Since I uploaded a set I've been spending a lot more times reading reviews than I usually do. I've also strongly noticed the way people make their points when reviewing sets.

Comparisons. Reviewers keep comparing the set to another one. Ladies and gentlemen, this just isn't a fair way of reviewing! A very typical example are sets by Agama, most sets are constantly being compared to hers. Lemme point out a few things I've thought a lot about:

1) Everyone has an unique drawing style, you cannot expect everybody to draw in the same style as Agama did. If they did, it would just be copying her and sets would look the same all over at some point. You should always form your own ideas of a good set instead of just taking standard in another set all the time.

2) Sets' styles and differences are what that makes levels vary, tile quality and quantity means a lot when creating a level. For example, a set such as Swamps by Agama would not suit very well to a simply and flat level as it's far too detailed, while a level with characteristic depths would probably require it. It all depends on what level you're making when picking the set, and having "This set would just suck for the level I've in mind" is just being a poor reviewer. I've seen sets that do not support mad slopes and insane movement used well, just as well as I've seen the opposite.

3) The funniest thing about creating more sets is improving your methods of doing it, so instead of just looking back on the older works and compare the improvements of the set, try looking at it as was it a firstborn by a completely unknown author. It's like complaining about Wisety not using the same cool textures over and over again, but that's really what makes his sets original and worthy. Creating sets isn't just about putting puzzle pieces differently together.

The point and conclusion is that it's really up to the level creator to use the set and not up to the example level as many people review from. An example level doesn't show the entire set, but only one possible idea to use it as a demonstration of the set. A set is like artwork, and you should always think of it as that when reviewing imo. All my points summed up:

- Don't critic sets from the way they're drawn, but its mistakes. A set badly drawn could still make an interesting level as long it has a variant of tiles and the important tiles, such as wines and spikes, while a set that is erroneous drawn, having tiles not smoothly fitting together, just looks plain flawed.

- Make sure on you look on the set's originality. What efforts have the author put into it? Is it just rushed textures or is it thoughtful and original? In my opinion, a set is just not good if the author haven't put his creativity and spirit into it.

/end rant