Judging
All judgments in the document are controversial and subjective. Here is the system I personally used for judging each of the four categories:
10 – Flawless
9 – Spectacular
8 – Amazing
7 – Great
6 – Good
5 – Average
4 – Okay
3 – Mediocre
2 – Poor
1 – Awful
0 – Appalling
Search your name or the name of your level to find notes on it.


“Journey” by “Thehoundsquad”
12/40
Level design: 4
The first two areas were very well designed, but the third, fourth, and fifth areas were not consistent with the theme. The fifth area contained an unobtainable key, as well as some empty regions that were unpleasant because of the slow autoscroll. The six area was well designed (although slightly too difficult) and seemed to return to the level’s original style.
Appeal: 4
The cut scenes negatively affected the level’s flow. The third, fourth, and fifth areas were not very appealing because they were not consistent with the theme introduced in the first two areas. The seventh area was peculiar because it was quite a bit easier than the area that immediately preceded it.
Functionality: 1
This level was dysfunctional. It was a red level, yet the secret exit was unobtainable. The diagonal pipe in the second area actually killed Mario unless the player reacted quickly. There were inconsistencies in the attributes of the grey platforms (some acted solid while others inexplicably acted like cloud tiles). The cloud tiles in the third area had inconsistent physics as well. The most important error was that this level contained no midpoint.
Fun: 3
Parts of the level were enjoyable, but the fact that the level contains no midpoint causes restarting the level after a death to be very frustrating.
“Mario Lost Color 2” by “Whoamme”
28/40
Level design: 7
The level was interesting and consisted of several unique challenges that led to an overall enjoyable experience. The creating/eating block provided an interesting challenge as well.
Appeal: 6
The level used an interesting black and white palette selection in the first area. The overall feel of the level was very pleasant.
Functionality: 9
This level was functional in all areas, though it would have been nice if there were dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 6
This level offered an interesting and unique challenge.
 “Firestorm Fortress” by “patgangster”
29/40
Level design: 8
This fast paced level consisted of one very well-designed area. Although it was very difficult, the shortness of the level and the ingenuity of the traps made it an excellent level. Unfortunately, the winged turn blocks at the end of the level failed to appear on screen, making the last jump extremely difficult.
Appeal: 6
There were custom solid blocks that used wooden block tiles were distasteful. Unfortunately, these were frequently used in the level and were not consistent with the original Super Mario World graphics.
Functionality: 7
Although most of the level was functional, some sprites didn’t appear every time (specifically, the winged turn blocks at the end of the level).
Fun: 8
This level was very difficult but short enough to still be enjoyable.
“Misty Horizon” by “Blind Devil”
23/40
Level design: 5
This level was a very average submission. There wasn’t anything necessarily bad about the design, but there weren’t very many unique or interesting challenges either.
Appeal: 4
The palettes were pleasant aside from the abrupt transitions in shading of the sky in the background (the original was more pleasing). So many objects from different tile sets were mixed that it came across as obtrusive (some foregrounds didn’t mix well either).
Functionality: 9
Coins were used to guide the player on any blind jumps. All five dragon coins were possible to collect. Finishing the level a second did not trap the player (even though the yellow switch was already pressed), because the designer added a goal sphere in the final area.
Fun: 5
An average level that didn’t have very many errors, but did not bring many new ideas either.
“Bronze Forest (V2)” by “Doownayr”
24/40
Level design: 6
The bonus areas and hidden prizes helped give this level an original feel. The secret exit added another interesting aspect to the level.
Appeal: 5
The background of the first area was very creative, and most of the palettes were good. The solid areas “behind” the leaves of the trees looked odd, and some of the tile sets did not mix well. The second area had some bizarre design choices regarding tree branches: some tree branches led to mushroom stems, and others did not make it to the ground.
Functionality: 7
The player should be warned before encountering tiles edited to have different attributes than they did in Super Mario World (limbs of trees now function as cloud tiles). Some of the wooden spikes could be jumped over and touched from the “wrong side.”
Fun: 6
A good level without very many errors or new concepts.
“Blueberry Way” by “Roykirbs”
8/40
Level design: 2
The areas of this level were very uninspired and did not feature any unique or creative ideas. The secret exit was inaccessible so it did not add any interest to the stage.
Appeal: 2
The palettes were garish and did not complement the stage whatsoever. The level featured ground tiles with inexplicably odd and unusual positions, as well as “condensed” shrubbery.
Functionality: 2
In the first area the player can hit against the bottom of a green cave ground tile that appears to be passable. The secret exit is inaccessible.
Fun: 2
This level was dull and unpleasant. The inaccessibility of the secret exit makes it even more distasteful.
“Lines and stuff (V5)” by SomeGuy712x
27/40
Level design: 7
The line-guided areas used new and interesting designs that made this level stand out. The ON/OFF switch puzzle near the keyhole that was required in order to continue was a unique challenge. Unfortunately, some unexpected and cheap deaths results from some of the saw placements on the lines. The secret exit also provided a distinctive challenge featuring the creating/eating block.
Appeal: 6
The foregrounds and backgrounds fitted appropriately with each other in each segment and did not contain superfluous decorations. Some of the areas looked less appealing because of the multitude of line objects.
Functionality: 7
The secret exit was obtainable, as well as all the dragon coins. There were some minor sprite issues, and the “Lunatic” line section was somewhat unfair (the multitude of lines made it impossible to predict which route the platform would take at some points).
Fun: 7
A difficult and enjoyable level that brought several new concepts to the table.
“Unnamed” by “horribleTASer1.1”
6/40
Level design: 1
The level cannot be completed in its current state. Only one screen is playable and does not feature any new concepts.
Appeal: 4
The original palettes and tiles are adequate for the level, but the screen’s inability to scroll hurt this section.
Functionality: 0
The level is dysfunctional because of screen is not set to “scroll at will.” This breaks the level and makes it impossible to complete.
Fun: 1
Because there is only screen of the level that is playable it is very dull and boring.
“Unnamed” by “Sockbat Replica”
27/40
Level design: 5
This level managed to be both confusing and entertaining in design but did not offer very many new ideas.
Appeal: 7
The palettes and layout of the level gave it a very dreary and lifeless feel that helped set the mood of the level. The high contrast of many objects and sprites accentuated this mood.
Functionality: 10
The level was functionally sound in most areas.
Fun: 5
The new palettes and interesting design gave this level an original style.
“The Legendary 4 Statues (V3)” by “Ripperon-X”
16/40
Level design: 5
The level did not offer very many new or unusual challenges and was quite average.
Appeal: 4
Unfortunately, this level wasn’t very appealing. Ground tiles were used in unrealistic and somewhat jarring ways that distracted from game play. The mixed cave tile set didn’t fit with the bright hilly background. A minor issue is the spike top that crawls on thin air when the P-Switch is not in use. Later on, some of the text in a cut scene is aligned awkwardly (some letters are higher than others on the same line).
Functionality: 3
This level suffered from several unfortunate flaws. The player may be surprised unintentionally by falling buzzy beetles from above. After entering a pipe, it appears as if the player is supposed to follow a shell across the bottom of the screen and witness it bounce off a question block that yields a vine. Unfortunately, the koopa that is supposed to kick the shell begins walking in the wrong direction. Worse still, the shell only hits the block about 10% of the time, ricocheting into the player the other 90%. This makes the level virtually unplayable from that point on.
Fun: 4
This level was okay, but not anything more, and the shell problems reduced its playability greatly.
“Castle Zero” by “abduel”
11/40
Level design: 4
The level had decent level design near the beginning, but deteriorated as it continued (expecting the player to differentiate between “false coins” and the normal ones when they look the same hurt this score).
Appeal: 5
The airships were pretty nice, but had too many lines.
Functionality: 0
Functionality is where this level suffers most. In the first area players are forced to wait out a timer if they fall into a pit of munchers (many of which have small safe spots, yet no way back up). There are several places with blind jumps that are not guided by coins. Many sprites flicker and disappear yet still hurt the player. In the castle area, players are expected to guess which coins act like munchers and which retain their normal properties. A player get trapped near the boss door by jumping over the ceiling. The player is only given three grab blocks to defeat the boss, so one miss will mean the player must reset. Finally, the final grab block is ridiculously hard to obtain without taking a hit.
Fun: 2
The many errors in the functionality category lowered this score a lot.
“The Haunted Island (V2)” by “RaindropDry”
25/40
Level design: 5
The level was pretty fun to play but did not have any new or interesting concepts.
Appeal: 7
The palettes used in the foreground and background were consistent with the overall theme of the level. The second area featured some inconsistencies in the physical properties of the cave tiles.
Functionality: 8
The level was for the most part very functional. Some sections (such as a prize region in the second area and the 3-up moon room later on) were impractical. There were some misleading coins that led to a pit near the pipe entrance to the second area.
Fun: 5
The palettes helped set the mood for a decent level.
“Switch Castle (new submission entirely)” by “KevKot”
8/40
Level design: 2
The level was decently designed but lacked a true finish (instead of using an actual yellow switch the author chose to simply use tiles that acted like cement blocks, giving this stage no true exit). This made the level feel very empty and bland.
Appeal: 4
The original Super Mario World graphics seemed to fit nicely, but the shining golden castle tiles felt a odd.
Functionality: 1
This level had no true exit because the designer did not succeed in inserting a working yellow switch into the level.
Fun: 1
Because it was impossible to defeat it the level felt unfinished and bland.
“Unnamed” by “Giga”
10/40
Level design: 1
The level was very short and bland, and there was no way to complete it.
Appeal: 6
The simplistic and monotone coloring style was pretty interesting and unique.
Functionality: 2
The level did not seem to have an ending. There was a keyhole, but no key.
Fun: 1
The level was very short and bland, with no way of completing it. This removed much of the player’s enjoyment.
“Fort of Confusion” by “Artsy3…”
25/40
Level design: 8
The level offered very interesting and unique gimmicks. In the field of vision was inverted for all objects (but not sprites). The second area featured a “rotating room” gimmick.
Appeal: 6
The original Super Mario World graphics fit very nicely with the feel of the castle.
Functionality: 5
The first area’s difficulty was a lot higher than the second. One of the rooms of the second area contained spikes that did not work correctly (they simply acted as bush tiles). The “boss” room was odd, and there didn’t seem to be a reason for the coins and used blocks to have their characteristics switched.
Fun: 6
The difficulty of the first area compared to the second seemed odd, but the level was still very well designed.
“Purple Lake Ridge” by “deedeedeechu”
15/40
Level design: 3
The level was very mediocre in design.
Appeal: 3
The structure of the level itself seemed rather unorganized and strewn about. Enemies seemed to be placed without much of a reason. The level did not seem to flow very well. This was especially evident in one of the underground areas, where the player could reveal an unclosed off side of grey lava by jumping off the right edge of the area.
Functionality: 7
Unfortunately, a diagonal pipe will rocket the player into a pit if the player doesn’t react fast enough.
Fun: 2
This level was not very enjoyable at all.
“Perverted Creatures” by “Yogui”
13/40
Level design: 3
There wasn’t really much to do in this level. It wasn’t badly designed, but there wasn’t much of interest in it.
Appeal: 3
The large amount of line drawings did not fit with the rest of the original Super Mario World graphics, which are more for a general audience.
Functionality: 5
Some of the tiles used are inconsistent. In the area with the vine, there are some upside down ground tiles that act like bush tiles rather than solid ones. In the castle area, the player is expected to differentiate between which ON/OFF blocks are “real” and which ones are “fake” without any prior warning. This can lead to a player getting trapped unfairly very easily.
Fun: 2
This level was not very fun. The theme did not work well for a Super Mario World hack, and the level design was not unique or interesting.
“Ghosting Factory” by “superwiidude”
35/40
Level design: 9
This level was excellent. Every enemy and obstacle seemed to be placed for a reason. The level was the right length and difficulty as well. If the turn blocks and magikoopa area had been developed upon a little more this level could’ve received a 10 (example: some more areas where the magikoopa is useful to passing or actually needed).
Appeal: 10
This level’s graphical choices were absolutely flawless. Every area consisted of unique choices from the original Super Mario World that were handcrafted into new and interesting tile sets.
Functionality: 8
In the boss area, the player interacted oddly with the layer 2 grab blocks, and this made it possible for some unfair deaths.
Fun: 8
This level was exceptional, and very enjoyable to play.
“Western Borders… (and Stuff!)” by “martin9172”
20/40
Level design: 4
The level wasn’t bad but was rather long and drawn out. It didn’t offer very many new or interesting experiences to the player.
Appeal: 6
The presentation was very well-down, except for one notable error. In the cave area the background wrapped incorrectly.
Functionality: 5
The hidden boo gimmick was not used very often (or well; most of the times the player is hit will be considered frustrating and unfair). A minor issue is that the player can potentially get stuck behind the turn blocks that hold the trampoline in the first area. The grey bricks are set to act strange so that they appear solid in areas that actually act like bush tiles.
Fun: 5
This level offered an average experience.
“Forest Cave (V2)” by “Glitch.Mr”
22/40
Level design: 5
A fun and enjoyable level, but it didn’t really stand out above the rest.
Appeal: 6
While there were some very nice visuals in the level (the overgrowth in the first area), some decorations seemed overdone and colored oddly.
Functionality: 7
The level was very functional except for the fact that one dragon coin seemed placed in an area that made it extremely difficult to collect.
Fun: 4
This level was pretty fun but nothing new or amazing.
“Party City” by “Lunar Rico”
13/40
Level design: 3
This level seemed thrown together and rushed. There was some potential in the mole riding area but the timing for the banzai bill and the general annoyance of the mega mole constantly turning around because of the koopas distracted from any positives.
Appeal: 3
This level consisted of very bright and oddly colored sprites and objects that were unpleasant. The background was pretty nice in and of itself though.
Functionality: 4
The mega mole area didn’t work very well because the koopa troopas constantly caused it to turn around. The banzai bill area was almost impossible to pass without taking a hit because of the way it was timed. Entering the final pipe into the boss area caused the player to be dropped from thin air instead of a pipe, which was inconsistent. The dark flashing boss battle was creative but may have lacked the proper set up to maximize enjoyment.
Fun: 3
This level was not very enjoyable or professionally made.
“Grinding Guides” by “Riolu180”
26/40
Level design: 5
This level was based off the simple theme of using line guides. The only problem was that it didn’t develop this theme very much; because of this the level ended up dragging on a bit with a lot of the same types of obstacles one after the other.
Appeal: 7
The background and foreground of the stage were very suitable for each other and worked well with the level. Some areas could have been built in slightly more aesthetically pleasing ways, but the outcome was still very favorable.
Functionality: 8
The level was very functional. Some of the enemy sprites could have been placed at areas to make the obstacles slightly fairer, and it would have been nice to collect dragon coins as well.
Fun: 6
The level was quite enjoyable but also felt very monotone.
“Chocolate-Dipped Vanilla” by “agie777”
File not found.
“Swamp Cabin” by “Hyperme”
20/40
Level design: 4
The level had an interesting theme but did not stand out above the rest in any way.
Appeal: 5
The level captured the mood of a swamp in a decent way but could have been done better as well. Some enemies were recolored in strange and unpleasant ways.
Functionality: 7
The level was functional except for the area with the player swapping P-Switches and trampolines. There was a good bit of backtracking involved.
Fun: 4
This level did not offer very many new or interesting obstacles.
“Midnight Forest (V2) by “Volke”
23/40
Level design: 5
This level was well-designed for the most part. Some parts could have been more well-thought out, however (the fishing boo section, for example).
Appeal: 7
The level made use of interesting palettes and techniques to create a unique atmosphere.
Functionality: 5
The way the fishing boo section was crafted made it frustrating to try to avoid. It seems like the ability to avoid the enemy’s flame is based more on luck rather than skill. There weren’t any dragon coins to collect in the level. The trampoline did not seem to serve a purpose (a skilled player can enter the pipe that leads to the secret exit without using the trampoline). The steep sloped area underwater can be swam through by a player holding a sprite, which can lead to problems. The dark clouds of seaweed underwater acted like solid tiles, making swimming awkward.
Fun: 6
The level was fun and interesting to play.
“Dolph Isle 1-1” by “Rainbow Slime”
19/40
Level design: 5
The level was simple but fun to play.
Appeal: 3
Many of the colors chosen were heavily saturated, yet some remained closer to the original Super Mario World style, causing inconsistencies. Tile sets were also mixed in ways that looked clumsy. The decorating seemed overdone (ghost house cloud tiles didn’t really go with the rest of the level).
Functionality: 7
The level was mostly functional. Near the beginning some sprites disappeared, and some tiles had odd characteristics. The collectable dragon coins added to the score.
Fun: 4
The level was okay, but it was not the most appealing.
“Shallow Lake (V2)” by “Kicezand”
21/40
Level design: 4
The level was okay, but lacked any important or interesting adaptations to make it stand out.
Appeal: 5
Although some of the palette choices come off as oversaturated at first, they actually fit together nicely in some areas.
Functionality: 7
The level was functional, except near the beginning. In the area where Yoshi is found, the side ledges of the ground tiles act odd from the inside and do not make logical sense.
Fun: 5
This level is actually quite fun to play.
“Eclipse Ruins” by “Lucas”
32/40
Level design: 7
This level was professionally made and is a very enjoyable experience. The secret exit was especially clever.
Appeal: 9
This level was crafted very well. Both the foregrounds and the backgrounds were high-quality.
Functionality: 8
This level functioned very well. The only recommendation would be to include less power-ups, because if there are too many the player can run through the stage without abandon.
Fun: 8
This level was extremely enjoyable and well-thought out.
“Reznorland 1” by “Zeldara109”
26/40
Level design: 7
This level was well designed and featured several unique obstacles and enemy choices.
Appeal: 6
This level was very controversial. Many tiles were left unfinished, and some sprites were used on unintended tile sets.  Some players may find this unappealing, but in a way the level managed to bring about an atmosphere that would not have been possible without these unorthodox methods.
Functionality: 6
This level was very dysfunctional in several ways, but the errors were part of the level’s theme. The best way to describe this level is that it was consistently inconsistent.
Fun: 7
This level was very enjoyable and fun to play.
“Crazy Cliffside” by “Phantor”
15/40
Level design: 3
This level did not flow very well. Large parts of the vertical section could be skipped by falling at the right spots, so the level did not seem to have much substance to it.
Appeal: 4
The tile sets were mixed in strange ways and looked awkward. Many of the new palettes did not accentuate the level very well.
Functionality: 4
This level wasn’t very functional. Many tiles from the original game acted very differently (some ground tiles were given vine aspects with no warning). Also, some angled terrain tiles did not properly connect, making it easy for the player to simply walk through the right edge of the bottom of the final area and reach the exit without taking the correct route. Some foreground elements overlapped, yet the player did not follow them correctly, creating unrealistic situations.
Fun: 4
This level was not the worst, but did not offer a new or fresh experience.
“Burning in Hell – For Noobs” by “notgoodwithusernames”
5/40
Level design: 0
This level was so difficult and obnoxious that it was virtually impossible for a player to defeat.
Appeal: 5
The palettes helped the level capture the warm cave environment the author was hoping to achieve.
Functionality: 0
This level was very dysfunctional. A player will not be able to make it past even the first introduction screen without a large amount of luck.
Fun: 0
The level’s extreme difficulty took away in fun the player might have hoped to have.
“The Great Mole Hunt (V2)” by “moltensnow”
14/20
Level design: 2
This level felt empty and free of any interesting challenges or interesting gimmicks.  The area where the player needed to fall in the green circled areas could have been a unique challenge if developed properly, but instead it ended up being a short and cheep screen. Even the mega mole guiding area was empty and uninspired.
Appeal: 4
The new background for the first area was less appealing than the original Super Mario World hills background. The first area also consisted of oddly assembled ground tiles twisting upwards into the sky, as well as oversaturated berries.
Functionality: 6
The level was somewhat functional, but the boss door was tough to enter (it could only be entered if the player stood on one side or the other. The exits were very close to each other and both could be accessed regardless of whether the player hit the last P-switch or not.
Fun: 2
This level was very bland and uninteresting.
“A Normal Day For Mario” by “Diddy Kong”
18/40
Level design: 4
This level was well-designed. There were various rooms to explore and challenges, though some parts did seem redundant and unoriginal.
Appeal: 3
The new palettes were not very pleasing. Ground tiles were used in unrealistic and awkward ways, and the new bullet bill shooters looked worse than the original Super Mario World tiles.
Functionality: 7
This level was mostly functional. There were some issues with a foreground tile issues (such as a diagonal pipe not being closed off correctly).
Fun: 4
This level was alright, but some issues kept it from getting a higher score.
“Stuck  in a Rainbow (V2)” by “Limepie20/Argumentable”
26/40
Level design: 6
The level was very straight forward and simple, yet well designed.
Appeal: 7
The level stuck to an interesting and unique theme that provided a fresh new style.
Functionality: 7
This level was mostly functional. In the first area, a player can get trapped if they fall into a deep pit guarded by a koopa paratroopa. Although the level was not too difficult, some enemy placements were slightly unfair because of the timing of the colors shifts.
Fun: 6
This level was fun and enjoyable to play.
“Frigid Frenzy” by “Alice”
21/40
Level design: 6
This level was well designed a fun to play. The slippery ice physics gave the level a special touch.
Appeal: 5
Some of the added decorations seemed overdone (meaningless line art made with dirt tiles).
Functionality: 5
This level had some problems. A player could use a trampoline to jump over the top of the screen at some points in the level and land in areas that should’ve been closed off. Some sprites disappeared now and then throughout the level, and the game ran slow for awhile as well.
Fun: 5
All in all, a nice ice level that is enjoyable but does not stand out above the rest.
“Gemstone Mines” by “PotatoNinja”
25/40
Level design: 6
The level design was really great in some areas, but other areas seemed to overstay their welcome.
Appeal: 6
The cave had interesting and unique palettes that added to the mood. Some may have been a bit too saturated.
Functionality: 7
The level was very functional. A purple triangle functioned oddly, however. Some tiles were also assembled incorrectly.
Fun: 6
The level was enjoyable and a fun experience.
“Tech Support vs. WWSPA 2: Journey for Altruism” by “MalcolmBellman38”
15/40
Level design: 4
The areas were not too bad, but were interrupted by obnoxious “plot cut scenes” throughout the game. Some areas also felt empty.
Appeal: 2
The Mario palette replacement looks strange, as well as many of the enemies. The game wasn’t often interrupted by cut scenes that were hard to follow and made the experience less enjoyable. Cement blocks were also used too often.
Functionality: 6
The level was mostly functional. However, the cut scenes and glitched sprites lowered this score.
Fun: 3
Parts of the level were enjoyable, but the level was dragged down by the strange attempts at “plot development.”
“Mario Takes a Walk” by “Blaze.128”
23/40
Level design: 5
The level was average. There weren’t any new or interesting ideas.
Appeal: 6
This level was graphically very nice, but lost some of its appeal because of its length.
Functionality: 6
The level was pretty functional, but was too long for most players. Also, some sprite graphics that can be spin jumped on acted like muncher plants (and others were fine for players to stand on) which is inconsistent. 
Fun: 6
The level was enjoyable and looked very nice.
“A Level in a Island (V2)” by “paper mario world”
18/40
Level design: 4
This level had a puzzle element in the first half and a side scrolling element in the second. The level wasn’t bad, but failed to offer any new or interesting challenges.
Appeal: 4
The first area looked awkward compared to the second, which was much better graphically.
Functionality: 7
The level was mostly functional. The small tight pathway to the fifth dragon coin in the screen scrolling area was very difficult to make it through as a powered-up player.
Fun: 3
The level lacked inspiration, and was rather dull.
“Koopa Plains” by “The Shady Nerd”
19/40
Level design: 3
The level started off very nice, but as it continued it got messier until it was little more than several cloud tiles copied over several times.
Appeal: 5
The first area was very appealing visual, but later areas seemed very untidy and chaotic.
Functionality: 8
The level was mostly functional. Near the beginning, there were some areas where solid ground tiles could be interacted with from the wrong sides, causing unrealistic occurrences.
Fun: 3
What started off as a very nicely done level ended in a very disappointing manner.
“Dense Forest Area (V2)” by “TheOtherGuy25”
29/40
Level design: 7
The level provided several interesting and new gimmicks that provided a fun and unique experience.
Appeal: 7
Parts of the level were presented very nicely. There could be improvements in some areas, but overall it was very nice.
Functionality: 8
Even though the level warned the player beforehand, it was still odd for the log graphics to act like muncher plants.
Fun: 7
The level was well designed, and a good length as well.
“Luigi’s Revenge” by “mariosyoshishade”
19/40
Level design: 4
This level seemed to ungulate between good and bad level design in areas. Many areas seemed rather unimaginative.
Appeal: 4
The first area was really poor, but some of the following areas showed signs of improvement.
Functionality: 6
Some areas had difficulties with improper tile settings (such as solid ground tiles in areas that allow the player to touch them from the wrong side).
Fun: 4
This level was nothing special, but not necessarily bad either.
“A Generic Vanilla Level” by “MarioFan22”
18/40
Level design: 4
This level was okay, but unfortunately wore itself out with a unusually long length.
Appeal: 4
The level got a lot better near the end, but the first area was filled with strange twisting masses of ground tiles in odd positions, as well as a completely orange background and foreground that look dull and uninteresting. Munchers were halfway submerged in the ground as well.
Functionality: 5
The level was very long, which subtracted from its functionality. In the dark cave areas the grey platforms that had been changed into blocks were almost impossible to see. The big boo boss battle was ridiculously difficult to pass because there were only 3 grab blocks (and one wouldn’t disappear even after the player grabbed it).
Fun: 5
The middle of this level was where it played best.
“Neopolitan Road” by “Caracc”
25/40
Level design: 6
The level was very nicely designed and feature some interesting obstacles and enemy placements.
Appeal: 6
The level used simple palette replacements to depict a level made of Neapolitan ice cream.
Functionality: 8
The level was mostly functional. The cloud tiles flipped upside down, although obvious, still did not make much sense (just because a cloud’s face is upside down does not mean the player should suddenly fall through it).
Fun: 5
An average level that was decently made.
“Bowser’s Mine” by “Noobish Noobsicle”
25/40
Level design: 6
This level introduced an interesting gimmick: a pipe maze. Unfortunately this pipe maze was also a little bit boring and frustrating.
Appeal: 7
Although it was a little blocky the lighting looked really cool.
Functionality: 7
The level was mostly functional, although the pipe maze was a little bit cheap (the player must take a pipe he or she just exited from in order to complete the level).
Fun: 5
The level was interesting, but the pipe maze aspect was not as fun as some other gimmicks.
“Silent Shivers” by “GeorgeVsSonic”
18/40
Level design: 5
Parts of this level seemed to be created just out of random assortments of sprite tiles transformed into foreground objects.
Appeal: 4
Many parts of the level were too crowded with unnecessary decorations that did not improve game play and just looked out of place.
Functionality: 5
Unfortunately, there were an abundance of inconsistencies with respect to tiles and whether they injured the player if he or she jumped on them (examples include grinders and thwomps). This was a problem throughout the level.
Fun: 4
The level was somewhat enjoyable but lost some points for its odd usages of sprite tiles.
“Siskart Hills” by “Mr ESC450”
33/40
Level design: 8
This level was well-made and very fun to play. The added gimmick of the land flipping provided extra excitement.
Appeal: 9
This level was almost perfect in terms of appeal. The graphics were handled very nicely.
Functionality: 9
This level was very functional, but would have been slightly better had it been a little shorter.
Fun: 7
This level was very fun to play.
“Castle Escape!” by “GravityxHammah”
16/40
Level design: 3
Parts of this level were empty of challenges, and the areas that were filled were made rather haphazardly.
Appeal: 4
This level included a large amount of sprites that had been converted into objects. Most of these looked out of place and acted odd as well.
Functionality: 5
The majority of this level included sprites that had been converted into objects that were inconsistent with the sprite versions.
Fun: 4
This level was not very interesting.
“An Aerial Anomaly” by “Forty2”
28/40
Level design: 7
This level was very fun, though the first area was a little more difficult than it should have been compared to the other areas.
Appeal: 7
This level looked great. The only thing that really lowered this score was the abundance of cement blocks, munchers, and smiling cloud tiles in the first area.
Functionality: 7
This level functioned correctly for the most part, though the first area was a little too difficult. Also one timing related puzzle involving a diggin’ chuck was set off so players could fail without it being their fault.
Fun: 7
This level was very enjoyable.
“Skull Island” by “aj6666”
21/40
Level design: 5/10
This level was pretty creative and fun, but the length and difficulty of some spots (such as the fishin’ boo section) brought this score down.
Appeal: 7/10
This level brought out the toxic poisonous atmosphere well.
Functionality: 4/10
The level worked fine for the earlier sections. Unfortunately, the fishin’ boo area was not tested well because was almost impossible to clear without taking a hit. Later on, sprites such as ball’n’chains were used as objects with odd hitboxes that hurt Mario even if he spin jumped on them (this is inconsistent with the original sprite). The length of the level also brought this score down.
Fun: 5/10
Although there were some fun moments (the majority of which being near the start), this level suffered from the end segments.
“Castle Hassle (V2)” by “miguel21450”
15/40
Level design: 5/10
This long level featured average level design that didn’t really stand out.
Appeal: 3/10
Unfortunately, this level used sprites as objects in ways that didn’t really fit in most cases.
Functionality: 3/10
Many, many, sprites were redrawn to objects that wouldn’t hurt Mario normally (examples include the thwomps becoming castle stones, yet they still hurt Mario if he jumps on them).
Fun: 4/10
This level was okay, but very long and cumbersome.
“Forested Field” by “E-Man”
35/40
Level design: 8
This level was very nicely made and enjoyable. Nintendo quality.
Appeal: 9
The forest was simple yet well made. It fit the level almost perfectly. The underground area was structured well also.
Functionality: 10
This level functioned perfectly.
Fun: 8
A great level that was present nicely as well.
“Unnamed” by “Mrgoomba909”
12/40
Level design: 1/10
This level was poorly designed. There was no rhyme or reason to any of the object placement at all.
Appeal: 2/10
The level used strange tile placements and odd palette choices that weren’t pleasing to the eye.
Functionality: 6/10
This level lost functionality points because some ground tiles were placed in areas that caused inconsistencies in their interactions with Mario.
Fun: 3/10
This level was not very enjoyable.
“Vanilla Plains (V3)” by “The Secret Exit”
19/40
Level design: 4
This level was not necessarily bad, but very bland and not very memorable.
Appeal: 4
The level looked alright, though tile placement could be improved upon.
Functionality: 7
The level functioned alright, though because Yoshi and blue koopas were both in the level it was possible to skip major portions of the level.
Fun: 4
The level was alright but failed to offer something different or interesting.
“Desert Beach” by “Darky”
20/40
Level design: 3
The level wasn’t bad, but failed to offer new or intuitive designs. It felt very bland.
Appeal: 4
The tiles that were half-covered by ground tiles were unpleasant, and the clear blocks used to substitute for the curved ground tiles looked strange. Parts of the level were cluttered. The castle area looked very nice however.
Functionality: 10
This level functioned perfectly.
Fun: 3
The level was okay, but not fun enough to stand out.
“Rainbow Fortress” by “TomPhanto”
33/40
Level design: 8
The level was a very fun and enjoyable challenge. Most of the traps and enemy placement appeared to be well-thought out.
Appeal: 7
The first area was really structured well. The castle tile set area was great too, but it could’ve been done better.
Functionality: 10
This level functioned perfectly.
Fun: 8
This level was extremely fun.
“Just  A Level” by “Chibikage89”
27/40
Level design: 7
This level was a fair challenge and built in the original Super Mario World style of level design.
Appeal: 7
The level made good use of the original Super Mario World palettes, though there were some errors in tiling.
Functionality: 7
Some tiles were placed incorrectly (for example, some corner ground tiles were placed in ways that the player could interact with unrealistically).
Fun: 6
This level offered an interesting and fun challenge.
“The Stroll… (V2)” by “Master S”
24/40
Level design: 6
A decent level that was crafted nicely.
Appeal: 4
Normally the amount of decorations this level used would be deemed unattractive, but the consistency and placement of the extra ground tiles allowed them fit better than usual. Still, putting in less of these extra tiles would raise this score.
Functionality: 9
The level functioned well. It would have been nice if there were dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 5
This level was pretty fun, but nothing special.
“Desert Discovery” by “K3nny”
32/40
Level design: 7
This level was very nicely designed. A simple but extremely enjoyable level.
Appeal: 8
The desert theme was recreated very nicely in this level.
Functionality: 10
The whole level function perfectly.
Fun: 7
This level was very fun even though it was very plain.
“Gravity Castle (V2)” by “Pikerchu13”
22/40
Level design: 5
This level was pretty well designed.
Appeal: 5
The level looked pretty nice in some areas, but other areas were crowded with too many decorations. Also the palettes were “dulled” to the point that it made some of them unattractive.
Functionality: 6
Some areas in this level had solid ground tiles that could be accessed from the inside, making them illogical. In the scrolling area with the growing/shrinking mushrooms, most players will have to learn by trial and error which mushroom tops they need to step on.
Fun: 6
The simple storyline and interesting water and lava placements made this level fun.
“Fantasy” by “Storm Kyleis”
23/40
Level design: 5
The level was an average level.
Appeal: 5
The translucent affect added to the level but could have been developed better.
Functionality: 9
Some layer 2 elements load slower than they should, but this is minor.
Fun: 4
Despite using some the translucent level mode, this level failed to deliver an overly fun and enjoyable level.
“Unnamed” by “IonDrako/K3fka”
26/40
Level design: 6
This level was well designed and featured some interesting gameplay.
Appeal: 7
This level was very beautifully constructed in the beginning areas (the style did not stay the same near the end, however).
Functionality: 6
It would have been nice if the level had dragon coins to collect. The fishin’ boo section made the player prone to unfair hits. In one of the areas a small Mario’s cap does not appear, and if he collects a super mushroom his whole head disappears.
Fun: 7
This level was very enjoyable. The storyline was interesting and not too hefty.
“Shining Moon Tourguide” by “Vic Rattlehead”
26/40
Level design: 5
This level was very fun in some aspects but also unfair in other areas.
Appeal: 7
The level used unique palette choices that helped accentuate the odd feel of the level.
Functionality: 8
The level was mostly functional. Some of the challenges (specifically those involving line-guided grinders) relied more on luck than skill.
Fun: 6
The level was fun and provided an interesting take on level design.
“Losoall’s Binary of LULZ” by “losoall”
23/40
Level design: 5
The level was decent, but the difficulty of some areas was too hard. Some areas gave large amounts of power-ups immediately after a challenge, implying that the challenge was unfair and needed an immediate reward after it.
Appeal: 6
Most of the level’s palette and graphical choices were good. The floating lava looked awkward in the lava cave.
Functionality: 7
The level was mostly functional aside from difficulty problems.
Fun: 5
The level was fun, but the difficulty of some areas removed from the player’s enjoyment.
“Sand Castle (V2)” by “neosaver”
19/40
Level design: 4
This level was really long and cumbersome, especially the part where the player was required to carry items on the netted surface.
Appeal: 6
Some parts of the level looked really nice, but others seemed like they were added just for the sake of being there, and not to actually accentuate the level.
Functionality: 6
This level was so long that some players will give up early.  Some of the waterfalls act like water tiles, whereas others act like bush tiles.
Fun: 3
This level is so long and cumbersome that it causes the player to become disinterested.
“Mario Fights the Big Boo, with the participation of Yoshi Superdragon” by “Morsel”
20/40
Level design: 6
This level had some awesome gimmicks that were brought down by the difficulty.
Appeal: 7
The level made use of some creative and interesting palettes.
Functionality: 3
The level was so hard that it became very dysfunctional.
Fun: 4
This level would have been better if the gimmicks had been reworked on an easier scale.
“Sea Brine Shrine (V2)” by “Spud Alpha”
27/40
Level design: 6
This level was well designed and had a lot of creative ideas.
Appeal: 6
This level used very appealing palettes. The water in the first area did not fit with the rest of the theme (normal Super Mario World water would have worked better).
Functionality: 9
This level was very functional. It would have been nice if there were dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 6
This level was a fun and interesting experience.
“Teal mountain” by “Kristian”
26/40
Level design: 5
An average romp through the mountainside. It didn’t feature any unique gimmicks, but was well-designed nonetheless.
Appeal: 6
The level makes good use of simple palettes and design to create the mood.
Functionality: 10
This level was completely functional.
Fun: 5
Although the level was very simple, it was a fun level to play.
“An SMW CeNNtral Production” by “S.N.N.”
9/40
Level design: 0
This level consisted of a large flat area with no enemies, only items such as P-switches and a trampoline. There were no interesting challenges whatsoever.
Appeal: 2
The level made use of a large amount of cement blocks and flat land, which were unappealing in this circumstance.
Functionality: 7
This level lost points in functionality because the midpoint was situated right next to the end of the stage, instead of at a useful area.
Fun: 0
This level offered no fun whatsoever because it failed to give the player unique and interesting challenges.
“The Factory” by “ZMann”
28/40
Level design: 6
This level was very nicely designed and offered an interesting “backtracking” gimmick.
Appeal: 8
This level looked really nice and did a good job setting the mood for the environment.
Functionality: 7
This level used some sprite tiles as objects, yet they had inconsistent properties (Mario can spin jump on regular grinders, but not the new object versions). Also, it would have been nice if this level had dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 7
This level offered a unique and fun challenge.
“Mario Goes Home (V2)” by “Extroble”
25/40
Level design: 7
The creating/eating block sprite was used in interesting ways that helped this level create a fun and enjoyable challenge.
Appeal: 6
The level looked alright, though more work could’ve made it look even better.
Functionality: 6
Some enemies reacted strangely to ground tiles (they may have been placed through direct Map16 access). It also would’ve been nice if there were dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 6
This level offered a fun and interesting challenge.
“Mineral Mines (V2)” by “Redtoonlink”
22/40
Level design: 5
This level was fun but came across as very cluttered.
Appeal: 3
Some tiles were used in strange and outlandish ways that caused the level to look unappealing.
Functionality: 9
The level was completely functional, though some tiles did act in unexpected ways.
Fun: 5
This level offered a decent (if not strange) challenge.
“Unlock the Key (V2)” by “x1372”
34/40
Level design: 9
This level was extremely fun to play. A simply gimmick was brought out and used in different ways, all the while giving the player a chance to learn how to master it.
Appeal: 6
The level looked decent, but could’ve been better displayed.
Functionality: 9
This level functioned well. It would’ve been nice if there were dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 10
This level was one of the most enjoyable ones in the contest and offered a unique challenge.
“In the Sunset” by “everest700”
22/40
Level design: 3
This level was okay but offered nothing new or interesting.
Appeal: 5
The level could’ve used better palettes (and many players don’t enjoy muncher plants attached to vines).
Functionality: 10
The level functioned fine.
Fun: 4
The level was an enjoyable experience but easier forgettable.
“Dungeon Disaster” by “LunarYoshi”
23/40
Level design: 5
This level offered average level design.
Appeal: 6
The level looked nice in some areas, but some of the palette choices were strange (a lot of the palettes seemed to be made of colors really close to each other in the color wheel).
Functionality: 6
Unfortunately, this level made use of some sprites as blocks, yet gave them different attributes (for example, the floating spikes from Yoshi’s Island 3 are not spin jumpable any more).
Fun: 6
This level was fun at points but did not offer any mind blowing challenges.
“A Starry Night Sky” by “MSAhm3d59113”
25/40
Level design: 7
This level offered some interesting and unique ideas.
Appeal: 5
The level’s presentation looked okay, but could’ve been better.
Functionality: 7
The midpoint to the level was really early on. Also, the dragon coins weren’t spread out very evenly.
Fun: 6
An interesting challenge with several different game play aspects.
“The Haunted House” by “Ninja X”
26/40
Level design: 4
The level was okay but offered no new or interesting concepts.
Appeal: 9
This level really used the 3d effect well!
Functionality: 7
Sometimes it was confusing to tell where Mario was. Also it would have been nice if this level had included dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 6
A fun level that offered a unique perspective.
“Wide Island Exploring (V2)” by “Mario’s Hat”
25/40
Level design: 6
A unique level that offered a variety of different choices to explore.
Appeal: 6
The palettes used worked well for the most part. Some ground tiles were used in odd ways.
Functionality: 7
The level was mostly functional, though it would’ve been nice if there had been dragon coins to collect.
Fun: 6
A fun level that offers several different paths.
“Lunar Limbo” by “Uhrix/GN”
29/40
Level design: 6
This level offered a unique and interesting style of level design.
Appeal: 10
The level was constructed in a spectacular way.
Functionality: 6
Some parts of the game could be confusing for players, or hard to understand what they need to do (such as near the start). Players may not understand the ending as well. Dragon coins would add to the game play.
Fun: 7
This level provided a lot of fun because of its fresh appearance and exceptional style.
“105 Days” by “TheGamer”
16/40
Level design: 4
This level was very convoluted and long. In the first area, the player has to “guess and check” the ground to find an invisible door onwards. There are other examples later on of poor level design throughout this level.
Appeal: 6
The custom graphical changes gave the level an impressive feel. The palettes could have been lightened a bit, however.
Functionality: 2
Suggesting to players to use save-states then claiming the block does it is an invalid way to deal with levels that are too long or difficult.
Fun: 4
The level was okay, but it got dragged down by its enormous length.
“It’s Raining” by “.Lester Vine”
26/40
Level design: 5
This level had decent level design but was very difficult at some spots.
Appeal: 8
The graphics used in this level were placed and formed really nicely.
Functionality: 8
There were minor tiling errors here and there, but otherwise this level functioned well.
Fun: 5
A good level that was enjoyable.
“Scared Mario” by “TRS”
28/40
Level design: 7
The idea of using a reverse switch palace added to the overall feel of the level.
Appeal: 6
Decent palette selection was used.
Functionality: 9
The level functioned well. It would’ve been nice if there were dragon coins to collect in the level.
Fun: 6
A fun romp through the woods that most players will enjoy.
“An Autumn Adventure (V2)” by “PowerStrike”
13/40
Level design: 4
This level seemed very weird and crammed full of unnecessary junk.
Appeal: 2
There was way too much going on in the dirt and everywhere on the screen. The palette chooses weren’t the best, either.
Functionality: 4
There were numerous areas where ground tiles were used incorrectly to create unrealistic reactions between sprites such as Mario and the ground objects.
Fun: 3
The crazy foreground elements distracted from the level.
“A Challenge?” by “King Boo”
22/40
Level design: 4
This level was strange and relied a bit on some item grabbing adventures.
Appeal: 5
The level looked alright, though it would have been nice if there were more color choices in the first area other than teal for everything.
Functionality: 9
The level was basically functional aside from a few flaws.
Fun: 4
The level was okay but did not stand out above any of the others.
“Lakeside Island” by “Aqualakitu”
32/40
Level design: 7
A fun level that relies on a classical style of design (though a bit long).
Appeal: 8
The graphics used in the level were well-polished and consistent.
Functionality: 10
The level functioned perfectly.
Fun: 7
This level was very fun. If it had been a bit shorter it would have been even more enjoyable.
“Abandoned Toy Factory” by “DragonLX”
31/40
Level design: 7
A well-designed level that was a bit on the long side.
Appeal: 7
The graphics used were very well made.
Functionality: 10
The level functioned well.
Fun: 7
A great level with an okay “plot.”