That's nice and all, but not really true.
I guess we all naturally agree that gameplay is more important than eyecandy. Duh.
But eyecandy IS important to make a level good, because it's a major factor in how playing it feels. A good comparison is music. If you had to play a level that's really awesome except that it features the most annoying "bleep-bleep" music ever, wouldn't that make playing it a quite less pleasent experience? On the other hand, you can turn music off. That will either become boring, or not.
It's the exact same with graphics. I've never played "Bilsy's Revenge?", but the "WACKO!!!" example doesn't really work because the blocks that were used probably at least look okay... meaning that the level's eyecandy is simple, not ugly. Big, fat difference, since simplicity can be awesome. Better than fancy, distracting eyecandy in many cases.


Pageclaim in the name of aesthetic values!

Originally Posted by ZAPPER

And Cooba, I want to see YOU make a better episode that's better in MY opinion.

Thats highly unfair. Your episode would always be better because
A) You would like your episode more since you made it.
B) You hate Cooba. It's Cooba's episode. Ifso Facto, you'd hate Cooba's episode no matter what.

No. I don't have to like a person and can still enjoy his stuff.

A good example is film starts. You might like an actor a lot, and be a fan of his films, while his/her real personality is awful.

And I second Faw. There's a difference between ugly eyecandy and standard/boring one. Having not too much eyecandy is ok, but having it ugly isn't.

Originally Posted by LittleFreak

Having not too much eyecandy is ok, but having it ugly isn't.

Having not too much eyecandy results in the level looking and feeling boring, and thus decreasing the overall fun value from the player. If the level is quite long, and still has little to no eyecandy, the player will just get frustrated and skip it. Having ugly and annoying eyecandy results in completely repulsing the player and forcing him to skip the level straight away.

So either way the player will JJNxt.

I disagree. Let's say EM's Invasion of Deserto pack would have not very much eyecandy - just enough to make it look ok, but the awesome gameplay would still be awesome.

Of course the pack would be overall worse, but I wouldn't quit just because the eyecandy sucks.

Also, you could have a level using only about 2 colors and perhaps 3 different hues for each, and it wouldn't exactly be colorful, but if pulled off well, it can still look perfectly fine in its simplicity.
..it's hard to explain. Meh.

Originally Posted by LittleFreak

Let's say Mike's Invasion of Deserto pack would have not very much eyecandy - just enough to make it look ok, but the awesome gameplay would still be awesome.

But without eyecandy the gameplay wouldn't feel as awesome as it was.

Originally Posted by Fawriel

Also, you could have a level using only about 2 colors and perhaps 3 different hues for each, and it wouldn't exactly be colorful, but if pulled off well, it can still look perfectly fine in its simplicity.

That sounds like a neat concept for a level, actually. Also, when used together with multiple translucency effects, such a level would look great, and would be scored better in everyone's rankings since it would look good while it would be extremely simple.

(split this discussion into a separate thread?)

Originally Posted by Cooba

But without eyecandy the gameplay wouldn't feel as awesome as it was.

That's the point. It wouldn't get as high rated, but it would still get a good score, wouldn't it?

Hear hear! Don't knock it if you haven't tried it, every ugly duckling can turn into a beautifull swan. Zapper may be using tilesets that look like they've been made with Paint, but that what gives it it's charm. Remember Biohazard's "Bilsy's Revenge?", which used tilesets that look the same?

The most important thing with eye-candy is not how good or bad it is: it's mostly how it stands out, how it's used in creative ways. You can fill a field with all kinds of flowers and trees or just leave it empty; neither stands out. One quick look at Violet's screenshots shows it: some tiles are used in a non-standard way, but they still look good; in a style unique to the author. It makes you think: "wow, why haven't I thought of that?", and thus makes it memorable. However, stand-alone eye-candy does nothing except draw your eye to the level, as a level's rating is mostly determined by the way it's played. A nice example is WACKO!!!, a puzzling maze using only standard one-tile blocks.

The fault here is that people think eye-candy equals gameplay. By standard eye candy is merely decoration, nothing else, unless the player can interact with it, like destroying it or hiding behind it; only then is it part of the gameplay. Want an example? Turn on low-detail on JJ2

I'm working on and off on my episode myself, focussing on the way it's played and not on how it looks (untill I actually finish all levels). Maybe when I have a nice area to capture I'll post some shots if there's enough demand.

Look like? Yes... uh... they onlly LOOK lie that. (This is awkward)
Anyways, the idea of my level in question, is a dream. And we all know dreams can be weird and... bad... looking. I once had a dream where I was surrounded and attacked by polygons! (DON'T ask why.) I'll make it look better if it is heavily demanded, but unless it is, I won't change it. And by heavely I mean 50 people all rating it and saying it sucks BECAUSE of the eye-candy. And Cooba, I like Rabbit Honour Gaurd, and I think it's better than mine. And I may not be friends with you, but that doesn't mean I would treat you unfairly. Why does every thread I post in become a battleground between me and Cooba?

What does RHG have to do with this?

It is'nt the eyecandy alone or the gameplay that matter, its BOTH that count.
If EVERY level was like zappers levels OR just a picture, Then JJ2 would be Dead as A Doornail Already.

What more can i say besides that a level needs a equal balance of both.

Originally Posted by ZAPPER

And Cooba, I like Rabbit Honor Guard, and I think it's better than mine.

I like it as well. It has some neat stuff (most of which are quite old but very very underused tricks), and the level design is very fun. However, Overlord doesn't like the official tilesets, and that's why he didn't really focus on eyecandy when making those.

I hate the official levels! They're boring...

If the JJ2 levels were boring you must think excellent level packs are mildly entertaining.
There are better reasons to hate the official levels,especially since your screenshots look worse than the official levels

Originally Posted by Super_Jarno

Well thats right LittleFreak
i used the background from it the tileset and the hills

People have already told you this, but it would best come from me.

Don't do this. If you want to use something I created, ask me first.

If you find the JJ2 levels boring, you're playing them the wrong way. Play fast, with capslock on. If you do it the right way, they'll be a lot more fun.

Originally Posted by EvilMike

People have already told you this, but it would best come from me.

Don't do this. If you want to use something I created, ask me first.

iam very sorry evilmike but if i put you into the credits

Originally Posted by Super_Jarno

iam very sorry evilmike but if i put you into the credits

He says no. So no.

Originally Posted by Cooba

He says no. So no.

I dont like you anymore

For stating the truth?
What a horrible reason to hate someone.

Originally Posted by Cooba

He says no. So no.

I am able to speak for myself.

iam very sorry evilmike but if i put you into the credits

Just tell me next time you decide to borrow something. I would appreciate being credited for anything that I made which goes into your level pack.

ahh ok ill make an new episode

but you wanna make an episode with me?

I haven't updated my episode page for while