Super Mario Bros. X Forums

I got a lower placement and a better score than last time. I guess the Top 10 gets like a 9-10 score.

Sewpah wrote:I got a lower placement and a better score than last time. I guess the Top 10 gets like a 9-10 score.

Usually they get 8+. I haven't seen a score above a 9.58 tho

tfw 5.92 and not 6.00

tfw tier 5

AeroMatter wrote:

tfw 5.92 and not 6.00

tfw tier 5

Don't worry. You still can try again when the next CC comes out.

Dang you got it first before I did.

Valtteri wrote:

Ace wrote:tfw valtteri and chad gave me a lower score than nien's 20 second mouser level

Edit: i've been told that there's no judging rubric.
what the fuck, valtteri.

You're not seriously defending your level, right? No one was able to beat it. It wasn't awful but we're still going to rate a level we can complete in a reasonable amount of time higher than a level that we, well, can't. There's a reason why I warned people to not submit very hard levels in the first post. If we tried to complete the hardest levels spending hours retrying them the judging process would take forever. Instead we'll just score them low because the truth is the frustration takes a lot from the enjoyability factor.

so that's why you rated my boring 20 second long mouser spam level (that looked pretty) higher than ace's because it was easier

alright

Uzendayo wrote:

Sewpah wrote:I got a lower placement and a better score than last time. I guess the Top 10 gets like a 9-10 score.

Usually they get 8+. I haven't seen a score above a 9.58 tho

The all time winner was in CC9 I think with 09.57/10, whilich is why I wantwd ti beat that this contest so badly!

MECHDRAGON777 wrote:

Uzendayo wrote:

Sewpah wrote:I got a lower placement and a better score than last time. I guess the Top 10 gets like a 9-10 score.

Usually they get 8+. I haven't seen a score above a 9.58 tho

The all time winner was in CC9 I think with 09.57/10, whilich is why I wantwd ti beat that this contest so badly!

Well that attempt went up and died right out the window, didn't it?

So, so happy I actually got pretty high in the rankings this time. My intention was to make a better version of my previous contest level, and also make fun of it. I thought the 8-4 callback would be a nice touch of nostalgia, but from I gathered, only Bomber got the callback to the contest level.

Nien wrote:so that's why you rated my boring 20 second long mouser spam level (that looked pretty) higher than ace's because it was easier

alright

Well I'm sorry I rated you higher than your friend, but sometimes the points you get for effort can be negated by something that otherwise ruins the level efficiently, such as crazy difficulty. Okay, bossedit8 could beat the level after countless tries. Quill beat the level with cheats. Bomber57, Chad and I tried it numerous times and could not beat it before it wasn't enjoyable anymore.

How many tiers?

Sux wrote:How many tiers?

Ten.

I'll probably be in 8. If I'm EXTREMELY lucky, I'll be in 9, but that's a stretch.

Valtteri wrote:

Ace wrote:tfw valtteri and chad gave me a lower score than nien's 20 second mouser level

Edit: i've been told that there's no judging rubric.
what the fuck, valtteri.

You're not seriously defending your level, right?

that's right, you heard me.

Valtteri wrote: No one was able to beat it.

" The level is pretty difficult, but that's a little more managable with the relatively short length." -Quill
"At least this level wasn't too long to actually finish it off" -bossedit8
nien beat it in 5 minutes
fallingsnow beat it in a little under 10 minutes
and i only gave it to those two people, so there you go. 100% completion rate with the people i gave it to, 40% completion rate with the judges. doesn't really seem like "no one".

Valtteri wrote:It wasn't awful but we're still going to rate a level we can complete in a reasonable amount of time higher than a level that we, well, can't.

and this is exactly why not having a rubric is stupid.

Valtteri wrote:There's a reason why I warned people to not submit very hard levels in the first post.

difficulty is relative to the player. I didn't expect the judges to have such a hard time at playing mario.

Valtteri wrote:If we tried to complete the hardest levels spending hours retrying them the judging process would take forever.

again,
" The level is pretty difficult, but that's a little more managable with the relatively short length." -Quill
"At least this level wasn't too long to actually finish it off" -bossedit8
these two judges obviously didn't spend hours beating it.
nien was able to beat the level in around 8 attempts. let's say on average a run takes 35 seconds. 35 * 8 = 280. less than 5 minutes. that is actually shorter than a lot of levels that people submitted (and i know this because it's the smbx forum, people love to make 15 minute levels here).
i think this is less of a case of the level being too hard, and more of a case of judges being overly impatient.

Valtteri wrote:Instead we'll just score them low because the truth is the frustration takes a lot from the enjoyability factor.

yeah i guess a 20 second mouser level is very enjoyable.



btw i don't really care about this contest, i'm not trying to get a better score or anything, but i am trying to improve future contests. future contests need to have a rubric, otherwise it's impossible to judge 83 levels fairly. The winner is always just going to be another ruins level in the sky or jungle, because people get overwhelmed by the custom graphics that they ignore everything else. the judges also need to be at least somewhat patient. bossedit8 is a good example of a patient judge who can play mario pretty well. if judges aren't patient, then the scores become biased towards easy levels, and with no rubric, you start getting boring, predictable outcomes. I knew i would get somewhere around tier 3 for this very reason.

Ace wrote:" The level is pretty difficult, but that's a little more managable with the relatively short length." -Quill
"At least this level wasn't too long to actually finish it off" -bossedit8
nien beat it in 5 minutes
fallingsnow beat it in a little under 10 minutes
and i only gave it to those two people, so there you go. 100% completion rate with the people i gave it to, 40% completion rate with the judges. doesn't really seem like "no one".

bossedit8 could beat the level after "over ten tries" (he told me). That's bossedit8, arguably the best SMBX player in this community. Quill beat the level with cheats (he told me). Bomber57, Chad and I tried it numerous times and could not beat it (they told me) before it wasn't enjoyable anymore.

Ace wrote:difficulty is relative to the player. I didn't expect the judges to have such a hard time at playing mario.

Ace wrote:i think this is less of a case of the level being too hard, and more of a case of judges being overly impatient.

You can't possibly expect everyone to be as skilled at SMBX as, say, bossedit8. I would say at least 70% of the audience of your level will struggle with it and will very likely find it frustrating.

Ace wrote:yeah i guess a 20 second mouser level is very enjoyable.

Yes, as it could be completed in a reasonable amount of tries.

And about the rubric, I honestly don't see the point. That's like forcing the judges to give individual scores to different aspects of the levels like design, graphics, music etc, right? And then like balance it like design is the biggest part of the score? I think we're achieving the same thing with the simple review system. They still pay attention to the different aspects of the levels giving design the most focus. I'm sure your level would get a higher score if we used a rubric where effort was like 70% of the score or something but what comes to the fun factor of your level I think your placement is perfectly reasonable.

I would say at least 70% of the audience of your level will struggle with it and will very likely find it frustrating.

I too, enjoy pulling out statistics out of my ass.

Valtteri wrote:And about the rubric, I honestly don't see the point. That's like forcing the judges to give individual scores to different aspects of the levels like design, graphics, music etc, right? And then like balance it like design is the biggest part of the score? I think we're achieving the same thing with the simple review system. They still pay attention to the different aspects of the levels giving design the most focus. I'm sure your level would get a higher score if we used a rubric where effort was like 70% of the score or something but what comes to the fun factor of your level I think your placement is perfectly reasonable.

It works well for MaGL X.

Ace wrote:The winner is always just going to be another ruins level in the sky or jungle, because people get overwhelmed by the custom graphics that they ignore everything else.

I disagree. Sure, there have been have been some contests where levels with marvelous custom graphics won, but that's certainly not always the case. Contest victors such as Emeral, Wind, Dark-Mecha77, and even yourself, won because your levels were well designed.

I'm also against the idea of having a rubric since in seems limiting, but that might just be me.

qig wrote:

I would say at least 70% of the audience of your level will struggle with it and will very likely find it frustrating.

I too, enjoy pulling out statistics out of my ass.

I too, enjoy cutting in on subjects I have nothing to do with.

Quill wrote:It works well for MaGL X.

I'm sure it does but this isn't MaGLX and I find the review system to fit better in CC.

Valtteri wrote: You can't possibly expect everyone to be as skilled at SMBX as, say, bossedit8. I would say at least 70% of the audience of your level will struggle with it and will very likely find it frustrating.

First of all, the level isn't as difficult as you make it out to be, he did not expect everyone to be as good as bossedit, because he had a 100% tester completion rate, meaning his level wasn't as unbeatable as you make it out to be, all it takes is to literally not suck at jumping.

Ace wrote:yeah i guess a 20 second mouser level is very enjoyable.

Yes, as it could be completed in a reasonable amount of tries.

ya a bland level with literally no gameplay is more enjoyable because it can be beaten, alright.

And about the rubric, I honestly don't see the point. That's like forcing the judges to give individual scores to different aspects of the levels like design, graphics, music etc, right?

Yes, that's what it means, it exists so the judges can give a score to every single part of the level, without having to give a vague final score based on "Nice concept and all but I can't beat this." nor "it's not pretty to look at". And, if your judges supposedly already do that, it shouldn't be that hard to implement a rubric.

MaglX contests use this, so a level doesn't get high/low scores only because of one factor (factor on ace's level being the difficulty).

I'm sure it does but this isn't MaGLX and I find the review system to fit better in CC.

"i'm sure it works good for that one level contest but this isn't that one level contest therefore it's not as good."

Literally the only difference between maglx and cc is the name gimmick, there's really no reason on why it wouldn't work on CC

I'm also against the idea of having a rubric since in seems limiting, but that might just be me.

It's the opposite of limiting, it's several scores based on different factors, against the current one, which is one score based on whatever the judges decided to focus on.

sezixor wrote:

Ace wrote:The winner is always just going to be another ruins level in the sky or jungle, because people get overwhelmed by the custom graphics that they ignore everything else.

and even yourself, won because your levels were well designed.

I won with a jungle ruins level, which was exactly my point.
And also because of controversy that was caused by the levels not having a rubric.