The only change this makes is that BATs can derank maps because of subjective issues. The BATs had the privilege to do everything else already mentioned in the description.
It's not a changeTheVileOne wrote:
The only change this makes is that BATs can derank maps because of subjective issues
The title of the thread ([Rule] Maps must be of an agreeable level of quality) implies two things.those wrote:
This is nothing close to a restrictive rule. This could have been all in private discussion and you would have ever known; additionally this makes zero impact on what is or is not allowed in mapping. I don't see why you see this as restricting at all.
Of course the levels of quality will be inconsistent.TheVileOne wrote:
You misunderstand. Eph said that there are inconsistent levels of quality in ranked maps. Only maps that are worse than the acceptable level of quality may be deranked until they meet the quality of the majority of other maps.
The thing is, some mappers refuse to change stuff in their map for whatever reason and because these changes are technically subjective, they are not unrankable. However, they should be fixed (for whatever reason) and this rule would allow the BAT to enforce these changes.Silynn wrote:
Of course the levels of quality will be inconsistent.TheVileOne wrote:
You misunderstand. Eph said that there are inconsistent levels of quality in ranked maps. Only maps that are worse than the acceptable level of quality may be deranked until they meet the quality of the majority of other maps.
You have so many ranked, some will stand out and others will fade away.
This doesn't mean that those in the latter category are bad, or undeserving of ranking.
There is currently no problem with the current quality standard, but this thread is implying that there is. If there isn't a problem with it, then there would be no reason to bring it up as a problem.
However this thread does clearly that.
So I'm not sure what I'm misunderstanding.
Edit: What I'm trying to say is, don't imply there's something wrong with current criteria, when what you actually want is more thorough checking by staff before maps go off to be ranked.
um.Koko Ban wrote:
i for once wants to see a DJpop-styled map on the latest ranked maps again
Gonna comment on this (Was gonna do it when it was first posted, but 5 hour silence <__<). I think we've forgotten that mapping is making content for a game. Now, I map for the hell of it, I'll map fun little one diff maps and share them with some friends and upload them on the site. However, when it comes to RANKING, that's when it becomes game developer time. Sure, it may not always be 100% fun to have to change some things in your map, to have to do more work, but quite honestly, mapping to rank isn't 100% about fun, but rather developing content so the community can play songs that they enjoy listening to. Now, mapping can still be fun, and should be fun, but you can't put fun over putting out quality content for an almost 3m player game.ErufenRito wrote:
Bats should never be the judge of a map's quality, mapping is supposed to be fun, not some job where we have to please a group of people.
Then I guess you want the faq to be removed, in case a newbie mapper decides to read it.CDFA wrote:
For instance, Cut Ver. maps. Piss me off uncontrollably. I understand like Eroge OPs and stuff, and cutting songs that repeat (Mostly like vidja game music), but when you have a full version song, cut it after the first chorus, and go off and get it ranked magically, that's pretty bad. There can easily be a rule saying "Songs should not be cut without due reason." BATs can also be harder on it by not being so fluffy wuffy and getting what can be done next time done now.
Plus, people can get away with cheap tricks that allow them to produce maps faster, get mods faster, and put out a bunch of mediocre maps to the ranked playlist. So if we're going to fight for quality, we can start by putting in little rules that help cut out the things that cause low qualityness.This is what bothers me about many recent maps more than anything else.
I just read all from this,why 8?and not 6? or 4? o dunno is more a discutible number... tell me how 8 BATs will check the map, because it's really hard to find atm 1 for a mod or for a simple checkEphemeral wrote:
8 BAT
Agree 1/2 of this; BATs should judge the map quality, BUT the mappers should not please a group for checking a map,for personal experience i know what this means,and searching for someone who is not busy/lazy/like the song is hard, it will be just a priviledge to have a ranked map and ppl will wait more and more for a rank.ErufenRito wrote:
Bats should never be the judge of a map's quality, mapping is supposed to be fun, not some job where we have to please a group of people.
Where does this happen? It doesn't. Why is this relevant if it doesn't happen? It isn't.Ephemeral wrote:
A map may be by all assessments of the criteria considered perfectly rankable. Simply placing a note on every beat throughout the length of a song is technically rankable, albeit an absolutely horrible map and one that should not even be remotely considered for ranking
t/92080&start=0Silynn wrote:
Also:Where does this happen? It doesn't. Why is this relevant if it doesn't happen? It isn't.Ephemeral wrote:
A map may be by all assessments of the criteria considered perfectly rankable. Simply placing a note on every beat throughout the length of a song is technically rankable, albeit an absolutely horrible map and one that should not even be remotely considered for ranking
This is exactly what I was trying to push a while ago. In fact, I believe that you posted in my suggestion thread about that. I certainly think that we should still try to get all maps up to a certain degree of polish, but being able to give the best maps a further stamp of approval would help the end user to find better maps. Here's hoping.Soaprman wrote:
I think a model like the critic/user score split on Metacritic could be useful here. Just abandon "standards" altogether and rank any map that isn't technically crippled in some obvious way when the mapper decides it's finished. Then the BATs' ratings (and comments/reviews?) go into a prominent "critic" category and all the other users' ratings go into a "user" category. Then add critic/user scores to the filters on the map listing, and have the filter default to critic score >= 70% or something... whatever would correspond to what the BATs think "rankable" should be.
If people make shitty maps, they'll fall off the "critic approved" filter, and people adventurous enough to download the map anyway will downvote the map and move on if they don't like it. People are pretty good at deciding whether they like something, so let them handle that decision themselves.
tl;dr get some free market up in this bitch.
Insane suggestion that most people will just roll their eyes and ignore aside, I like ErufenRito and awp's posts. Don't restrict the "bad" maps. Just give extra spotlight to the "good" ones.
If 8 BATs actually think, it is bad, there must be something bad, else they wouldn't be BATs. Even if 20 of them think, it is fine, 8 is a good number to say that there is at least something heavily wrong.CXu wrote:
Out of curiosity: what happens if 8 BATs think something is bad, but 4/6/8/10/whatevernumber of BATs disagree?
so if 8 BATs don't like the map, but all the others do and the community likes it and everybody is happy and everything is wonderful, it still could get unranked?Loctav wrote:
If 8 BATs actually think, it is bad, there must be something bad, else they wouldn't be BATs. Even if 20 of them think, it is fine, 8 is a good number to say that there is at least something heavily wrong.CXu wrote:
Out of curiosity: what happens if 8 BATs think something is bad, but 4/6/8/10/whatevernumber of BATs disagree?
I hope you get this logic. lol
Personally, I am quite astonished at the large variance of map quality present these days. Mappers are increasingly playing the quantity over quality game for whatever reason, and overall map quality is beginning to suffer for it.Mappers
if you're a new mapper and your maps are shit dont expect to get them ranked, try to improve first.Stefan wrote:
You almost all are talking about it, and talking about it and herpiderpiderp it. But the thing is: Can you even imagine the position of a new Mapper which may has potential to make nice Maps in the future but stucks for now in a low Level? Because nobody did that. Just say that if x BATs dislike it it isn't worth to rank it or to keep it ranked. Because the Title is saying that subliminal.
That's not an excuse, yes. Also I've never tried to lead on this way.silmarilen wrote:
getting bad maps ranked just because "its their first map" is a horrible excuse
Improving cannot only come by saying "bad" "boring" "stop mapping". There must be a balance between that. As I said this Discussion doesn't really focused on newer Mappers. And with this Rule - what's kind stupidity - you're giving more like 70% of the Mappers no chance. Sure, try to improve yourself. But being demotivated if someone says "Your Map does not fullfil our personal criterias." is just normal then.silmarilen wrote:
if you're a new mapper and your maps are shit dont expect to get them ranked, try to improve first.
the only maps that get unranked will be the ones which ARE "so bad at all"Stefan wrote:
If someone made a Beatmap which has actually no problems - which means that it has no unrankable issues and it isn't so bad at al
why do you assume it's gonna be like that? If a map sucks that badly it gets unranked that's for some actual reasons. BATs tell the mapper these reasons, e.g. "you have only 2 different patterns in the whole map, this is not fun to play, try some more creative stuff, like XYZ".Stefan wrote:
Sure, try to improve yourself. But being demotivated if someone says "Your Map does not fullfil our personal criterias." is just normal then.
We already have enough problem with the 8 limit. The amount of new maps is way too high for your idea, since it'd cause millions of good maps still pending.Otonashi Yuzuru wrote:
If it's like this , then how about limiting 1 or 2 new beatmaps per day? BATs can make a voting or something like that to determine which map has to be ranked today. If there are no beatmap that met their criteria, then no ranked beatmap that day. imo
"Unfunny and strict?" I think it's safe to say that the staff are capable of having a laugh. With the rules and guidelines, there is also plenty of room for self-expression and personal style. If we didn't have "tons of rules," then we'd have ranked maps which are far worse than they are at the moment. Making a beatmap is simple enough as a concept, but it takes a lot of effort to make something that feels cohesive. There's a reason as to why new mappers are usually bad and 2007 maps are usually inferior--they need time to develop.Stefan wrote:
That Thread is completely invalid. my 2ct
I am out here because this Thread is mostly represents how osu! shouldn't be: unfunny and strict with tons of rules.
large variance of map quality present these daysand maps from this week\month\two which could be handled by this rule.
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/88299CDFA wrote:
For instance, Cut Ver. maps. Piss me off uncontrollably. I understand like Eroge OPs and stuff, and cutting songs that repeat (Mostly like vidja game music), but when you have a full version song, cut it after the first chorus, and go off and get it ranked magically, that's pretty bad. There can easily be a rule saying "Songs should not be cut without due reason." BATs can also be harder on it by not being so fluffy wuffy and getting what can be done next time done now.
Same with like guest diff maps. I swear there was a rule where mappers had to map at least 2 of the diffs in a map (Or at least participate like in a collab diff or something.). But there's a lot of maps where people are like "MAP ONE DIFF LOL OTHER DIFFS ARE DUMB IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE PUBLISHING THIS FOR A GAME OR ANYTHING", which is totally a sign of low quality. A rule can be made easily.http://osu.ppy.sh/s/94623
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/76731Mr Color wrote:
I've been seeing a lot of very uninteresting mapsets lately, 2-diff mapsets that clearly have no gameplay experience to bring, very low user rated beatmaps, and just maps that are boring and uninspired and get very few plays. I think these are the one that the "level of quality" is aimed at. I don't think we're talking about "this is fun but dodgy, let's see if we can get 8 BATs to change it" but more like "hey, this really brings nothing to the game, why is it here" type of deal. Of course, that's a very blunt way of putting things, but it is true. You have no idea how few beatmaps I download these days because at least 1/3 of them are 2-diff mapsets or clearly show no effort in making them. And I know for a fact that I'm not alone.
If 20 BATs actually think, it is good, it must be good, else they wouldn't be BATs. Even if 8 of them think, it is bad, 20 is a good number to say that it is good.Loctav wrote:
If 8 BATs actually think, it is bad, there must be something bad, else they wouldn't be BATs. Even if 20 of them think, it is fine, 8 is a good number to say that there is at least something heavily wrong.CXu wrote:
Out of curiosity: what happens if 8 BATs think something is bad, but 4/6/8/10/whatevernumber of BATs disagree?
I hope you get this logic. lol