THIS CHEESE... SKIPS THE SUB WORLD ENTIRELY. | Super Expert Endless [25,550+ Clears]

[@Currnation22]

Thanks!

[@philly234]

Hi

[@RoyruPlus]

hi

[@nemozetbit]

I feel like Roy is trigger Boo happy. Only levels he likes are expert levels with 0 deaths and 3 one ups at the end.

[@RoyruPlus]

??? it's called level design some levels just deserve an instant boo and most levels at the end I give actual thought behind the boo, meh or like. I feel like anyone who watches my content knows I give fair ratings 99.9% of the time.

[@26dollar]

the little timmys are trigger happy on the upload course button

[@Alice_Fumo]

@@RoyruPlus I watch you decently often and I find myself often disagreeing with your criteria for rating. My observation is that you seem to rate levels almost entirely based on the context of an endless super expert run and thus will boo almost every level which requires spending a handful of lives to figure out the elements you'd consider "unfair". Thus, you often boo a level which to me looked fun to play. Other criteria, such as how nice the level was aesthetically, or how creative the concept was barely seem to matter at all when the level was deemed 'unfair'. Personally, I think a 'meh' is in order for any level which shows a lot of effort put into either aesthetics, creativity or gameplay, regardless of how fair it was. And while you might argue that fairness IS a large part of what constitutes good gameplay, I think they should be viewed separately, as fairness only really matters for endless runs, but not when viewing the level in isolation. It's fine for it to be a criterion, but it shouldn't overpower everything else. I would like to see you relax your boo criteria a fair bit and reserve it for levels where the creator clearly purposely made a worse level than they could have. If they tried, but failed at making a good level, it should be a 'meh'. Attempts at making good levels should always be rewarded, as even if the creator is not good yet, they may find it motivating and continue making levels until they make actually good levels. It creates a contrast where people know that if they try their best, they are rewarded, if they make their levels purposely bad, they don't. If the standards are too high, people may think: "Nobody will like my levels anyways, so I might as well upload garbage".

[@RoyruPlus]

@@Alice_Fumo The criteria you see in these videos when doing endless IS for endless. Aesthetics can matter, creativity can matter, but 50% of the grade is fairness. The rest of the grade falls into every other category. Outside of endless, when sent a level, I grade it completely fair with thinking of every single side of grading. I have actually turned a meh into a like because of creative stuff, or even great aesthetics. Yes this has happened in Endless before. But if a level reaches an instant boo state (even if unintentional at times), it will receive said boo before it can redeem itself. As long as it stays a meh and learning towards a boo, it can redeem itself at the end result screen or when I skip. You don't get to see the side of non endless grading unless there is a "submitted level" in the video at the end/middle ish portion. Mostly due to the fact I run Super Expert 90% of the time. I have ran contests in the past and do very fair grading. you can ask every regular in my community (twitch or discord) and most of them will back me up when I say I am fair in judgement. Endless is a different matter and lives are at stake, so 50% of the grade is fairness. I have much lower standards outside of endless.

[@Alice_Fumo]

@@RoyruPlus I think that changing your criteria based on whether or not you are currently doing your endless run is ... wrong? Is it fair that depending on whether or not you encounter a level in endless or outside of it, a creator would either get a boo or potentially even a like? That is what bothers me - having different criteria at different times. How you rate levels outside of endless is in my opinion how you should rate them always. You are fair in so far that you apply your criteria consistently and it's pretty clear what they are, but I disagree with switching them situationally. A level is either good or its not, that shouldn't change based on where you encounter it. And yes, I understand that the way you perceive a level is hugely different due to context and it sucks to see your lives get drained by things which are unfair, but .. I'm pretty sure endless super expert was not really even supposed to be possible. I also get that lowering the odds of re-encountering levels which are bad for your run is strategically a valid move, but to me it seems just so unfair to ever not rate levels as if you encounter it in isolation. I hope that makes sense.