Endaris wrote:
Okoratu wrote:
"a beat in the song is stressed so stress it somehow in your map to follow the song!"
how vague is this
Many ways lead to Rome.
Except for the one where you don't stress it at all.
That's like not even starting to go one of the many ways.
Yeah, that's why I find it vague. One person can say "this best is stressed in the song, why is it not stressed in your map?", while someone else can say "I don't thin that beat is stressed in the song" or "I think that beat is stressed enough in the map". I think that leads back to the idea off mapping being purely subjective, but the way it was presented in the post, looked to me like it was an objective rule.
Xanandra wrote:
It's okay jawns, I know how it feels when people thinks that your maps are weird. Apparently I am one of the weird mappers too.
Also don't feel so down, you never know if by 2020 this style will become the norm!
In more seriousness though, I am someone that believes that shapes and consistency is what gives structure to a map, and you already have consistency, so try to improve your shapes in your patterns.
thanks for the advice!
Manysi wrote:
Dude, you will be alone in this world with your current mentality. By that i mean the community wont support you, and your ''punk maps'' which is mainly because you refuse critisism. You will get bored of this sooner or later and maybe want to map properly. Take my word, its just a matter of time when you stop or the community will disinherit you if you even mess with them.
Ok, this was too harsh. But i have a very good reason to discourage you from what you are about to do.
I had the same mentality about a year ago when i started mapping. I also thought my maps are great but only because i wasnt able to read them. (couldnt even fc hards) I wanted to map 5* or more and i cant find the words how bad of a decision it was. My maps looked nice but didnt make any logical sense. This affected my whole career in mapping. The moment i got bored of it and wanted to make stuff that i can actually play i had to face reality... I was like: ''wtf is wrong, why do i struggle playing this?'' then I created a discussion in here like you. I thought its the spacing, people ofc didnt understand what i was missing so i had to map for 5 more months to finally realize.
I would say you are safe as long as you dont get lost inside your head and think what you do is special and nobody experienced the same. The difference is they didnt take their first impressions seriously. They were realistic enough to see that they dont know shit as newbies. You are not the special snowflake, at least not yet.
The best advice i can give your is to read this first: t/239778/ then try to analyze older (2010-2011) maps. Keep in mind that what you feel like fitting the music will make little sense most of the time. You have to do it technically by following instruments and try to represent them.
For example pick one like drums for a section and swap to guitar if it gets the dominance. You are free to experiment as long as you make sense with it.
Ask people for further help and accept their advice if you see they are experienced. Hope i could help,good luck!
I think the reason I have a hard time taking criticism, is because I don't feel I have yet gotten any good criticism. I even wrote in the description of Velvet Green: "If you mention the distance spacing, you better have a damn good argument to why it should be changed, besides "It's too inconsistent!"".
People might say stuff like "it doesn't make sense" or "the spacing is bad", but they never seem to give any reasons to do so. I've never liked the idea, that you should blindly take any criticism from anyone who is more experienced than you, when it comes to any creative art form really.
Another reason is, that I enjoy playing the map so much, I honestly don't think I've enjoyed any map as much as this one. Some might argue, that the map is a bit out of my skill level, and I admit, I do have to put on NF when playing it, but I am generally quite good at reading difficult map (I have defeated airman). I can play every part of the song well, apart from the hardest part in the middle.
But if anybody has any criticism, they are willing to explain well, I'll be happy to take it to heart. And if I disagree, it's probably because I have reason to do so.
-[Koinuri] wrote:
jawns wrote:
This is what I mean by "unwritten rules". I don't agree with the idea, that there are thing you should never violate, especially since these concepts seems quite vague.
There's always going to be "unwritten rules" we have to follow in anything, even in arts. Take music for example. It has a lot of theorems on which notes to use, and we don't use many of the 20k hz ish range we can hear because it's already been established by bunch of people that they usually suck and you won't end up with something nice using them. osu! community has slowly developed some rules to address things that work or doesn't work the same way. Some of these can be broken on certain occasion if done right, but you can assume it's going to be bad for the most part.
Additionally, there's one super important rule in osu! you should NEVER break when you're mapping a song, which is "maps should always compliment the song it's mapped to". You can't make a quiet part the hardest section, you can't add streams where there are no sounds, etc. These "unwritten rules" are mostly based on this idea.
I assume you mentioned spacing in your first post because some people pointed that out on your first map. Problem with having large spacing for entire map like your "punk mapping", is that a random sections here and there has huge jumps only the hardest part should have. It makes the hardest part feel normal in comparison and ends up not standing out. It's kind of like how 100% white is theoretically the brightest, but white with shadow look significantly brighter. That's why you need "shadows" in your map aka easier parts with smaller distance, so your hardest part will actually be the hardest. And this is why it's one of an "unwritten rule". By failing to properly making the strongest parts stand out, you are violating the one rule you can't break.
There's nothing vague about these "rules". Through more experience in mapping, you'll realize that they all have valid reasoning behind them.
I agree that a lot of music is based on theorems, and ideas like dividing the song up in fours or threes. This is the reason these two time signatures are the most common, for some reason music made this way is naturally pleasing to listen to.
However, there's also tons and tons of good music, that break these rules, and are amazing, not just despite them breaking these rules, but sometimes
because they are breaking these rules. A good example, is coincidentally Velvet Green. The song for the most part doesn't seem to follow a specific time signature, and the rules of music says: "you have to follow a time signature, otherwise the rhythm makes no sense". This song breaks the rule, and it ended up being amazing because of it.
I agree with the "maps should always compliment the song it's mapped to" statement, however there is a clear problem with it. Since both music and mapping is subjective, it's more or less impossible to say that something doesn't compliment the song. The only real time I think you can say that, is when there are hitcircles where there is no music; otherwise it's completely up to the interpretation of the mapper.
And in regards to my own map, I really can't see how everything is so hard that the hardest parts don't stand out. There are a clear difference between the instrumental parts (harder), and the verse/chorus (a lot easier), and in the middle bit, where the BPM increases significantly, it becomes a lot more difficult. I tried removing that bit, and the star rating decreased to 6.18!
And while all these unwritten rules have valid reasons behind them, there can also be valid reasons to break them.