What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
Author Message
Bloo Offline
Professional Mediocre Spriter
****
Registered

Posts: 156
Threads: 8
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 1
#21
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
that bloo should never be relied on for anything
13-10-2017, 03:19 AM
Website Find Reply
The Mega Fan 19XX Offline
AKA: Speed Wind
***
Registered

Posts: 95
Threads: 9
Joined: Apr 2016
Reputation: 2
#22
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
a̶b̶s̶o̶l̶u̶t̶e̶l̶y̶ ̶n̶o̶t̶h̶i̶n̶g̶
13-10-2017, 01:22 PM
Find Reply
Soulephant Offline
He can arrowslide
*****
Registered

Posts: 661
Threads: 8
Joined: Jun 2012
Reputation: 12
#23
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
I have a few lessons at the ready.

Keep an eye on the level length: While for the most part Flashman touched upon this already, I want to stress in addition that MaGMML is definitely big now. 81 submissions+extras is a metric ton of levels. With that in mind, submitting a level that is a game upon itself is simply not a good idea. It's fine if a level is just longer, although it needs checkpoints and substance to justify it. However, if your level is practically a game, any and I mean any significant mistakes in it (such as overly demanding challenges) are greatly exacerbated. The same also goes for judge stages, and not just because they can't afford to feel flawed. I'm gonna put it out there: Referencing all submissions, especially with how big MaGMML is, is a trick. It didn't work out in MaGMML2, and I have no idea yet how it would in the future.

Introduce gimmicks, build difficulty curve: That you have to introduce your gimmicks seems obvious. People may not know devkit gimmicks because they haven't played the source games. Now in MaGMML's case, many people are familiar with those gimmicks so this may seem moot. But there is another reason to introduce your gimmicks properly: Since a gimmick introduction shouldn't pose a huge challenge, you also work towards a solid difficulty curve by doing this.

Whatever takes center stage can be "the" gimmick: I used to think of a substantial gimmick as something with all sorts of pizzaz. If it didn't have the pizzaz, it would not stand on its own as (primary) gimmick or outright wasn't one. Several stages in MaGMML2 have proven me wrong. It's really about what takes center stage. If Forced Weapon Usage takes center stage, you could have many other gimmicks and still have the player feel like there's only a few. If you milk a platform gimmick for all it's worth, your stage feels deep despite having only one gimmick. Perhaps most notably, I've learned enemy-only stages can feel like they have gimmicks, something I didn't know was possible. This happens when an enemy type has complexity and a peculiar behavior to it and is ever present. If an asset draws attention, it's a gimmick. Period.

Costumes are fun: Doctor Light roleplaying talking to himself. 'Nuff said.

Noble Nickels are a godsend: These are one heck of a good addition, for the simple reason that MaGMML2 (and probably onward) don't have lives to reward you with, and placing letters does not work in the context of a contest. Nickels absolutely must be kept, as they give participants an extra tool to work with, a reward that justifies optional challenges. Especially with how prevalent or effortless E/W-Tanks can be.

Noble Nickels can get stupid: Simply put, there have been Nickels that are unduly hard and/or convoluted. If getting the Nickel would require a gimmick that you only introduce afterwards, severe backtracking or simply a maneuver that crosses the line, so to speak... reconsider that Nickel. They're meant for challenges, but there are still limits.

It's broken if the level designer can't fix it: There has been contempt for force beams, but mostly because how they've been used, and MaGMML2 for one saw good use of them. One level was all about proving these sorts of things can be fixed (The Stage Nobody Asked For). However, we've also seen some elements that just drag stages down. If your stage had Pakatto 24s, you were hard-pressed to make it to the highest tiers. The rock dispensers were also a pain. And personally, I feel the picketmen went overboard, being tremendously bulky and often shielded for how crazy they went. No matter what context you end up using those things in, they feel like a nuisance, and in that case it's pretty much a devkit trap. Again, most assets aren't inherently frustrating, but any that are must be toned down before the devkit's release. If I may offer a suggestion for the picketmen, Smed had a good take on them in his "Big Annoying Mess of a Level", or at least good for a start.

[Image: jWFQYSO.png]
04-11-2017, 12:10 AM
Website Find Reply
Lamda Offline
Ace of Spades
*****
Registered

Posts: 954
Threads: 28
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 62
#24
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
i think "feel free not to use stuff the way it was used before" is a good one too

it kinda falls in line with being able to fix broken things, but the stuff doesn't have to be broken already

like i used crazy cannons as environmental hazards rather than enemies and a ton of other people did neat shit like this

it was awesome, seeing old stuff being repurposed into something fresh

Quote:Game making in 6 steps:
1: Get assets and program
2: Smash the two together until stuff happens
3: Beat your face into your keyboard when stuff breaks/doesn't want to work
4: Continue beating your face into your keyboard until you've smashed the right code
5: Rejoice that it works and move on to the next thing
6: Go back to Step 2 and repeat
04-11-2017, 04:30 PM
Find Reply
Blackhook Offline
Gonna get promoted...eventually
**
SIBRE Alpha Testers

Posts: 402
Threads: 9
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 10
#25
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
Memes were a mistake.

[Image: d82bcef28Chwb.png]
04-11-2017, 08:50 PM
Find Reply
Joseph Collins Away
Postman
**
SIBRE Alpha Testers

Posts: 139
Threads: 3
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 1
#26
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
I forget if this applied to the first contest, so much, but as of the second contest, I've personally learned that levels which are not intended to be judged are, apparently, exempt from the judging guidelines and, sometimes, the ideals of basic level design. In my opinion, the endgame (and, post-endgame) content is definitely not what I'd call "high-tier." In fact, I have no qualms in saying that I don't think that having to play through all of the Wily Star or post-game are worth their "prizes." Some of those levels are incredibly difficulty, severely tedious, drag on for far too long, or otherwise become just plain frustrating more than fun. Plus, there are actually more than a few levels where I genuinely got bored enough to start yawning, thanks to their poorly-utilized gimmicks. This is especially the case in the mandatory (to beat the "game") Wily Star levels.

I've also learned that if you give level creators any sort of leeway with death traps, such as infinite lives or making insta-kill things do damage… they will take full advantage of it. Just, not in any good way. There are far too many "for the lulz" kinds of levels – particularly, in post-game – for my tastes. Like I said, it's almost like levels which aren't meant to be judged can get away with basically anything. That's not at all a good thing, considering that some of these levels are, as also mentioned, actually mandatory, in order to finish the "game." A good level should not make the player completely disinterested… much less want to crush their controller, in anger. And, don't get me started on the custom bosses – in-house or otherwise.

And, finally… I've learned that the judges' tastes are… borderline-random. There are several levels which I do not think should have placed where they did, whether they ranked low or ranked high. There are also several instances of "this level is bad because" while other levels are good for the very same reasons that the other ones were bad. Yes, sometimes a gimmick is better-utilized by someone else… but, still.
Oh, on that note, there were actually a lot of levels with the same gimmicks, this year. (Like, did we really need three levels based around the Gravityman gimmick, much less VVVVVV?) It's a little surprising.

So, that's what I've personally learned. And, I hope I'm not the only one who feels this way.
But, I wouldn't be surprised, if I were.
(This post was last modified: 18-11-2017, 09:14 PM by Joseph Collins.)
18-11-2017, 07:27 PM
Find Reply
JupiHornet Offline
Regular
****
MaGMML Judge

Posts: 31
Threads: 0
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 1
#27
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(18-11-2017, 07:27 PM)Joseph Collins Wrote: And, finally… I've learned that the judges' tastes are… borderline-random. There are several levels which I do not think should have placed where they did, whether they ranked low or ranked high.
I'm pretty sure everyone disagreed with some of the placements. That can't be helped, different tastse for different people.

Quote:Oh, on that note, there were actually a lot of levels with the same gimmicks, this year. (Like, did we really need three levels based around the Gravityman gimmick, much less VVVVVV?)
I mean, we can't do anything about that. It just so happened that a few people wanted to make VVVVVV levels.
(This post was last modified: 18-11-2017, 09:03 PM by JupiHornet.)
18-11-2017, 09:02 PM
Find Reply
Flashman85 Offline
Minor Internet Celebrity
*****
Registered

Posts: 271
Threads: 9
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 17
#28
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(18-11-2017, 07:27 PM)Joseph Collins Wrote: ...I've personally learned that levels which are not intended to be judged are, apparently, exempt from the judging guidelines and, sometimes, the ideals of basic level design. In my opinion, the endgame (and, post-endgame) content is definitely not what I'd call "high-tier." In fact, I have no qualms in saying that I don't think that having to play through all of the Wily Star or post-game are worth their "prizes."

There's still a lot of postgame content I haven't seen, but I have been through the Pit of Pits and Wily Star, and I can agree with this to an extent. I'm one of apparently very few people who enjoyed Wily 4, for instance, but I recognize that it's the kind of level that would have gotten a skip teleporter if it were a regular submission...and that alone makes the level inappropriate for a mandatory part of the game.

I appreciate that the judges just want to have fun making a level like the rest of us, and that even the official Mega Man games have Wily levels that aren't popular with everyone. At the same time, I think it's reasonable to expect the judge levels to blow us away with aesthetics and awe us with creative and thoughtful design. Putting the Wily levels in order of ascending difficulty and/or quality would also help manage player expectations.

(18-11-2017, 07:27 PM)Joseph Collins Wrote: I've also learned that if you give level creators any sort of leeway with death traps, such as infinite lives or making insta-kill things do damage… they will take full advantage of it. Just, not in any good way. There are far too many "for the lulz" kinds of levels – particularly, in post-game – for my tastes. Like I said, it's almost like levels which aren't meant to be judged can get away with basically anything.

If you compare the Pit of Pits with Mega Man Endless, I think it's safe to say that leeway has little or no bearing on how people design their levels. If anything, infinite lives and softer penalties in the Pit are a response to designers doing whatever the heck they feel like, rather than a cause.

I'm more forgiving of "for the lulz" levels in the Pit because (a) they're super short and (b) there's no other place in the game (or any fangame, at current) where people can get away with experimental and joke levels. I'm guilty of submitting challenges that I KNOW violate some basic principles of good game design (eg, the Lyric level), so I apologize if my deliberate deviations from good practice didn't pay off the way I'd hoped. I think a little more quality control is warranted for the future, though, by either weeding out more levels or making modifications as needed.

(18-11-2017, 09:02 PM)JupiHornet Wrote:
(18-11-2017, 07:27 PM)Joseph Collins Wrote: And, finally… I've learned that the judges' tastes are… borderline-random. There are several levels which I do not think should have placed where they did, whether they ranked low or ranked high.
I'm pretty sure everyone disagreed with some of the placements. That can't be helped, different tastse for different people.

I'll second Jupi's response, but I'll also add that judges need to clearly articulate their opinions for their tastes and judging criteria to feel coherent and consistent. MaGMML2 is definitely an improvement over MaGMML1 in terms of judge feedback, but there were still instances (from multiple judges) where the rationale provided didn't seem entirely rational or consistent with the score given. That being said, maintaining consistent objectivity while critiquing 81 levels of wildly varying quality and style is no easy feat.

No matter where you go, there you are.
20-11-2017, 05:39 AM
Website Find Reply
ACESpark Offline
Stoke me a clipper, I'll be back for Christmas.
*******
Administrators

Posts: 943
Threads: 195
Joined: May 2012
Reputation: 38
#29
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(20-11-2017, 05:39 AM)Flashman85 Wrote: I appreciate that the judges just want to have fun making a level like the rest of us, and that even the official Mega Man games have Wily levels that aren't popular with everyone. At the same time, I think it's reasonable to expect the judge levels to blow us away with aesthetics and awe us with creative and thoughtful design. Putting the Wily levels in order of ascending difficulty and/or quality would also help manage player expectations.

In this case, the judge levels were reordered because of Seven Force. I was originally Judge 3. It was felt more appropriate to have the "boss rush", where the stage currently was, and because of spectacle creep. Hitting my level early in the fortress might've been poison to the expectations of everyone else.

But at the same time, I went into this with the mantra of "If I'm going to make a Wily stage, I'm going to make a level with the intention of "winning the contest". It may be impossible, but that is my main design goal."

Realistically, if anyone is making a judge level for MaGMML3, that is the core ideal they should also go with. The expectations are higher for your stages than anyone else's, because you are supposed to know what you are doing.

(As having one of the few levels in the Feedback form with a 45:0 advantage in favourites to least favourites, I might've have actually succeeded in part, the fact I am coming back essentially via community vote also means I might've succeeded.)


One of the things I've learned: People don't like you being vague in your reasoning. As annoying as long judge comments are for Let's Players... the players seem to prefer them, as at least that way you know exactly why a judge is scoring a level what they are scoring them.


So the thing is...
Joseph Collins and Flashman85 Wrote:Collins: And, finally… I've learned that the judges' tastes are… borderline-random.

Flashman85: there were still instances (from multiple judges) where the rationale provided didn't seem entirely rational or consistent with the score given.
The fact the rubric was not transparent in-game means... several levels look like they rated higher than they probably should've. The high creativity score (it's 15 out of a 50 mark), carried several levels this time round, and the fact that information is not accessible in-game makes many scores look completely random and weird.

(This post was last modified: 20-11-2017, 12:35 PM by ACESpark.)
20-11-2017, 12:11 PM
Website Find Reply
barberbarberjoe Offline
Postman
****
Registered

Posts: 112
Threads: 2
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation: 1
#30
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
It's probably a good idea to wait a few weeks after a large-scale fangame is released before playing it, just in case there are severe bugs and/or the game has been rushed for the deadline (if any).

Also, higher tiers are not necessarily going to be always good (in my case, I didn't truly fully enjoy the Tiers until I got to 9 and 10). I mean, this is Make A Good Mega Man Level and not "Make A Good Attempt To Annoy The Judges/Players". When this type of contest is increasingly getting so many entries, quantity over quality is expected, but the game shouldn't be turned into a slog for that reason. The participants should strive to be as good as they can be, especially in a time where current fangame makers are attempting to raise the bar more and make up for past mistakes.
20-11-2017, 12:25 PM
Find Reply
Professor_Q Offline
Newbie
*
Registered

Posts: 2
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2017
Reputation: 0
#31
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(04-11-2017, 04:30 PM)Lamda Wrote: i think "feel free not to use stuff the way it was used before" is a good one too

I was kind of thinking something along these lines with the very old artist's lesson "Understand the rules, so you know how and when to break them."


Shovel Knight has a few great examples of this. For instance, to obtain that nostalgic feel they stuck very closely to the NES palette, except in a few instances where they cheated.

Likewise, we can come up with all kinds of guidance for what makes a good level and what makes a bad level, and it's important to listen to all that guidance and understand it thoroughly. But it's just as important to know when and how to ignore everything you learned.

After all, if you take no risks even the most creative idea might not realise its actual potential. The rule to remember is that there is an exception to every rule.


Of course this does mean there is one piece of guidance you should NEVER EVER ignore (this is the exception to the exception rule) - ALWAYS have your level playtested and ALWAYS make edits.

No great artist gets it right consistently without years of practice, and even the greatest artists still have "happy accidents." Thankfully as game designers we enjoy the benefit of editing.
13-12-2017, 11:35 AM
Find Reply
Crazy_Hand Offline
Regular
**
Registered

Posts: 37
Threads: 3
Joined: Apr 2018
Reputation: 0
#32
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(05-06-2017, 06:50 PM)Flashman85 Wrote: For the benefit of anyone aspiring to host, judge, or design levels for future contests—not to mention anyone who wants to make a fangame of their own—I'd like to discuss what lessons we can learn from Make a Good Mega Man Level Contest 1 and 2.

Specifically, I'm looking for insights on organizing and judging the contests; perspectives on being a contestant or just someone who's played/watched the final products; observations about level design (including the submitted levels, judge levels, and hubs); reactions to the special weapons and upgrades; thoughts about the graphics, music, and dialogue; tips on programming and designing custom assets...basically, any wisdom you can share regarding any aspect of the contests or games.

The goal is to come up with a sort of "do's and don'ts" list for the general public. I am fully expecting some friendly jokes at the expense of others, but let's try to focus on being helpful and analyzing the contests as a whole—not so much the specific people involved.

If you've somehow missed out on either game, here are some handy links:
MaGMML1 contest thread and download page
MaGMML1 results livestreams
MaGMML2 contest thread (no download yet)
MaGMML2 results livestreams

My least favorite thing was the Noble Nickels.

Collectibles need to be rare, and low-profile games that are not likely to get a guide need to create one in some way. Also, letting scrub level makers place them was a terrible idea.

Maybe add a blue teleport-er for levels that are non-frustrating, but have frustrating Noble Nickels? That would have drastically improved MaGMML2. Also ban anyone, including JUDGES, from locking collectibles behind PARTIAL Keys, NOT a good idea, EVER (I actually liked Garriry's level EXCEPT for that part)

Tier placement was wonky as a side effect of the low opinion pool, you can't add enough judges to subvert that (it'd take hundreds), but some checks and balances could at least mitigate the problem, like maybe adding bonuses for things that high quality levels do (such as custom graphics and music) , and penalties for things like, say, a level having a ROBOT MASTER NAME but NO ROBOT MASTER. I find it completely unacceptable that one such level reached TIER FUCKING 8. Even surpassing levels that the judges said "felt like a MM10 level". No such level belonged above Tier 5, and 5 is being generous.

It's not the only problem, copying a DKC track and slapping on a Bike Gimmick shouldn't have been enough to reach Tier 10, especially when many superior levels were ranked well below it. Even one of the judges said many of the Tiers were "inconsistent". While some of this can be chalked up to my opinion, the problem is clearly pervasive enough that having some checks and balances to mitigate this would benefit MaGMML 3. 2 had a lot of good content, but even more potential, and I feel some tweaking would have done it a lot of good.
(This post was last modified: 13-06-2018, 12:43 PM by Crazy_Hand.)
13-06-2018, 12:41 PM
Find Reply
Flashman85 Offline
Minor Internet Celebrity
*****
Registered

Posts: 271
Threads: 9
Joined: Jan 2016
Reputation: 17
#33
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(13-06-2018, 12:41 PM)Crazy_Hand Wrote: Collectibles need to be rare, and low-profile games that are not likely to get a guide need to create one in some way. Also, letting scrub level makers place them was a terrible idea.

I get where you're coming from, but I'd argue that the rarity of collectibles is up for debate (eg, look at how much there is to collect in the Battle Network and Zero/ZX games), and that Noble Nickel placement fits right in with item and enemy placement as a component of the level design abilities being tested. If letting amateur level makers place Noble Nickels was a terrible idea, then letting them make a level in the first place was a terrible idea. I don't think Noble Nickels are any more inherently problematic than giving contestants access to Apache Joes and Quick Man lasers—yes, these things can utterly ruin a level if used improperly, but that can be said of practically any asset.

To your point, we do have a guide in the form of the MaGMML wiki, and Crystal Man gives in-game hints about where to find the Nickels you haven't collected yet. I'm fairly certain MaGMML3 will handle level skipping a bit differently, so hopefully this will be less of an issue next time.

(13-06-2018, 12:41 PM)Crazy_Hand Wrote: Tier placement was wonky as a side effect of the low opinion pool, you can't add enough judges to subvert that (it'd take hundreds), but some checks and balances could at least mitigate the problem, like maybe adding bonuses for things that high quality levels do (such as custom graphics and music) , and penalties for things like, say, a level having a ROBOT MASTER NAME but NO ROBOT MASTER. I find it completely unacceptable that one such level reached TIER FUCKING 8. Even surpassing levels that the judges said "felt like a MM10 level". No such level belonged above Tier 5, and 5 is being generous.

The rating rubric had a lot to do with the wonky tier placement, and the tier designations are an arbitrary way of breaking up the contest into digestible chunks. For MaGMML3, we're re-examining the rubric to ensure everything is weighted appropriately. I've actually proposed devoting a point or two to the level name properly setting expectations for the level.

Custom graphics and music were never part of the rubric, so it's a bit unfair to give an advantage to level designers for them—and if we award that kind of novelty in aesthetics, we need to reward people for EVERYTHING new (eg, custom enemies and gimmicks)...at which point, why would anyone bother using what's in the comprehensive devkit if it won't earn them maximum points?

At the end of the day, the contest is a test of one's ability to organize different elements into a fun, cohesive level. The specific ingredients shouldn't matter; it's what the level does with them that counts.

Besides, custom assets vary in quality; does Taco Man (sorry to throw you under the bus, Taco Man) really deserve the same amount of bonus points as Quarantine Woman and Boil Man for its custom music? Beyond that, it's impossible to consistently identify which assets are truly custom assets, and which are ripped from some obscure game the judges have never heard of. Consider how unbalanced the scores for Mount Sabre would have been.

(13-06-2018, 12:41 PM)Crazy_Hand Wrote: It's not the only problem, copying a DKC track and slapping on a Bike Gimmick shouldn't have been enough to reach Tier 10, especially when many superior levels were ranked well below it.

Again, this all goes back to the rubric. Beneath Sand and Rock is arguably most memorable for its music and bike gimmick, but those only account for a fraction of the total score. In fact, there were complaints about both the music and the bike section in the judge comments, so copying a DKC track and slapping on a bike gimmick weren't enough to reach Tier 10. The level got points for things like the boss fight (which is solid), all the challenges prior to the bike section (which are sufficiently creative and generally well assembled), and the graphics (which are polished enough to belong in a high tier). The judges gave the level several perfect or near-perfect scores across the board, not just where the music and bike section were most relevant.

To some degree, it sounds like you've got different criteria for what qualifies as a good Mega Man level, and that's fine. I think it's the rubric, more than the tier breakdown, that's the main issue here. I agree with you that there are several levels that don't feel like "Tier [whatever tier they're in] quality" to me, but when I look at the score breakdown, the overall placement makes more sense. Judge comments go a long way in justifying scores I disagree with, too. The MaGMML3 rubric currently under consideration has more granularity than the one used for MaGMML2, which should help smooth out some of the weirder score variations seen here.

No matter where you go, there you are.
13-06-2018, 06:55 PM
Website Find Reply
Crazy_Hand Offline
Regular
**
Registered

Posts: 37
Threads: 3
Joined: Apr 2018
Reputation: 0
#34
RE: What Have We Learned From MaGMML1 and 2?
(13-06-2018, 06:55 PM)Flashman85 Wrote: I get where you're coming from, but I'd argue that the rarity of collectibles is up for debate (eg, look at how much there is to collect in the Battle Network and Zero/ZX games), and that Noble Nickel placement fits right in with item and enemy placement as a component of the level design abilities being tested. If letting amateur level makers place Noble Nickels was a terrible idea, then letting them make a level in the first place was a terrible idea. I don't think Noble Nickels are any more inherently problematic than giving contestants access to Apache Joes and Quick Man lasers—yes, these things can utterly ruin a level if used improperly, but that can be said of practically any asset.

To your point, we do have a guide in the form of the MaGMML wiki, and Crystal Man gives in-game hints about where to find the Nickels you haven't collected yet. I'm fairly certain MaGMML3 will handle level skipping a bit differently, so hopefully this will be less of an issue next time.

Good point about Crystal Man and the MaGMML wiki. I think Crystal Man MIGHT be better replaced with an in-game guide that costs 9999 Bolts, but is more of a direct help though, some Nickels were a pain even WITH the map.

(13-06-2018, 06:55 PM)Flashman85 Wrote: The rating rubric had a lot to do with the wonky tier placement, and the tier designations are an arbitrary way of breaking up the contest into digestible chunks. For MaGMML3, we're re-examining the rubric to ensure everything is weighted appropriately. I've actually proposed devoting a point or two to the level name properly setting expectations for the level.

Custom graphics and music were never part of the rubric, so it's a bit unfair to give an advantage to level designers for them—and if we award that kind of novelty in aesthetics, we need to reward people for EVERYTHING new (eg, custom enemies and gimmicks)...at which point, why would anyone bother using what's in the comprehensive devkit if it won't earn them maximum points?

At the end of the day, the contest is a test of one's ability to organize different elements into a fun, cohesive level. The specific ingredients shouldn't matter; it's what the level does with them that counts.

Besides, custom assets vary in quality; does Taco Man (sorry to throw you under the bus, Taco Man) really deserve the same amount of bonus points as Quarantine Woman and Boil Man for its custom music? Beyond that, it's impossible to consistently identify which assets are truly custom assets, and which are ripped from some obscure game the judges have never heard of. Consider how unbalanced the scores for Mount Sabre would have been.

That's very good to hear. To your point about Taco Man, I do agree. Maybe have custom graphics and sound each give 0-2. 0 for things like sound that breaks your speakers and plain colors/gradients, 1 for bad stuff clearly made in good faith, and 2 for stuff that is at half-decent.

It's just a thought of course, but it would avert the problem.

(13-06-2018, 06:55 PM)Flashman85 Wrote: Again, this all goes back to the rubric. Beneath Sand and Rock is arguably most memorable for its music and bike gimmick, but those only account for a fraction of the total score. In fact, there were complaints about both the music and the bike section in the judge comments, so copying a DKC track and slapping on a bike gimmick weren't enough to reach Tier 10. The level got points for things like the boss fight (which is solid), all the challenges prior to the bike section (which are sufficiently creative and generally well assembled), and the graphics (which are polished enough to belong in a high tier). The judges gave the level several perfect or near-perfect scores across the board, not just where the music and bike section were most relevant.

To some degree, it sounds like you've got different criteria for what qualifies as a good Mega Man level, and that's fine. I think it's the rubric, more than the tier breakdown, that's the main issue here. I agree with you that there are several levels that don't feel like "Tier [whatever tier they're in] quality" to me, but when I look at the score breakdown, the overall placement makes more sense. Judge comments go a long way in justifying scores I disagree with, too. The MaGMML3 rubric currently under consideration has more granularity than the one used for MaGMML2, which should help smooth out some of the weirder score variations seen here.

That's fair enough, considering your points about the Rubric above. At any rate, thanks for reading and considering my feedback.
(This post was last modified: 13-06-2018, 07:37 PM by Crazy_Hand.)
13-06-2018, 07:36 PM
Find Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread:
1 Guest(s)

Return to Top