Super Mario Bros. X Forums

I also think the trash can is insulting, and I can say that levels above 2/10 are not trash or terrible, just simply bad or barely enjoyable
I've moved like 8 levels (out of 53 levels) to the trash can but only 2 of them deserved the definiton trash. (and they had 0.7/10 and 1.2/10 from me, the rest of the levels I've moved to trash can had at least 2/10 aside from one, but that was only slightly below 2/10)

When I check other levels in the trash can, they mostly get something around 2/10 and 2.5/10 too.

I vote on changing the name to something less demotivating.

ShadowStarX wrote:simply bad or barely enjoyable

The Trash Can is a forum for bad and barely enjoyable levels.

The level that you mentioned, Linik, is a good example of lack of attention to detail. I looked at the screenshot and thought that it would be better than a trash can level, but then upon playing it I saw that the lava moved too fast and there were graphical glitches. If the designer were to just take a bit of time and fix those things, the level would definitely end up with at least a 3 or a 4 from me.

"Levels posted here need a lot of work before they're ready to be played" doesn't suggest that the levels are ridiculously broken. It suggests exactly what it says - that levels need a lot of improvement.

As for "newbies posting their first level", the only people I've heard complain about that are people that aren't new members posting their first level. The community can't be the only thing that judges levels - level designers need to be able to assess their levels themselves and compare them to their ideas of good level design (which most people who have played Mario games should have) to decide whether or not they're good. There's no reason to post your very first level (or any level, in this case) on the forums if you don't think it's good.

Also, I think that the Casual Levels should be changed to something like, "Kaizo and Casual Levels". A lot of the Trash Can levels are there because they lost so many points from overly tough gameplay and difficulty when rate by level judges, so renaming the Casual levels sub-forum might really help as well.
suggests exactly what it says - that levels need a lot of improvement.

Joey wrote:As for "newbies posting their first level", the only people I've heard complain about that are people that aren't new members posting their first level. The community can't be the only thing that judges levels - level designers need to be able to assess their levels themselves and compare them to their ideas of good level design (which most people who have played Mario games should have) to decide whether or not they're good. There's no reason to post your very first level (or any level, in this case) on the forums if you don't think it's good.

And a lot of new users getting ticked off comes from not following the posting guideline (screenshots, etc.).

I think people should just post kaizo stuff in the casual levels, no matter what the name is. It could've been mentioned in the discription though.

Ludwig von Koopa wrote:I think people should just post kaizo stuff in the casual levels, no matter what the name is. It could've been mentioned in the discription though.

I like the idea of updating the description. It would help too since I'm not sure anyone reads the guidelines or rules posts.

Ludwig von Koopa, in the first post, wrote:if they've never had any criticism they can't know what's good or not.

That sounds like the fault of the Level Judge, not the name of the category.

Imaynotbehere4long wrote:

Ludwig von Koopa, in the first post, wrote:if they've never had any criticism they can't know what's good or not.

That sounds like the fault of the Level Judge, not the name of the category.

*before they got reviewed*

One night with Ponyo is more scary than "The Trash Can."

Ludwig von Koopa wrote:if they've never had any criticism they can't know what's good or not.

I just saw this now but I want to point out that it's false. The easiest way to know what's good level design is to just play Mario games, which I think most people who download this game have done.

Let me throw a little internet logic out for you:

The Internet will be more than blunt about anything you do wrong. If you can't comprehend that your shitty level ended up in the Trash Can and you're offended that your level ended up in a category with such a name, then you're not made out for the internet. The users won't improve if they aren't told bluntly that their levels suck.

Jesus hell people learn to take shit directed towards you better anyway. Lady Justice won't cater to the whiners.

Tbch people that make levels like this don't need to be told they need to improve, because if you look carefully they're never the type who listen anyway. Instead I would replace the ad box with public shaming of users who submit garbage levels. But that's just me. ^-^

TNTtimelord wrote:Let me throw a little internet logic out for you:

The Internet will be more than blunt about anything you do wrong. If you can't comprehend that your shitty level ended up in the Trash Can and you're offended that your level ended up in a category with such a name, then you're not made out for the internet. The users won't improve if they aren't told bluntly that their levels suck.

Jesus hell people learn to take shit directed towards you better anyway. Lady Justice won't cater to the whiners.

Agreed, but you're wasting your time saying this in front of a 2:1 ratio in favor of coddling.

The Trash Can should stay as it is. Not that i'm fond of coddling which is clearly an act that stifles free speech because of its ties to political correctness but that's another matter... but it is where the bad levels end up because the designers made very apparent bad decisions that happens to be costly to their creations and shows an effective "what NOT to do." in making levels that you play as Mario and Co (there are exceptions to the rule of course). I also see it to be an insight also on why some threads get trashed and moved to a section where trashed topics are on display (looking at you SMWC) because of these bad decisions made by the users who posted in them.

Also on effect on users regarding the name, It's only disincentivizing to those who take their levels as part of themselves or as some sort of sacred cow that cannot be herded by disagreements and it is the matter of those users to learn what they should do instead to improve their abilities and acknowledge the faults that are displayed in their levels and how they handle criticism. At the same time, you critics are be blunt yes, but it is better to have a rational discussion with the person whom you criticized his or her creation instead of actively trying to disempower those creators.

I'm not saying the title should change into something good/positive, I'm just suggesting to make it less blunt.

There's nothing wrong with bluntness in this case, though.

Ludwig von Koopa wrote:I'm just suggesting to make it less blunt.

"It's too clear and honest, change it."

My only problem with it is that people may think that once they get a level in "The Trash Can" they aren't good enough to make levels and just quit trying to improve.

Of course, one could argue that we don't want people like that here.

HenryRichard wrote:My only problem with it is that people may think that once they get a level in "The Trash Can" they aren't good enough to make levels and just quit trying to improve.

Of course, one could argue that we don't want people like that here.

One could argue we already have enough of them here.
And considering the fact we DO have people like this, I doubt what you just said can be applied in practical situations.

Eh. The name seems ok, and it's not like joey will really change it anyways...

If you're getting offended, or even more - insulted by the fact that you're not as good at designing levels as others, then you should either improve or get off the internet.

h2643 wrote:If you're getting offended, or even more - insulted by the fact that you're not as good at designing levels as others, then you should either improve or get off the internet.

That means 14 people are offended by it and need to improve or get off the internet.