the perspective.

Either way, it's a pick your poison situation. No matter how I ripped this, It would not be perfect in perspective. It's not my flaw.

I thought it would be cool to post this FG on this site, because there's so few graphics that are oriental-like here, and I wanted to help, bringing more diversity. It's the reason why I brought some Castlevania and Ganbare Goemon rips. Even if I don't use it, somebody will.

I did this rip with the most accuracy possible. And it isn't even complete. SEAWAR did a rip better than mine.

Also, saying that the graphics are ugly isn't helpful for a moderation log. I think that these assets are beautiful. So it's a subjetive point, not worth of bringing to the removal itself.

I'm very disappointed with the decision of removing the foreground itself. I could edit to make the perspective look better, but that wouldn't be a rip anymore.

--------------------


/\ Amazing art made by Deeke

Currently working on:
Aeron's Golden Cookie Quest

.
First of all I agree with every point made in this thread in disagreement of the removal so far, but also like, if the ripper faithfully ripped the tileset I don't think any graphics mod is in the position to strike it down because they have an issue with the graphics themselves. If it was ripped poorly that's one thing but Anorakun did a pretty faithful job so I see no reason why it should be rejected.

And if we're gonna talk about ease of use, we might as well nuke any ripped background that takes up more than 3 GFX slots because its hard to make decent looking levels when the background dominates the GFX slots that hard. Not that it's impossible, just like it's not impossible to make a fun level out of Anorakun's rip.

Originally posted by Dakras
I can't even tell what's meant to be solid and what's not with this tileset. Not only is it inconsistent with perspective and outlines, but it's generally ugly overall and clashes with itself somehow.


Considering that Anorakun clearly put effort into this and didn't make any rookie mistakes, you're kind of doing them a disservice by putting out a two sentence rejection log that has no real substance to it.

I'm honestly disappointed with how this was handled.
Anorakun made some excellent points that said it better than what I ever could.

Now here is where I do agree with the graphics mods when it comes to editing rips, but these are niche cases and all of which could be done using tools such as SNESGFX.

1. When ripping tilesets and backgrounds from systems that have color counts higher than 16 and which are not optimized to be taking advantage of other palette rows.
2. If there are too many unique 8x8 tiles that have a virtually unnoticeable at minimum when looking at the raw original rip, 1 pixel difference in color, or a virtually unnoticeable x and y pixel shift that could be deleted and substituted for an optimized 8x8 tile while keeping the original look and feel of the rip in question when submitted.

The rest on usability, I don't think we should be free to get to decide on how the rips are "unuseable" or not when it isn't our own original submissions because rips inherently have their usability based on the fact of their context in the original game in question that we hackers, can choose to be faithful to or edit/remix for our own level design purposes. Rejection of rips should be squarely on if the rip in question as a rule, can be optimized losslessly but the submitter refuses to do so (such as having repeated 8x8 tiles in the .bin or two or more colors that have little to no discernable difference in colors)

--------------------
On Pixel Art Requests: I generally do not accept work unless I either have the time, if I see your project worth my time to contribute towards, and that is usually me doing the approaching to you on that.
-I also do not accept speculative work as I do have various art I made on-hand with me.
-I am more receptive to equivalent exchange of resources in which case, you can DM me wherever I have an active presence on for the details.
-Other times I'm availible for your project is C3 request threads I may run.




Originally posted by Sinc-X
theres no such thing as "unusable". one of the benefits of having large sections of available resources is that people can find even the most weird and wild things and get creative with them. just because on the surface something looks strange doesnt mean it cant be used well and should thus be completely excluded from the site. there are far, far stranger submissions on the site than this, and they all have a purpose, even if it's maybe a limited one.

If this is the case then why are there even section moderators? Why do we have a job beyond simply making sure things are what they say they are and insert? Music that takes up a ton of space is fine, the user can work around that. A sprite that crashes when a goomba is fine, just tell the user to not use goombas. Graphics that use up a bunch of palette space they don't need, sure, go ahead. I really disagree with this idea at a fundamental level, and I know you're talking about post-optimized, but frankly even then I think there are places where yes a resource is going to be too janky or unwieldy to use even after it meets our guidelines.

I know I like my own things to be modular and easy to quickly modify to work together, and I know that not everybody (especially not in a rip) is going to be able to meet that, because that's crazy. It just really feels to me sometimes that the graphics section gets a lot of leeway on rips where other sections do not. If I rejected a background ripped with a tool for not having organized map16, I would likely get flack for it, so I've avoided doing so. Even if it's an easily-buildable background that could be fixed, because I would likely get a response exactly like this or discourage a user who does good work otherwise from submitting at all. I've had multiple different people I've asked for quick corrections just tell me to reject it instead. It's gotten to the point where I'm often correcting things where I probably shouldn't be, and it makes moderating the section difficult. Maybe we do need to be stricter and start rejecting for these reasons?

Originally posted by Anorakun
Yes, but there's some inconsistencies about the graphic section itself. So, I don't agree with this speeach of usability. I even saw hacks with "realistic" backgrounds and even If I find odd, I respect the decision of the author of using that kind of asset.

The background below, ripped by Ayami, uses a lot of EXGFX, and yet was accepted. Not that it shouldn't, but it contradicts what you say about using a lot of slots.

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=20043

Also, there's this foreground that Zampari ripped. I find it very cool, but not so much practical. Very specific at best.

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=20428

How about another example? This excellent rip from Brutapode89 uses a lot of graphics, and I find the perspective a little odd to be used in levels, but it was accepted. Only FG3 is free.

https://www.smwcentral.net/?p=section&a=details&id=20975

Also, the foreground that I ripped doesn't eat too much graphical slot. I don't understand your point. Yes, three palettes are a lot for a foreground, but, BG2, BG3 slots are free and there like 4 palette rows free.

My point wasn't about your rip, but usability in general, since it's a problem I have with the entire section. For those other ones you've pointed out, our internal guidelines say that for a background that uses a lot of slots it must leave at least one slot open for an FG, as well as a palette row to go with it (with all the preferred background ones used first, of course.) which all of those meet. I'm sure there's older files that break that guideline, but we're long overdue for a remoderation anyways. I personally think this should be on the submission guidelines, and I'm not quite sure why it isn't. Maybe Gloomy will have some insight on that when he's around.

I agree this is subjective, and while I went on a huge tangent about it I probably would've accepted it myself, but I'm just super frustrated that any time any of us try to bring up a standard for any rip it gets immediately knocked down by these kinds of arguments. I know I've said my piece on this before and I'm not going to change any minds on it. I'm sorry, I probably should've just bitten my tongue.

--------------------
Sinc is talking about unusual or odd resources, not straight up broken resources or unoptimized and poorly made ones. When he means nothing is unusable, he means that, as long as it functions properly, isn't broken or unoptimized in some way, and properly follows the rules of submission, a resource is usable, no matter how unusual or odd it is. This tileset would certainly be an odd one to use in a hack, but it functions perfectly fine and follows all the rules of submission, so it should be on the site. A mod's job when it comes to graphic rips is to make sure the resource functions properly on a technical level.

There are those that think moderation should be 100% objective and only test whether things work on a technical level. I don't really agree with that. When a resource is created by the author, it has an aspect of creativity, and that should be moderated. But that's really just for original/creative works, such as hacks, original music, or original graphics. When it comes to graphic rips, ports, and even asm, there doesn't need to be a judgement on the subjective quality, as long as the objective quality and submission rules are fully met.

Now there's obviously some caveats to that (i.e. if a resource is too similar to an existing one or a better one already exists, etc)
Originally posted by Teyla
It just really feels to me sometimes that the graphics section gets a lot of leeway on rips where other sections do not. If I rejected a background ripped with a tool for not having organized map16, I would likely get flack for it, so I've avoided doing so. Even if it's an easily-buildable background that could be fixed, because I would likely get a response exactly like this or discourage a user who does good work otherwise from submitting at all. I've had multiple different people I've asked for quick corrections just tell me to reject it instead. It's gotten to the point where I'm often correcting things where I probably shouldn't be, and it makes moderating the section difficult. Maybe we do need to be stricter and start rejecting for these reasons?


Okay but what you're describing is nothing like the submission that just got rejected.

A basic ass background being unoptimized is a perfectly valid reason to hit up the user who submitted it and be like "Hey could you fix this?" I know its not the same as GFX but bebn literally hits me up all the time when he's moderating my ports to point out minor (and sometimes major) mistakes I should fix. Sure I roll my eyes a lil bit but its not discouraging at all, just made an oversight and I gotta correct it. Easy. Usually takes five minutes. If people can't handle being asked to optimize something and being told exactly how to fix it, that's their issue and you shouldn't feel any guilt for that.

This Goemon rip on the other hand didn't have anything wrong with it aside from Dakras (and others) thinking its ugly and it looks weird, which is a bad reason to reject something if its faithful to the original source. You don't have to like something to respect the fact that it has it's place and people should be allowed to have access to it and do with it what they will. I mean for the love of Christ there are some ports in the music section that SUCK but I'm not gonna gatekeep what I think does and doesn't deserve to be in the section. And honestly I don't really think this tileset is that unusable given the amount of hacks (mostly from Japan) that have cleverly utilized stuff like this for many many years. Its certainly more usable than stuff like this yet that's still in the section so...

IMO you should be allowed to hit people up and ask them to make minor corrections and not be given shit for it; you learn through feedback and correcting mistakes, if the mods were a bit more strict and made the rippers do the work it would likely make moderating the section a lot easier, either because people will suck it up and actually make the corrections or they'll fuck off on their own and you don't have to deal with it anymore.

However, rejecting a submission because YOU think its ugly, despite the fact that there are plenty of people who could find a use for it, is ridiculous and deserves to be called out.
Just want to point out that this decision was not made alone. Dakras brought it up in the channel for graphics moderators on the Discord server and was ultimately given the okay by Gloomy. Please don't assume that a mod made the rejection decision alone just because their name is the only one attached to the log, and especially don't use that assumption to make pointed remarks. Looking at you, Samantha.

Anyway, while there is no argument that the core values are relaxed a bit for rips (as opposed to original submissions), they do still apply. A well-made rip is NOT an automatic ticket into the graphics section.

Would I have accepted it? Eh... probably. It seems like it was well-ripped, and the only conveyance issue I can see is that the blind graphics look like they could be solid-on-top platforms. There is some weird mixed perspective, but mind you SMW has a bit of that itself.


Originally posted by SF - The Dark Warrior
Video of the original game and how it uses the tileset - https://youtu.be/ob648xBCMEw?t=2027

What it shows - That theres a clear conveyance of what is solid and not-solid on how the stage design uses it. Even among other levels in that game that opt for that perspective best exemplified by that town level you can tell what is interactable from what is décor. Additionally the in-game sprites of the character and NPC are rather similar in perspective to SMW's Mario having a 3/4ths view.


Having to point to a video to show what graphics act like what is an argument against the usability of the graphics, not for it. You should be able to tell from looking at the graphics alone. Though as I said earlier, I don't think it has that kind of *major* conveyance issues anyway.
And so, what I'm supposed to do? Fix it to Mario stand the ground like the Halberd graphics? Forget about posting it?

I'm not saying that the moderation didn't do its job, but that moderation log was very empty, compared to other rejections. Also, the point here, at least for me, isn't if was a decision of one moderator or more to reject my submission. My problem here is the removal log itself.

While others logs gave proper feedback, the log for the rejection of the assets that I ripped, was just like : "perspective bad. graphics ugly". What I would learn with this?

Sorry if I'm going to sound a bit harsh, but the impression that I had while reading the log : "Has he even tested the sample level that I sent? What a lazy removal log..."

I would understand If the rejection was about the confusing sample level that I sent with the archives.

But even if fixed the ground to be like the one from the Halberd tileset, it still would be wrong in perspective. Even if I fixed the bamboo too. Also, I'm still learning ExAnimation, that's why I didn't animate the lanterns. Also, for me, the curtains are decoration (with priority on). I wanted to be close to the original game with the behavior of the tileset.

When I posted this rip, CalHal came and talked about SEAWAR Mario World. I didn't even knew someone ripped this graphics already.

Also, I want to give a bit of context why this doesn't look like an usual castle. Kabuki Castle represents the Kabuki, a form of theatre in Japan. There are lanterns, giant Kabuki actors, the "curtains", parasols, taiko drums,fans, bamboo and etc. Maybe it looks odd, but there's some logic behind the graphics in the original game.

And I thought this would be a fine addition to SMW. The graphics are colorful, even it the perspective is odd at some parts. Could even fit a Switch palace (if you ignore other parts of the set) or an oriental-themed level.


That's fine if the mods want to rejection my submissions, but give me proper feedback, at least. If there's something you think that I should fix, just say. I'm open to the feedback in my graphic rips submission.

Some of the backgrounds I ripped, I had to remove colors, because it would consume too much colors, for example.

--------------------


/\ Amazing art made by Deeke

Currently working on:
Aeron's Golden Cookie Quest

.
The submission violated the section's Core Values, which apply to Rips too as stated in the footnote, and have been effective since last year and publicly disclosed without complaints. Internally, we settled for more leniency on Rips when it comes to applying the Core Values on their moderation, but this one submission was seen by both me and Dakras as one that didn't sufficiently meet them, especially when it's first and foremost violating ones that help safekeep the section from graphics that hinder gameplay. Some of you think it doesn't have conveyance issues, but some of us do, and there may be more people sharing our opinion, so it all comes down to playing safe for the sake of hack players and for the section too. Why for the section too? Put yourselves in our shoes: if we accepted this, we'd be opening the floodgates for more controversial submissions and slowly but surely we'd have to accept submissions with similar issues that could also become marginally worse and worse, because there'd be precedents and this lingering argument of not being lenient enough, and at that point the section would be filled with confusing submissions and require yet another remoderation, which is by far the most costly thing for any moderation team to go through ever. And besides, if we got too lenient with Rips, at some point someone would in their own right claim that their Original graphics should be accepted because they're as bad as X ripped submission that got accepted. In fact, I only agreed with more leniency for Core Values on Ripped graphics, because I admit that we don't want to tell rippers to artistically improve Ripped graphics, as it's not an easy task to work and improve on someone else's graphics.

As for usability, it will be judged at the moderation team's discretion and I have no sufficient reasons to change that policy (bringing up the same arguments multiple times, be it through different posts, or new threads, won't change anything). It's our job as moderators (not testers, not checkers, not fixers, moderators) to assure graphics submissions aren't a disservice to gameplay and aesthetics in any hack and that our section is worthwhile to browse and easy to filter, which is why we have Core Values in place for every submission of any kind. Feel free to release noncompliant graphics in this forum or even C3, though.

With all that said, however:

Originally posted by Anorakun
I'm not saying that the moderation didn't do its job, but that moderation log was very empty, compared to other rejections. Also, the point here, at least for me, isn't if was a decision of one moderator or more to reject my submission. My problem here is the removal log itself.

I wholeheartedly agree with this, and I'll personally talk to Dakras to come up with more elaborate and educational logs. I apologize in the name of the team for this whole situation.

Originally posted by Teyla
For those other ones you've pointed out, our internal guidelines say that for a background that uses a lot of slots it must leave at least one slot open for an FG, as well as a palette row to go with it (with all the preferred background ones used first, of course.) which all of those meet. (...) I personally think this should be on the submission guidelines, and I'm not quite sure why it isn't. Maybe Gloomy will have some insight on that when he's around.

It's not currently in the Submission Guidelines because I wasn't sure if it was a frequent enough issue to justify giving more walls of text for submitters to read, since the guidelines as of now are already pretty bulky. However, looking at this discussion, I see that maybe it's for the better I add it.
This is a bullshit argument. Why do we need to play things safe? Hackers can decide for themselves if a graphics set works for them. And there are no "floodgates" to open - rips are not going to change because of what gets accepted and what doesn't. People will rip things whether you like them or not, and why should we limit them to only releasing them at C3? That's completely against the entire purpose of SMWC. There's zero reason any rip submissions should be cause for even thinking of a remoderation; what is important here is that the rips are properly organized and easily insertable, not that they meet some arbitrary quality standard. What needs to be changed is the core values themselves if this violates them. As for originals, like I already said, the key difference is in the potential for improvement. Ripping and drawing are vastly different skillsets. It's not our place to criticize game graphics. Even the ugliest of ugly game rips have a purpose somewhere. But we can give guidance to those who do submit their own works to make them the best they can be. It's complete, absolute horseshit to moderate the section the way you claim it is moderated. A few stranger rips here and there aren't going to make any difference in browsing the 3200+ files already accepted, and you know as well as I do that these kinds of rips are few and far between. You cannot judge whether a rip will be "a disservice to gameplay and aesthetics in any hack", as that comes down purely to the discretion of the person using it.

I apologize for rambling, but this is completely unacceptable.

--------------------
soundcloud / bandcamp / twitter / battle of the bits / buy our album
Originally posted by Gloomy
The submission violated the section's Core Values, which apply to Rips too as stated in the footnote, and have been effective since last year and publicly disclosed without complaints. Internally, we settled for more leniency on Rips when it comes to applying the Core Values on their moderation, but this one submission was seen by both me and Dakras as one that didn't sufficiently meet them, especially when it's first and foremost violating ones that help safekeep the section from graphics that hinder gameplay.

Okay, let's look at the core values.



1. I don't really see how the first one applies here

2. I guess I can see how some things don't interact with the player like you'd think they would (Mainly just the Taiko drum), but beyond that... I don't see what's so confusing about this rip. While I do agree having to look at the original gameplay to understand how the player interacts with these objects is a mark against it rather than for it, but I don't really see the need to look at the original game footage because this rip isn't that difficult to wrap your head around.

3. I mean, given the setting this rip embodies, it feels pretty consistent. I can see how it would appear grossly clashy given one of the screenshots provided with the submission but I think the purpose of that screenshot is just to have the GFX on screen for people to see how it looks in game. I don't think anyone with good taste for aesthetics or good level design skills would mash EVERYTHING in this tileset into one screen. And I mean, it has a lot of colors but they're all consistently vibrant and if you were to go to a place like this in real life you'd probably see a very similar assortment of colors. So yeah I don't see how this submission violates this core value.

4. This value doesn't apply because it's a rip not pixel art.

5. This value doesn't apply because this is a whole foreground rip and not a simple edit.


So yeah I don't really understand the reasoning of anyone involved in this decision. Seems bonkers.

Originally posted by Gloomy
Some of you think it doesn't have conveyance issues, but some of us do, and there may be more people sharing our opinion, so it all comes down to playing safe for the sake of hack players and for the section too.

I really only see the graphics mods and Noivern defending this decision. It honestly feels like you guys are gatekeeping what you think is and isn't useful because clearly there's a demand for this sort of thing (why else would this thread exist?). As a team you should be listening to what the users want, after all you all chose to volunteer to be staff to benefit this community. Shouldn't you be listening to feedback like this rather than getting on a high horse because you think your opinions are more important than the feelings of the userbase you're trying to improve?

This honestly makes me lose some of my regained faith in the staff team.

Originally posted by Gloomy
Why for the section too? Put yourselves in our shoes: if we accepted this, we'd be opening the floodgates for more controversial submissions and slowly but surely we'd have to accept submissions with similar issues that could also become marginally worse and worse, because there'd be precedents and this lingering argument of not being lenient enough, and at that point the section would be filled with confusing submissions and require yet another remoderation, which is by far the most costly thing for any moderation team to go through ever.

Do I need to link every jank graphics rip in the section to show that the section has always allowed oddball submissions to some degree? Like take the DKC3 rip I linked in my last post, I don't really see anyone finding use for that outside of maybe trying to recreate the DKC3 final boss a la Brutal Mario but that wouldn't even work because the entire background is split up across two different submissions. It feels like you guys have your priorities in the wrong place because you could make a pretty decent level out of Anorakun's rip, meanwhile with the 3+-GFX-slot-required backgrounds that you guys still accept to this day I don't see that kind of thing getting much if any usage in the hacking scene. If you're gonna be so gung ho about this, at least be consistent about it and nuke submissions that are actually useless.

Originally posted by Gloomy
And besides, if we got too lenient with Rips, at some point someone would in their own right claim that their Original graphics should be accepted because they're as bad as X ripped submission that got accepted.

I mean I could see an angry 15 year old user trying to make that case but like, rips and originals are clearly in their own leagues and have different standards. If people can't seem to grasp that then idk, let them be mad?

Although I will say, for all the talk of "maintaining quality" there's a SEVERE lack of creativity in SMW hacking these days and frankly I wouldn't mind seeing more weird shit in the sections that intrigue people and push them to experiment and be creative. That's just my personal opinion though.

Originally posted by Gloomy
As for usability, it will be judged at the moderation team's discretion and I have no sufficient reasons to change that policy (bringing up the same arguments multiple times, be it through different posts, or new threads, won't change anything).

1. If this amount of backlash isn't a sign you need to change the policy I don't know what is.
2. Yeah you regurgitating the same talking points won't make a difference because you're clearly outnumbered by the userbase, maybe take that as a sign that you need to reevaluate your stances?

Originally posted by Gloomy
It's our job as moderators (not testers, not checkers, not fixers, moderators) to assure graphics submissions aren't a disservice to gameplay and aesthetics in any hack and that our section is worthwhile to browse and easy to filter

If you're seriously implying Anorakun's rip is a disservice to the section that's incredibly fucking pompous and frankly I thought you were better than that.



So yeah in conclusion all you've really demonstrated here is that the graphics team is too opinionated and stubborn for its own good, and seeing the site owner greenlighting this nonsense makes me question how well this site is run behind the scenes.
Originally posted by Samantha
This honestly makes me lose some of my regained faith in the staff team.

Originally posted by Samantha
that's incredibly fucking pompous and frankly I thought you were better than that.

Originally posted by Samantha
So yeah in conclusion all you've really demonstrated here is that the graphics team is too opinionated and stubborn for its own good, and seeing the site owner greenlighting this nonsense makes me question how well this site is run behind the scenes.

Honestly cut it out. Sour attitudes like that help absolutely nobody and do not help get your point across. It's one thing to call out people's arguments, it's a whole different story to get personal and shit on the people themselves.

For the record I more or less agree with the stand that you and other people in this thread have taken, but not when you have to get to this extent. Keep it civil.
LINKS Twitter | YouTube | SoundCloud | Fortaleza Reznor
to hear birds and see none.
So, I was tinkering with the perspective. And, I fixed some things. If weren't for this topic, I wouldn't even touch this tileset again.

But still, I don't agree with the argument of "graphics hindering the player". If the graphics hinder the player, is the original game unplayable? No, it isn't. It sounds like a lame excuse to reject my rip.

First fix I did was with the bamboo itself. While not perfect, now it has a better hitbox and doesn't look confusing anymore.



The second fix I did to the blocks and the checkers pattern of the tileset. Somehow I ripped few pixels wrong in the first version. My bad. But these two are the only issues that I found with my rip.





Then I tried change the perspective of the ground. Didn't like it too much, tho.



So, I'm going to maintain the perspective of the ground like my old rip. Also, the taiko drum is fine. If I change its perspective, I would cause a much worse perspective error.

You could have pointed some inconsistencies and mistakes that I made with this rip, but yet all is resumed to "this graphic is too odd for the graphic sections", "perspective is bad".

And yet, I fixed some oddities in a few minutes.

--------------------


/\ Amazing art made by Deeke

Currently working on:
Aeron's Golden Cookie Quest

.
Originally posted by Sinc-X
Why do we need to play things safe? Hackers can decide for themselves if a graphics set works for them.

Quote
You cannot judge whether a rip will be "a disservice to gameplay and aesthetics in any hack", as that comes down purely to the discretion of the person using it.

When hackers download a resource from a curated section, they expect it be of enough quality for their hack, they expect it to be something everyone would be okay with. I don't feel like being the one to make them believe that bad game design practices won't be frowned upon here. I'm a staff member and I have to give the example, and that starts with something as simple as giving them good resources.



Quote
And there are no "floodgates" to open - rips are not going to change because of what gets accepted and what doesn't.

Quote
A few stranger rips here and there aren't going to make any difference in browsing the 3200+ files already accepted, and you know as well as I do that these kinds of rips are few and far between.

It will in a section which submitters constantly expect consistency in moderation. Let the noncompliant graphics get in, the rest will follow and will use those as precedents.



Quote
why should we limit them to only releasing them at C3?

Originally posted by me
Feel free to release noncompliant graphics in this forum or even C3, though.




Quote
That's completely against the entire purpose of SMWC.

SMW Central's purpose is to be an archive of curated hacks and resources, otherwise we wouldn't have any moderation in any section.



Quote
There's zero reason any rip submissions should be cause for even thinking of a remoderation;

Maybe not on their own initially, but once they set the precedent they might be.



Quote
what is important here is that the rips are properly organized and easily insertable, not that they meet some arbitrary quality standard.

SMW Central's purpose is to be an archive of curated hacks and resources.



Quote
What needs to be changed is the core values themselves if this violates them.

So let's go back to square one where people were complaining about consistency in moderation.



Quote
It's not our place to criticize game graphics.

I didn't know game companies were untouchable gods whose art must absolutely not be criticized.



Quote
Even the ugliest of ugly game rips have a purpose somewhere.

I see 0.0000 benefit in contributing to make hacks ugly. And even if they do have a purpose, it wouldn't be in a curated section.



Quote
It's complete, absolute horseshit to moderate the section the way you claim it is moderated.

It would be horseshit to make moderation standards and consistency hazy too, so I guess we have to live accepting that no matter what we do, it'll be horseshit to someone somewhere.



Originally posted by Samantha
I really only see the graphics mods and Noivern defending this decision. (...) As a team you should be listening to what the users want, after all you all chose to volunteer to be staff to benefit this community.

Just because we're staff it doesn't mean our opinions weigh less than any regular user's. You know, I was a regular user for most of my time in this site and I used the section as a user as much as any of you and that's where I got the feeling that the section was a bit too lenient seeing all the poor quality submissions and even ones that were barely optimized. I didn't care whether the submission was ripped or not when I felt frustrated at them being subpar, because at the end of the day, they were all graphics resources and that was all there was to it.



Quote
Shouldn't you be listening to feedback like this rather than getting on a high horse because you think your opinions are more important than the feelings of the userbase you're trying to improve?

No one is getting on any high horses. I didn't ever say or imply that our opinions were the deciding factor:

Originally posted by me
it all comes down to playing safe for the sake of hack players and for the section too.




Quote
Like take the DKC3 rip I linked in my last post, I don't really see anyone finding use for that outside of maybe trying to recreate the DKC3 final boss a la Brutal Mario but that wouldn't even work because the entire background is split up across two different submissions.

Using a 2014 submission as an example has absolutely no effect when the oldest moderator in the current team (yours truly) only was brought to staff in 2016. I obviously won't be held responsible for any action commited by any past staff member without any of my involvement and I also refuse to be expected to know all the 3000+ submissions we have hosted. Let's be realistic here.



Quote
meanwhile with the 3+-GFX-slot-required backgrounds that you guys still accept to this day I don't see that kind of thing getting much if any usage in the hacking scene.

As Teyla mentioned earlier, we let them in if they leave the minimum amount of graphics and palette space available for a foreground or background to be used with them. With that in mind, I don't see how they're unusable enough to not be accepted, especially considering how often they're visually impressive to boot.



Quote
I mean I could see an angry 15 year old user trying to make that case but like, rips and originals are clearly in their own leagues and have different standards. If people can't seem to grasp that then idk, let them be mad?

As I said to Sinc, no matter what we do, someone somewhere won't be satisfied. Moderating in different standards has its own set of inconveniences too, so it's a pick your poison situation.



Quote
If you're seriously implying Anorakun's rip is a disservice to the section that's incredibly fucking pompous and frankly I thought you were better than that.

I don't recall mentioning Anorakun's submission anywhere in that paragraph. The topic of usability came up in the middle of the thread and I thought appropriate as manager to address it.



Quote
If this amount of backlash isn't a sign you need to change the policy I don't know what is.

Saying the same argument multiple times doesn't make the argument any stronger.
Pages: « 1 2 » Thread Closed
Forum Index - Valley of Bowser - Moderation Questions - I disagree with this removal log

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