Sonic Hacking Contest 2016 - THE RESULTS

Er, Donnie... Your evaluation on my Sonic Bash v2 hack:

"This is back yet again. Starting to get tired of returning hacks at this point. I think a good third of this year’s entries aren’t even debuting for the first time, it’s the same stuff from last year.

On the plus side, there were some changes. Still, I think it wasn’t necessary to submit the game again."


But it won the best multiplayer trophy, the main trophy I was aiming for (and didn't exist last year). So surely it was worth entering. I'd understand if it was the exact same game from last year, but it's not. And even with the small changes, a lot of work went into it (ever seen SYZ boss blocks not flicker?). You didn't really comment on the hack itself either; just expressed disappointment that my and other hacks were back in the contest. If that upsets you, then why does the 'Tails trophy' exist? Come on, I want to know what you thought about my hack, not the contest.

Rest of the evaluation by other judges, fair points. Also SuperEgg, come at me bro! =P

 

...wasn't that kinda the point of bringing Donnie, though? We don't want every judge to be the technical sort, who gets lost in the intricacies of a hack, and loses sight of the overall experience. I think Donnie's feedback speaks well to the casual player. Take, for example, Pocket Adventure: the hack means way less to a non-hacker. How about Eggmanland? It's just Sonic Unleashed minus the Werehog.

Yes, an important part of criticism is knowing when to judge something based on what it is, vs. how successful it is in being what it wants to be. I try to stick to the latter, but it's also important to consider the viewpoint of someone that just wants to be entertained. There's no denying that a significant portion of the Community votes were fuelled by this kind of viewpoint, so we need something like that in the judging panel too.

EDIT: I also think there's some validity to disapproving of resubmissions: To paraphrase what I said in KEH's thread, should a resubmission be judged as a whole new hack, or as an update? Could MarkeyJester resubmit The Next Level, year after year, and win the Hidden Palace Trophy time and time again, or should he be told to come back with something more? I think the answer's obvious.

 

Well, if a judge claims that layouts in my hack weren't edited, was that your intention too?

I know most people don't play Sonic 2 SMS, but wasn't it obvious based on original artwork?

 

Donnie seemed to get lost in the fact that the entries were simply "repeat entries" instead of their technical flaws, though. I don't know a lick of ASM, nor do I really know the efforts that go into making a full-fledged hack, but I still can see the merits of each entry and how they've been changed throughout the years. I can see why and how each individual entry got the trophies they did, and I can see the effort that went into all of them.

Besides, the community trophy is there already to gather "the common man's opinion", and like shown this year, it mirrors the judge's thoughts as well. Either the average person doesn't share his thoughts or they've kept quiet about it. As for having a casual fan on board, I really don't think it's necessary. The judges should be the people who understand the medium the most and can therefore judge everything in a hack based on experience. And between SuperEgg, Laz, and Ayla, there should be enough objective judging to overshadow any small catchups on individual aspects of a hack.

As for discouraging repeat entries, they already are. Judges even advised against people resubmitting entries with minimal changes when asked about it. Yes, they should be told off for resubmitting, but only if the effort they put in is minimal. Hacks like Scorched Quest shouldn't be trashed because "it's just Burned Edition for the third year in a row".

 

On the subject of technical judging, I feel like our current judges are largely not equipped to properly appraise the technical skill in things that are not Megadrive Sonic hacks. Sure, something like Sonic Pocket Winter is obviously difficult to make purely because it's the first of its kind, but how difficult is something I wouldn't feel comfortable judging, because I've never had any experience with the system or game in question. I'm not sure how knowledgeable the judges are on the technical details of 8-bit games, but I'd say it's quite a bit less than the MD games; and maybe I'm letting the general public's apathy color my opinions, but I don't feel like many of the judges follow 3D modding scenes, and I'm pretty sure none of them have actually tried making mods themselves.

Though I will say, I appreciate that Clownacy (and maybe others, he's the only one who specifically mentioned it though) actually looked at the source code of the SADX mods, which isn't a full picture of the complexity of making mods, but it's at least a good start.

 

Would you say that perhaps we should look for a judge to specifically have a focus on the 3D entries?

 

I think having a judge specifically to judge the 3d games would be a good idea, that way there could at least be someone to actually be able to vote for the 3d entries.

Anyways, about the me and the wanting to be a judge thing, if I were a judge I could try to be able to play the Genesis hacks on my phone during the weekdays, since I have an emulator on it, however it for some reason doesn't allow me to load 32x or GameGear games. I also won't be able to play any of the 3d games, as like I've said on Discord, I don't own any of them and my computer sucks anyways. But for the games that I can actually play, I'd try to be fair for them (though any entry that contains Green Hills Zone in it is automatically getting the D.A Garden vote from me :V) and I'll try to play as much as I can.

So, about next year, there's 2 hacks that I know that I will be entering (hopefully, depending on how well development goes), and there's another 2 which I'm not sure about. I plan on taking the entries from this year and improving them to be way better than they were here, but they would probably one zone long since I still need to work on my main project.

Until then, though, I have to actually work on these hacks. I probably shouldn't be working on a new project just after getting finished with one big one, plus I have another project which I need to get prepared for May of next year. Until then, folks. Until then.

I probably shouldn't have wasted this post on this. Oh well, 8 more posts to go. I'm probably not gonna post until next week. So, you know, I can save for something important.

P.S someone should probably check on Donnie since from looking at his reviews of the hacks, he seemed like there was something going on.

 

I don't know if it's even possible to find someone with the required level of knowledge who would want to be a judge. There's also the issue of impartiality, the two people who have the most knowledge of SADX modding also have at least some level of direct influence on just about every mod that gets made, so even if we wanted to, we wouldn't be able to fairly judge SADX mods.

 

You know,that mite not be a bad idea. Wouldn't hurt to maybe have one person in specific area's for example if say ValleyBell was a judge, he knows his stuff when it comes to music so he would have a better understanding.

 

Well then perhaps the experts in each individual field could pass on tidbits of their knowledge to the judges, explaining the limitations of the system, the limitations of the game's engine, what kind've things are impressive and what things aren't, what's easy to do within the confines of the game, and what isn't.

'Course, you have the issue of one or two persons swaying the contest more in their favor, but you run that risk in general when you allow hacks of any kind to be entered into a contest, and in a scene mainly focuses on a single console.

 

I would prefer a judge to, y'know, play the original game before playing a hack... to recognize edited art and layouts.

...or just look at the fucking retro wiki.

 

You do realize I was merely stating an example right? =/. I'm not saying you need to do this, but it mite be an idea even if just perhaps for games out side the mega drive.

 

Does effort matter though? This is a competition, not a 'You Tried' sticker handout. If SSF1991 feels there weren't enough changes, then that's that - he judged it as an update, and felt the update wasn't trophy-worthy. I can't speak for him, but when I see a hack that's been resubmitted after a year, I expect to see a year's worth of changes. I think that's fair. Not changing anything is just as big a problem as changing something, and doing it poorly.

The problem with the Community votes is that they're just that: votes. As least you get feedback from judges. Not to mention, if community voters sharing the same viewpoint as SSF1991 makes him redundant, then shouldn't the entire judging panel be redundant, since you claim the votes mirror each other? They also don't, by the way: Scorched Quest was a contender for the 11000101 and Windy Valley Community Trophies. The disconnect is apparent from that alone.

Besides, us judges aren't here just to run our lips: we communicate with each other, and try to explore different angles on what makes a hack good or bad. I found SSF1991's feedback insightful throughout the judging process, and it made me rethink my views on a number of hacks. Alternate perspectives are important: he was actually one of the people that praised Lose Tails Or Else, while I was stuck in the 'just not for me area', more bothered by the fact the hack took virtually no effort to make. Being a technically-minded judge is a double-edged sword, and having a panel full of them I don't think is the right way to go forward with this contest.

 

The problem is, the only thing he says about my hack is "On the plus side, there were some changes." He doesn't even go into what changes they are. I think anyone seeing the "v2" bit would know there are changes. He just says he's fed up of seeing hacks from previous years being re-entered. I'm sorry, but that's my fault because? You're evaluating my hack, not the contest.

What did Donnie like about my hack? What changes are there and which of them did he like or dislike? Did he have fun, or just get frustrated? He didn't comment on anything about my hack; nothing. Until he answers these, or even make some comments on the hack itself, it's not fair to say, "Still, I think it wasn’t necessary to submit the game again." Please, Donnie, tell me why it wasn't necessary. I can handle the criticism.

 

It is a double edged sword really. Donnie should have made it more clear in his evaluation. And I believe that SuperEgg could have bashed Sonic 1 Dream Eater some more.

I would like to say that Sonic Generations Level Ports is great and all but why make it out to be a bad thing? I am all for original levels but there needs a substance.

 

Lazlo, if you read my post correctly, you'll notice that I said everyone else's evaluation is fine.

We understand you have life's to get on with, and we truly appreciate what you lot have done, bringing the contest year after year. But don't take it the wrong way. If you are going to evaluate, then it needs to be done properly. No time? Then do what Cinossu did and leave it blank. Simple.

Like I said, it's just Donnie's evaluation on my hack because it wasn't done properly. Yours was fine.

Also, I'm not saying every hack has to e evaluated, nor did I say every detail needs to be picked up. I'm just saying I literally got nothing constructive from Donnie.

 

Last thing I want to see right now, with all my emotional stress at the moment, is people getting this upset because of my evaluations. But still, it's feedback, and I'll try to respond to it the best I can.

I'm fully aware about the amount of work that hacking takes. I got a first-hand account of it thanks to the Donnie The Chao entry, which I beta-tested for months. I acknowledge this, and know IRL stuff can also interfere with your entry, dragging production down. But here's the thing. In any other enviornment, be it your own free time or just something you want to show off to your friends, this is very understandable and something I expect. But this is the Sonic Hacking Contest. You're specifically submitting your work to an event with a deadline, with the intent of showing your work at your best, in the hopes that it wins trophies. You get plenty of time to get your entries ready, more than a year. The Contest has been specifically enabled so people who deal with IRL stuff and have to deal with all this work can still juggle that and deliver a good entry. I can understand the amount of work and the IRL stuff, but, well, the SHC isn't just a circus act. It's a commitment. It's something that thousands upon thousands of people will see for a week. As a result, I expect the best that the Sonic hacking community offers. Despite all the obstacles that stand in your way, the fact that you can still deliver magnificent works of art that is very fun to play is something I've seen in the community many times. I just want to see care and effort is all.

That brings me to this year's entries. I mean yeah, my evaluations were vague. But to be honest, there was really not that much I could say about the entries. Because they were that uncreative, and a lot of them felt so damn small in changes. It felt like I was just playing the same thing over and over again, and it just became boring and repetitive to me. I play based on the fun factor, not a technical factor. Why? Because your entries are games, a form of entertainment. I expect to be entertained in some way. How do you expect me to be specific on an entry where the only thing that changed was just spamming tree sprites? Or an entry where a character palatte was swapped?

If you're going to bring your entry back from a previous year, I expect quite an update. Because otherwise, what else could I say that isn't different than last year? I could copy and paste my review for Sonic Bash from last year (which was more positive) and it would apply to this year, word for word. The difference is that the concept of the entry isn't new anymore. It's the same game. The charm is lost. I'm no longer able to judge a returning entry based on what it is, but what's changed, and to me, that brings down the entry. Sonic Bash is not a bad hack, and nowhere do I say it's bad. But I'm considering the politics of the contest in play here. If the best this year's entries can do is to basically return an entry from last year, what does that tell the people who will be playing this during Contest Week? Not to mention, this has been a year where unoriginality has been a nasty pattern, so entries that are returning really don't stand out as much as they normally would.

I'm sorry you guys didn't like my evaluations, but, well, that's what happens when this year's entries feel rather bleh to me, and that's what happens when you're having to put more time and effort just getting an opportunity to play the damn entries in the first place. I ended up dedicating an entire night, hours of work, to play and evaulate the entries. It resulted in my sleep schedule degrading massively, and only within the past few days have I finally recovered from it. There was 54 of them this year. There's a reason I basically vanished from the Contest Week by Day 3, and if my tweets have been any indicator, I've been in a nasty depression. So much so that by late week I had been brought to tears multiple times. I'm not trying to play the victim here, but I'm being honest. We have IRL stuff and work commitments, just like you. And there's a reason why I'm not the only judge. I'm not a technical judge like others, but that's not a bad thing. That's why Burned Edition won so many trophies this year, despite my remarks about it being a returning entry (and to be fair, I don't even remember what I said about the entries, I wrote the evaluations before Contest Week and this month has been an absolute blur so yeah). It may have been in the contest last year, but other judges saw something I didn't. And that's not a bad thing. I look more towards creativity and fun, other judges look more towards a technical perspective.

Again, I'm sorry if you don't like my evaluations.

 

I'm actually in complete agreement with this. And especially with the streams done this year and with those of us judges joining them, I also feel that anything that can't be put across in the evals can often be conveyed through the streams. But also with this year's turnout... trying to be very detailed with evals ( or in my case trying to do evals for anything other than the standout ( for better or worse ) entries ) in addition with Lazzie's mention of IRL shenanigans since I may have fallen prey to them, myself. It was kind of um... well, how much "this feels so low effort and did not hold my attention at all" does there need to be? A lot of the entries felt like they were very slap dash put together with the hacking equivalent of school glue and scotch tape, maybe some popsicle sticks for cosmetic differences. Even if I took the time and effort to slap every MD hack on my Everdrive, there was kind of not much I could say aside from voting for the trophies. And with some of these hacks that just fall so hard or are outright painful to look at in addition to other things, some of which are not specific to each judge... it's been kind of hard to get all of things out for some of us. Even if it seems disappointing, do please try to understand.

 

I don't think I've ever seen this. Was your review in last year's thread?

Saying that, thanks for your reply. I can understand real life and etc, but just wanted to give my view on the situation.