There are sooooooo much constructive feedback in those posts, and the momentum is quite obvious.Xilver wrote:
Hello!
As part of the Criteria Council we are currently gathering feedback from what people leave, and we will sort it out in the next couple of days. In the meantime, we are going to observe how the current changes work and how they turn out to be. Please leave your constructive feedback in order for it to be considered by us, and make sure to stand out and give your valid reasons as to what you agree or disagree on.
Blue Dragon wrote:
hello, as I have already posted my constructive message, I am sorry but I really really have to post my fine dose of dank memes
https://www.reddit.com/r/osugame/commen ... ove_ztrot/Blue Dragon wrote:
hello, as I have already posted my constructive message, I am sorry but I really really have to post my fine dose of dank memes
I <3 you Momoko let's play cute VNs togetherAsahina Momoko wrote:
HAPPY VALENTINE BOIS
weldoneaabc271 wrote:
Pretty much describes the new rules
IM DYING HOLY SHIT LMAOXII wrote:
Let's make osu! great again, vote ztrump 2016.
WE WILL BUILD A WALL
What kind of wall?
A WALL TO PREVENT QUALITY MAPPING
For the most of us who don't troll with meme here, it's already done, we just don't want that rule, like it was is good.Cherry Blossom wrote:
If you, guys, think that quitting this community will make things changed then you're wrong.
Things are not definitive and we still need your opinions. If you quit and don't participate in adjusting this rule change, then never complain like a child.
gloriousXII wrote:
Let's make osu! great again, vote ztrump 2016.
WE WILL BUILD A WALL
What kind of wall?
A WALL TO PREVENT QUALITY MAPPING
That's more of a problem with "lowest diff < 2.0 star" rule. We still need to make those diffs even with this change.Wafu wrote:
Meaning, if there is some very fast song, people tend to make somewhat normal-ish easy, so lower difficulty would be sometimes appropriate.
Very nice visual explanation!Mr Color wrote:
hey i didn't read the whole thread but if you're reading this chances are you probably already know your idea is borked.
but yeah i'm gonna try and explain why despite not having been around the game in a long time but hey my name's in black so that means if i'm not relevant well at least I was at some point
so this graph in the opening post is like this right
but really that's not what's happening and we all know this. the spread in difficulty is infinitely wider in the higher than lower levels. To me trying to chart this out is already pretty dumb because some maps will have a spread with easy easies, easy normals, easy hards and so on, other with hard easies (which uh good luck with that), hard normal, hard hards, etc. but if we were to chart it out this is what it would most likely look like![]()
obviously this is all relative which is why i disagree with the idea of even charting it out but oh well it will do. so pretty much the idea is that it's actually very stupid to require such a spread when there is absolutely no leeway with how hard/easy difficulties can go. i still don't understand why 1/4 is outright banned from normals. other rhythm games less difficulties yet cover a higher range because hey some songs make easy maps and others make hard maps. (shoutouts to jubeat and REUNION with that lv10 normal)
if you want your difficulty spread to make more sense then you should allow more flexibility into how easy and hard the difficulties within that spread rank. By the way, we have a star rating system that (from what I can tell) works now, so even a name like "easy" and "normal" is kind of whatever because all that matters is that star rating in the end.
let me try to chart what i'm trying to say. we'll take Easy and Ultra as their logical maximum, aka how easy/impossibly hard a map can be.
that's basically my beef with the new set of rules you guys have been pushing, haven't really looked at the rest of the announcement and it's implications but if it makes as little sense to me as this does i'll make another post showing my glorious photoshop skills
Great post, let's keep this visible.Mr Color wrote:
hey i didn't read the whole thread but if you're reading this chances are you probably already know your idea is borked.
but yeah i'm gonna try and explain why despite not having been around the game in a long time but hey my name's in black so that means if i'm not relevant well at least I was at some point
so this graph in the opening post is like this right
but really that's not what's happening and we all know this. the spread in difficulty is infinitely wider in the higher than lower levels. To me trying to chart this out is already pretty dumb because some maps will have a spread with easy easies, easy normals, easy hards and so on, other with hard easies (which uh good luck with that), hard normal, hard hards, etc. but if we were to chart it out this is what it would most likely look like![]()
obviously this is all relative which is why i disagree with the idea of even charting it out but oh well it will do. so pretty much the idea is that it's actually very stupid to require such a spread when there is absolutely no leeway with how hard/easy difficulties can go. i still don't understand why 1/4 is outright banned from normals. other rhythm games less difficulties yet cover a higher range because hey some songs make easy maps and others make hard maps. (shoutouts to jubeat and REUNION with that lv10 normal)
if you want your difficulty spread to make more sense then you should allow more flexibility into how easy and hard the difficulties within that spread rank. By the way, we have a star rating system that (from what I can tell) works now, so even a name like "easy" and "normal" is kind of whatever because all that matters is that star rating in the end.
let me try to chart what i'm trying to say. we'll take Easy and Ultra as their logical maximum, aka how easy/impossibly hard a map can be.
that's basically my beef with the new set of rules you guys have been pushing, haven't really looked at the rest of the announcement and it's implications but if it makes as little sense to me as this does i'll make another post showing my glorious photoshop skills
Good postXxVivaxX wrote:
Why do we want to change something, that isnt borken. If you look at a average or a new player, they will all have problems to improve. Why do you want people to improve in big steps, instead of little small ones?
Best post.XxVivaxX wrote:
Why do we want to change something, that isnt borken. If you look at a average or a new player, they will all have problems to improve. Why do you want people to improve in big steps, instead of little small ones?
Mr Color wrote:
hey i didn't read the whole thread but if you're reading this chances are you probably already know your idea is borked.
but yeah i'm gonna try and explain why despite not having been around the game in a long time but hey my name's in black so that means if i'm not relevant well at least I was at some point
so this graph in the opening post is like this right
but really that's not what's happening and we all know this. the spread in difficulty is infinitely wider in the higher than lower levels. To me trying to chart this out is already pretty dumb because some maps will have a spread with easy easies, easy normals, easy hards and so on, other with hard easies (which uh good luck with that), hard normal, hard hards, etc. but if we were to chart it out this is what it would most likely look like![]()
obviously this is all relative which is why i disagree with the idea of even charting it out but oh well it will do. so pretty much the idea is that it's actually very stupid to require such a spread when there is absolutely no leeway with how hard/easy difficulties can go. i still don't understand why 1/4 is outright banned from normals. other rhythm games less difficulties yet cover a higher range because hey some songs make easy maps and others make hard maps. (shoutouts to jubeat and REUNION with that lv10 normal)
if you want your difficulty spread to make more sense then you should allow more flexibility into how easy and hard the difficulties within that spread rank. By the way, we have a star rating system that (from what I can tell) works now, so even a name like "easy" and "normal" is kind of whatever because all that matters is that star rating in the end.
let me try to chart what i'm trying to say. we'll take Easy and Ultra as their logical maximum, aka how easy/impossibly hard a map can be.
that's basically my beef with the new set of rules you guys have been pushing, haven't really looked at the rest of the announcement and it's implications but if it makes as little sense to me as this does i'll make another post showing my glorious photoshop skills
Except it is allowed (probably?) vCirno-baka9 wrote:
Since pretty much every post has been "This is bullshit" (even my posts), I will attempt to post a reason why the second rule is horrible (if it wasn't obvious enough).
According to this, we can have a 3* Hard and a 5* Insane, but no way to make a Light Insane that is 4* for good difficulty spread
Please change..
The fact that it is so vague that it is being misunderstood by everyone (it's still a terrible rule though for reasons I've stated previously) reflects on how poorly created this rule is.ztrot wrote:
The difficulty is not dependent on the star rating. The mapping techniques used within the difficulty and the spread to the surrounding difficulties define the category each difficulty level falls into. Difficulties must be named to reflect that.
People complain about shit maps. What you do in return is limit the amount of quality sets.Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
ztrot wrote:
Hello everyone, ztrot here with some exciting new news!
ztrot wrote:
some exciting new news!
ztrot wrote:
exciting new news!
lol'dztrot wrote:
exciting
Timorisu wrote:
People complain about shit maps. What you do in return is limit the amount of quality sets.Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
How does that make sense?
[/quoteCirno-baka9"[quote="Timorisu wrote:
People complain about shit maps. What you do in return is limit the amount of quality sets.Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
How does that make sense?
I'm sorry I must have missed the 200 posts an hour of people complaining about shitmaps. I don't suppose you have the thread that happened in handy anywhere? Or by "everyone" did you mean "less than 1% as many people as there are opposing this change"?Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
Use new.ppy.shBlind Justice wrote:
Let's fix the website first. It keeps crashing on me every time I reload.
I'm very agree for this!XxVivaxX wrote:
Why do we want to change something, that isnt borken. If you look at a average or a new player, they will all have problems to improve. Why do you want people to improve in big steps, instead of little small ones?
This is a change in the system, not the mapping itself. There still can be shitmapping with this new system. Your logic is flawed.Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
the only time this was ever mentioned to the community was by ztrot 2 nights ago on modhelp. Only the council supposedly agreed to this.Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
Broccoly wrote:
This is a change in the system, not the mapping itself. There still can be shitmapping with this new system. Your logic is flawed.Zak wrote:
For months now everyone complains about shit mapping, now we announce a change and everyone says it was fine.
Make up your fucking minds.
Things are not ending, this does not kill your ability make maps, you can still make multiple sets for a single song, you still have options.
And not everything here is final as already stated, it's not like we just ignore what everyone else thinks, there's just too much to reply to currently.
I don't really agree with it. I came in osu when approved map could just be a harder map (doesn't matter the lenght) and from this, it gave me motivation to improve even more to actually pass this map.XxVivaxX wrote:
Why do we want to change something, that isnt borken. If you look at a average or a new player, they will all have problems to improve. Why do you want people to improve in big steps, instead of little small ones?