not to sound negative/stubborn or anything but whenever i post my work, i can practically predict what types of crits im going to get(most of them i have already thought about and investigated while working). hence if i ignore something, it's not out of spite, but simply because it would conflict with my original expression/goals, and end up leading me away from what i original sought out to do.
I suppose i just have to be more clear outfront what i intended to accomplish and what i chose to ignore or sacrifice.
I feel like I'm reading my old self
if you have to be argumentative about it, you already lost. People see only what you show trough your picture, so if they see only one option it's your fault. I personally would have gotten into whatever alternative you proposed, but I saw nothing of the sort in the picture, if you opted out of using brightness contrast to convey the platforms, it would've been fine if you used maybe direction of your lines to do it, or some kind of alternative. Instead, I have yet to see what you are trying to implement that leads you to "experiment". You just argue that clarity simply isnt necesary because you can just expect the player to accomodate to your mistakes.
Experimenting is ok, but to come up with no results and expect people to see some kind of wisdom in this is nonsense.
http://www.davidhellman.net/blog/the-art-of-braid-part-3/ Baird does far more visual experimentation than it is perhaps posible in a NES mockup, yet when an element in the background was simply a little misleading it was removed for the player's sake.
ROSSE: What the hell happened to your mock? I *think* what I see somewhere there underneath looks cool, but to be honest it is far too darkened to know what the hell is going on. Are you trying to use the "fade" raster feature?