Super Mario Bros. X Forums

So, we're nearing the big design period of bowser's castle, but there's one big question on my mind that I'd like to see some conversation about.

Bowser's Castle is a LEVEL, come back soon to help decide the song which will play in it.

------------------------------------------------------------------
STEP 2

Welcome to Impenetrable Bowser's Castle!
SONG 1 - Devil Engine - Distant Call

(url in case video doesn't load)
Winner!

------------------------------------------------------------------
STEP 3

IT IS FINALLY TIME, BOWSER WANTS A NEW HOUSE, AND YOU GET TO MAKE IT REAL!
How will this phase go? Well, you'll need to download the bowser's castle level template and folder, then you will need to go on the claims sheet and claim all the resources you want to use (So that we don't get any conficting ID problems).

THE SHEET/HOW TO CLAIM
In order to keep things running smoothly, this sheet will be used to keep track of the resources people have used, in order to gain full access to the sheet you'll have to DM me on discord or PM me on the forums (For the sake of security). But if you just want to make a thing you can comment on the sheet and I'll add your claim
What are the claiming limits:

-One person may only claim one room, until they've completed that one room.

-Your room should preferably not be longer than 10 screens

-You may not override the vanilla backgrounds: 3,15,24,41,42,43,44,54,57. As they are common castle backgrounds, however you may still use them in their vanilla forms.

-You may use up to 15 of each resource (Blocks, NPCs, BGOs, Effects) from the custom field (801-1000), if you need more DM me and I will approve it on a case-by-case basis

-If you are using custom lua scripts, please contain all your code in a library called luna_YOURUSERNAME.lua (lua_sancles.lua for example). It should be the only thing we need to load in luna.lua to load your entire code. Remember that in libraries, events like onTick need to be registered. Instructions

-Your section should preferably end with a door or pipe, they don't need to be functional, they're just there so I know where to put the warp.

-This level uses rooms.lua, so your room should be contained within one rooms.lua room, if you do not know how rooms.lua works, then here's a link to the forum thread with some instruction on how it works.

-MAKE SURE TO CLAIM EVERYTHING YOU'RE GOING TO USE BEFORE YOU USE IT, AND MAKE SURE NOBODY ELSE IS USING IT

The Files
Here's the download which includes a small sample from me in section zero of how your room should be encased within the rooms.lua room.

The deadline for submitting your levels is January 31st 23:59 CET

Good luck, don't disappoint Bowser.

Full world is more soul imo. you can still make the final level like a grand finale of the world, ala MAGMML2's final level abeit not fucking an hour long.

I definitely vote for world.
It just sounds like an absolute hassle to send levels around like in a relay.

If we really want to keep a size limit (due to tension) we could perhaps limit the amount of levels still, but 1 level is not enough for Bowser's Castle in my opinion due to technical limitations. (even accounting the usage of sizables for fill tiles)

I also have the idea of having two possible pathways leading up to the final level inside this final world in order to give the player more of a choice... That way we can already have a higher amount of levels! (though it might still remove tension for players going for 100%)

I already have a level in mind if we decide to do a world.

PS: A pro worthy of addition for the world might be the higher room of possibilities for recaps as it's generally a nice touch to reflect on the game's previous obstacles in the final world.

I believe a final world map with hardcore levels is a good decision and builds up some tension if it doesn't drag for too long, like 2k1x's Tower of Biased, but I'd also be completely down for something along Uzendayo's idea: having a final world and its last level being an ultimate collab (like 2k1x's Absolute Zero!).
The idea of a full level is very enticing indeed, as I'm a big fan of the JUMP Series's Bowser Castles and last level shenanigans; however, with SMBX's limitations and the "more manageability" of a world, I'm drawn more to Uzendayo's suggestion.

if people document their events and a claims sheet for sprite replacements is set up, the level method sounds easy enough to assemble using the "copy section" feature. world sounds like all negatives in my eyes.

i prefer full world. i feel multiple levels would be cool, as it would not only feel like you're making progress and taking down bowser's defenses as you beat the levels, but the world map could display where the levels take place in the castle itself. like with the halberd in kirby super star. sure it would probably be hard to do something as ambitious as that with a community collab but it would still be cool

also i didn't know what slam was until like 2 weeks before the deadline so :I

8lue Storm wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 26, 2020 6:11 pm

I believe a final world map with hardcore levels is a good decision and builds up some tension if it doesn't drag for too long, like 2k1x's Tower of Biased, but I'd also be completely down for something along Uzendayo's idea: having a final world and its last level being an ultimate collab (like 2k1x's Absolute Zero!).

Tower of Biased isn't even the final world and wasn't intended to be that since like early 2018 (before any of the lategame levels were made). It's also only 1/10 of the episode's level count (standard size of a submap), and not potentially 1/5th (assuming 15 people submit to bowsers castle. In a scenario where "it doesn't drag for too long" would just be like 4 regular slam levels).

I feel like I should elaborate on the Absolute Zero part, though, since I did think a lot about that level's structure back then, too. There were various iterations of the concept, some of which were levels, others worlds.
Timeline of events: You'll notice how none of them ended up implemented. And the timestamps really speak for themselves. The final implementation is a fairly uncomplicated level layout (compared to much of what is in that spoiler). In the end, it was easier to manage and less of a scope commitment. When setting out to having a world of content for a final level, not only are you risking fatiguing the player when momentum matters the most, but you're also expecting a specific lower bar of content to be met. If 3 people submit, it'll feel incomplete and a lot more content needs to be added to flesh out the idea than if every contribution was a single section (or a single rooms.lua room, in the same section as another contribution).

A concrete set of rules (clear layer and event naming, a shared tileset devkit, claims for sprite replacements and used lua scripts, a sheet for what room corresponds to what idea) diminish the effort of merging submissions greatly. Together with clever use of rooms.lua, the negatives of the level method are virtually erased.

There's also a possibility to merge all levels into a big one by these functions in the Warps and Doors tab:



By that, level design formula could be simply this: Player starts in main level, picks a door, warps to the other level. Player beats a door level, goes back to main level, advancing to the next place. Chooses second door, warps to the level. Beats it, goes back to the main, advancing further to the next place. Then possibly a checkpoint. Repeat several times this formula and then boss fight.

Is there gonna be a poll on this? I'd also prefer Full World

I would prefer a world.
Reasons:
- more freedom as to what you do with it
- you don't have to worry about limiting your creation to one section (or as Enjl pointed out, one rooms.lua room)
- object limits might cause issues if working on a Collab level
- a Collab level will end up being really long. You could set a limit to the size of a participants' submission but this will probably end up having a negative effect on the participant's possibilities. With a full level to one's disposal then the creator can make their submission much longer than they could with the Collab level.
- I feel like there might be some difficulties when multiple people are trying to work on the same level at the same time (assuming it'd be via GitHub). This is more an issue with the rooms.lua room approach. Imagine that someone is working on their room but they need more room to work with - so they might move the position of someone else's room / objects slightly to make more room for their own submission. What would happen in the case that other user is working on that room at the same time? Might cause some slight issues. Easily fixed, but this isn't an issue with the individual level idea.

I don't mind if we end up doing a level or world. Either way I'll try to get involved by making something for this (I wanted to participate in the main Collab but never got around to doing so).
If we do go down the Collab level route then I agree with glitch4's idea of linking levels together to create the illusion of one level. Although that may make the level overly long

Enjl wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 26, 2020 6:45 pm

A concrete set of rules (clear layer and event naming, a shared tileset devkit, claims for sprite replacements and used lua scripts, a sheet for what room corresponds to what idea) diminish the effort of merging submissions greatly. Together with clever use of rooms.lua, the negatives of the level method are virtually erased.

Ah, I was just about to mention the rooms.lua approach! got damit enj so fast
Your momentum reasoning is sound, and now the concept of a level seems not only more doable, but a more comfortable method.

Taycamgame wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 26, 2020 7:12 pm

I would prefer a world.
Reasons:
- more freedom as to what you do with it

You can ALSO have more freedom, given the rules and agreements Enjl mentioned (sprite replacements, lua scripts; ideally, no one would do anything blindly)

- you don't have to worry about limiting your creation to one section (or as Enjl pointed out, one rooms.lua room)
- object limits might cause issues if working on a Collab level

Actually, I'm pretty sure the rooms.lua approach encompasses including many rooms in a single section (clever manipulation of that code will let you do that seamlessly, I believe). And if no one makes many huge clusterfucks of blocks then we should be fine. Besides, the biggest levels I know only come as far as about half the block limit. SMSE's 9-9 Part 1 has 7.2k, Part 2 has ~5k, Absolute Zero has just a little over 10k and SMB0's 0-4 has 10.6k, while the block limit is 20k (correct me if I'm mistaken).

- a Collab level will end up being really long. You could set a limit to the size of a participants' submission but this will probably end up having a negative effect on the participant's possibilities. With a full level to one's disposal then the creator can make their submission much longer than they could with the Collab level.

This would enter in the "delay the climax" category, but also I'd like to point out that some of JUMP's multiperson collab rooms are brilliantly done, and even execute an all-new gimmick. Take a look at snoruntpyro and Mellonpizza's room in JUMP 1/2's RNG here (timestamp 1:03): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nhPEELNk_hk, it executes a new concept (the falling snow) in a very final level-y way, even if using a short amount of level length.

- I feel like there might be some difficulties when multiple people are trying to work on the same level at the same time (assuming it'd be via GitHub). This is more an issue with the rooms.lua room approach. Imagine that someone is working on their room but they need more room to work with - so they might move the position of someone else's room / objects slightly to make more room for their own submission. What would happen in the case that other user is working on that room at the same time? Might cause some slight issues. Easily fixed, but this isn't an issue with the individual level idea.

With the rooms.lua method, horizontal rooms could be arranged one on top of another in a way they wouldn't interfere with each other. Some easy lua code could also prevent that entirely.

I opt for a quick three level world for build up followed by a collaboratory level. The single level is what I like.

Normally if this was a regular game id go for a world. But since this is a collab effort (and on the scenario where there are a ton amount of levels to comb through) I feel it would be more efficient and to the point if it was a level.

Taycamgame wrote: ↑

Sat Dec 26, 2020 7:12 pm

- I feel like there might be some difficulties when multiple people are trying to work on the same level at the same time (assuming it'd be via GitHub). This is more an issue with the rooms.lua room approach. Imagine that someone is working on their room but they need more room to work with - so they might move the position of someone else's room / objects slightly to make more room for their own submission. What would happen in the case that other user is working on that room at the same time? Might cause some slight issues. Easily fixed, but this isn't an issue with the individual level idea.

The single level idea can be done without multiple people ever having to work on the same file. Sections can be copied between levels.

It would make more sense to be a level.

Another reason why I support having a world is because Bowser's Castle doesn't really seem to have much buildup before it as of now and being confined to like... 1500 blocks per person might be problematic, to say the least. Renaming the custom tileset graphics would also be kind of a hassle too in my opinion.
If the amount of levels ends up being too high we can still do split paths on the world map.

And generally, SM3DW benefitted from having a Bowser world on its own in my opinion.

A potential compromise would be having a few levels preceeding the final level and having that final level also be a collab. (this was mentioned in the OP too)

I also would prefer full world.

Only use of a world is a few select levels for build up before the collab level.

I think I would be more on board with merging the two ideas together and making it one level where each significant section is one entire level by itself, to remove the hassle/limitations of making it a collab level that people constantly have to send around and to remove honestly all the negatives of making it a whole world.

And just to clarify, everyone's "level" is still just the reasonable size of an ideal section. So not a whole entire level, it's just one "level" pieced together by smaller ones.

TLtimelord wrote: ↑

Mon Dec 28, 2020 2:11 am

I think I would be more on board with merging the two ideas together and making it one level where each significant section is one entire level by itself, to remove the hassle/limitations of making it a collab level that people constantly have to send around and to remove honestly all the negatives of making it a whole world.

And just to clarify, everyone's "level" is still just the reasonable size of an ideal section. So not a whole entire level, it's just one "level" pieced together by smaller ones.

I assume you mean levels connected via warps?