Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. osu!
  3. Development
  4. Feature Requests
  5. Completed Requests

"Portal" based ranking system [Denied]

posted
Total Posts
12
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +0
Ephemeral
Inland Empire
3,945 posts
Joined April 2009
Topic Starter
Ephemeral
This map has been deleted on the request of its creator. It is no longer available.
anonymous_old
0 posts
Here since the beginning
anonymous_old
A few problems.

Score resets. They would be pretty common I would think.

Now-approved maps are set to be equal to almost-ranked maps. I don't like this. I'd prefer a third score system which didn't count accuracy or score.

How would storyboards and skins be handled with this system? To me, they are assets like the audio file. Would these be put toward the entire set, or would they possibly be diff-specific? (Backgrounds are a related issue but that's kinda "solved" already.)

I am, of course ignoring this paragraph, because I'm totally against it:

F wrote:

This also means that new maps can be made on the fly - as updating the song portal would not require a redundant download of song and timing data - the user could simply opt as to whether they would wish to download the SB/background/video/skin data a mapper supplies with that mapset.
Some praises.

I like your idea of putting maps on the 'cloud' of sorts. Timings and good audio files could be submitted, and maps would be made by other players (or, of course, the same player who submitted timings/audio). "DJPop's Insane" would simply be as DJPop wanted; no middle man to submit to.

Down the road, I would like to see open maps, where anyone can edit it (or anyone within a group). This, paired with the cloud idea and revision history, would make map submission feel more transparent.
LuigiHann
Resident Skinner
4,432 posts
Here since the beginning
LuigiHann
I think even if people are remapping the same song, they should be using a new mp3 for variety, and even if they don't, they should be having the timing rechecked for accuracy. In most cases of remaps that I've seen, standards had risen between the times of the two maps, so there was a real benefit to it.

But I mean, there's no real big downside to just stealing the mp3 and timing from the existing map.
anonymous_old
0 posts
Here since the beginning
anonymous_old

LuigiHann wrote:

But I mean, there's no real big downside to just stealing the mp3 and timing from the existing map.
  1. Have to re-upload the MP3.
  2. Have to keep two separate MP3's on the server and on each player's computer.
  3. Timing corrections have to be made in at least two separate places.
What F is suggesting goes beyond just timing. Think about Remmy's Moskau map set.
LuigiHann
Resident Skinner
4,432 posts
Here since the beginning
LuigiHann

strager wrote:

What F is suggesting goes beyond just timing. Think about Remmy's Moskau map set.
And that's a horrid abomination, what is your point
Derekku
COOL DUDE
7,270 posts
Joined March 2009
Derekku
So basically, every song would end up with 10+ diffs by multiple mappers instead of people having their own, unique mapsets? Yes, some people collab or have guest difficulties right now, but this would just blow that completely out of proportion imo. :/
anonymous_old
0 posts
Here since the beginning
anonymous_old

Derekku Chan wrote:

So basically, every song would end up with 10+ diffs by multiple mappers instead of people having their own, unique mapsets?
What's wrong with that?
Derekku
COOL DUDE
7,270 posts
Joined March 2009
Derekku
I just think that it would be wasting time. There really isn't a NEED for such a large difficulty spread for maps in the first place. "What about multiple instances of maps?" I think that one would better spend their time mapping songs that aren't currently in osu!, but I don't "dislike" multiple versions of songs. With a ton of different difficulties for a map, it just means more attention for single, popular songs instead of others. Plus, how would credit be distributed? The original uploader could make their own 3-4 diffs, but then a bunch of people would be throwing their own on top of it and it just seems messy. :/
Ephemeral
Inland Empire
3,945 posts
Joined April 2009
Topic Starter
Ephemeral
It kind of goes without saying that such a system would organize the difficulties by the mapper, so you'd have tabs with mapper names inside the song cloud. It wouldn't be like Moskau, for example.

Anyway, I was discussing this internally with peppy last night and the system just isn't feasible. Among other things, it'd require a rewrite of a lot of stuff and throw a lot of other things out the window. It's a novel idea, but in practice? Probably not so much.
Gabi
2,554 posts
Joined December 2008
Gabi
EDIT: NVM


most of those uploading stuff will probably be easier in osz2 anyway.
Shohei Ohtani
Shohei Ohtani
Why not just add an option for "Do not allow Guest Diffs." or something? I'm using bad wording by saying "Guest Diffs", but you all know what I'm saying, verdad?

Therefore, people can have maps that are all them, but people can also have maps that have a bunch of diffs.

This seems like a good idea, but good going eph ruining our dreams ;-;.
anonymous_old
0 posts
Here since the beginning
anonymous_old

Ephemeral wrote:

It kind of goes without saying that such a system would organize the difficulties by the mapper, so you'd have tabs with mapper names inside the song cloud. It wouldn't be like Moskau, for example.
I was having a more socialist vision on this.

Too bad socialism isn't "feasible". =[
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 12