|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Yeah, Dr. Light going all Ryu on your rear end was brilliant. In fact, almost all of the broad strokes of this sound great or at least silly in an Axe Cop sense. It's all the details that turn it into a horror. Like Simon said, someone should take this ROM and make a game out of it. e.g. Cheat Man is a really fun idea that someone with this level of hacking expertise could do great things with. But as implemented he's way too hard for a fun casual game and way too random for a serious skill game.
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2017 21:26
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 14:01 |
|
|
FPzero posted:
I was really digging Coconut Ruins, I was bummed when it just kind of up and quit 
|
|
#
¿
Apr 2, 2017 23:56
|
|
|
Hemingway To Go! posted:there is some hilarious poo poo like what Flame Mammoth now does. About 1 hour in, for people that don't feel like watching the whole thing. I actually kind of dig it--it's well telegraphed (outside from the inevitable first surprise kill) and it seems like even if you get stunned you have a chance to recover.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 22:18
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:It probably bears noting that it's a lot easier to make a hard hack than a fun hack. All you need to do is define a narrow path through the level and punish any deviations with failure. That's a pretty easy concept to grasp. Whereas making a fun hack requires a much deeper understanding of what makes games engaging and rewarding. It's not just the design end, either. Romhacking is hard! Many games have few or no editing resources, and even where they exist they're generally not terribly intuitive or user-friendly. Often due to technical limitations they're only really capable of editing a subset of what the game can do, which is usually a subset of what it looks like the game can do because a bunch of stuff will be hardcoded (they certainly weren't written with modding in mind.) If you want to go beyond that, welp, guess you're learning how to write assembly code by hand. Pasting spikes and pits everywhere is easy, getting a game to do something new and interesting is tough. Granted, this doesn't explain stuff like Rockman CX, but in theory at least some bullshit hardmode hacks might have had loftier intentions that got scuttled for technical reasons.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 5, 2017 19:37
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:Can you Runic Blue Magic? I want to say that you can Runic anything that costs MP but I've honestly never tried it with Blue Magic. Honestly it would be a sweet ability if you could use it against the late-game "magic" like Absolute 0 but I'm guessing that it doesn't work there because those abilities don't actually have MP costs. IIRC a lot of monster spells have an MP cost of 20, but Runic is hardcoded to only work against proper "spell" spells with the color dot and everything.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
What the gently caress, Ninjaboy?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2017 22:38
|
|
|
Aniodia posted:On the topic of judging, I went searching through the VLDC9 topic just to see what the poo poo was going on with Sky At The Weird (because I'm not even PLAYING that poo poo and I wanted to know what the fresh gently caress went on in this guy's head). While I didn't seem to find anything on that outside of people wanting a green goal-door, I did find this. Kind of a lovely thing to do, regardless of your reasons. I think it's legitimate to ding a level a few points overall if it's that frustrating--like, I don't really care how nice your level looks if I can't see half of it because it's gated behind insanely difficult sections--but only up to a point. Completely tanking something with single digit scores is well beyond that point.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2017 15:58
|
|
|
It's really disappointing too because there were some really cool segments in there. If they had toned down some of the crazy stuff it would be an awesome level.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2017 22:07
|
|
|
get that OUT of my face posted:That was a real "alpha and omega" video. A better name for "Oops!" would have been "gently caress You!" because that's what that level says to the player from beginning to end. Emphasis on end. That's one of the biggest dick moves in the entire hack 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 19, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Bruceski posted:Any one of the back and forth bits could have been a cute little level (though that last big vertical one... if your solution to "what if they mess up" is "don't mess up" then you need to take another look at your design) but all of them together after a random assortment of initial stage design, was definitely a slog. Yeah, there have been plenty of actual Mario levels with similar "go back and forth through a big area" setup and they tend to be very fun and memorable. But they also limit themselves to just one area like that.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2017 01:58
|
|
|
Rabbi Raccoon posted:FP, why did you kill Moonwalking Koopa? What did he do to you? He just wanted to bring you joy. I think the key to Mass Extinction is that it's extremely explicit about where you should ditch Yoshi. That takes out a lot of the frustration that mandatory Yoshi jumps can lead to.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
I dont know posted:But then you would lose the Mass Extinction joke, and the level would have to be renamed. I think they're talking about taking out death pits other than the "no Yoshi allowed" pits, so that you can't accidentally lose Yoshi before the sign and get stuck.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
Cheez posted:And I'm going to say it again, there's only really one point in the level where the gimmick was working against playability. Multiple points. Not only is it fairly simple to get yourself perma-stuck on some segments, the upward rushing platform segment seems incredibly janky. Actually, physics in general on the vertical segments are broken (randomly registering hits when spin bouncing, etc.) Also, as mentioned in the commentary using looking left/right as a platforming mechanic is very cumbersome since it doesn't play nicely with the other controls. The whole level is very anti-playability. You can think it's a cool and interesting idea. Honestly, from a conceptual standpoint I agree, and I'm really curious to see what someone with better restraint could do with the mechanic in a more conventional Mario level. But it just fundamentally doesn't work.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2017 20:25
|
|
|
Power Bottom posted:I feel like it would have been significantly less garbage if it didn't have the vertical sections (because they were by far the most buggy) and the "abuse L/R scrolling to phase through walls" sections (because they required meta-knowledge of the game engine and the controls in a contest that's supposed to be about vanilla level design). I could see it being workable if they were just horizontal platforms and it was like... a level where you had to climb up a huge tree in a spiral pattern, because that would make sense from both a design and aesthetic perspective.  There's a reason that most of the levels in Best World don't push their gimmick to their logical conclusion, because that's really not what makes a good Mario level.To hook into the conversation earlier about secret exits, stuff like wall phasing would have been a neat way to hide an exit. But... what exactly was it supposed to add here except breaking up the gameplay? It's not a mastery check because the game hands you the solution. You can say "oh, weird, neat I guess???" when you see it in action but then it just does the same thing several more times.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2017 16:15
|
|
|
The coin at the beginning was a nice touch. The first half in general seemed pretty inoffensive. Even with the lack of powerups I think it would have been salvageable if it had been cut down a bit. If they took like the best 3 setups after the midpoint and then ended it I think it would have made a fine level. It seemed like it had a lot of padding, in the form of platforming that was tough enough to kill you if you were being sloppy and just trying to get through to the tricky parts, but not actually tough enough to be interesting or challenging.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
I'm really confused about the intent of the mushrooms, given the presence of the filter. You can't carry mushrooms between segments because of the filter, so I guess they're there to give you a boost on a particularly difficult segment? But the info box doesn't really communicate that, and most players probably aren't going to bother saving them because it seems to be set up as "you have two mushrooms to make it through this whole gauntlet in one go."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 5, 2017 20:04
|
|
|
Cheez posted:I may be wrong on this but I think the whole deal is that this is possible in vanilla? Doesn't really change how the execution feels, but maybe it's supposed to be really interesting on that level instead of on playing it. The sticking point is that the level takes away the mushrooms after each segment, which is in no way suggested by the wording. You don't get the mushrooms for "all" segments, you get the mushrooms for "up to 2" segments. The warning to use them wisely could very naturally be interpreted as "don't gently caress it up and lose them because you're not getting them back", not "we're going to take them away even if you're careful enough to keep them, so don't use them until you're 100% sure you need them."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
Cheez posted:If someone told you that you only have two sandwiches to eat for all of the days you're locked in the basement, do you have two sandwiches every day or two sandwiches period? Jesus christ you're a dense motherfucker. Nobody (or at least hardly anybody) is talking about getting the mushrooms back ever; the level is quite clear on that point. The complaint is that the level forces you through a buzzsaw after each segment, so you even if you never get hit during a segment you don't get to keep the mushroom for all the levels. Someone who quite reasonably interprets the message as saying "you have 2 mushrooms and only 2 mushrooms to get through this entire gauntlet" is likely to screw themselves out of one or both mushrooms. I guess in your analogy this would be someone deciding to ration themselves part of a sandwich and save the rest of it for future days, only to have someone come in and take the half eaten sandwich away at dawn the next day. Because when they said "you only have two sandwiches to eat for all of the days" they really meant "you only have two days in which you get to eat sandwiches out of all of the days", even though that's a really tortured interpretation of the basic instruction "you only have two sandwiches to eat for all of the days."
|
|
#
¿
Nov 8, 2017 05:12
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:Now I'm not a romhack expert, but I would still say it should be kinda obvious even without playtesting that throwing poo poo at the player that they have no possible way of reacting to in time is bad game design. And with that kind of attitude you never will be one either  What, you want people to beat your hack without savestates? What's the point of that? It's madness.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2018 23:29
|
|
|
I took the randomizer out for a spin after watching the LP and a couple other videos. For a while I thought I had a really interesting progression going but then it turns out sll the critical progression items I was working my way through dungeons to find were just in a random cave I overlooked. That's my main complaint with the randomizer; it's so rare that progression items actually wind up in dungeons that every run seems to turn into "loot all the important items in the overworld and then go beat whatever dungeons."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 27, 2018 06:13
|
|
|
CPColin posted:There are no romance hacks; it takes hard work and communication. romance hack: finger the butthole (works for both guys and girls)
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2018 04:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 16, 2024 14:01 |
|
|
That's great to hear. I probably won't get around to trying it out for a while, so hopefully by then it will have a bit more polish.
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2018 17:23
|
|