Banner
The Questionable Level Design Contest ends in…
12 DAYS, 1 HOUR, 53 MINUTES AND 10 SECONDS
Views: 914,477,174
Time:
26 users online: Anas,  Anorakun, AppleBoy54321, Black Goku, BootaNoBijuu, Dark Prince,  DeppySlide,  E-man38, Earthling, edgar, heatedgiraffe79, Infinity, Jephro512, Kerfuffle,  KevinM, Mirann, Mitchel1987,  Nameless,  Noivern,  NopeContest, quietmason, Sweetdude,  Tahixham, TheJank, Vic Rattlehead, Zamo - Guests: 56 - Bots: 151 Users: 51,219 (2,273 active)
Latest: Dara86
Tip: If you make a change to your ROM that you regret, just go to File > Restore > Restore ROM to Previous State in the menu. From there, you can select a restore point and revert your ROM to a previous state.
Not logged in.
VLDC12 - Results
Forum Index - Sunken Ghost Ship - Old Contests & Events - The 12th Vanilla Level Design Contest - VLDC12 - Results
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 » Link
The level in question was literally called "Actual Loopholes", so the author was clearly trying to push the rules as much as the possibly could -- I'm personally willing to not give them the benefit of the doubt in this case. For what it's worth, I played the level myself, and while I admittedly thought it was actually really fun, I can see why it would be unfair to allow that level into the contest when most of the other contestants likely didn't have it in mind. Also, the level doesn't even work in Snes9x, so it does overtly break rules that the contest has had in the past - it just wasn't specified this time around because, you know, common sense.

Also the VLDC3 Smallhacker thing was all the way back in 2010. I would personally argue that hacks exploiting Lunar Magic bugs should be DQ'd as well, since it's still not really something that showcases the skills of the level designer under a restriction.

--------------------
Twitter
Well, 63rd place. Honestly, not horrible for a first time in one of these, though I certainly could have done better. I think the creative aspect was the one area that hurt me severely. Hopefully I'll keep that in mind for the next one, if I decide to do it. :)

--------------------
Click here to enter the world of mediocre!
I didn't think my level would be in the top 50, especially since this was my first time participating in one of these, so that's cool 8>
Originally posted by Katerpie
There's practically zero benefits in adding such a rule, especially if it's unilateral. I don't like how we have to spell out to not find loopholes for the sake of common sense, as judges will just waste their time discussing whether to disqualify the offending entry or not. If anything, they could just be disqualified from further contests if they keep getting hasty like this (and the ACE situation is a first, to my knowledge).

In contrast to this, what is the drawback from adding this rule? Like, there are people out there who don't even believe Common Sense exists. Or heck, just tell people to use what is widely considered "Common Sense" when making a level for (this) contest(s).

Quote
Also, the level doesn't even work in Snes9x, so it does overtly break rules that the contest has had in the past - it just wasn't specified this time around because, you know, common sense.
Also this, like the level works in every other emulator but SNES9x? I get that SNES9x is the most widely used emulator, but what if somebody uses BSNES or mains god-forbid ZSNES because it's the only thing that can run on their dinosaur computer? Does anybody who submits a level to contests have to make sure their level works with all known major emulators?(ZSNES/SNES9x/BSNES/ZMZ)

Also keeping in mind what I said about "common sense" and not everybody believing it exists, common sense in and of itself is a very subjective thing because everybody is raised differently. What I consider common sense (Right turn on red lights, or like... the Golden Rule; don't yell at people because you're mad, etc.) might not be the same for them.

Lastly, why even remove the rule if it existed in previous contests b/c common sense? If anything, that doesn't make sense, if it was there before and didn't cause any problems, why remove it? There's a reason why before you play some games, there's like... 20 page agreements, Terms and Conditions, you must agree to before you play. A lot of it is common sense but it's still there because there are people out there who take what they see and examine it to the dot. Whatever isn't listed is pretty much fair game. Yes, common sense dictates you shouldn't, but people do it anyways because that's how people are.
the level only worked on bsnes specifically. our contests expect levels to work on at least snes9x and bsnes, which is why it not working on snes9x was mentioned

--------------------
soundcloud / bandcamp / twitter / battle of the bits / buy our album
if the vldc12 baserom innately works in both snes9x and bsnes, there shouldnt really be anything people can do within the confines of the contest to change the baserom to no longer work in snes9x.

--------------------
Originally posted by Skewer
Originally posted by Katerpie
There's practically zero benefits in adding such a rule, especially if it's unilateral. I don't like how we have to spell out to not find loopholes for the sake of common sense, as judges will just waste their time discussing whether to disqualify the offending entry or not. If anything, they could just be disqualified from further contests if they keep getting hasty like this (and the ACE situation is a first, to my knowledge).

In contrast to this, what is the drawback from adding this rule? Like, there are people out there who don't even believe Common Sense exists. Or heck, just tell people to use what is widely considered "Common Sense" when making a level for (this) contest(s).

That should be left as an unwritten rule...
Originally posted by K.T.B.
The level in question was literally called "Actual Loopholes"

Just a little devil's advocate (or maybe more 2¢ than is needed): (only reason I even looked at VLDC12 though was because I heard about this, so yeah)

- Fwiw, they've got a loopholes.bps uploaded in 2019 and asked FPZero before doing so, so while that's a veeery fair implication, that's maybe a little hasty.
- As far as it being "common sense", loooots of the interesting stuff (1F0, etc.) is using things in ways they shouldn't be.
- If it had worked on snes9x it probably should've made it through, imho. Sad it didn't really.
- Regardless, obviously you can get way too chocolate with ACE so a rule against that seem worth it, especially given the level of glitchiness that's considered "vanilla". You can even have your cake and eat it too as far as "spelling out common sense":
"Vanilla in that it introduce no new code to the baserom. Whether temporary, hex-edit, etc. without prior approval." just lump it in with the rule on hex-edits and such that need baserom-update approval.
And the "no kaizo" rule already covers egregious item-abuse and glitch-abuse that requires player input.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 » Link
Forum Index - Sunken Ghost Ship - Old Contests & Events - The 12th Vanilla Level Design Contest - VLDC12 - Results

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

Copyright © 2005 - 2021 - 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
  • sm64romhacks