Hi! I'm doing OLDC through PMs now. I like having an audience of one and only one.
I really really like your take on Mario levels. I like your Minecraft-esque details on the sides of the rooms and just generally on everything. It must have taken a lot of time to do, but you also must have really enjoyed it.
Just one question: Why did you make this level? No seriously.
As mapping grows beyond a simple "I'm making maps because it's fun," it becomes necessary to start labeling the process of mapping and playing in very concrete, solid ways which at first glance seem like fluffy nonsense. So in the spirit of feedback, please follow me through this. I don't pretend it's totally accurate, and it's not complete; there's still other parts to consider while mapping.
Generally, art gets pieced up into works. Each painting is one work, and everything inside the frame is meant to be taken together as one whole. Music has songs, where each song is meant to be taken together in one listening. Novels are one story, complete from cover to cover. Thus, in SRB2, some amount of cohesive design seems to fit with our already established cultural norms. To make a map which seems fragmented and uncohesive would be subversive in nature because of the established expectation sitting in your head.
In the SRB2 community, we consider each map as a separate canvas. At least I do. In the context of level packs, you could make the case that the canvas is the entire pack, or that the zone is the canvas, but this is the OLDC we're talking about. Maps have to come in standalone, and that's the division we're working with here.
Again the question: Why is this all here?
Because, by putting all of these different sections together into one map, you're implying through your medium that they belong together. Most often, mappers stick with one aesthetic idea and develop it throughout an entire map (or an entire zone) by stretching the idea and reapplying it and casting out that same old lexicon in combinations you had not expected. Ultimately, SRB2 mapping is one giant pot of ideas and, as a mapper, you're trying to give a new idea into the pot.
The Greenflower set actually gives mappers the biggest advantage in this regard. The GFZ set has already been worked in so many different ways already that you can know exactly what has been done. All of the ways you break the mold and subvert people's expectations by creating something original will be clearly defined. The one disadvantage to GFZ maps are that, in order to be an effective map, your map must have something which is clearly and most definitely new and original. In a Sonic game where the texture set implies the level, it's easy to let the texture set itself become your lexicon, where your map becomes simply a product of the theming. I think the better way is to let your map determine your theming and pick the textures which best suit the map you decide to make. However, this may be impossible, because (for me) the level and the texture set come together as one mental image; the two usually cannot be separated.
You have not picked GFZ. You sat down and decided to make a Mario level. That in itself is a subversion, and Mario maps are so unpopular in this community that, in the context of the SRB2 community, you don't have that heavy set of background knowledge about what a Mario-style map is, what it has been, and what it has not been. We do have a good number of Mario maps floating around here, but the theme doesn't get enough attention that any good mappers have really sat down with the theme and defined what it is. You're the first person to give the Mario theme the attention it needs to start building a definition around it, and that's great!
But it's also scary. Because the territory is so under-traveled, I wonder if you set out in purpose to give a broad definition of the theme in a workable, functional way that would make your level the first serious Mario level. I believe the best way to define an idea broadly is to offer a specific definition. By defining the Mario theme as small confined passageways with defined and specific platforming challenges, you would present a more forceful definition than simply offering up a variety pack. And, if you forerun the Mario idea with a specific definition, your own work will hold up as interesting and still relevant as other people begin offering their own specific definitions. It's entirely possible (though unlikely) that Penopat could answer your definition of confined passageways with platforming challenging with a specific definition of expansive landscapes dotted with looming fortresses. Both interpretations of the same basic aesthetic idea would still be valid.
So, again,
where are you going with this. Your definite and most concrete direction you're going in the level is with your detail work on the sides and edges of the level. Those frilly ruffles give the map its mature tone and authority, and inside those details you give new weight and new seriousness to old ideas about what a Mario map should be. Inside this map, you have packaged scattered, unrelated ideas about the Mario theme and tried to hold them together inside your detail work.
Was that what you wanted? If it was, then great! But I do believe that you could have done more with the map. Each individual room could have worked out your one idea about the Mario theme in different ways, and you could have done more with your level than bring together scattered archetypes about the Mario theme.
~ ~ ~
You know, part of my understanding of the mapping process is to focus on the author's intent, and I have to guess at this. Obviously, because I'm guessing, I have quite a large possibility to guess wrong. I really don't want to offend you by guessing wrong; I'm just trying to help. Even regardless of my guesses, I still may mistake you for being at a different level of thinking and so present you with a more elevated level of discourse than you can process. I think I'm just going to shut up and hit the "send" button.
Fawfulfan said:
I really think you should actually just post this as a legitimate vote and give a score.
BlueZero4 said:
May I ask why? Would you prefer it that way?
Fawfulfan said:
I'd prefer it that way because I think it would help other people. I know I've often found it helpful to look at ratings for other peoples' levels.
Though I also have to say that I don't understand why you find my level's theme to be inconsistent. I consider it to be quite cohesive.
BlueZero4 said:
Um, I don't know either. I just went back and played your level again, and I think I'm once more speaking too quickly and without thought.
I think there's a part of this that I've failed to conceptualize. Now we're coming back to that old "Hur hur hur, don't port other games to SRB2" idea. There's a gradient involved, a sliding scale between directly porting ideas from other games and using pieces of the game with barely a glance at the source material. I am not a Mario fan, so I don't know exactly what you've taken and what's your own. To me, the second area (platforming over open-air deathpit) doesn't seem to match the feel of the rest of the level, which is clearly grounded and a little more landscape-y. The blue underground area at the end seems unnecessary to me, again because you're working a day-time on-the-ground-floor level.
Because these two seem out of place to me, I am speculating (and am likely to be completely wrong) that you wanted to include them because of their presence in real Mario games and wanted to try your hand at them, rather than wanting to build a level with the Mario theme with more of a focus on finding your own direction inside your own map. Am I communicating the difference in mindset clearly?
If you understand where I'm coming from, please tell me: Am I wrong, and if so, how much? I ran into this problem about assuming things with Blade last contest, and I want to know now.
Fawfulfan said:
I don't think you're wrong at all...that's a pretty realistic description of my thoughts on this level. And yes, I'd imagine that you'd appreciate it more if you were a Mario fan...without any prior knowledge or liking for Mario, I'd understand how the underground section felt out of place.
BlueZero4 said:
Okay. Well, I think I hurt Blade really badly two months ago, and I didn't want to do that again to you. I'm going to go apologize to him now.