Does Clear Rate ACTUALLY Matter in Super Mario Maker? 

Nice video btw

Great vid

nice vid keep up the good work

It would have been cool to go back in time and track the average clear percent over time. I have a feeling that since the game released, less people are playing and the people that are still playing are really good at the game. So perhaps the levels got harder to accommodate that crowd thus the average clear percent would go down over time.

@@cak5171 Check around 8:59 to see that DSteves cleared K. Wonka's level, too. XD

Comment from one verified user with 9 likes placed over multiple comments of unverified users with so much more likes? Clearly, RU-vid is falling apart in terms of ratings of videos.

yo

And also throw triple shell jump, mashing, and near-pixel perfect precision levels

@@Fowlware fun fact: likes are not the only thing that RU-vid looks at to bump a comment.

comment placement is decided based on likes and how often the user has a interaction (and maybe subscribers)

Yeah. I always wonder how one of my levels was initially placed after upload since it took me one attempt to clear check it, but found out later that most people who played it struggled and gave up.

That said, I still feel like you could get a better starting estimate by taking into accounts the # of failures before a successful attempt when clear checking it. It would make it so that harder to clear levels tend to be higher difficulty on average.

And yet I've made many levels that took me dozens of tries to clear check and yet they have a 5%-10% clear rate. Many creators aren't the best or most skilled and yet make levels that test them to their limits, whereas there are significantly better players out there that are so much better and can beat the level easier. Beyond that, in my experience most levels are straight forward. No tricks, tech, or lore needed. Just standard levels. I think the point you brought up is very cogent in troll levels, little Timmy levels with random hidden blocks, and very hard levels by amazingly skilled players/creators. For the rest of levels, which might be the larger portion, it doesn't necessarily hold true.

Initial clear check just shouldn't affect difficulty at all, actually. Bad game design.

@@Syranovara If initial clear check didn't matter at all, it could be that most of the people would never get their levels in the random pool, because nobody could find them in the first place. In SMM2 you need to get at least 1 play from somebody else before you get a new level into the random pool, and as a rookie level creator finding even that first player can be tough. I'm not exactly sure if the first play needs to finish the level. Then again, when writing this it occurred to me that they could just use that first other player's clear rate to recalibrate the difficulty before putting the level into the correct random pool. They might actually do that, this video doesn't really confirm or deny anything related to that.

Since the number of tries it takes the level maker comes into play, I wonder how that has affected the categorization of my own uploaded levels. I often quit a clear check and nerf my levels a little (because I don’t have the patience to beat them lol) until I end up beating them on the first or second try after failing to beat earlier versions of them. So I wonder if Nintendo factors in ALL attempts on a saved level, or if the counter starts over when the level maker quits a clear check and changes the level slightly. One of my levels like this has a 4% clear rate, but I ultimately beat its final form in one try (after failing to beat earlier versions of it). So I wonder which endless mode it ended up in initially because of that.

Thank-you! I’ve been on the lookout for resources that would allow me to see stats on my own levels. My curiosity can now be satiated.

Hey man! It's me, hamstercol from twitch, how are you?

I think that the algorithm might ignore any clear attempts of a person after the person beat the level for the first time. Another theory I have is that clears of different persons count differently based on some internal skill level value of a player. Somewhat similar to ELO

Hi biggest maker

Thank you

based

Would’ve been a sin to leave Kirby 64 out of this 😝

Chad

The Kirby series has the best soundtrack, with the classic Sonic games being the second best.

I had this same question but typically a lengthy level already indicates its difficulty. So if we take that into account I surmise they may have a separate yet similar algorithm to deaths that involve skips. Since every skip would be unique to a level, if a player didn't participate in the level there must be a reason why(which I would surmised levels in Expert and Super Expert get skipped over 5/10 to 9/10 times respectively)

If the player never clears the level like exit the software, it won't save like if you never played it, also The clear rate of 199,000 out of 400,000 is only showing every player's attempt to succeed, all the times the characters looses a life it counts as a failure point(meaning that is where the player's character fails there because of enemy, hitbox of icicle or liquid hazard),The shoe icon only shows how many people played it, and also the clear rate is everyone's attempt to reach the goal point there. Never overestimate the clear rate if the player doesn't know what to do, give it a chance if you think you can complete it.

I had the same question while watching the twitch vod and I was really hoping someone would have brought it up live in twitch chat. If I had to theorize, skips wouldn't affect difficulty as strongly as deaths but it would make sense to factor them in to a degree. On one hand a skip could mean the player died once or twice and determined it was too difficult and skipped it or came across some difficult tech or some precise jump they knew they couldn't do so they skipped it before dying at all. In those cases the skip would represent the amount of difficulty the player WOULD have had if they had kept playing until they cleared the level. Either a great amount of time in the case of difficult tech without a way to die, or many many deaths in the case of precise jumps. On the other had a skipped level may not be difficult but instead be too long, boring, or super annoying. The player could easily beat it, they just can't be bothered wasting their time on something they aren't enjoying. So these skips would be the opposite; they represent a hypothetical first try clear rather than an amount of deaths or struggle clearing the level. So basically skips represent an unknown variable in the difficulty because we can't know the reason for every individual skip. In a hypothetical world where skips didn't exist and a level had to be played until cleared, a level's clear rate could potentially be drastically different than same real world level. The more I think about it, the more curious I am on just how the algorithm DOES consider skips. Does have a way of predicting the reason why a specific player skipped a specific level? Does it gauge the player's own skill level based every other level they've attempted? Does it consider the amount of spent time in the level before skipping? Does it just give all skips a blanket weight and be done with it? Or did the programmers just say "hecc it" and leave skips out of the algorithim altogether?? 🤔🤔🤔 It's so interesting to think about and we will likely never 100% understand how the algorithim works. Unless someone at Nintendo leakes it out...

I think this would be grouped into the how many clear vs plays it has. Not the clear rate, but how many DIFFERENT players actually clear it. If the theory that levels that get cleared more often, even if the clear rate is low, are easier in difficulty, then skipping a level and never going back to clear it likely does increase the difficulty rating

That was one of the things we were looking at also, but unfortunately there wasn't an easy way to test that - that's definitely a possibility in factoring in level difficulty though!

Probably wouldn't work as I am good at smm1 (so the skills carry over) but i have barely played smm2.

Agree with this. Someone who has beaten a lot of Super Expert levels should have a different weight in how a level gets classified from a newbie and how hard the level is for them. The algorithm should be looking at the reputation of WHO beats the level.

@Raysfire If the SMM2 scraped datasets contain the players who cleared each level, a correlational analysis could maybe be performed, but obviously this is well beyond the scope of a Twitch stream :)

@Bezray There would be outliers, but with enough data it would average out. And they could weight players less if they haven’t beaten many levels

Thats basically 0% chance. There are so many levels that some are going to have the same tags as other but be completely different difficulties. There have to be some easy levels with the puzzle tag

I think the issue with puzzle levels is that people just skip the level if they can't solve the puzzle, lowering its clear rate

shudhead located 📍

Lol

Idk the twister and galoomba at 0:15 - 0:19 seem pretty fused to me

@@rorycannon7295 sadly, the twister is closer than the galoomba, they are not fused.

@@EnderrBoi i mean they could be shadoingled along the z axis?

@@EnderrBoi but tru

Me too!

See I find normal significantly easier than expert. My normal record is currently well over 200 but my expert record is only 6. This is with skipping, which I use pretty liberally. I do agree though. Some normal levels could almost be super expert and I have played expert levels that are easier than your average normal level.

First clear is the first person cleared the level, and the world record is anyone who did the quickest way to complete the level or the most efficient; and well played and honor for everyone who skillfully came close to anyone's World record, or matching theirs, even if its 00:005 around 00:03.45 seconds difference(or very close to WR)