 Poll
|
| Question: |
|
Author
|
Topic: Should we include these Hacks in the archive? (Read 2801 times)
|
MegaManJuno
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #15 on: November 29, 2006, 03:46:41 am » |
|
After some further though and reviewing some of the posts here, I've decided to go with a yes vote. I think Neil hit the proverbial nail on the head with his post, since it kind of mirrors what I was thinking as well.
|
|
|
|
|
RedComet
Guest
|
|
« Reply #16 on: November 29, 2006, 06:02:21 am » |
|
Yes for the three. They're extremely well done and I have no problem with the site archiving graphic hacks of this quality.
|
|
|
|
|
deespence2929
Guest
|
|
« Reply #17 on: November 29, 2006, 06:27:59 am » |
|
I think that SMB3 mario is a stackable hack. If thats the correct term. You can apply it to other hacks that have less well done marios. And it gives him his appropriate SMB3 jumping/enemy stomping heights also. It would be best if the site had a a properly done SMB3 gfx port, but I don't know of any. Most of them change the levels too probably. I tried making one myself but to do it properly takes a bit more work than I could do. The flashing of the flowers and coin boxes need to be stopped. The bricks cant really be ported properly either, you just have to redesign them to look smb-ish. And I was having problems with the floor, heres an example.  So I just stopped doing mine. |
|
|
|
|
Nightcrawler
Guest
|
|
« Reply #18 on: November 29, 2006, 10:23:55 am » |
|
There is no question on the SMB3 hack.. That's a poor example of unquestionable hack in the database. It belongs here. Aside from the sprites as iamstillhiro1112 mentioned, it changes the physics of Mario to match SMB3 as well as many of the animations.
If these Castlevania hacks changed the game play of the character to match the newly inserted one, that would be a big difference and be an automatic go right in and we wouldn't be having this vote.
Also, Spikeman, a pointless hack to YOU is not a pointless hack to others. We don't judge whether a hack is pointless or not. We try not to judge content at all. Instead, we go by what's been done. DB summed up our categories nicely on the previous page. Spoof was created for that very reason. The content in those is pointless to sum, however the hacks were still complete projects regardless.
In this case, not much was changed in the game, so we now do have to use a bit of content/quality judgment which we try to avoid if possible. I always lean toward being less lenient and not including it because I am of the mentality quality over quantity. I would rather have 10 hacks in the database of superb quality than 1000 where you can't weed out good from bad anymore.
Obviously, there is middle ground to this, but I personally lean more toward that side. This stems from say the hack archive at Zophar's. It's awful. I don't want that heap here, so that's generally why I am less lenient.
Beyond that, plenty of good points have been brought up here that I agree with on both sides. It's a close vote so far.
|
|
|
|
|
Piotyr
Guest
|
|
« Reply #19 on: November 29, 2006, 09:05:24 pm » |
|
There is no question on the SMB3 hack.. That's a poor example of unquestionable hack in the database. It belongs here. Aside from the sprites as iamstillhiro1112 mentioned, it changes the physics of Mario to match SMB3 as well as many of the animations.
If these Castlevania hacks changed the game play of the character to match the newly inserted one, that would be a big difference and be an automatic go right in and we wouldn't be having this vote.
Also, Spikeman, a pointless hack to YOU is not a pointless hack to others. We don't judge whether a hack is pointless or not. We try not to judge content at all. Instead, we go by what's been done. DB summed up our categories nicely on the previous page. Spoof was created for that very reason. The content in those is pointless to sum, however the hacks were still complete projects regardless.
In this case, not much was changed in the game, so we now do have to use a bit of content/quality judgment which we try to avoid if possible. I always lean toward being less lenient and not including it because I am of the mentality quality over quantity. I would rather have 10 hacks in the database of superb quality than 1000 where you can't weed out good from bad anymore.
Obviously, there is middle ground to this, but I personally lean more toward that side. This stems from say the hack archive at Zophar's. It's awful. I don't want that heap here, so that's generally why I am less lenient.
Beyond that, plenty of good points have been brought up here that I agree with on both sides. It's a close vote so far.
*Claps at night crawlers judgement as well as his choice of avatar and name*  |
|
|
|
|
deespence2929
Guest
|
|
« Reply #20 on: November 30, 2006, 06:16:16 am » |
|
I think you should be careful about trying to be too elite tho. I think acmlm is gonna take this approach with their hack hosting service and basically they will only host Mario Adventure calibur stuff over there and some good hacks will be missed by them.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: December 01, 2006, 04:53:12 am by iamstillhiro1112 »
|
|
|
|
deespence2929
Guest
|
|
« Reply #21 on: November 30, 2006, 08:12:53 pm » |
|
The majority has spoken, so I guess we will be seeing these in the next site update? Or do I have to write up the submission forms again.
|
|
|
|
|
Aerdan
Guest
|
|
« Reply #22 on: November 30, 2006, 08:35:28 pm » |
|
My feelings on this are mixed, but I voted to include these anyhow.
On the one hand, they *are* just graphics hacks. No gameplay modifications were made, so they're not Improvements in any sense of the word.
On the other hand, they can be used as a basis for game improvements. They also aren't the usual naked $character graphics hacks, either.
I think the later outweighs the former, really.
|
|
|
|
|
Simpleton
Guest
|
|
« Reply #23 on: December 01, 2006, 02:26:37 am » |
|
Yes, due to the potential for an improvement hack. I'd end up adding a graphics hack category if I was stuck implementing it though...*shudders at the thought of the flood of crap hacks* Mebbe take it on a case by case basis though...>_>
|
|
|
|
|
Aerdan
Guest
|
|
« Reply #24 on: December 01, 2006, 02:36:49 am » |
|
Exactly how many 'naked mario' hacks have you seen turned into gameplay modifications as well?
|
|
|
|
|
I.S.T.
Guest
|
|
« Reply #25 on: December 01, 2006, 03:03:05 am » |
|
I think in cases where long amounts of time/quality assurance were spent, graphics only hacks should be allowed. I don't think it's particularly fair to say to a guy, "Hey, despite the fact that you spent some 30(Or whatever long ass number ya want) hours completely revamping the sprites for the central characters of a game, your hack isn't up to our standards."
|
|
|
|
|
Piotyr
Guest
|
|
« Reply #26 on: December 01, 2006, 10:35:12 am » |
|
I think in cases where long amounts of time/quality assurance were spent, graphics only hacks should be allowed. I don't think it's particularly fair to say to a guy, "Hey, despite the fact that you spent some 30(Or whatever long ass number ya want) hours completely revamping the sprites for the central characters of a game, your hack isn't up to our standards."
Just because it took them 30 some odd hours to do does not mean it turned out good. |
|
|
|
|
Nightcrawler
Guest
|
|
« Reply #27 on: December 01, 2006, 03:00:35 pm » |
|
The majority has spoken, so I guess we will be seeing these in the next site update? Or do I have to write up the submission forms again.
We're going to leave it up for a few more days yet. Yes, you'll have to resubmit when it's official. Rejected submissions are actually removed from the database. |
|
|
|
|
deespence2929
Guest
|
|
« Reply #28 on: December 01, 2006, 04:17:15 pm » |
|
I think in cases where long amounts of time/quality assurance were spent, graphics only hacks should be allowed. I don't think it's particularly fair to say to a guy, "Hey, despite the fact that you spent some 30(Or whatever long ass number ya want) hours completely revamping the sprites for the central characters of a game, your hack isn't up to our standards."
Just because it took them 30 some odd hours to do does not mean it turned out good. On topic. THey did turn out good. The links are in the 2nd post on the first page. |
|
|
|
|
MegaManJuno
Guest
|
|
« Reply #29 on: December 01, 2006, 07:31:43 pm » |
|
I don't think there's any question of the fact that any graphics hacks submitted would be on a case-by-case basis. You'd have to do it, otherwise you either end up A) excluding all (including good ones) OR B) including all (including a massive tidal wave of bad ones).
It would be up to the submitter to provide the reasoning as to why they should be included in the archive, so that the staff (or members in general if/when public voting on submissions is implemented on the site) can make an informed decision whether to reject it or not, without having to put up a poll for each submission.
|
|
|
|
|
|
RHDN Forum Archive
