Antipixel by juangd

Design - 1.9/2.5
The issue with the design of this level isn't that it's ugly. In fact, it's a very nice looking design. I just find it extremely bland. It's just some grey blocks. But as I said, it's a very effective design that works very well and looks rather nice.

Decoration - 2/2
This is not boring, and is exceptional. Great job here.

Gameplay - 2.3/4.5
Boring is one way to define the gameplay of this level. There are very few vehicles in the level, the level uses this horrible slow motion from start to end, there isn't much in the way of activity. You spend quite some time doing very little, but thankfully the wave parts are a bit more lively, and I'm not a fan of the transitions between vehicles and some of the odd movements. I know this is an easy, simple level, but I remember when they had outstanding gameplay, but this is just slow and boring.That being said, the difficulty is consistent and although you could argue that the decoration does hinder slightly, there's very little that could cause confusion.

Music Synching - 1/1
Brilliant. Can't fault it.

Creativity - x1
Custom background levels used to be very creative, but now they are becoming common. Soon this could become less than 1, but for now it's just fine.

Bad/Good Things - x0.95
Prioritising design, decoration and effects over gameplay shouldn't be done.

RESULT - 6.8/10 (Decent Level)
It's close to be a good, star worthy level, but this has some serious gameplay issues, and the design could have been a little more inventive. If the slow pace was made a bit quicker then perhaps this could have been a lot better, but the boring gameplay is caused by a lot more than this. A bit more concentration on gameplay I think.

Oh, so it's only now that you've managed to pick up on my reviewing system.

I've made it clear more than once, but I'll make it clear again for you.

0-4.9 is "Needs Improvement" because there's more bad than there is good. It's just logical.
5-6.9 is "Decent". That's just how I do it. I don't personally feel that something below 7/10 deserves stars.
7-8.4 is "Good". Once you get past 7 there's a considerable amount of good things and not so many bad things, but still not enough to warrant a feature.
8.5-10 is "Feature-worthy". In order to get a featured level it must look fantastic and play brilliantly. There's very little room for issues in levels like these.

That's my scoring system explained. Everybody has their own opinion as to how it should be done, and discussions have been made as to making one scoring system, but everybody's is so diverse that it would be impossible to achieve.

As for you telling me how to review, I find that quite amusing. I use an advanced spreadsheet to calculate my scores to the nearest tenth (or more) decimal place in order to make my reviews as objective as possible. When I write a review I explain what needs improving. My scoring and reviewing is thorough.

Your reviews seem so open and subjective (to the point of being biased) with scores that seem to based on complete nonsense. You also seem to just have an eye for good design and decoration but don't even consider gameplay, like quite a lot of 2.0 creators that are heavily criticised for doing such thing.

So next time you want to criticise my reasoned, thorough and highly respected reviewing system, make sure you are doing something more than what you are doing now. Clear?

EDIT: Why do you say you agree to my review and then disagree with me saying that it's decent only? That makes about as much sense as a chocolate teapot. Oh well, I'll just move it to decent as you did actually see you agree.