raocow's talkhaus

docopoper wrote:

Sturg wrote:I'm beginning to think we need to get all the level authors back and just have everyone re-do their levels one way or another. There just seems way too many problems with both difficulty as well as just being boring/annoying.

I would love that so much. If every author came back and fixed all the problems listed - the game would improve so much.

Can we also please not be too conservative on cutting levels (it's not even all that harsh to have a level cut - it just means that it gets put back in the general level list and might be used in a later episode if it's improved enough).

I find it both aggravating and difficult to deal with that it seems to be specific level creators that are massively dragging the quality down - but honestly at this point even if we end up cutting most of a particular person's levels - we should just do it. Because what keeping them in ASMBXT did to the game really annoyed me.

Sturg wrote: EDIT: Also I think that because LunaDll wasn't working for you that made a lot of levels unplayable, including the Final Level Name Pending since that one uses a crap-load of lunadll.

Either way I still really dislike the final boss, which sucks - because ASMBXT did the final boss so well. The level itself is pretty fun I find - except I find the miniboss horrid.

Honestly, if I could - I would cut the final level and have it redone to be less of a monolith with a stupidly difficult ending, but that is a heck of a lot of work and a lot of the level is actually good anyway.

Honestly, The final Boss in ASMBXT in raocow's LP is a lot better than what I originally did, but I still don't like it, even if it was done up halfway through the LP in a day.

Also, good to know I'm not the only one who doesn't like the final battle.

Lastly, I should remind people that I did say then when someone submitted a level to A2MBXT, you gave use express permission to modify your level as needed, for bug or quality reasons. What we should do is take stock of the levels, determine which ones can be salvaged, cut the salvageable ones and replace them with other levels, then divvy up the levels and clean them up.

EDIT: Maybe get in the IRC 6PM EST tomorrow, and we can go through this?

modify them a little bit, to rework what doesnt work, okay, fine, that was part of the initial 'agreement'.

But don't deleat them, and keep them extremely... like, recognisable. Find the core of the level and make it shine. That's fine. But you really should not completely remove a level.

I'm serious here, I don't like that some of you are thinking of litteraly removing some levels one bit.
Even USS Unoptimised would have been salvegeable with some work.

SAJewers wrote:EDIT: Maybe get in the IRC 6PM EST tomorrow, and we can go through this?

Fine by me, I hope other folks will be there as well.

No offense meant to Isieri, but I'm not sure why one person's write up is suddenly making it as if the entire project needs to be scrapped and restarted. He's not the only person to have played these levels.

Also what Ometeotl said. Having a huge review like that is awesome, but it's still 'one voice'.

SAJewers wrote:What we should do is take stock of the levels, determine which ones can be salvaged, cut the salvageable ones and replace them with other levels, then divvy up the levels and clean them up.

Hehehe, I assume you mean the unsalvageable ones.

docopoper wrote:

SAJewers wrote:What we should do is take stock of the levels, determine which ones can be salvaged, cut the salvageable ones and replace them with other levels, then divvy up the levels and clean them up.

Hehehe, I assume you mean the unsalvageable ones.

Yes, I did.

Doctor Shemp wrote:It is a jerk move to cut them now but I would say it's more of a jerk move to make other people play levels like USS Suboptimal, Fluffly Quest, Tewi whatever it was called and so on. Besides, it's a jerk move to submit shitty levels in the first place.

Hey, there were plenty of jerk hard levels in world 8. They just were boring at the same time so nobody remembers them.

So one of Isrieri's request was to change around the order world one. We might as well start at the beginning. I don't know what my level was made first other than to make this game into a Septentrion sandwich.

raocow wrote:Even USS Unoptimised would have been salvegeable with some work.

That's like the one example that disproves the rules

Ometeotl wrote:No offense meant to Isieri, but I'm not sure why one person's write up is suddenly making it as if the entire project needs to be scrapped and restarted. He's not the only person to have played these levels.

The "one-person" write up consists a lot of what has been said all along.

Septentrion Pleiades wrote:

Doctor Shemp wrote:It is a jerk move to cut them now but I would say it's more of a jerk move to make other people play levels like USS Suboptimal, Fluffly Quest, Tewi whatever it was called and so on. Besides, it's a jerk move to submit shitty levels in the first place.

Hey, there were plenty of jerk hard levels in world 8. They just were boring at the same time so nobody remembers them.

I'm just picking the three that always get held up as like the "unholy trinity" of bad postgame level design in ASMBXT. I'm not picking them because they were difficult, although they were, but because there was so much bad about them that was raised during testing and then they were included anyway. Seeing as we could be repeating that same mistake, that's why I'm stressing those three.

raocow wrote:Even USS Unoptimised would have been salvegeable with some work.

Some work? No. A hell of a lot of work? Yes. You'd need to fix:

• The paratroopa behaving erratically and unpredictably
• The complete lack of a difficulty curve: it starts really hard and doesn't get any harder until right at the end where there's a difficulty spike of donut shooters everywhere
• Getting stuck on the ladders
• Getting crushed into the walls
• The paratroopa's AI seemingly getting puzzled by the other terrain outside the ship
• The fact that it doesn't even feel like a finished level, more like a proof of concept (and it is, if anything, a proof that the concept doesn't work)

If you fixed all of those things there would be nothing recognizable about the level anymore. It would be the same as scrapping the whole level and trying again with the same concept.

I know what you mean raocow. This is supposed to be a collaboration hack geared around letting the community have fun and all join in together.

But in every single game I've ever made I've had to cut stuff that I spent ages on that just didn't turn out very well (I even completely redid the Calleoca battle in the game when it was already nearly finished and I had spent months on it) - So I think you can see why I am pretty frustrated by this.

Ok raocow - I'll admit I am treating this too much like a professional game when the ethos that made ASMBXT work in the first place was to accept anything. I really didn't like the feeling of "oh - you're going to hate this next level" when watching other people LPing it.

I'm totally up for not cutting levels that the authors actually come back to fix - but ugh it's frustrating when they don't.

*sigh*

lordy this drama you could cut it with a toothpick

I have an IDEA!

Instead of cutting levels, we should just remove all love frog! That should solve all the problems in the game.

I don't think any level that it can't be salvage. If worst comes to worst, we will just have to chop of the cancerous parts.

My god though this is a well written review.

I know you're saying it's only one mouth raocow - but this mouth seem to be very good at game design.

Actually, one of the biggest things you have to learn when designing games is not to get defensive about what you've made if people say they don't like it. Being able to get over yourself and discard what isn't fun or detracts from the core gameplay of your game is one of the hardest things to come to terms with.

I can honestly say that you're probably more attached to the game than anyone else on the forum - I mean while we may have made a lot of the game - this game was made FOR you and I get that you want it to be a reflection of the community you've worked to create around you and how they see you. But if you want this to be a good game - you're going to have to let us make cuts.

I know it must feel bad to have your level cut from a game - but what's the point in QA if you don't actually make the changes you need to?

Septentrion Pleiades wrote:I have an IDEA!

Instead of cutting levels, we should just remove all love frog! That should solve all the problems in the game.

I don't think any level that it can't be salvage. If worst comes to worst, we will just have to chop of the cancerous parts.

When the basic premise of a level isn't fun - no amount of changing that level while still keeping the same premise is going to make that level fun. And since changing the premise is destroying the level's identity - it only makes sense to either replace or redo the level.

In fact that's why I cut the original version of the Calleoca fight - she was originally a stealth boss that was just plain boring to play and no matter what I did - she was still boring. So then I redid my level with a different premise - and now the level is actually really quite fun.

Septentrion Pleiades wrote:I have an IDEA!

Instead of cutting levels, we should just remove all love frog! That should solve all the problems in the game.

Ahahaha. I don't know whether this is a joke or not, but I think it's an excellent idea. Maybe some of them could stay. Overall though, I'd like to see how this would turn out. The love frog actually became my friend's sworn enemy as early as World 2 when were playing ASMBXT together, making me slowly realize there was almost always at least one or two instances of that enemy in every level, sometimes in places that didn't exactly make for a non-postgame obstacle.

yo, docopoper. What if there are some levels where the basic premise is actually pretty good but the execution is flawed? You speak like there aren't any of those to consider.

cheez8 wrote:yo, docopoper. What if there are some levels where the basic premise is actually pretty good but the execution is flawed? You speak like there aren't any of those to consider.

There definitely are - in fact from having finally read the entire review (and I honestly don't think there are too many spoilers if raocow wants to skim over it to get the gist of the reviews' tone) a lot of the levels seem to be very much salvageable.

I am just trying to push raocow to let us actually make cuts and big changes when we need to. I am very much opposed to cutting as anything other than a last resort. I was even fighting to keep the final battle in it's current state - just made easier - earlier in the development on the grounds that it was working well and had a lot of effort put into it, but it was just too unforgiving.

docopoper wrote:

cheez8 wrote:yo, docopoper. What if there are some levels where the basic premise is actually pretty good but the execution is flawed? You speak like there aren't any of those to consider.

There definitely are - in fact from having finally read the entire review (and I honestly don't think there are too many spoilers if raocow wants to skim over it to get the gist of the reviews' tone) a lot of the levels seem to be very much salvageable.

I am just trying to push raocow to let us actually make cuts and big changes when we need to. I am very much opposed to cutting as anything other than a last resort. I was even fighting to keep the final battle in it's current state - just made easier - earlier in the development on the grounds that it was working well and had a lot of effort put into it, but it was just too unforgiving.

I see. That sounds pretty reasonable! (though I kind of get the feeling whatever the final battle is can still be made forgiving with certain tweaks- possibly even putting it into its own level, or even breaking it into two separate levels, if it's unforgiving due in part to length. From the way you say you supported it, it sounds like the concept behind the battle is in itself solid. This isn't really relevant though, and I'm glad cutting levels is something you would only consider a last resort.)

Isrieri wrote:I've compiled a review of all the levels housed in the Episode 1 level list.

I've put a link to it up on the Bugpage. It's a long text file I didn't feel like putting on the wiki entry by entry, so you can either download it or read it on mediafire.

http://asmbxt.wikia.com/wiki/Episode1/Bugs

Thank you for the reviews!
Johnson McCain: Fun Times at the Laundromat: Lightning in a box: Ghosts in Space:

EDIT: Disregard everything below here until the other EDIT. Read Isieri's post below instead.

cheez8 wrote:yo, docopoper. What if there are some levels where the basic premise is actually pretty good but the execution is flawed? You speak like there aren't any of those to consider.

Skimming through the reviews, the only levels that Isieri recommended cutting completely rather than reworking heavily were the following:

"Plant Zone" by MonkeyShrapnel
"Koopa Time" by MonkeyShrapnel
"The Triforce Trials" by GanonTEK
"Grand Trunk Arena" by Minnakht
"Science Battle" by ??? (not on the Wiki)
"JAYBIRD & QUACK! ~DOUBT!^" by most of the ASMBXT team (come on us step it up)

Which aren't that many, and possibly someone can salvage them. Based on the level design abilities shown by the designers, I'd say someone other than them. And for completionism's sake, here are the levels Isieri recommended reworking heavily:

"Poison Tree" by Narolas
"Sloppy Sands" by MonkeyShrapnel
"Cinder Canyon" by Alpherio (just the second half)
"Soggy Steelworks" by Heavy Sigh
"Fun Fungus Function" by Ometeotl (specifically just the graphics in the second half)
"We Will Fall Together" by SAJewers
"Item Babysitting" by Horikawa Otane
"Navel of the Universe" by Louiejub
"Castle of the Above and Elsewhere" by Octagon (note: Isieri does say "scrap it" but also said "started promising")
"Dark Side of the Sun" by Louiejub (mostly just the graphics)

Of course there are a bunch of other levels that need small fixes but, in synopsis form, those are the big offenders.

EDIT: Stop disregarding here.
Also, I'm not sure where SAJewers' original post was about his levels "Qraestolia Caverns" & "We Will Fall Together", so I won't quote it but will go directly to my opinions, which I believe I did post when the levels were originally submitted.

Qraestolia Caverns
I agree with every single thing Isieri said about this level and he said it more succinctly than I could, so just re-read that. I know you said that there is a linear path straight through the level, and there is, but it's similar to the linear path employed in classic LoZ dungeon design: it's only linear and obvious once you know it's there. Anyone playing through for the first time and happening to be on the linear shortest path won't know they're on the shortest path and are liable to wander off it in case they miss something. When I played through the level for the first time it took me 5+ minutes and that was without dying. That's way too long for a Mario level in my opinion. It feels like a level that's more appropriate to a Metroidvania game.

We Will All Fall Together
Again, what Isieri said, especially with regards to the length and the enemy spam. My level "Blue Surfer" is a reference to the game "Silver Surfer" which is an entire game of punishingly hard enemy spam and yet I still had the decency to tone it down for this game. So when you have someone saying a level that's a tribute to a dick of a game is easier than your level then you have a problem. Also, if you're attached to having the level match the length of the song, can't you shorten the song or something? The level really is too long.

Sheath Courage Returns
You said something along the lines of the platforms and boss behaving that way because that's how they do in the original game. Without having played the original game I'll just say that just because a commercial game does it doesn't mean it's necessarily a good idea. Besides, this is a different engine, so surely you can take some liberties.

Doctor Shemp wrote: "Science Battle" by ??? (not on the Wiki)

It's on the wiki, and isrieri didn't should that it needed to be cut.

I think everyone has been exaggeration the cutting issue.

Doctor Shemp wrote:"JAYBIRD & QUACK! ~DOUBT!^" by most of the ASMBXT team (come on us step it up)

There's no need to fix that one. It's a mess but that was the whole point, and I was being hyperbolic anyway. It has a certain kind of charm to it, it's the last level of the post-game, and I think it should remain as-is. I already feel bad for stirring up all this hubbub and making raocow a sadcow. That one in particular should just be left alone.

Technically no level needs to be cut. I only said to cut them because in my mind it would have been easier to start from scratch on those particular levels than to try and rework them. Less effort. But I don't want my review to be the start of a hack n' slash campaign when the vast majority of levels only ever needed a few tweaks and touches. These ones

"Plant Zone" by MonkeyShrapnel
"Koopa Time" by MonkeyShrapnel
"The Triforce Trials" by GanonTEK
"Grand Trunk Arena" by Minnakht

Are the only ones that are in great need of an overhaul.

Axon wrote:

I feel that this would make it trivial. It's not really hard with a little practice (and since the midpoint is right before the boss).

I assure you it does NOT. It only makes the sequence easier to learn, which should be the goal. I understand your other comments but at least make that change.

Apparently my intro level had foreground tree issues? Uhh... could someone fix the foreground trees so demo is behind them, if it's been modified to have an ending and all that?

This has little to do with the pruning and replanting, but what's with that "uh oh", Isrieri? Did Castle on the Moonlit Cliff make me that infamous?

Shemp: the metroidvania feel is exactly what I was going for.

We will fall together I've already decided to cut.

sheath courage I can fix the platforms, but I fail to see anything I can fix for the boss.

Yeah, let's just calm down and remember that we aren't intending on going on a hack and slash campaign here. This is just a requirement for QA to be meaningful in any way.