Was the meetup on Guangzhou? Just wondering
yupAncuL wrote:
Was the meetup on Guangzhou? Just wondering
thx modMrSergio wrote:
too bad there are no modding coffee houses in Italy
04:19:024 - this stream can be reduced in spacing to make it fit with the decreased volume in hitsounds fix
not a big problem, but you should try to make your patterns fit with the hitsounding. I saw some parts where strong hitsounds were doing a rhythm which was simply expressed with a stream in the map.
That is surely not the best, since the map is one, yet you seem to have divided your map into 2 distinct layers: hitsounds and patterns I seem to understand the difference you're trying to say, because the hit and sound effects of this map are done separately from patterns .some to 01:04:024 (1) - 01:16:624 (4) - In this, I try to tune the music to the sound, not the patterns.. If you think these places need to be changed, I'll try it. But I also want to keep those thoughts, because it's an attempt
Anyway, I won't ask to redo them, since only some streams seem to do that (04:32:224 - dynamic hitsounds) while some do it better (03:41:824 - static hitsounds) fix to 04:32:224 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
Dynamic hitsounds: when the base line, aka the strong drum beats of your hitsounding, follows a specific and varied rhythm.
Static hitsound: when your drum hitsounds only support the song, usually following the default 4/4 metric.
Keep it in mind for next maps
of course
What's with "rsi" in tags? I don't like memes, you know... ("rice" and "insane" too seem unrelated to the map imo) fix
The map's design is not bad at all, but tbh those hitsounds kinda go against my philosophy
MrSergio wrote:
If you can explain me the reason why you tried to make this "innovation" by dividing hitsounds and patterns I can probably come to understand it too, but right now it feels like "hey, let's try to do this because sounds like fun" without actually having a real reason behind it. (that's what I understand from "In this, I try to tune the music to the sound, not the patterns.. ")
Also, I know what RSI means lol, that's why I considered it a meme x)
lol.but Thanksquirrelpascals wrote:
was looking through this map and i thought i'd bring this up while your bubble is popped
04:19:024 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1) - you completely skipped hitsounds on this stream. Pretty confusing because the stream before it is very heavily hitsounded.
no kd
Nevermind I'm dumb, my map want updated. Ignore this
Circle wrote:
Not saying this is an issue, but I just felt that the song being so quiet in this section 01:51:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4,5,6) - was weird. It's part of the song but I just wasn't expecting the volume to go down in that section? emmm....I'm not quite sure what you mean. Do you mean the song itself?I didn't reduce this part of the sound volume o.o I just reduced the density
The map looks fun to play. If only I could play it.
no.all of the streams is done manually .actually, in test, it's not particularly ugly here .emmm.....at least I think so .I can't guarantee that everyone thinks it looks goodHpocks wrote:
Why are these streams so ugly? Did you even use slider to stream?
fieryrage wrote:
playability > aesthetics
edit: ok there's actually things wrong with this map, wtf is wrong with the hitsounding and ncs and what are the streams even following lol
goes from vocals to guitars to drums and where is the consistency hello
You can put forward detailed suggestions. But I can also refute you. This map has been prepared for a year, each mapper's style is not the same. I have my own understanding and explanation for the map, I can't guarantee that you will agree with me, but I can promise to tell you what I think.idke wrote:
i believe this can be ranked someday, but not now especially with many questionable flaws included in the map.
emmmm....Xexxar wrote:
01:55:474 (7,8,1) - isnt this just emphasizing 8 because u simply ran out of room in the editor due to poor stream placement management
01:55:024 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 01:55:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - In fact, this is a set of accelerated sounds .about this sharp angle. I don't think there is any problem. because 01:54:949 (16,1,8,1) - Here, as the beginning of the acceleration, it is also an acute angle . but this looks, is not very molimen
02:51:649 (4,8,12,16) - vs 02:53:524 (13) - what is the reason for this difference is stream design? lol..I think this should be a classic part, not a mistake. This paragraph follows the guitar.Toy's Mod mentioned it here .and I like it
03:42:274 (7) - red tick vs 03:42:949 (16) - blue tick in the same combo ?? 03:42:274 (7) - watch the difference in guitar 03:42:949 (16,1) -The definition of the turning point of the tail and head is very vague .Because they're turning at the point of stress, In fact, I can explain that since 03:43:024 (1) is stress, it is connected to the acute part .and 03:42:274 (7) - I can explain that it's stressed, so I'm just pausing for a shot, and then connecting the acute angle. It doesn't make sense because they're all in the spinning part
i dont rly care how you want to prioritize rhythms, whether that be forcing direction change after the blue tick to emphasize a change in movement before the white tick / red, or if you want highlight it by making the red / white tick be the corner of the stream, but you need to be consistent with it and especially shouldnt be doing these changes in the same combo. But about turning, I'm not thinking about defining the stress as the center, or the head at the next sharp angle .In my opinion, they just need to do something about the turning point
04:58:324 (7,8,1) - this flow makes me a sad boy emmm.....If you want, i can really drop 04:58:474 (8) - a little .But now I don't feel necessary
thx.But I chose to keep my point of view .Lasse wrote:
didn't expect it to get qualified so fast after bubble, even less so as it is right now..
I called for you, but you didn't pay attention to me
hitsounding
why are you using edm kick samples as hitnormal, that sounds so unfitting with this song
using some non-electronic kick samples would make much more sense
04:22:624 - using hihat hitnormals in parts like this also makes no sense with the song, there are drum and guitar 1/4 but basically adding a 1/4 hihat layer with hitsounds sounds horrible
similar for the intro/part until first kiai
and parts like 01:17:824 - etc.
not using cymbal samples (like default soft finish) in a song that uses them quite frequently also seems really lacking
I don't quite follow you . Is this denying all sound effects...? I can't guarantee that everyone sounds good .at least these sound effects are regular .Hummm... I've changed my hitnormal once. At least it's not bad now. If you have a better hitnormal.please send it to me
streams
your stream emphasis is all over the place in many spots
just from looking at parts like 03:41:824 - 03:49:024 -
things like 03:42:274 (7,8) - are emphasized a lot for whatever reason but then 03:42:424 (9) - isn't all, even though it stands out much more in the song and your hitsounding
then 03:42:949 (16,1) - 03:43:549 (8,9) - 03:44:149 (16,1) - actually make sense, but for some reason you do nothing on 03:44:824 (9) - 03:45:349 (16,1) - etc
03:46:024 (9,11) - are hitsounded to somehow stand out, but your patterning doesn't make them stand out in any way
u overlooked an important piece of information .03:46:174 (11) - this .It's the last repetition 03:46:024 (9,11,13) - 03:44:824 (9,13) - 03:43:624 (9,13) - 03:42:424 (9,13) - In the next paragraph. a change has taken place 03:46:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
So it's changed at the end of the paragraph
I mean these things could work if you actually were consistent with them, but emphasizing like half of the stronger beats and ignoring the other half makes no sense
That's a very good suggestion, but about this. I just cut the same paragraph very thin. So that it looks very random. maybe it makes you feel a little confused... Emmm... I'll try to get someone to understand my audio model .mrsergio and I discussed the problem
00:08:749 (16,1) - this is suddenly using such an outstanding angle when you didn't do that on all the strong beats before is ?? 00:08:749 (16,1) - 00:09:874 (15,1) - 00:11:149 (16,1) - 00:12:349 (16,1) - If I say it's a twist, I don't know if you can accept it .yes, I can start with an acute angle from the front, but I didn't do that. Is consistency necessary here? 00:06:124 (13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5) - 00:07:324 (13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5) - If you need, I can even explain these two as buffering because their angles are getting sharper and sharper .but it doesn't make sense, you know. If I keep the consistency here, it will become very single. streams lost his mind
these issues are mainly relating to when you use such inconsistent concept of (not)emphasizing stuff during the same stream, and how you decide to do it.
changing things up a bit for different parts etc. is alright though, especially for a long song with so many streams
perhaps the consistency for many people is a must. But this is not blindly believe the reason. Most of the time, what we see is quite different .
more things
00:47:824 (6) - is putting lots of emphasis on the 1/2 ticks with hitsounding but mapped tapping rhythm doesn't fit, this would be much better as two 1/4 sliders I don't deny your point of view, but I don't think it's bad right now .00:47:824 (6) - This can be seen as a pause .00:48:124 (1,2) - give the player a better response to this place .
03:55:024 (1) - should probably be 1/4, the guitar is not that clear, but sounds better on 1/4 as the important guitar beats seem pretty close to 03:55:174 - and 03:55:249 - , together with clear drums on 03:55:174 -
hummmm... This place is very blurry, because I really follow the guitar .I think if I use a 1/2 slider. Plus a note. here will become very strange. But if 1/3, it will not be so molimen .03:55:324 (1) - because the two sounds coincide here But I still have a choice, if you think so https://puu.sh/x8aMM/47defe6647.png
04:19:924 (13,14,15,16) - this doesn't give enough hitsound feedback, 10% is way too low, fadeout you put here should just se smaller steps as the ones before are really hard to hear
but this is a diminishing process.a gradual process of decline .04:19:924 (13,14,15,16) - they all added finish.and there's a rising sound in
the map uses some nice ideas, but it seems to really lack in how they were executed
fieryrage wrote:
ok i have to make a separate post for this
- 1) why are your finish hitsounds overused in the kiais? it makes playing this song without your hitsounds feel like complete ass because all i can hear is just "pop pop pop pop" where there should be vocals and, you know, not finishes
no
2) on the topic of hitsounds, WHY are the whistles substitute clap hitsounds? what is even the purpose of doing that, just make them actual whistles or some other sound besides a snare
no
3) why do your streams in the kiai follow vocals at some points in terms of spacing changes but then go to drums like 01:01:624 (1) - here during this entire stream?
no
4) what's wrong with your nc's like 00:51:724 (1,1) - this literally screams unpolished 00:51:874 (1) - This NC is consistent for the number of streams .00:51:874 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) - 00:53:224 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) -
5) 00:55:624 (1,2,3,4,5) - where is the emphasis on literally any of these patterns? because 00:57:124 (1,2,3,4) - you seem 00:58:024 (1,2,3,4,5) - to be 00:59:524 (2,3,4,5,6,7) - changing 01:07:624 (1,2) - emphasis 01:19:024 (1,2,3,4) - quite 01:20:524 (2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - a 01:22:324 (1,2,3,4,5) - lot
no
6) 01:19:924 (6,7,8,9) - this is not straight, unpolished, although this is more of a minor thing anyway
no
7) 01:22:624 (4) - nc every downbeat but then this isn't? what? I can't understand why I need Nc here
8) 01:28:624 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - this blatantly ignores rhythm for no reason, same thing with the next pattern, you could be following vocals or guitar here but it's just 1/4 spam??? 01:27:424 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - 01:29:824 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Really?
9) 02:15:424 (1) - what the absolute fuck is this no
10) 02:25:024 (1) - hitsounds randomly get 30% louder here?? no
11) 02:28:024 (2,3) - 02:29:224 (2,3) - these are the same distance but different gaps in rhythm, why? no
12) 02:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - don't you think this is a TINY bit overmapped considering the part before it?
Is this really overmapped? There is enough intense guitar sound to support this paragraph
12) 02:45:274 (4,1) - why? no, like, genuinely, why? how do you imagine this as a playable pattern? you're introducing a concept like this 3 minutes into the map, you are LITERALLY asking for people to break here no
13) 02:51:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - i've legitimately seen more structured stream patterns from unranked mappers, like 02:51:724 (5) - why isn't the direction change on the white ticks? it shouldn't be on the blue ticks, that ignores rhythm entirely no
14) 02:55:624 (1,2,3) - yeah, no, please actually stop doing this, your map is unplayable at this point no
not to mention the fact that the 100 bpm sections aren't even warranted considering the only things mapped in those sections are spinners, it should be a consistent 200 bpm throughout the entire song no
i seriously can't be bothered to look at this map more, it's not ready for ranking at all. the fact this even was considered as anything near a rankable map basically just proves the existence of a double-standard in the mapping community, as if it weren't proven already by monstrata being able to rank literally fucking anything
Yes, you're too lazy to look at this map. So what are you writing so much for? Do you promote your sense of being? Or just because your high ranking can do this? This is not an mod.
why did this get through with like 10 mods it so very clearly needs a LOT more than that?
ill keep that in mind thanks!!!Natsu wrote:
If the mod is disrespectful then the mapper don't need to reply to it
Mun wrote:
Whether the mod was respectful or not, the points it brings up are entirely valid, and just responding "no" is not a valid defense - just a segue into more shitfighting.
Shouldn't this be DQ'd until 09kami provides some sort of valid defense against the vehemently negative reaction this has received from mappers - something he has utterly failed to do?
MashaSG wrote:
Wtf is this guy ranking one of the most beautiful Dragonforce's song that badly and just answer to actual points in mods by copying "no"? Where is QAT members??? Many people ( even BNs and previous BNs ) have many suggestions for the map to increase it's quality, isn't this the reason to DQ this?
I'm sure this would got DQ in 2 days or so, but if it wouldn't, I will "join party" and write mod as well
Actually, I don't mind dq. if there's a better hitnormal. stubbornness doesn't make sense, but it takes better advice to break it . The map doesn't make everyone feel good. If it doesn't make you feel good, I'm sorry, but I hope you look at it in an objective way
fieryrage wrote:
6) 01:19:924 (6,7,8,9) - this is not straight, unpolished, although this is more of a minor thing anyway
I don't think it's a kind of mod.. Is it straight? Is it important?
12) 02:45:274 (4,1) - why? no, like, genuinely, why? how do you imagine this as a playable pattern? you're introducing a concept like this 3 minutes into the map, you are LITERALLY asking for people to break here
I can't understand why I can't do it here
thxNatsu wrote:
If the mod is disrespectful then the mapper don't need to reply to it