Nintendo Deleted a Very Popular ‘Mario Maker 2' Stage Without Explanation

One of the more popular (and hardest) levels in Super Mario Maker 2, a goofy low-gravity stage called Pile of Poo: Kai-Zero G by noted streamer GrandPOObear, has been deleted and can no longer be played, its creator revealed this morning. Nintendo said the level was taken down for “inappropriate and/or harmful content,” according to an email he shared.


This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/qv7ypm/nintendo-deleted-a-very-popular-mario-maker-2-stage-without-explanation

While transparency from Nintendo would definitely help (on this and oh so many other fronts), I really can’t shake the feeling that in this particular case it’s as straightforward as the phrase “Pile of Poo” not actually being allowed, despite what GrandPOObear had heard.

10 Likes

Since he’s one of the most well-known level creators in western SMB romhacking communities, there’s a high likelihood that groups of detractors have been mass-flagging his levels, and Nintendo’s moderation systems are easily tripped up by large amounts of volume in content flagging.

I doubt Nintendo secretly has it out for the guy.

12 Likes

Yeah it’s probably a pretty mundane reason, but even though Nintendo is probably the game studio who’s output I’ve enjoyed the most, it’s a good reminder that they like all companies are scum who will screw you over at a moments notice. Even if you are popular influencer.

2 Likes

I hope Patrick is able to get a statement about this eventually because it’s just really disturbing to have a product centered around creating and sharing content that does this.

Nintendo:

Agreed. I have a feeling Nintendo probably implemented some a “dumb” system where if a level gets reported X number of times (possibly over a limited span of time), it just gets auto-removed with a warning. Some people may have decided to brigade GPB’s level by mass-reporting it.

If that’s the case, and the vague nature of the warning is a big reason I think it’s likely, it is a bad filter implemented by Nintendo, of course.

Side issue, but I also think the “Boo” button is just overall a terrible idea. They make it the default button, they oddly put it on the left when many people expect a positive to be on the left, and then they appear to have it such that “Boos” result in a level popping up for people less in Course World (if that’s accurate, it’s what my understanding of it is, at least). What an awful design.

And we literally pay for this online shit now.

3 Likes

The online experience in MM2 is just not thought out at all. You don’t have to be a UX expert to immediately notice the flaws or come up with decent alternatives.

  • Why is tagging so limited

  • Boo doesn’t need to exist as an option, in fact why bother having a rating system to begin with. I don’t like overly hard levels that are about perfect execution but other people do

  • No playlists

  • If there are words that are banned such as “poop” don’t even let people use the plain nonl33t spelling of it, drop the hammer if people purposely get around the blacklist. Or go the Pokemon route and just have a bank of words one can use.

  • No replay functionality, most people can’t beat every level but once I’ve given up I would like to see the solution

  • No way to quickly queue up a number of levels outside of the game. Hey that phone app sure would be cool as a search and queue program but I guess that thing was such a train wreck Nintendo doesn’t want to remind people it exists

  • No leaderboards among friends, I’m not getting a world record but I would like to try and beat my friends time

2 Likes

It’s odd to assume the rating system was made because “people don’t like overly hard levels” and not to regulate the thousands of genuinely poorly-made / troll levels. Playing the original game for player levels was a crapshoot precisely because there was no rating system.

Also, they made Smash World for the online app in April so it’s a matter of time for a similar app to be made for Super Mario Maker.

Eh… that’s not so odd, when you consider Japanese is read right to left.

Even family friendly corporations are not your friends. Even the most open of companies are still black boxes to consumers. They will take your labor and separate it from you, giving you no say in it. No explanation or power.
That’s why we need games that fall under commons laws (or commonwealth) instead of private ownership by corporations.

I never said it was in response to overly hard levels I just said I don’t like really hard levels. If I’m using the rating system as Nintendo wanted me to I would boo any level I found too difficult just as I’m sure there are people who only want to play really hard levels and would boo any level they found too easy.

A rating system does not work at all for something that is 100% subjective. No one should be able to get on and say “I feel your level is bad and is in fact so bad it should be removed”.

People booing levels that are just hard is a valid concern but that doesn’t mean there should be no rating system at all. The quality of anything is subjective but we still rate games and movies and books (and online systems…). It’s no more or less subjective to boo a level for being too hard than it is to praise or criticize Super Mario Maker 2 by the same or similar metrics.

What Nintendo wants you to use the Boo system for is to Boo bad levels; the fact that people have different ideas of what a “bad level” consists of is not the fault of rating systems and doesn’t mean it should be abolished. People are allowed to have different opinions of what’s good or bad.

It’s also not like it’s a discussion board or anything, like this site. No one’s going to sit around reading nuanced paragraphs of reviews of what they did or didn’t like about a Mario Maker level. Did you like it? “Yeah!” Do you not like it? “Boo!” Not sure? “Meh.” That’s all it needs.

People will Boo levels for every kind of nebulous reason and with little discussion or nuance. Lol

Your post is not as great of a justification for these ratings systems as you seem to think it is.

2 Likes

Yeah, that’s my point. People have their opinions of what makes a bad level. Because quality is subjective. How does it make sense then to not allow anyone to express their opinions because people can rate things “wrong”? The Super Mario Maker 2 community isn’t a discussion board, or rather, the system in which you can play and comment on levels isn’t a discussion board. No one is going to read essays on how bad or good a Mario Maker level is. Because they are Mario Maker levels.

Wazanator is asking that the game shouldn’t have a rating system at all because people will not rate things the way they want them too, as if there’s some kind of objectivity towards critique. Which is silly. I agree that it can be better, but that requires that there is a rating system at all.

This would be a fantastic position in support of your argument if wasn’t apparently the case that the system is being used to auto-flag levels.
We already, as a community who makes things and has rating systems for things know that single-valued rating systems are far too blunt as a solution for anything like user-generated content. They’re worse than having no-rating-system-at-all, if you’re using negative ratings for auto-removal - imagine a situation where the community has 10% who hate hard levels, 10% who hate easy levels, and 10% who hate levels without Bullet Bills in them. If your threshold for auto-flagging is 10%, all hard and easy levels - and a lot of middle-rated levels without specific features - will all be autoflagged.

There is absolutely nothing that implies that Poo had his level banned because he had too many downvotes. He’s also stated that this was happening to him as early as the first game, which did not have this system, nor that it had anything to do with his name. This level in particular was popular, so I doubt it had SO many Boos that it hit an automatic threshold.

Either some Nintendo moderation intern is getting fired or people are abusing a reporting system to spite this guy (are you also against the use of reporting things for inappropriate content for this reason?), but neither of them have anything to do with the use of rating systems.

EDIT: This board that can handle a rating system because you can actually talk to each other and give feedback directly, but there are likely millions of people on Mario Maker’s servers with a bunch of levels and they’re not going to have the time or patient to read or write out nuanced reviews or criticisms.

Or they could just make their tagging and filtering system better and rely on that instead of a rating system.

No need for rating at all if you provide a better alternative to getting people what they want.

4 Likes

Tagging and filtering has nothing to do with whether people like a level or not and does not provide feedback whatsoever (although they do need to improve the tags too).

There’s also a functional benefit for the rating system because levels with too many Boos do not show up in the Endless Challenge (a mode where you play random user-made levels until you lose). In the original game, getting crappy or troll levels had the chance of screwing over your run, and Endless Challenge does not give you many lives. They don’t prevent these levels from being played, but they do stop them from pissing people off.

And why is this information needed exactly? I don’t like levels with crazy jumps, is that fair to the creator and the people who like these levels if I boo it? My opinion shouldn’t be counted but it is.

The rating system accomplishes nothing. I’ve gotten extremely hard and extremely easy levels in endless multiple times on normal difficulty which means the system does not work.

The comments section can be and is used for feedback in game.

People shouldn’t have their levels taken out of rotation because people who these levels are not aimed at got them served to them.

I do not like seafood. If I was forced to go to a seafood based restaurant and then leave a 1 to 5 star review my review is not going to be valuable at all.

1 Like