I am giving this a lower score, but I do not hate this level, and I don’t think I would be particularly caring about it if it now didn’t accidentally represent the poor judging in the SGC. This is no means on Vegtam, he seems like a nice and understanding person who made this and had a good time with it. I’ll go into my thoughts on the level divorced from the SGC contest first and then relate those points to why this as a first place (as well as pretty much every placement) doesn’t sit well with me.

From what I have heard, this level was initially much harder, which explains a lot of the structure choices and busier structure design, and then nerfed as the gameplay was not the most enjoyable. I can’t comment on whether this was the best move, as I have not played the initial version. However here, the effect it has on playing is really weird. The level presents itself in pacing and structure as much harder than it actually is, which a lot of the time made me think I was going to die to an obstacle, then just going past it. I found this really (anxiety inducing? Unsure on how to word this), and it didn’t make it that fun to play. The coin is also fairly inconsistent, the hitboxes are rather odd. I typically don’t go into critiquing gameplay since it isn’t something I pay much mind to, I don’t really enjoy it most of the time. This one though felt like uncanny. It was strange.

The visuals are not that good. The characters are the main focus, and are very poorly drawn. Not in a like endearing way, more so just inexperienced. Which maybe sounds pretentious, but like nearly every creator is fairly inexperienced at art, especially characters (which is why we have such a plagiarism issue haha). The surrounding visuals are like fine. They are inoffensive, nothing particularly special, but nothing awful. I did find there was too much fighting for attention, very messy and lacked distribution of any detail really. Same rings through with the colours, there is so much that is homogenous in terms of it and detail. I think maybe some people will argue that it could perhaps aid the comic book theme, but this is sort of misleading. It’s not really an issue of “too much detail”, more so the details are not placed correctly, so they don’t aid in drawing attention to anything in particular. This is inherently not very comic-esque considering how much thought has to go into composition in comics to lead the viewers eye appropriately in the order the artist intends (between panels and within specific scenes). I think most of my other critiques on the visuals are simply an extension of these thoughts, so there isn’t much use repeating them. As for the aesthetic and theming, I won’t comment much since I don’t particularly like it, I am not part of the target audience.

For how this relates to SGC, it’s more so how the judging arrived to this being #1 over so many other levels (main issue is space i guess placing so low though, maybe Aperture too). From what I have gathered from Viprin messages and conversations between friends and those involved in judging, each entry was ranked from 0-10 on gameplay, visuals, and theming. This itself is problematic, as it cuts out a lot of nuance to what judging and understanding a level actually is, as is ranking any art from 0-10. I would leave no true rating on my posts if it were an option, it just can’t be represented by numbers. I also heard, the judges are definitely inclined to more flashy stuff, and care primarily about spectacle and gameplay (I don’t believe this, I’ll get into it later). It should be rather obvious why promoting flashy stuff is problematic for fostering creative expression. It teaches newer creators to just care about the stats and spectacle. This has already always (I have heard, I didn’t start creating until later 2.1) been an issue though, as people are just inclined to want attention, human nature thing. I don’t think this was the case given how the judging was conducted, but I did hear speculation that this and others got high rankings due to their closer approachability for new creators, where they may be able to see themselves making it one day. Where with for instance Aperture which includes a lot of knowledge barriers to make (outside of art and editor knowledge, but also a lot of math) does not feel as accomplishable to newer creators. More of a “this could be you one day” thing. I don’t like this sentiment as it doesn’t promote or demonstrate the actual artistic progress and expression of the community. I know this to be true, as when I showed this level to my sister who isn’t into art or Gd, she commented on it looking bad, and wondered why it won. When I showed her Aperture earlier, she was had much more positive comments, same for space i guess. For the inconsistency in how these were judged gameplay wise, this gameplay as I had mentioned earlier is not great. Yet, Aperture was weighed down purely by gameplay. This kind of shows they prefer a level nerfed down to a semi-auto over engaging gameplay that may be a little practicey. I dislike that. They did like the gameplay in the second place entry which I agree with though, that level is fun. Overall though, I think the takeaway is clear from the SGC. The judges and who run and promote Gd do not care much for good art or artistic expression, just whatever has the flashiest colours and plays well in their minds (usually just whatever kills them least). This does not promote making art. This promotes making clickbait. I cannot respect that.

Note:

This is not implying this level is clickbait, Vegtam didn’t make it for that reason I believe, I think he just had fun. I would love to see him improve as an artist, he has potential to do very well (though I do highly dislike Decay). I wish him the best. The judges and who set up the judging format should be the ones to question themselves and think a little.