My thoughts on "CGFX, Slopes and Nonlinearity"
Posted: Sat Oct 18, 2014 11:32 am
Okay, since the first time I wrote in castlewar's thread, what followed was Darkmatt's unbelievable assault that nearly left me unable to write, I've decided to give this a second thought and explain myself a bit better this time and overall give my general view on the topic.
First of all, yes, there is a certain obsession going on in this community concerning CGFX, slopes and nonlinearity. I don't support it, but I'm not against it either.
My point is, all of these things are good, but not necessary, in levels, IF USED CORRECTLY.
Just because your level has slopes or cgfx doesn't mean it's good, you have to know how to use these things.
Now, there is no real instructions on how to use slopes or cgfx, but you can generally say that slopes work well in levels that are nature-based, like grass or cave levels, and work less well in artificial or handmade-based levels, like castles or factory levels. Keep in mind, that this is just a general rule, and doesn't always apply. In the end it boils down to how you like to design your levels. There are people who are fairly good level designers, like Viola, who don't always use slopes, but in the end the outcome is still pretty acceptable, I'd say high Average to middle Pretty Good at least. (I'll talk about level rating too in a bit)
Custom GFX are good, if you use them the right way. Just because your level is clustered with custom gfx and fancy backgrounds, doesn't mean it's a good level.
First of all, you need to use the right custom gfx. Mixing ten million different tilesets or using ice cgfx in a desert level will not work (unless it's intended to be that way) and will most likely only irritate the player and distract from the actual level/gameplay.
Another thing to keep in mind is that no level is good just because it looks pretty but then is boring as fuck.
Yes, I'd actually say that a level with cgfx and bad gameplay is still better than a level with no cgfx and bad gameplay because you can still tell the creator put actual effort into it, but that is no excuse to completely let go of gameplay.
While I'm on the subject, I'd also like to talk about clash and how people have started to misinterpret it.
Clash isn't something that can be read out of a table (yes, I'm aware there is one).
But even there, the author clearly states that
"[...] this notepad is just giving you a general idea of what tiles clash what do not, that doesn't mean you need to follow them, you're free to do whatever you want, but this is just a general thought of the community."
Which is also something I'll talk about, the community's perception of things.
But like it states that it's a "general idea of what tiles clash and what do not", that doesn't mean that every SMB3 tileset used in combination with a SMW tileset automatically looks horrible (which by the way it states in that notepad that SMB3 and SMW actually DO work together if used correctly)
Basically what I'm trying to tell here is, just because two gamestyles are mixed together doesn't automatically mean it looks bad, it's still up to the eye of the beholder.
Which brings me to my next point, the "eye of the beholder", which in this case is either the community, or every individual here.
The community sure does have a lot of influence on the individual's attitude, as in when the "general community" says that CGFX are mandatory or that clash is bad, many individuals actually start thinking that way.
This is, what causes the real unoriginality, as in everyone ending up doing the same things in their levels, and everyone starting to react the same way about certain things, which I think is a bad thing, but also a good thing. It helps us keep track of what is good (even though just because many think it's good doesn't actually MEAN it's good), like when rating and ranking levels.
It's the thing that many call the "community standard" which states that a level has to fulfill certain aspects to be a good level. This isn't 100% true, because it is still up to everyone to decide themselves what they think is good, and the majority of people isn't always right, this is also why I think Level Judging can't be 100% objective and is always at least a bit subjective.
When judging levels, I go what after I think the majority of people thinks is good, and by majority I don't mean the community, by majority I mean people in general. I ask myself what a person that has never played SMBX before would think playing this level, and that's how I rate. However, many people nowadays think that Level Judges judge after the "community standard", that's where the saying that a level with CGFX receives a one-way ticket to the Pretty Good section comes from.
In the end, everyone has to decide for themselves what they think is/looks good in levels, and what doesn't. As a Level Judge, I review levels to help the creator improve, but I can only do so much, because then I have to ask myself the question as to what "improving" actually means. What is a "good" level? Who says what "good" is? Everyone does it for themselves. If you don't like putting slopes in your levels, then don't do it, noone is gonna stop you. If you don't like nonlinearity, then make linear levels. Heck, Nintendo's first Mario levels were one plain with some holes in the ground and some stairs and pipes to jump over. If you don't like custom graphics, then don't use them. Try to be creative.
Yes, if you use unfitting tilesets together then the outcome is hideous, but that doesn't mean that every two tilesets together equal clash.
Yes, levels with cgfx can look stunning, but that doesn't mean that levels without them are automatically bad/levels with them are automatically good.
Yes, slopes make things look more natural, but that doesn't mean you have to use them.
In the end, try to live after what you think is good for yourself, or what you think the whole majority of people says is good. Don't listen to what people in this community say, most of them (not everyone, but most of them) have a very distorted view of the world and can only tell you what this community thinks is right.
This is my way to live, I try to gather as many different opinions as I can and in the end do something that results from what I think is best for everyone.
tl;dr: Build what you think looks good and is fun to play.
First of all, yes, there is a certain obsession going on in this community concerning CGFX, slopes and nonlinearity. I don't support it, but I'm not against it either.
My point is, all of these things are good, but not necessary, in levels, IF USED CORRECTLY.
Just because your level has slopes or cgfx doesn't mean it's good, you have to know how to use these things.
Now, there is no real instructions on how to use slopes or cgfx, but you can generally say that slopes work well in levels that are nature-based, like grass or cave levels, and work less well in artificial or handmade-based levels, like castles or factory levels. Keep in mind, that this is just a general rule, and doesn't always apply. In the end it boils down to how you like to design your levels. There are people who are fairly good level designers, like Viola, who don't always use slopes, but in the end the outcome is still pretty acceptable, I'd say high Average to middle Pretty Good at least. (I'll talk about level rating too in a bit)
Custom GFX are good, if you use them the right way. Just because your level is clustered with custom gfx and fancy backgrounds, doesn't mean it's a good level.
First of all, you need to use the right custom gfx. Mixing ten million different tilesets or using ice cgfx in a desert level will not work (unless it's intended to be that way) and will most likely only irritate the player and distract from the actual level/gameplay.
Another thing to keep in mind is that no level is good just because it looks pretty but then is boring as fuck.
Yes, I'd actually say that a level with cgfx and bad gameplay is still better than a level with no cgfx and bad gameplay because you can still tell the creator put actual effort into it, but that is no excuse to completely let go of gameplay.
While I'm on the subject, I'd also like to talk about clash and how people have started to misinterpret it.
Clash isn't something that can be read out of a table (yes, I'm aware there is one).
But even there, the author clearly states that
"[...] this notepad is just giving you a general idea of what tiles clash what do not, that doesn't mean you need to follow them, you're free to do whatever you want, but this is just a general thought of the community."
Which is also something I'll talk about, the community's perception of things.
But like it states that it's a "general idea of what tiles clash and what do not", that doesn't mean that every SMB3 tileset used in combination with a SMW tileset automatically looks horrible (which by the way it states in that notepad that SMB3 and SMW actually DO work together if used correctly)
Basically what I'm trying to tell here is, just because two gamestyles are mixed together doesn't automatically mean it looks bad, it's still up to the eye of the beholder.
Which brings me to my next point, the "eye of the beholder", which in this case is either the community, or every individual here.
The community sure does have a lot of influence on the individual's attitude, as in when the "general community" says that CGFX are mandatory or that clash is bad, many individuals actually start thinking that way.
This is, what causes the real unoriginality, as in everyone ending up doing the same things in their levels, and everyone starting to react the same way about certain things, which I think is a bad thing, but also a good thing. It helps us keep track of what is good (even though just because many think it's good doesn't actually MEAN it's good), like when rating and ranking levels.
It's the thing that many call the "community standard" which states that a level has to fulfill certain aspects to be a good level. This isn't 100% true, because it is still up to everyone to decide themselves what they think is good, and the majority of people isn't always right, this is also why I think Level Judging can't be 100% objective and is always at least a bit subjective.
When judging levels, I go what after I think the majority of people thinks is good, and by majority I don't mean the community, by majority I mean people in general. I ask myself what a person that has never played SMBX before would think playing this level, and that's how I rate. However, many people nowadays think that Level Judges judge after the "community standard", that's where the saying that a level with CGFX receives a one-way ticket to the Pretty Good section comes from.
In the end, everyone has to decide for themselves what they think is/looks good in levels, and what doesn't. As a Level Judge, I review levels to help the creator improve, but I can only do so much, because then I have to ask myself the question as to what "improving" actually means. What is a "good" level? Who says what "good" is? Everyone does it for themselves. If you don't like putting slopes in your levels, then don't do it, noone is gonna stop you. If you don't like nonlinearity, then make linear levels. Heck, Nintendo's first Mario levels were one plain with some holes in the ground and some stairs and pipes to jump over. If you don't like custom graphics, then don't use them. Try to be creative.
Yes, if you use unfitting tilesets together then the outcome is hideous, but that doesn't mean that every two tilesets together equal clash.
Yes, levels with cgfx can look stunning, but that doesn't mean that levels without them are automatically bad/levels with them are automatically good.
Yes, slopes make things look more natural, but that doesn't mean you have to use them.
In the end, try to live after what you think is good for yourself, or what you think the whole majority of people says is good. Don't listen to what people in this community say, most of them (not everyone, but most of them) have a very distorted view of the world and can only tell you what this community thinks is right.
This is my way to live, I try to gather as many different opinions as I can and in the end do something that results from what I think is best for everyone.
tl;dr: Build what you think looks good and is fun to play.
