SMWCX - Credits

[tirakai]

This probably should've been two levels with the current midpoint being where they split (so you'd have one stage for the castle entry and one for the final gauntlet and boss), it would've left the player with a much better impression overall I think.

As it is it's another one of those levels that has some cool ideas and good design in it but lasts way too long for it own good, ruining a lot of the fun.

[Mandew]

I personally believe that this game is of a good size, considering from the beginning to the credits.

The level design was generally superb. I was honestly expecting constant murder to happen way before the final level - so I was pleasantly surprised that it didn't happen like that.

Chosing to stick with the final level in its current, unforgiving state sours the final impression of the maingame, which is unfortunate.
And I said this before even the second video was posted - the level has really cool and neat things going for it. The appreciation the player can have to the level is just scrapped by its punishing nature. If there's ever one mistake to avoid as a designer, it's that one.

[AuraLancer]

There was Filler Level 1 and 2, I think that would have worked nicely for this level. The second half being the sequel.

[BobisOnlyBob]

I think the biggest problem is pretty clear from the credits.

Final Level "Sky Fortress Assault": Blue Leaf, Imaynotbehere4long

PROJECT LEADER: Blue Leaf

BETA TESTERS: Blue Leaf, Imaynotbehere4long

Now I don't know about everyone else here, but personally as a software developer - as an academic, a professional and a hobbyist - I personally don't believe you can beta test your own code. I know that might sound absurd, but I don't consider self-testing the same as beta-testing. Beta-testing is inherently external. What this tells me is that the final level was not beta tested, nor were any of Blue Leaf or Imnbh4l's levels. I mean, they were tested, self-tested, and they all had good elements - but they weren't beta tested. Even if they checked eachother's levels throughout, that still means the final collaborative level went unexamined. It's unfortunate, as Imnbh4l said earlier, that those who did apparently check things (but weren't credited as such?) signed off on them so readily, and that a more critical eye wasn't cast over these before public release and broadcast.

[Stink Terios]

Another thing: not everything has to end in a boss.
The strenght of Mario games is in its levels and platforming. In official games bosses are generally easy, boring and lazy.
You can do without them. Just end the game with a level. You don't need a boss. Especially a very difficult boss that controls completely differently than the rest of the game, using a glitchy sprite, after a long stretch of level.

You'd need an entire game of preparation 'till that boss would be fair. Hell, playing Ikaruga should be a requirement.
Actually, cheat at the boss and just play Ikaruga in your own time.

But hey, at least it reminded me to buy that game at some point in the future!

[Nimono]

I think the biggest problem is pretty clear from the credits.

Final Level "Sky Fortress Assault": Blue Leaf, Imaynotbehere4long

PROJECT LEADER: Blue Leaf

BETA TESTERS: Blue Leaf, Imaynotbehere4long

Now I don't know about everyone else here, but personally as a software developer - as an academic, a professional and a hobbyist - I personally don't believe you can beta test your own code. I know that might sound absurd, but I don't consider self-testing the same as beta-testing. Beta-testing is inherently external. What this tells me is that the final level was not beta tested, nor were any of Blue Leaf or Imnbh4l's levels. I mean, they were tested, self-tested, and they all had good elements - but they weren't beta tested. Even if they checked eachother's levels throughout, that still means the final collaborative level went unexamined. It's unfortunate, as Imnbh4l said earlier, that those who did apparently check things (but weren't credited as such?) signed off on them so readily, and that a more critical eye wasn't cast over these before public release and broadcast.

Yeah, it's a real shame that no one wanted to beta test this thing. I lost interest in it long before it got finished, so I have no idea what went on in there, but...why on earth did NO ONE test this thing? People wanted it out, but no one was willing to beta test to make sure it was of good quality????? WHY!? Stuff like this is why I adamantly refuse to release my projects until I get at least 3 people unrelated to the project to test it. Better safe than sorry!

[raocow]

I mean, guys, you got to realise that sometimes getting beta-testing going is a lot harder than you might think. Like I agree it's important and explains some of this, but at the same time I understand why it was released the way it was.

[TaviTurnip]

Hrnnnn...

Honestly, I liked the second half of the level more objectively speaking.

A lot of the traps (specifically thinking of the red platform you need to crouch on, the most) were completely fair and just required quick thinking on the player's part, in a way where if you mess it up, you will always understand why, and that's okay. I would have gotten caught by at least one of them too <.<;; This half also feels nicer just because there's no mini-boss in the middle of it (really, why did that need to be a thing) and because no flight sections at all or anything "inconsistent". It was a lot more stable and straightforward. And detaching both player and viewer frustration from that woooonderful first half, it's just a hard switch-based action level area, and that's okay. It's good. It's just not in the right place.

Also the boss was cool. See again player and viewer frustration from being involved for way too long at once. The first and second halves could have been separate levels or this could have been divided into quarter chunks, probably.

[BobisOnlyBob]

I mean, guys, you got to realise that sometimes getting beta-testing going is a lot harder than you might think. Like I agree it's important and explains some of this, but at the same time I understand why it was released the way it was.

absolutely, no slight intended against Blue Leaf and Imnbh4l, just that the game suffered for a lack of it. I know all too well how hard it is too.

[Stink Terios]

Another thing that I hate about the endgame is how it gates and limits you. Being forced to play as only one character/having your powerups filtered is bad, unless it's for a very gimmicky reason. Don't take options away from the player.
Yeah, people might be able to cheese stuff but you know what?
Let them.
Super Mario World has a cape feather. It's overpowered. It lets you fly over entire levels. Nintendo knew this, and yet didn't take measures to impede this.

And the worst part? This is only at the very end, it wasn't a thing in most of the game.

"Taking away options from the player" should be part of the essential "don'ts" of Mario level design is what I'm getting at.

Having uh, "beaten" the post-game... It shouldn't make me regret ever playing this. 90% of the game is excellent, and yet the other 10% will make me get annoyed every time I remember this game, and overshadow all the good memories.
This is really sad.

Also @ TaviTurnip: I agree! I really, really liked both platforming sections! If the level was only those with a midpoint in the middle it would be a great, focused final level!

[Ometeotl]

raocow and the terrible horrible no good very bad level

[The Doctor]

"Taking away options from the player" should be part of the essential "don'ts" of Mario level design is what I'm getting at.

I can't agree with this. Not wanting your well-designed level that was tested to be a proper difficulty level to be completely broken by an overpowered cape or a Kuribo's Shoe is perfectly valid.

[Ometeotl]

"Taking away options from the player" should be part of the essential "don'ts" of Mario level design is what I'm getting at.

I can't agree with this. Not wanting your well-designed level that was tested to be a proper difficulty level to be completely broken by an overpowered cape or a Kuribo's Shoe is perfectly valid.

Why? How does it hurt you that the player made a choice?

[BobisOnlyBob]

"Taking away options from the player" should be part of the essential "don'ts" of Mario level design is what I'm getting at.

I can't agree with this. Not wanting your well-designed level that was tested to be a proper difficulty level to be completely broken by an overpowered cape or a Kuribo's Shoe is perfectly valid.

Why? How does it hurt you that the player made a choice?

I can understand the desire to have the level experienced as-planned, and I think powerup and character filters are sometimes valid. I don't advocate their perpetual usage, and I support the right of the player to say "screw what the author intended, I will play this as I see fit". The switch arrays in MaGLX and MaGLX2 are excellent for this - each level has its own character and powerup filters, so each level is initially experienced as each author intended, but players are always able to override that (or use cheat codes, etc) to have an experience more calibrated to their personal needs - but those options are set out of the way of the main flow, where they have to be a conscious decision by the player. This means that players are unlikely to unintentionally spoil things for themselves by bringing in overpowered items (shoe + hammersuit) from a prior level, throwing off the intended experience or even breaking level elements outright, but they can still have that freedom of choice. I think that's the best compromise between authorial intent and player experience.

[SAJewers]

I mean, guys, you got to realise that sometimes getting beta-testing going is a lot harder than you might think. Like I agree it's important and explains some of this, but at the same time I understand why it was released the way it was.

Yeah.

As much as I would like to make levels, I realize that having someone else playtest the levels is more important. I'd rather leave myself free to look at other peoples' levels than to make lots myself that seem ok to me, but no one else can vouch for. (this is probably why about half the levels that my name is attached to in A2XT Ep2 are me fixing up other peoples' levels)

[Zephyr_DragonLord]

I like what today's section did. And that was a really awesome boss, too. But I also think raocow hit the nail on the head for this one. All of that level is too punishing for an average joe to really enjoy. I think I would enjoy this more than raocow (due to better reaction times), but I still stand by my words that I said earlier; more midpoints would make this experience incredibly solid.

I mean, guys, you got to realise that sometimes getting beta-testing going is a lot harder than you might think. Like I agree it's important and explains some of this, but at the same time I understand why it was released the way it was.

To be fair to the two beta testers, the rest of the levels were REALLY good, so they overall did a nice job with the beta testing. But it's easy to mess up on a complicated level that they were both involved in creating.... In conclusion, I think raocow is the best beta tester. :)

...But seriously, he goes through pretty much every game, and manages to dig at the problems of each and every one of them. These playthroughs are not only great entertainment, but also great educational material for good design. And for that... I thank you. See you all in the postgame...

[Stink Terios]

Beat the level legit just now. Boss is actually really, really fantastic. It just needs to be it's own level/have a midpoint. You NEED to be rested to appreciate it.

e: Also FUN FACT: I once beat the boss and yet it didn't die and the battle didn't end. Hooray!

[Alice]

I can't agree with this. Not wanting your well-designed level that was tested to be a proper difficulty level to be completely broken by an overpowered cape or a Kuribo's Shoe is perfectly valid.

You do realize that the entire point of a game is for the player to enjoy it, right? The designer may intend one thing but letting the player play how they want will always trump it since the player is generally playing games to have fun. Forcefully limiting them is just bad design.

[Mandew]

I'm honestly just going to stick by my argument that the level is very well crafted, but the one major problem it has (its punishing lenght) just breaks the entire experience in the hands of a player.

And in turn, since this is the final level of the game, the level being this harsh will taint the final impression that people are going to have with it. This is what a lot of people will remember this game for. It's just logical if you put yourself in the shoes of someone playing, but it's not always obvious.

The Koopa Clown Sky Pop being janky? That'd still be not that frustrating if the punishment attached to it wasn't this large.
The Ikaruga inspired gimmick is super neat! But how can I appreciate it as a player if I have to spend my entire focus worrying about dying costing me 3 to 5 minutes to get back there?
Those set-ups are super well crafted - but there's no reason to celebrate getting past them the first time because chances are, you're going to do it again 30 more times.

All because of punishing level lenght that cares more about what's in the level than what's in the player's mind as they play it.

[Voltgloss]

I agree with Mandrew's summary entirely.

Splitting this into two levels (each with its own midpoint), or adding a couple of Luna shortcuts added (at least one at the final boss door), would vastly improve things. Quite possibly the only improvement really needed.

[The Doctor]

I can't agree with this. Not wanting your well-designed level that was tested to be a proper difficulty level to be completely broken by an overpowered cape or a Kuribo's Shoe is perfectly valid.

You do realize that the entire point of a game is for the player to enjoy it, right? The designer may intend one thing but letting the player play how they want will always trump it since the player is generally playing games to have fun. Forcefully limiting them is just bad design.

Name one non-Indie platformer that allows the player to break levels whenever they want. Name one 2D Platformer that doesn't limit the player.

[Alice]

Name one non-Indie platformer that allows the player to break levels whenever they want. Name one 2D Platformer that doesn't limit the player.

Right here in the very post you first quoted to begin with:

Super Mario World has a cape feather. It's overpowered. It lets you fly over entire levels. Nintendo knew this, and yet didn't take measures to impede this.

Guess what most people do in SMW when it comes to flying. They'll typically refrain from flying over/through levels unless it's either required, they dislike the level, or the level is too frustrating to them.

[Arctangent]

Hell, SMB3 had shades of it, too. You didn't get infinite flight from racoon Mario, but the levels were so short that just flying through them cut huge swathes out of them anyway.

Also, Sonic 2 and 3 ( and Knuckles ), kind of. You do have to get the Chaos Emeralds, but the first level is literally designed so that you can get nearly all of them if you're good. And, sure, you need to get 50 rings, but that's basically x amount of time into a level - about the only time you won't get those rings is in final boss levels.

And, Rush Jet, to a lesser extent than in Mario or Sonic but far more reliably and to an extent nonetheless.

[Voltgloss]

Hell, SMB3 had shades of it, too. You didn't get infinite flight from racoon Mario

...but you do with a P-Wing.

Arguably, SMB2 started it all with Peach and her floaty jump.

And recent Mario games have the "mercy invincibility" powerups that appear when a player is having trouble with a level. The player can choose to use it, or not. Up to them.

[BobisOnlyBob]

And recent Mario games have the "mercy invincibility" powerups that appear when a player is having trouble with a level. The player can choose to use it, or not. Up to them.

Ah yes, the white tanooki suit of shame! Great for beginners, legitimately mocking for stubborn veterans struggling on an awkward jump. Or just playing badly.

I think I preferred Mario Galaxy's Super Guide, at least using it only marks that stage as guide-assisted clear, rather than marking the whole save file as imperfect - I can never get shiny stars in Super Mario 3D Land because I was curious how the White Tanooki Suit looked! Damn you Nintendo!