Holy Osu! This got ~400 more stars within several hours. Are we going for 20k?
forum
[added] New beatmap category for good unrankable mapsets
posted
Total Posts
293
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +12,918
It can be arranged
all my stars to this
@People who complain about mappers going for this category because less effort.
Who cares, most maps that are gonna end up there are either extremely difficulty for over 99% players for whatever reasons. You can sugar coat it a low but in the end they are just gonna be very hard maps designed for fun for very high level players, that's what this is about. There are a few maps using some gimmicks like jubeat style or DJMax but what's gonna get spammed there are just hard maps where mappers don't want to spend a lot of time mapping easy difficulties.
Problem is you want to avoid everything involved with the current ranking system. This means BATs and whatever should have no word about what can and cannot go in this category, because we all know how it goes, even if this happens to exist most stuff will end up dead because some guy decided it's not gimmicky enough or that the mapper is just lazy.
I've said this ages ago but maybe getting some... idk something like BATs but instead of mappers let it be players and if you get like 3 or 4 players on that group approve the map then it just gets into that category and can't be modified any further (because scoreboard issues). Ofc let's say you just need 1 BAT approval because players who don't know much about mapping (because they actually spend their time playing the game) won't be able to notice some issues like maybe timing things and some technical things I don't even know about.
Who cares, most maps that are gonna end up there are either extremely difficulty for over 99% players for whatever reasons. You can sugar coat it a low but in the end they are just gonna be very hard maps designed for fun for very high level players, that's what this is about. There are a few maps using some gimmicks like jubeat style or DJMax but what's gonna get spammed there are just hard maps where mappers don't want to spend a lot of time mapping easy difficulties.
Problem is you want to avoid everything involved with the current ranking system. This means BATs and whatever should have no word about what can and cannot go in this category, because we all know how it goes, even if this happens to exist most stuff will end up dead because some guy decided it's not gimmicky enough or that the mapper is just lazy.
I've said this ages ago but maybe getting some... idk something like BATs but instead of mappers let it be players and if you get like 3 or 4 players on that group approve the map then it just gets into that category and can't be modified any further (because scoreboard issues). Ofc let's say you just need 1 BAT approval because players who don't know much about mapping (because they actually spend their time playing the game) won't be able to notice some issues like maybe timing things and some technical things I don't even know about.
i just want a form of ranking that is outside the reach of petty QAT's and their opinions they use as word of law.
too many maps that made it through the arduous process of getting approved by BAT's and so much effort by the mappers to polish them only for someone who is arbitrarily in power and has to follow no guidelines for judging a map to say "ugly, remap" "unreadable" or the like and shoot it down.
too many maps that made it through the arduous process of getting approved by BAT's and so much effort by the mappers to polish them only for someone who is arbitrarily in power and has to follow no guidelines for judging a map to say "ugly, remap" "unreadable" or the like and shoot it down.
I want to address the argument that this will promote low effort maps. I would like to point out that due to the current rules, it's already easy to rank low effort maps. Just look at how many 2 difficulty TV Size maps exist. If you search "TV Size" in all ranked beatmaps more than half the maps on the first page are 2 diff TV Size maps. And it's not just old maps either.
this has become a wall of stars 
Almost 11k
I want this so badly now ;w;
I want this so badly now ;w;
Vegeta, what did the scouter say about it's star priority?
this is so many stars peppy better do this >.>
How the heck all these stars ended here...
cracker12_old
Eh, bump.
Also this would be very nice to have, for separating good maps with unrankable elements and a effortless/inexperienced maps (honestly, there are some).
Also this would be very nice to have, for separating good maps with unrankable elements and a effortless/inexperienced maps (honestly, there are some).
Yes please
11k stars speak for themselves, Im still waiting for a statement.
It's not hard to disable pp for a map and just leave scores. It's probably making a proper catagory listing on the website and ingame which is holding this back. I think this is more likely to be implemented when the devs will be up to the beatmap listing on the new site.Wojowu wrote:
Why is this not a thing yet
The problem is picking which maps to give a leader board. At least, that's the biggest problem I can think of with this.abraker wrote:
It's not hard to disable pp for a map and just leave scores. It's probably making a proper catagory listing on the website and ingame which is holding this back. I think this is more likely to be implemented when the devs will be up to the beatmap listing on the new site.Wojowu wrote:
Why is this not a thing yet
Oh my god, the star amount.
Bump.
Bump.
It was known as approved beatmaps. Anyways, I want this! 
I'm really asking myself, if it already has so many stars and has not been implemented yet, there must be a good reason for it... Maybe peppy simply doesn't want to promote gimmick maps, or atleast doesn't want them officially listed, as osu! is still a rhythm game that aims for maps being sightreadable etc, which would not be the case with these maps? Like, maybe he doesn't want those maps to represent the game as a whole.
It's prob because he is too busy working on other stuff so this is not much of a priority right now.Desperate-kun wrote:
I'm really asking myself, if it already has so many stars and has not been implemented yet, there must be a good reason for it... Maybe peppy simply doesn't want to promote gimmick maps, or atleast doesn't want them officially listed, as osu! is still a rhythm game that aims for maps being sightreadable etc, which would not be the case with these maps? Like, maybe he doesn't want those maps to represent the game as a whole.
That doesn't mean what I said is wrong though...abraker wrote:
It's prob because he is too busy working on other stuff so this is not much of a priority right now.Desperate-kun wrote:
I'm really asking myself, if it already has so many stars and has not been implemented yet, there must be a good reason for it... Maybe peppy simply doesn't want to promote gimmick maps, or atleast doesn't want them officially listed, as osu! is still a rhythm game that aims for maps being sightreadable etc, which would not be the case with these maps? Like, maybe he doesn't want those maps to represent the game as a whole.
scrolling this page makes my PC lag
Bump...
I wish I could support this.
I'll just make a comment in spite of supporting this with stars, because I have none.
Edit: Just saw that I had two votes...
I gave one...
Waiting to see this turn out to be a reality.
I wish I could support this.
I'll just make a comment in spite of supporting this with stars, because I have none.
Edit: Just saw that I had two votes...
I gave one...
Waiting to see this turn out to be a reality.
What a bump
Latest post was 6 hours xD
Latest post was 6 hours xD
Maybe he's just waiting for osu!next for all the greater-scale changes.
I would be VERY surprised if he just eats all the stars like that.Desperate-kun wrote:
That doesn't mean what I said is wrong though...abraker wrote:
It's prob because he is too busy working on other stuff so this is not much of a priority right now.
Wow this has more stars than the pp ExGon has!
Hello! it seems you are all wanting a new category for beatmaps, but this has been done in the past and the results were a mixed bag. It is a shame to see so many votes on something that essentially could be done by anyone with a bit of free time. Unrankable maps are just that unrankable.... this doesn't mean they aren't good in there own right hell some of them could be amazing! But there is no need to create a category for something we wouldn't allow to save scores for, that is kinda all there is to this discussion. I mean if you really want no one is stopping you from making your own little blog or something listing out all the best gimmick maps, I mean if we were to make a category for things we wouldn't track score it would just be as effective as a personal ran blog. I understand some of you are newer around here so you wouldn't know but we have tried this and it failed it was reverted, and there is no sense in repeating ourselves.
The point IS to save scores, but disable pp ranking for these maps, just like those several old TAG4 maps that got derakend way back. It should be a section for maps which we love but will possibly never get properly ranked due to either the mapper going inactive, not meeting the ranking criteria, and so on.ztrot wrote:
But there is no need to create a category for something we wouldn't allow to save scores for, that is kinda all there is to this discussion. .
Please, it's better to have it centralized. I have enough headaches going through the various fan made ranking or beatmap listings sites as sone include helpful features others don't have and have yet to be implemented on the official osu! page.ztrot wrote:
I mean if you really want no one is stopping you from making your own little blog or something listing out all the best gimmick maps.
I don't remember if I've commented in here before, but I do recall seeing this thread on numerous occasions.
I'm willing to bet that there are two reasons as to why this is not feasible to implement. The first reason is that it is substantially more taxing on resources for the website. Every single difficulty of a beatmap that has scores saved to it are going to require a point where all of that data can be held. People need to also understand something else with that: just because you can only see the top 50 on a beatmap's page does not mean that the rest of those scores are not put into database tables. There's a reason why when a song is picked, you see #x out of y players. Sure, there are a lot of beatmaps now, and one could ask "well, if there's this much here, why can't there be more?" There are a finite number of resources for holding all of these scores and other data, and this category increases the flow of maps having data associated with it -- the consequence of this becomes scalability. Resources would be utilized at much higher rates than before.
The second reason I could see this not being implemented: it sets really bad precedents. While I myself do not agree with some aspects of ranking criteria, it does exist for a reason, and it helps to define a very clear scope that content must follow before being ranked. Making this secondary category sets up a situation for tremendous amounts of subjectivity. Until very clear parameters are set for this, it will be nothing but problems -- and at that point, if you're going to set so many requirements up in the first place, you might as well try and achieve ranked status.
I'm willing to bet that there are two reasons as to why this is not feasible to implement. The first reason is that it is substantially more taxing on resources for the website. Every single difficulty of a beatmap that has scores saved to it are going to require a point where all of that data can be held. People need to also understand something else with that: just because you can only see the top 50 on a beatmap's page does not mean that the rest of those scores are not put into database tables. There's a reason why when a song is picked, you see #x out of y players. Sure, there are a lot of beatmaps now, and one could ask "well, if there's this much here, why can't there be more?" There are a finite number of resources for holding all of these scores and other data, and this category increases the flow of maps having data associated with it -- the consequence of this becomes scalability. Resources would be utilized at much higher rates than before.
The second reason I could see this not being implemented: it sets really bad precedents. While I myself do not agree with some aspects of ranking criteria, it does exist for a reason, and it helps to define a very clear scope that content must follow before being ranked. Making this secondary category sets up a situation for tremendous amounts of subjectivity. Until very clear parameters are set for this, it will be nothing but problems -- and at that point, if you're going to set so many requirements up in the first place, you might as well try and achieve ranked status.
Uhm, aren't only the scores saved, and not the replays?
If only scores are saved, this is not that much of a problem
If only scores are saved, this is not that much of a problem
Not every single map in existence should be under this category, so I think it should be under the subjectivity of a group that knows a good map when they see one. I want this to be more like an honor system where a beatmap is nominated because it a display of quality and/or popularity.Halogen- wrote:
The second reason I could see this not being implemented: it sets really bad precedents. While I myself do not agree with some aspects of ranking criteria, it does exist for a reason, and it helps to define a very clear scope that content must follow before being ranked. Making this secondary category sets up a situation for tremendous amounts of subjectivity. Until very clear parameters are set for this, it will be nothing but problems -- and at that point, if you're going to set so many requirements up in the first place, you might as well try and achieve ranked status.
I am thinking the system should be based on nominations just how the monthly charts work. Every month the BNs and QATs should chose a set of graveyarded maps that weren't updated for years and verify whether the mapper plans to work on the map to push it towards rank. If the mapper says that he/she doesn't plan to rank it or doesn't respond within a month, then that map can be put on a list to be nominated by them.
I would expand this more towards the community, but I fear we are going to get more spam of mappers posting their own maps, unplayable maps or yet another TV sized shit (in mania's case).
Also this should be per-map and not per-mapset. Otherwise there would be some unjustified combinations like one awesome map and unfinished shit.
I would support this but it seems like the solution in 2015 going into 2016 is to just rank the unrankable gimmick maps.
I don't want those kind of beatmaps to be mixed with normal beatmaps. Also, this will encourage to mappers to map more gimmick maps rather than actual beatmaps. The only way I see this working is by nominating age old beatmaps.Kayla wrote:
I would support this but it seems like the solution in 2015 going into 2016 is to just rank the unrankable gimmick maps.
This ofcourse is in no way a problem or a negative.Kayla wrote:
Also, this will encourage to mappers to map more gimmick maps rather than actual beatmaps.