Super Mario Bros. X Forums

Enjl wrote:

mariogeek2 wrote:

SnoruntPyro wrote:The main flaw of food is that anyone can eat it.

Oh, so anyone should just be able to move in a country and do whatever without being approved first?

There's a difference between getting approved to move into a country and having a policeman show up at your door so they can test the quality of the sandwich you made for breakfast.

There's also a difference between who has the right to eat lunch and who can post in the levels forum.

Enjl wrote:

mariogeek2 wrote:

Enjl wrote: I hate it when everyone is able to share their creations on a platform built around sharing creations. Drains the fun right out of the concept, doesn't it?

So this is what it's like to be AeroMatter. Huh.
The problem is the platform is being filled with crap and then nobody wants to visit on that platform because it stinks.

The levels forum should not be an elite selection of levels "approved" people have made. As we are a community we serve as a platform for anyone to share their creations.

I'm not saying that it should be for elites only. I'm saying that there should be some kind of quality control.

Your argumentation "censor bad levels" is a hilariously bad statement which will do nothing but reduce activity on the forums. Lots of people will realise that this "open and friendly" community doesn't want their creations and will leave because there's nothing binding them to this place. It also completely goes against the idea of wanting to help people get better results at what they like doing.

Tons of new users leave anyways. There's ton of users who joined several weeks or even months back, made one or two posts, and then never did anything else. Also, your argument "they'll leave because they see the community doesn't like their work" still applies even if we don't put my suggestion into place because they'll see all the negative scores all their levels are getting. And before you say, "What about if they make good levels?", well then that's great! Under my recommended system, they'd pass and gain access to posting in the levels forum. One more thing: They can get better results without clogging up the levels forum by following general design tips laid out by the community first.

If you really want a selection of good levels I suggest introducing something AeroMatter mentioned before (I don't remember completely but the idea is the same): Have the community's members vote for levels they think stood out each month and feature them in a list so they're easily visible to people looking for a good few minutes of fun.

I don't have trouble finding really good levels. That's not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is the levels forum is getting clogged and backlogged with levels, and it's possibly avoidable if we tried out the system I'm recommending.


You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not saying the levels forum should be for the elites only. I'm saying we should prevent people who've just recently discovered SMBX, and are so hyped about it, they think their creation is good, without even seeing what the community likes and dislikes in design methods and choice, from posting until they've got the minimal, simple basics of the editor down, such as "What is clash?", "How do I use custom graphics?", and "Why BGOs are so important to making a level look good."

mariogeek2 wrote:

What you're suggesting would reduce activity drastically. The point of the Levels forum is that people can share their levels with others. The six subdivisions of the Levels forum are our quality control and they do so without limiting people in the way that you suggest. It's an awful idea and pretty much goes against AeroMatter's intentions of creating increased activity. (Just mentioning that since you seem to have sided with him)

mariogeek2 wrote: Tons of new users leave anyways. There's ton of users who joined several weeks or even months back, made one or two posts, and then never did anything else. Also, your argument "they'll leave because they see the community doesn't like their work" still applies even if we don't put my suggestion into place because they'll see all the negative scores all their levels are getting. And before you say, "What about if they make good levels?", well then that's great! Under my recommended system, they'd pass and gain access to posting in the levels forum. One more thing: They can get better results without clogging up the levels forum by following general design tips laid out by the community first.

That will end up confusing new users and probably discourage them from posting.

mariogeek2 wrote: You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not saying the levels forum should be for the elites only. I'm saying we should prevent people who've just recently discovered SMBX, and are so hyped about it, they think their creation is good, without even seeing what the community likes and dislikes in design methods and choice, from posting until they've got the minimal, simple basics of the editor down, such as "What is clash?", "How do I use custom graphics?", and "Why BGOs are so important to making a level look good."

But that is something a Level Judge should be already doing. If they see the user is new and its their first level then they should explain those basics.

mariogeek2 wrote:You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not saying the levels forum should be for the elites only. I'm saying we should prevent people who've just recently discovered SMBX, and are so hyped about it, they think their creation is good, without even seeing what the community likes and dislikes in design methods and choice,

Every designer develops their own style on how to make levels. We shouldn't force flawed standards onto them, but we can point them in whatever direction we like.
Often these are conflicting. You'll see veterans argue in either direction on a new user's level topic. What you're accomplishing by introducing this quality control is a restriction of creativity.
I'd argue people who make levels commonly classed as "6/10 levels" and are introduced to "the likes and dislikes in design method" make worse levels than those who are new and make "2/10 levels". Simply because their design is boiled down to these "standards" and developing any sort of personality in design takes a back seat.

mariogeek2 wrote:I'm not saying that it should be for elites only. I'm saying that there should be some kind of quality control.

Where is the difference? How do you define "quality"? Believe me, the definition of quality in this context is VERY subjective.

mariogeek2 wrote:"What is clash?", "How do I use custom graphics?", and "Why BGOs are so important to making a level look good."

1) irrelevant as long as the level is fun
2) we have topics on that and explaining that isn't even an effort
3) they aren't

I don't believe I am misinterpreting your opinion, I just think it's a very naive approach which will definitely backfire due to points I have previously mentioned.

PixelPest wrote:What you're suggesting would reduce activity drastically. The point of the Levels forum is that people can share their levels with others. The six subdivisions of the Levels forum are our quality control and they do so without limiting people in the way that you suggest. It's an awful idea and pretty much goes against AeroMatter's intentions of creating increased activity. (Just mentioning that since you seem to have sided with him)

There are some levels that people just do not want shared with them. I'm not recommending this because of "quality control". I'm recommending this to stop the influx of so many levels into the level forum.

And, I could be completely wrong, but I think that this would actually increase activity, instead of decreasing it. The way it is now, users' attention is spread so thin because of so many level topics that they could choose from. If the levels were limited, people's attention could be focused. If the attention is focused, the fewer topics will become more active. And more people will be attracted to those topics, as active topics attract users' attention.

And, I'm honestly not sure who I side with. I'm undecided.

mariogeek2 wrote:I propose that, in order to fix this, we have the rule that, in order to post in the levels forum, you must send a level or levels to a specified admin (whether it be global moderators or level reviewers), and he/she must approve of the quality of design. Once your level(s) pass(es) the test, you get permission to post. This would fix the major influx of crappy levels.

This takes everything that's wrong now and magnifies it a few thousand times. Some of the central problems with Level Judges is that they lose interest over time, they moderate instead of review, and slack off. This would just bottle neck the entire Levels forum while doing nothing to fix any of the problems with activity, discussion, and reviews themselves. Joke levels are already against the rules, and I think even crap levels should be posted so that they can be critiqued and improved upon. If levels were kept in a singular thread, this keeps crap levels from pushing other people's work down the line by containing it all in the designer's thread and cancels out this influx that you seem to see and I don't. If a designer is shown to be a bad designer, then all of their junk will be in that one thread and you wouldn't need a bunch of Judges running around moving threads every which way.

MightyMerlinStyle wrote:

Enjl wrote:Have the community's members vote for levels they think stood out each month and feature them in a list so they're easily visible to people looking for a good few minutes of fun.

I actually really like this idea! In fact, we could do this for episodes too. Oh wait...

Bad management was the problem then too.

Enjl wrote:

mariogeek2 wrote:You're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not saying the levels forum should be for the elites only. I'm saying we should prevent people who've just recently discovered SMBX, and are so hyped about it, they think their creation is good, without even seeing what the community likes and dislikes in design methods and choice,

Every designer develops their own style on how to make levels. We shouldn't force flawed standards onto them, but we can point them in whatever direction we like.
Often these are conflicting. You'll see veterans argue in either direction on a new user's level topic. What you're accomplishing by introducing this quality control is a restriction of creativity.
I'd argue people who make levels commonly classed as "6/10 levels" and are introduced to "the likes and dislikes in design method" make worse levels than those who are new and make "2/10 levels". Simply because their design is boiled down to these "standards" and developing any sort of personality in design takes a back seat.

Oh, so is "clash" a design style? NO! Most, if not all, of the SMBX community can agree on certain things, clash being one of them.

mariogeek2 wrote:I'm not saying that it should be for elites only. I'm saying that there should be some kind of quality control.

Where is the difference? How do you define "quality"? Believe me, the definition of quality in this context is VERY subjective.

Now that, I can agree on. The definition of quality will have to be laid out in strict rules and definitions, otherwise we could have admins abusing this system or disagreeing on what defines as passing.

mariogeek2 wrote:"What is clash?", "How do I use custom graphics?", and "Why BGOs are so important to making a level look good."

1) irrelevant as long as the level is fun
2) we have topics on that and explaining that isn't even an effort
3) they aren't

I don't believe I am misinterpreting your opinion, I just think it's a very naive approach which will definitely backfire due to points I have previously mentioned.

1) I have a ton of community contest entries that got put in the lower tiers just simply because of clash that beg to differ.
2) I know, we have tons of topics. Again, I agree on that. The problem is, tons of new users don't look at those, and go ahead and submit their level to the forums anyway. What I want is for new users to be redirected and grasp an understanding of how to before they have to be told how to by level reviewers who, currently, have to do that for the tons of new users who submit levels to the level forum.
3) Yeah, I admit, that's debatable.

I think the idea of having one topic for each user to post their levels might be a good idea. Every time someone posts their new level it will bump their topic filled with their old levels. This means that discussion from old levels can continue. Also, if some one wants their level judged they MUST pm a level judge or have one topic where people make replies with their download link and link to the page where the level is posted. The topic can also help users wanting to see the newer levels posted. If they don't pm or reply on the topic then it will be treated as a casual level. And like AeroMatter said, a sticky containing the best levels can be made weekly/monthly.

mariogeek2 wrote:Holy crap, guys! I can't stay away from the forum for a few days while I work on (STATEMENT REDACTED), and everything turns into a salt storm! Just...ST0P IT! Please. As far as I can tell, this has been a "STATE OF THE LEVEL FORUMS" debate with AeroMatter and PixelPest, and other users coming and commenting

lol sorry daddy we'll behave next time
not really, who the hell are you and why must you backseat mod?

Yoshi021 wrote:I think the idea of having one topic for each user to post their levels might be a good idea. Every time someone posts their new level it will bump their topic filled with their old levels. This means that discussion from old levels can continue. Also, if some one wants their level judged they MUST pm a level judge or have one topic where people make replies with their download link and link to the page where the level is posted. The topic can also help users wanting to see the newer levels posted. If they don't pm or reply on the topic then it will be treated as a casual level. And like AeroMatter said, a sticky containing the best levels can be made weekly/monthly.

This idea of user threads just doesn't make sense to me. It would involve all different types of levels (quality and battle levels, casual levels, etc.) combined together into a chaotic, unorganized system. Not only would this make commenting on a specific level difficult and be an awkward system, especially for new users, but the work that would need to be put into place to take the current state of the Levels forum to this would be an insane amount of work

PixelPest wrote:nsane amount of work

>archive current levels forum
>make new one
>people post their topics

PixelPest wrote: It would involve all different types of levels (quality and battle levels, casual levels, etc.)

look at graphics packs and art threads

PixelPest wrote:This idea of user threads just doesn't make sense to me

serves as a hub for levels by one person. If you enjoyed one you might wanna check out more. Using forum search is more complicated.

PixelPest wrote:commenting on a specific level difficult and be an awkward system

"<levelname> is really cool, good job on that! I especially liked <this part>!!!"

Apex wrote:

mariogeek2 wrote:Holy crap, guys! I can't stay away from the forum for a few days while I work on (STATEMENT REDACTED), and everything turns into a salt storm! Just...ST0P IT! Please. As far as I can tell, this has been a "STATE OF THE LEVEL FORUMS" debate with AeroMatter and PixelPest, and other users coming and commenting

not really, who the hell are you and why must you backseat mod?

I'm sorry. Was I backseat mod? I didn't think I was. I won't do it next time.


You know, thinking it over, I see that, while my proposed system has advantages, the cons probably outweigh it. Even if the "standards" were strictly laid out, there's still the possibility of abuze, so I've decided to just drop the entire issue. I will still, however, commentate on the match between AeroMatter and PixelPest.

"In this corner, we have AeroMatter, and in this corner, we have PixelPest.

They're going at it neck-and-neck. And....0oh! Suprise attack from Valtteri!"

EDIT: Enjl, the particular way you reply to the opposition seems... insulting. You might want to town down the rudeness. After all, you're not Rudeguy.

R u?

mariogeek2 wrote:

Apex wrote:

mariogeek2 wrote:Holy crap, guys! I can't stay away from the forum for a few days while I work on (STATEMENT REDACTED), and everything turns into a salt storm! Just...ST0P IT! Please. As far as I can tell, this has been a "STATE OF THE LEVEL FORUMS" debate with AeroMatter and PixelPest, and other users coming and commenting

not really, who the hell are you and why must you backseat mod?

I'm sorry. Was I backseat mod? I didn't think I was. I won't do it next time.


You know, thinking it over, I see that, while my proposed system has advantages, the cons probably outweigh it. Even if the "standards" were strictly laid out, there's still the possibility of abuze, so I've decided to just drop the entire issue. I will still, however, commentate on the match between AeroMatter and PixelPest.

"In this corner, we have AeroMatter, and in this corner, we have PixelPest.

They're going at it neck-and-neck. And....0oh! Suprise attack from Valtteri!"

Can you please stop making this discussion more than it is? If anyone is ticking me off it isn't AeroMatter; it's you.

EDIT: What Enjl said was by no means rude. If anything, it was actually somewhat helpful.

EDIT 2: Even though I still don't agree with that method

PixelPest wrote: This idea of user threads just doesn't make sense to me. It would involve all different types of levels (quality and battle levels, casual levels, etc.) combined together into a chaotic, unorganized system. Not only would this make commenting on a specific level difficult and be an awkward system, especially for new users, but the work that would need to be put into place to take the current state of the Levels forum to this would be an insane amount of work

It will take a lot of work, but I think it will be more organized. The original post can have like a table of contents along with the score given by a judge for each level. That way you can find a person's older levels and see if there have been improvement. Also, by implementing the "weekly/monthly best levels" the users that prefer to play levels can find an easy way to get good levels.

PixelPest

I didn't say anything about you being ticked off. I was just making a joke about comparing the "discussion" between you and AeroMatter to boxing.

Anyways, I think we've just about come to a standstill. There really doesn't seem to be any more confrontation between you and AeroMatter.

mariogeek2 wrote:

PixelPest

I didn't say anything about you being ticked off. I was just making a joke about comparing the "discussion" between you and AeroMatter to boxing.

Anyways, I think we've just about come to a standstill. There really doesn't seem to be any more confrontation between you and AeroMatter.

I never said that you said anything about me being ticked off, I said that you are the cause of me being ticked off.

Enjl wrote:

The reason I brought up the difficulty of the process is with the intention of removing the subforums and combining all of the levels there into a topic for each user such that none of the levels are archived or deleted

You said:

PixelPest wrote:If anyone is ticking me off, it isn't AeroMatter, it's you

That implies that I suggested that AeroMatter was ticking you off.

PixelPest wrote:This idea of user threads just doesn't make sense to me. It would involve all different types of levels (quality and battle levels, casual levels, etc.) combined together into a chaotic, unorganized system. Not only would this make commenting on a specific level difficult and be an awkward system, especially for new users...

"This idea of user threads just doesn't make sense to me. It would involve all different types of art (music and drawings, comics, etc.) combined together into a chaotic, unorganized system. Not only would this make commenting on a specific art piece difficult and be an awkward system, especially for new users..."

You're making it sound bad without really giving any reasons why it would be. It works just fine, everywhere else and Levels aren't any different. It's honestly looking like you want to defend your position as Level Judge than defend a system that's supposed to be better than mine at this point. I mean you're just throwing around adjectives like "chaotic" and "unorganized" when we're talking about organizing levels in a different and more compact way.

AeroMatter wrote:

To put it straight to you, I don't like any of the systems suggested that change the layout of the Levels forum or the role of the Level Judges

mariogeek2 wrote:You said:

PixelPest wrote:If anyone is ticking me off, it isn't AeroMatter, it's you

That implies that I suggested that AeroMatter was ticking you off.

mariogeek2 wrote:

PixelPest

I didn't say anything about you being ticked off. I was just making a joke about comparing the "discussion" between you and AeroMatter to boxing.

Anyways, I think we've just about come to a standstill. There really doesn't seem to be any more confrontation between you and AeroMatter.

Because there was never any confrontation in the first place.

PixelPest wrote:

AeroMatter wrote:

To put it straight to you, I don't like any of the systems suggested that change the layout of the Levels forum or the role of the Level Judges

Well, you are a Level Judge yourself, so...