Super Mario Bros. X Forums

HenryRichard wrote:
Kep nobody thinks that because they are from different games they clash. NOBODY except Kep. If you do something like SMB3 pipes on SMW grass, it may look bad to some, but not to others. I think it's bad, others think it's fine.

One time people tought it.

castlewars wrote:Guys, listen up. You're misusing the term "clash" again.

Clash has absolutely NOTHING to do with the games the graphics come from. It is when two graphics that are placed in a vicinity of each other are not compatible. Example of this are:

1. Airships in a castle (definite no-no)
2. Lava in a grassland (definite no-no)
3. Pyramids in a factory (definite no-no)
4. Bushes in an underground level (only works if you're doing an overgrown cave, but in other cases, no)
5. Toad Houses in an airship (definite no-no)

However you can't just say that anything such as those will automatically be clash. Remember, it's about how you use the graphics, not about the graphics themselves, so if you have ice tiles inside an airship, then that's clash, but in a cave, you can actually get it to work nicely and make an icy cave. Same with a castle, but I'm not a fan of seeing grass tiles in a castle, unless it's a forest temple.

Where did you get this information? It's entirely wrong.
While the term clash is being somewhat misused, the proper meaning is not what you're talking about.

The term "clash" refers to when sprites of a different style, shading style, or color scheme are used in conjunction. It has nothing to do with what game they're from technically, but since most games have different styles, sprites from different games often clash. It looks ugly because it results in a motley collection of different styles or color schemes rather than one consistent one. It's a common misconception that recoloring a sprite will "fix" the clash, but this only works if the shading and art style is the same as the style you're attempting to match.

In that image you linked, the SMW grass with SMB3 blocks does clash, but only minimally. Unless you're a real perfectionist, most people won't mind it. The bigger issue is the trees, which are done in a completely different style with thick outlines and totally different shading rules.

Ignoritus wrote:

castlewars wrote:Guys, listen up. You're misusing the term "clash" again.

Clash has absolutely NOTHING to do with the games the graphics come from. It is when two graphics that are placed in a vicinity of each other are not compatible. Example of this are:

1. Airships in a castle (definite no-no)
2. Lava in a grassland (definite no-no)
3. Pyramids in a factory (definite no-no)
4. Bushes in an underground level (only works if you're doing an overgrown cave, but in other cases, no)
5. Toad Houses in an airship (definite no-no)

However you can't just say that anything such as those will automatically be clash. Remember, it's about how you use the graphics, not about the graphics themselves, so if you have ice tiles inside an airship, then that's clash, but in a cave, you can actually get it to work nicely and make an icy cave. Same with a castle, but I'm not a fan of seeing grass tiles in a castle, unless it's a forest temple.

Where did you get this information? It's entirely wrong.
While the term clash is being somewhat misused, the proper meaning is not what you're talking about.

The term "clash" refers to when sprites of a different style, shading style, or color scheme are used in conjunction. It has nothing to do with what game they're from technically, but since most games have different styles, sprites from different games often clash. It looks ugly because it results in a motley collection of different styles or color schemes rather than one consistent one. It's a common misconception that recoloring a sprite will "fix" the clash, but this only works if the shading and art style is the same as the style you're attempting to match.

In that image you linked, the SMW grass with SMB3 blocks does clash, but only minimally. Unless you're a real perfectionist, most people won't mind it. The bigger issue is the trees, which are done in a completely different style with thick outlines and totally different shading rules.

Ignortius I think he got that info from "common sense". The information is not completly wrong. Also, If you keep the blocks not connected(a gap) and they are diffrent styles than it doesn't matter that much. The shading is when they are in contact. Recoloring can fix it if you keep the tiles not connected.

lighthouse64 wrote: Ignortius I think he got that info from "common sense". The information is not completly wrong. Also, If you keep the blocks not connected(a gap) and they are diffrent styles than it doesn't matter that much. The shading is when they are in contact. Recoloring can fix it if you keep the tiles not connected.

"Clash" is a term that is local to this community and a few affiliated. Therefore, since it has no official definition, its definition is however it's utilized. The most common utilization is in reference to art-styles and palettes, not themes. Therefore, that is the "correct" definition. And no, making a gap does not fix anything as long as the two conflicting styles are on screen at once the player is still viewing them simultaneously.

Well... Ok, But warping them to a diffrent area does change it. Yeah... I clash a lot.

HenryRichard wrote:Kep nobody thinks that because they are from different games they clash. NOBODY except Kep. If you do something like SMB3 pipes on SMW grass, it may look bad to some, but not to others. I think it's bad, others think it's fine.

That's because my opinion and perspective of clash is palette-mixing. If you have super-detailed SMB3 and bad and "undetailed" SMB1, it clashes. If you have cartoony SMW and a cartoony YI, it doesn't clash, however. And SMB2 and SMB3 are perfect together. But, for instance, SMB1 and SMB2 are visually awful together.

In fact, here's a chart. If it says "clash" or "awful clash" (NOT kinda clash or no clash) I mark points down for it in my reviews:
-smb1+smb2 - clash
-smb1+smb3 - awful clash
-smb1+smw - kinda clash
-smb1+yi - awful clash
-smb1+metroid/zelda - awful clash
-smb2+smb3 - no clash
-smb2+smw - awful clash
-smb2+yi - no clash (honestly, I don't know why people say SMB2 and YI aren't compatible with each other. They look fine together)
-smb2+metroid/zelda - awful clash
-smb3+smw - awful clash
-smb3+yi - awful clash
-smb3+metroid/zelda - kinda clash (won't mark points down for it reviews because they're both detailed)
-smw+yi - no clash
-yi+metroid/zelda - worst clash there could possibly be

Kep wrote:

HenryRichard wrote:Kep nobody thinks that because they are from different games they clash. NOBODY except Kep. If you do something like SMB3 pipes on SMW grass, it may look bad to some, but not to others. I think it's bad, others think it's fine.

That's because my opinion and perspective of clash is palette-mixing. If you have super-detailed SMB3 and bad and "undetailed" SMB1, it clashes. If you have cartoony SMW and a cartoony YI, it doesn't clash, however. And SMB2 and SMB3 are perfect together. But, for instance, SMB1 and SMB2 are visually awful together.

In fact, here's a chart. If it says "clash" or "awful clash" (NOT kinda clash or no clash) I mark points down for it in my reviews:
-smb1+smb2 - clash
-smb1+smb3 - awful clash
-smb1+smw - kinda clash
-smb1+yi - awful clash
-smb1+metroid/zelda - awful clash
-smb2+smb3 - no clash
-smb2+smw - awful clash
-smb2+yi - no clash (honestly, I don't know why people say SMB2 and YI aren't compatible with each other. They look fine together)
-smb2+metroid/zelda - awful clash
-smb3+smw - awful clash
-smb3+yi - awful clash
-smb3+metroid/zelda - kinda clash (won't mark points down for it reviews because they're both detailed)
-smw+yi - no clash
-yi+metroid/zelda - worst clash there could possibly be

Eh... I think diffrently compared to a lot of people. I think smb3+smw is fine

smb3 is detailed

smw is cartoony

it objectively creates horrible clash

Kep, the bricks are sort of cartoony. (I always forget there's exceptions. )

Kep, there are exceptions to what you said. I made a level with SMW and SMB1 that had barely any points taken off for that. I know it only said "kinda clash" but it actually looks really nice. Especially in this case, where the tileset would fit with either one.



The SMW coins look good with the tileset, as do the SMB1 NPCs.

KoolKat wrote:Kep, there are exceptions to what you said. I made a level with SMW and SMB1 that had barely any points taken off for that. I know it only said "kinda clash" but it actually looks really nice. Especially in this case, where the tileset would fit with either one.



The SMW coins look good with the tileset, as do the SMB1 NPCs.

That obviously looks really cool.

I'll probably release all the old Shadow Epidemic levels at some point.

I think I should work on reducing clash from my levels a bit. Maybe then they would look better. But you have to always remember variety . (at least that is for me)

Variety is a hard trick to work with. Making the enemy variety just right but not Mario's Ark, is pretty challenging, but it feels right when you do it right.

KoolKat wrote:Variety is a hard trick to work with. Making the enemy variety just right but not Mario's Ark, is pretty challenging, but it feels right when you do it right.

Well it's easier to do variety with npc's than the tiles.

Well, tile variety isn't needed, but having it increases the aesthetics of a level.

KoolKat wrote:Kep, there are exceptions to what you said. I made a level with SMW and SMB1 that had barely any points taken off for that. I know it only said "kinda clash" but it actually looks really nice. Especially in this case, where the tileset would fit with either one.

I only said "kinda clash" because it depends. I mean, if you used the SMW cave tileset and it had SMB1 hammer brothers and Goombas, it actually would clash. So that's why I didn't say "no clash" or "clash".

Yeah, clash really is subjective to certain stuff and exceptions to others.

KoolKat wrote:Yeah, clash really is subjective to certain stuff and exceptions to others.

So clash depends on anything then.

Basically. That's why I use "clash" as things that look bad together, in general. That actually is the proper definition.

(ex. "That shirt clashes horribly with your blouse")

I did just look it up though to be sure.