Raiden wrote:
I would also like to point out that the switch to 200 should be at 02:41:824 - . Currently there are double the necessary downbeats
Reset back to 100 at 03:22:624 -
And back to 200 at 03:37:024 -
Current timing playwise is fine but musical accuracy is ignored
(also for extra accuracy 01:17:824 - red line with 200 for "NC friendliness" or "metronome reset";
similarly 02:44:224 - here)
gratz tho, more DragonForce is always welcome 👀
It's a good discussion. I'd be happy to answer youKagetsu wrote:
hmm... the thing that bothers me the most about this map is the lack of contrast between intense and non-intense beats. the streams are so poorly (in my opinion) implemented that it's difficult to actually feel the song when playing.
for example, around 04:29:674 - you start mapping an endless deathstream using only spacing changes in order to somehow represent the song variations, which sounds good on paper, but the thing you're ignoring here is that after such high density, the patterns start to feel difficult regardless of the spacing shifts. there's a guideline in the ranking criteria that states: "Avoid following multiple layers of the song if it is unclear what rhythm is prioritizing. Players should be able to discern what part of the song is being followed." which doesn't seem to be followed here, as it's pretty difficult to recognize what your arrangements are mapped to.
04:29:674 (1) - Hummm... I've thought about it. This section follows Voice ., but there's a section in the middle that I need to filter through 04:30:424 - 04:30:649 - There are several similar ones that are rhythmic only .I've thought that if the spacing is lowered, maybe people will understand that .But what I want to say is that the rhythm here is stream too .If change here, I think all of them need to be changed. And this change is the whole map.I think I have a clear purpose. It's part of the voice .I've made a lot of concessions about the difficulty. I don't think it's difficult for everyone to play now .what you said is a very good point of view .thx
other things i'd like to point:
most of your direction changes feel random in my opinion, your streams are extremely inconsistent on sections such as 03:41:824 - where things like 03:43:399 (6,7,8,9,10) - are tremendously difficult for no reason
well. all don't seem to like it here. I changed my angle to a very simple angle
your map contains a lot of snapping mistakes. i'm pretty sure that stuff like 03:01:924 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) - 03:57:424 (1,2,3,4,5) - are 1/3.
no. I noticed in many places that the guitar was 1/3., but I only followed a small part .because I made a mistake on another map(https://osu.ppy.sh/s/459901). It's because of 1/3 .I always remember this mod. when you frequently switch between 1/3 and 1/4. in a stream, the player is very out of tune. This is not a good idea .switching between 1/4 and 1/3 will be difficult for players to master
Avoid following multiple layers of the song if it is unclear what rhythm is prioritizing. Players should be able to discern what part of the song is being followed."
and I think the red line sounds(no hitsounds) good enough to support these using 1/4
you have many streams that follow nothing. 04:11:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9) - 02:45:424 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - just to mention a few
same
hummm...I didn't answer him. Just because he didn't put himself in a moder position. In fact, he had a lot of radical arguments, didn't he? I have revised some places that I think need to be modified .but it's not just his taunts. It's just that I think these places might do better .I am talking very calmly about it now. I just want to be respected as a mapper .I don't want this map to be commented on as worthless. If it really isn't worth it, I shouldn't pursue it with ranked as its goal .If everyone complains about it on a map of Qualified, its value will be reduced .I believe that no one wants to see . on. except to belittle it. It's difficult to make a good map , but also very happy . when someone loves your map .A mod is someone who gives you good advice .It's a kind of respect. Respect for maps .so I respect every moder .Even if opinions can not be unified, I also want to explain my ideas as much as possible. There are reasons for refusing .But the premise of all this is that this is a mod that respects mapsNaotoshi wrote:
the mapper should respond to all mods properly, respectful or not... ignoring them cuz he doesn't find them nice and coddling is stupid =D
I don't follow a fixed pendulum. It makes the map very boring, but I fix a rhythm at each section .same to stream. in my opinion, a lot of stream can do it in different ways .but this can become inconsistent in some people's eyes .This is not a kind of targeted speech. I mean. Everyone has different opinions .But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .sdafsf wrote:
i dont understand much about hitsounding but while this is disqualified i have concerns with the emphesis on the streams.
in some parts you accentuate beats by placing them on the turn of the stream like:
04:09:424 (1) - , 04:33:424 (1) - , 04:38:224 (1) - , 04:48:124 (1) -
04:09:424 (1) - emmm... I think it's ok. because of the shortening of the spacing 04:09:424 (1,2,3,4) -
04:33:424 (1) - About here. I can understand the idea at the time. The turning point in the white of the drums. 04:33:124 (13,14,15,16) - But you reminded me. I should slow down here .like 04:37:924 (13,14,15,16) -
04:38:224 (1) - Emmm... I may know why you have any doubts about these places . 04:38:224 - This place is a drum sound and coincides with the long sound of the human voice .when sufficient conditions are supported, this rotation gives the player an accelerated sense of power .Also, the deceleration ahead is enough to allow the player to adapt to this segment .
04:48:124 (1) - same
About the angle of the corner, I don't think it's necessary to adjust the angle to the same, because the only thing you need is to let the player feel the effect. Most of the same angle doesn't make sense
but in some parts you place the beat before the accentuated beat on the turn of the stream like:
03:43:024 (1) - , 03:43:624 (9) - 03:44:224 (1) - , 03:57:424 (1) - , etc.
on.I changed it here in the mod above
these are just some examples the it is incosistent throughout the whole map.
also i dont know why this is accentuated 03:42:274 (7) - .
03:42:424 (9) - this should be instead.
same
maybe im misunderstanding your structure. im interested in an explanation.
zigizigiefe wrote:
I would want to point out a consistency issue
00:45:874 (11) - You forgot to add clap sound as you did for 01:36:874 (1) - or 04:29:674 (1) - or other parts where Marc says "zone", so it doesn't emphasize "zone".
on.sorry .It was a mistake. I corrected it > <
Okorin wrote:
so why do you halve bpm on spinners to then immediately double it again?
i mean if you halve it it shoulda stayed halved until like 02:41:824 -
but even that doesnt seem necessary
There are some differences. I think I need to change the BPM to 100. BPM is now modified to be provided by Raiden
03:55:324 (1,2,3,4) - this is 1/3??
fix
those hihats that you use as a hitnormal are so much louder than everything else >_<
fix
taking this down to further discuss the things that were mentioned properly because a lot of the things that you just said "no" to were actually not hostile
I picked up some of the items that need to be modified and put it on the separate Post above
so your point is basically consistency is boring and uncreative?09kami wrote:
I don't follow a fixed pendulum. It makes the map very boring, but I fix a rhythm at each section .same to stream. in my opinion, a lot of stream can do it in different ways .but this can become inconsistent in some people's eyes .This is not a kind of targeted speech. I mean. Everyone has different opinions .But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .
This is a concept that the East has struggled with for nearly a decade. Trying to explain to them that "just because you're getting bored as a mapper doesn't mean the player is getting bored" is a waste of time.sdafsf wrote:
consistency and creativity are not mutually exclusive
HW himself was extremely consistent. Like, wow, his maps are absurdly consistent and predictable. They're just crazy creative and interpretive. But misunderstanding creativity to mean "making up random stuff" is such a cute thing to do. It's literally what makes most newbie maps so adorably awful.09kami wrote:
But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .
sdafsf wrote:
so your point is basically consistency is boring and uncreative?09kami wrote:
I don't follow a fixed pendulum. It makes the map very boring, but I fix a rhythm at each section .same to stream. in my opinion, a lot of stream can do it in different ways .but this can become inconsistent in some people's eyes .This is not a kind of targeted speech. I mean. Everyone has different opinions .But I'm used to looking at this from a variety of perspectives .That's what I learned when I followed HW .Creation, change .
i disagree with that in the first place but i dont think having the emphesis points in your stream off by one object makes your map any more interesting as it is.
consistency and creativity are not mutually exclusive
In fact, this is forced.She told me that if you want to break the limit from your point of view, a perfect map state must be guaranteed .I don't think I can do it yet. It's a great thingShiirn wrote:
HW himself was extremely consistent. Like, wow, his maps are absurdly consistent and predictable. They're just crazy creative and interpretive. But misunderstanding creativity to mean "making up random stuff" is such a cute thing to do. It's literally what makes most newbie maps so adorably awful.
But practice makes perfect.
emmmmm....Just compressedpkhg wrote:
why is the mp3 so bad lol
do you really need to involve your ego? ewShiirn wrote:
Don't use HW as an excuse if you're doing the exact opposite of what he/she does,hahahaha.
Neptune wrote:
09kami take my star as a sign of my appreciation for this masterpiece
thxI believe in "Mod" like this. It's easier for us to communicate .Cherry Blossom wrote:
Did i see someone mentioning "HW" here ?
Before this goes for qualified section could you look at these following points ? :3
- I know people already mentioned it, but could you improve your map visually ? This does not really impact the gameplay a lot, but it doesn't make eyes bleeding. Small details can make your map a lot of times better visually, trust me.
Some streams are really weird-shaped and not really polished like
- 00:54:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - when you can make something better shaped :
fix
- 03:41:824 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16) -
It's a strange suggestion. I don't think they have to be round .the ellipse is actually a spin. u mentioned the "polished". A detail is ignored. that's the AR. of this picture. when you're at test or playauto, you'll see. they don't look like edit .It's just a turn .but the difference between an ellipse and a circle is that the speed of rotation is different. what mapper and player see is different .that's why I've been looking for someone to test the map. Some places I need to look at them from their perspective .But on this question, I choose to respect your opinion, because I always think you are a great mapper. So I reworked the place. I modified some ellipses for the circle .so I reworked the place
- 04:45:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - : you just have to move 04:46:024 (11) - a little on the left for a perfect shape.
emmm.....According to your idea, I just need to change the position of 04:44:824 (1,2) - . 04:45:274 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - Some subtle spins- This could be considered as a rhythm choice issue : 01:19:174 (2) - when you start the slider on the red tick (so this very important tick 01:19:324 (3) - is only followed and not played (and it should be played)) but you do the "right" thing 01:21:424 (1,2) - , so is there any reason ? Variating patterns is not really a good idea if you don't really emphasize the right notes, this current example is the perfect example of what you should not do if you want to vary patterns. If you want to keep variating, then keep emphasizing the "right" (by "right" i mean strongest/most important) notes. So you should make this tick 01:19:324 - clicked
fix.I agree with that, but it's very difficult to grasp the most important sound when it comes to the switch between voice and accompaniment .Some people will say, "why do you follow the two? It's confusing! "but balance the vocals and the accompaniment to complete a map. You know, when it's done, it'll be very cool. remove not adapted things .complete this mapping. that's what I'm doing- 02:45:499 (2) - There is definitely nothing audible on this blue tick, why do you follow it ? (even the guitar isn't snapped on it)
02:45:499 - There is an extension of the guitar here .02:45:424 - 02:45:949 - In fact, I believe it is a complete guitar sound because it has no sense of pause .02:46:024 (1) - But starting here, the change can be clearly distinguished .02:45:424 (1) - I'll change it here to 1/4 slider.maybe it will make you accept it .
No kd.
xDololow wrote:
small thing
04:17:824 (1,1) - how about end those sliders on red ticks ( 04:18:274 and 04:18:874 .) , because it more feet the music. And make them more wiggly?
hummm...fix to 04:18:274 - because there's a change in the guitar sounds here .but 04:18:874 - not added. If choose the weaker drums here .will conflict with 04:18:424 (1) .
0w^
Discourse is not disrespect, and if anyone can't handle this level of discourse, they probably shouldn't be putting their own work out into a community that is centered almost entirely around the judging of said work. I'd even go so far as to say that avoiding providing any sort of thoughtful criticism in a map that you see needs work is far more disrespectful, and even patronizing. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to be disrespectful to 09kami, it's to make the map better before it's brought into the ranked section, a section of "finalized works."MaestroSplinter wrote:
So this is mapping has become, people complaining about every single object that the mapper has placed, even going disrespecfull and expect to someone listen him...
^We reached this point ? Someone needs to call respect ?
It's a very subjective view. you're just looking at these problems in your own eyes .u impose your opinions on others. I don't think that's reasonable. Because you're talking about it. It's just a mapping approach . It's not the only one. It's not rigidMun wrote:
Discourse is not disrespect, and if anyone can't handle this level of discourse, they probably shouldn't be putting their own work out into a community that is centered almost entirely around the judging of said work. I'd even go so far as to say that avoiding providing any sort of thoughtful criticism in a map that you see needs work is far more disrespectful, and even patronizing. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to be disrespectful to 09kami, it's to make the map better before it's brought into the ranked section, a section of "finalized works."MaestroSplinter wrote:
So this is mapping has become, people complaining about every single object that the mapper has placed, even going disrespecfull and expect to someone listen him...
^We reached this point ? Someone needs to call respect ?
But you need to know about "mod". It's about map communication .the premise of communication is that it can be discussed with mapper .when language is offensive, this is no respect. would u casually greet a stranger with offensive words on the street? at least I won't . for instance.when your map is Qualified, I'll use Chinese to "mod"(and based on the fact that I understand the need to use English.) .but my "mod" is based on maps .what would you think? think this is a mod or a provocation? at least for fieryrage's speech. I think it's the same effect . u can see my response to other people. I believe everyone has answered them in detail .that's what I call a kind of respect .At least I think that "mod" must be based on communication, and that exchanges are based on the most basic equal dialogue
edit : If you don't respect me, why do I need my map to respect what you call "mod"?" yes, you can say. You don't need to respect "mod". You just need to change it .So why should I change it? Can you make sure that what you mentioned is correct? You answered, "yes, because I found these mistakes! " Since I don't respect your mod, why should I take notice of your findings? I just want to say "no". mapper is not a machine. It's not when you type an error that you change it .the path to a map entering ranked is through mapper. at least I won't accept rude "mod". about maps. In my eyes, it's a formal occasion .destruction zone01:16:774 (5) - I opened the map and saw this - you should add a hitwhistle here! The sound in the song is almost entirely consistent with 01:16:174 (1,2,3,4) - but the lack of a hitsound + the difference in spacing makes it look and feel more like an entirely different beat. fix
As for consistency, the map is highly inconsistent, but I haven't seen any real reason provided for it. For example, look at the 2 measures starting at 01:17:824 - vs the 2 measures starting immediately after them at 01:20:224 - the rhythm changes completely in the middle of it. Major rhythmic inconsistencies like these are evident throughout the map.
About consistency .I don't even have to open the map to know what you're trying to say...consistency is not a necessary thing. It's just a condition. a mapping. This map varies in two ways based on voice and accompaniment .when you think you need to maintain a high degree of consistency, it's different from this map, mapping's policy .but I don't mean there's no need for consistency .consistency is not a requirement. There is no need for a whole map to maintain a consistency. Some details, etc. I'll read the map tomorrow and explain
edit : It looks just like I guess .
Beyond that, what's with your streams? For example, check out 01:36:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - it's quite obviously hand-placed, but the curve is extremely rough and abrasive looking. Do you have a reason not to use more consistent curves in your streams?
all streams just hand-placed.Is there any doubt about that? Do you have a reason not to use more consistent curves in your streams
So why more consistent? what you mean is the need for bigger flow., simpler streams ?no. Streams does not have to meet all the needs of everyone .It's just because you think .In fact, does it make sense to adjust it to a perfect arc? This is just looking pretty pretty in edit. For this AR., some ugly angles can have a more intuitive effect on test .
After that, why emphasize 01:36:874 (1) - instead of 01:37:024 (3) - ? Sure, the word "zone" starts at 01:36:874 (1) - but it's obvious to anyone listening that the most intensely emphasized note here is at 01:37:024 (3) - .
So I think it's too much trouble to explain these things. I've explained the same thing in front of post .according to your idea, should even delete 01:36:949 (2) -.01:37:024 (3) - As a place to start .but isn't that the way you choose it? but it's obvious to anyone listening that the most intensely emphasized note here is at 01:37:024 (3) - . are you sure it's anyone? I don't agree with that .I think it's necessary to follow "ZONE".
Such emphasis and construction issues are present throughout the map.
Mun wrote:
Discourse is not disrespect, and if anyone can't handle this level of discourse, they probably shouldn't be putting their own work out into a community that is centered almost entirely around the judging of said work. I'd even go so far as to say that avoiding providing any sort of thoughtful criticism in a map that you see needs work is far more disrespectful, and even patronizing. At the end of the day, the goal isn't to be disrespectful to 09kami, it's to make the map better before it's brought into the ranked section, a section of "finalized works."MaestroSplinter wrote:
So this is mapping has become, people complaining about every single object that the mapper has placed, even going disrespecfull and expect to someone listen him...
^We reached this point ? Someone needs to call respect ?destruction zone01:16:774 (5) - I opened the map and saw this - you should add a hitwhistle here! The sound in the song is almost entirely consistent with 01:16:174 (1,2,3,4) - but the lack of a hitsound + the difference in spacing makes it look and feel more like an entirely different beat.
As for consistency, the map is highly inconsistent, but I haven't seen any real reason provided for it. For example, look at the 2 measures starting at 01:17:824 - vs the 2 measures starting immediately after them at 01:20:224 - the rhythm changes completely in the middle of it. Major rhythmic inconsistencies like these are evident throughout the map.
Beyond that, what's with your streams? For example, check out 01:36:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - it's quite obviously hand-placed, but the curve is extremely rough and abrasive looking. Do you have a reason not to use more consistent curves in your streams?
After that, why emphasize 01:36:874 (1) - instead of 01:37:024 (3) - ? Sure, the word "zone" starts at 01:36:874 (1) - but it's obvious to anyone listening that the most intensely emphasized note here is at 01:37:024 (3) - .
Such emphasis and construction issues are present throughout the map.
All I'm reading here is a VERY subjective, rude, disrespectful and unjustified rant (or egotrip, if you will).Shiirn wrote:
Please note that a lot of the issues that people have with this map are not due to you making "mistakes while mapping".
It's because the mapping quality is extremely low.
You are not paying attention to the music's level of intensity or where the music gets stronger or weaker, nor are you using the vocals at all.
As an example, 00:58:324 (3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This is an pattern. It's not a bad one, nor is it a good one. But it uses the previous notes and goes under them. But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. The music does not repeat in any way. This isn't a matter of "creativity" or "my style", it's just straight up ignoring the music in favor of putting a "pattern you think looks cool". This is your entire map.
Your entire map is "patterns you think look cool", not "patterns which fit the musical structure".
You have made a map with no soul. It is just taking music and turning it into a one-dimensional set of clicks with plain, simple patterns representing it.
That's rankable. But it's a horrible way to map. And accepting it just lowers the quality of mapping as a whole. And it's why monstrata's cookie map is an insult to everyone who has any respect for music or this game. Because it's rankable, but intentionally lacking anything resembling mapping.
That said, your map is "rankable", but if you're satisfied with ranking but being bad, that's your choice. You'll just end up being another soulfear - a forgotten relic only remembered by a few for "how badly they mapped for how hard they tried".
emmm....I don't think it's disrespectful. At least not from your language. It's not very rude .I looked at that post. .But I was so tired last night(When I finished the last post, it was already 5 in the morning ), so I didn't reply to you .I'll explain them tonight. At least I don't think the quality of this map is so badShiirn wrote:
If you want a community-based content creation system, you're going to have to deal with criticism, often harsh. Because very few people actually get good at something by getting nothing but praise. "Rankable" should be equated with "Mediocre" - because that's what ranking standards are meant to be, a minimum quality threshold for maps. Aiming to be mediocre, being satisfied with being mediocre, is something that needs to be pointed out in a "are you SURE you really want to be boring?" question.
If you want a game where everyone gets praised for doing their best, go play Hello Kitty World.
Shiirn wrote:
Please note that a lot of the issues that people have with this map are not due to you making "mistakes while mapping".
It's because the mapping quality is extremely low.
You are not paying attention to the music's level of intensity or where the music gets stronger or weaker, nor are you using the vocals at all.
This is a strange point of view .I even suspected that I had misunderstood this sentence .If follow this point of view. So this map, so the object just follows the sound of my brain? well, mine brain power is really too high .I think if I don't follow these .can't even finish the map
As an example, 00:58:324 (3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,1) - This is an pattern. It's not a bad one, nor is it a good one. But it uses the previous notes and goes under them. But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. The music does not repeat in any way. This isn't a matter of "creativity" or "my style", it's just straight up ignoring the music in favor of putting a "pattern you think looks cool". This is your entire map.
It's also a weird argument .But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. The music does not repeat in any way. It's just a choice of location! yes. I can definitely stagger it. even change it directly. But what's the point? But the music doesn't do anything to suggest that. ?I don't think this paragraph tells you anything. I don't think your understanding is music. It's about you. It's about thinking. about mapping. "memetics" If you understand the word, you will see what I am trying to say. In your mind, you think everyone does that, but it's a prejudiced view. u rule out some of the things that you think are wrong . And it's a long process. When you keep a point of view for a long time, you think that's the only thing that's right .when you maintain this view, your thinking has been fixed, so I'm breaking this mindset . these are just some opinions. For what you mentioned. and about maps .there's a simple reason here, but you didn't notice it .00:58:324 (3,4,5,3,4,5,6) - delete these .bring your headset and slow down to 25%.Listen to the drum. 00:59:149 - if you say there's no sound here, I can tell you . It's only because of the different tones of 00:58:474 (5,5) - I think 00:59:149 (6) - need to fill that difference. Of course. If you insist on.00:59:074 (5) - can modify the slider for 1/4. Include other places .But for the players, I believe these places are relative to the 1/4 slider . A continuous stream is no sense of violation. This is not a view I have imagined .It's what I found when the player tested the map .00:58:474 (5,5) - Some people say that this is just a drum. Why do you need to distinguish them? Just because of the scale? yes. just because of the scale. It's a kind of detail .There's another reason .00:59:074 (5,6,1) - Here it is. It's a part of the voice. It's coincident with the drum . So that's what I need to explain to you about innovation .but when you look at the problem in a single angle, it's easy to ignore something else. When people collect these things before your eyes, isn't that an innovation?
Your entire map is "patterns you think look cool", not "patterns which fit the musical structure".
You have made a map with no soul. It is just taking music and turning it into a one-dimensional set of clicks with plain, simple patterns representing it.
The soul of this map. I think it's at least stronger than you see . take an inappropriate example .please look at someone else's Extraction Zone. and look at my map .I'm sure you have a lot of opinions about the difficulty, but I want you to see the middle section 02:05:824 (1) - 02:41:374 (6) - this is my favorite part .About"patterns which fit the musical structure".this is a veryveryveryveryveryvery subjective view . music will not tell you any design .tell you about it. It's the player. so about not "patterns which fit the musical structure".I think it should be amended as "patterns which fit the player".
.So when you choose "patterns which fit the player".u will consider a question. Is this suitable for most player? or "I seem to think it's flow ".It's a complicated problem. I don't want to talk about it .But I'd like to mention two points
1 In the case of high AR, speed issues need to be taken into consideration .As I mentioned before, the relation between the cround and the ellipse. They are in the case of high AR. Just a few deviations from the radian. These slight deviations are even invisible .but you would say that bigger round make players feel more flow .That's the right point. When you change an ellipse to a bigger cround, it really reduces the difficulty of the player. Also, increase flow. But I would like to make second points. In fact, it is not my point .It's hers .
2 one can play a map well, but you can't. then you're just too weak. but what I need to add is that we need a limit .I can add difficulty in many places. Even in one version, the difficulty is raised to 8.25 stars .of course. I changed it later. I don't think it's necessary .back to this topic. I don't think stream needs to be in full compliance with everyone's flow .of course, I can do that, too. if I want to complete this kind of map as a pp map .You can look at 1 toy and Xilver's mod. I almost completely took their advice because I knew what they were thinking. I watched them play with this map .that's why I limit the limit. They're the standard .but right now, almost everyone wants me to follow them on flow .And that's why. or the fuse .I think there's no need to explain any more
That's rankable. But it's a horrible way to map. And accepting it just lowers the quality of mapping as a whole. And it's why monstrata's cookie map is an insult to everyone who has any respect for music or this game. Because it's rankable, but intentionally lacking anything resembling mapping.
And accepting it just lowers the quality of mapping as a whole. Can I understand that only pp map can belong to the correct mapping? In fact, according to the idea you mentioned, there is only a fixed rhythm. fixied the ds. fixied the flow. fixed pattern is the correct way to mapping .
That said, your map is "rankable", but if you're satisfied with ranking but being bad, that's your choice. You'll just end up being another soulfear - a forgotten relic only remembered by a few for "how badly they mapped for how hard they tried".
If there's no malicious vote, let me try. At least I'm willing to go on the road map. Look for different ways with ppmapping .(and at least all of my rank maps have done this before
"why are you even mapping" on the question of "MOD", it does lead to the emergence of this sentence .Because maps are made by individuals,.MOD is just for advice and advice from others. When you take all the advice, it's really even. But there will be a problem at the same time. Is this map the first one you've completed? Everyone takes a little. Then add a little .Some people change it in the name of being better .But you won't notice it because you've changed everything .This kind of map won't be a good map when you finish it. Trust me . Actually, when your experience builds up to a certain extent,.mod becomes extra content .I don't mean I can improve a map without Mod, But sometimes it's more efficient for.Mapper to check its maps than Mod itself, and the perfect things are better. This is a special consistency .on this premise .random modifications will only destroy the structure of the map without lifting the map .Shiirn wrote:
It's not bad like "why are you even mapping"?
It's just so plain and simple and could be so much better, but you'd need to basically remap over and over to make it better. People expect better from DragonForce maps.
thx for mod. Some of the time. I hope to retain some of the original things. Because it is a habit for me. When I finished a map. My first impression will retain some great things. And after the modification. only perfect them. And not a lot of change them. I have passed that stage that requires a lot of changes. At least this is my experience. Jumps about random distances. At least I don't think they're random. I fixed this shape on another mapCherry Blossom wrote:
Hello again, i can review this map if you need more feedbacks (the points i mentioned previously are just more or less "objective").
Note that's it's my own viewpoint, so take what is said below, very subjective.
I can agree that this map lacks of quality overall, but it is not really a "very bad quality map". This map lacks of structure (but this is a stream map so it's a little ok) but a majority of what is not stream is not really very well structured. I and people don't really expect perfect things, but at least try to make things a little tidied up and very carefully done with a real intention of making things structured. If i take your references like HW, her maps (despite they are "special" compared to others), there is a consistent structure behind them. I know we should not really compare maps because each style is different etc. but there is a lot of things in common in mapping. By making things structured and making things emphasized well, the quality of your map will be increased, that's my viewpoint.
first. thank for your viewpoint.
But some ideas about stream. I'm different from HW .If you open Genryuu Kaiko. 04:05:781 - Notice the changes in these stream .they don't have much in common. or radians .04:08:555 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - like this. I'm sure my map has a similar place before, but everyone is proposing a point of view, consistency .04:09:942 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4) - And this. I don't think these are for flow., or even you can say. they're not an arc. But are they important? flow does make players feel smoother, but if all stream uses a flow., they can create a sense of aesthetic fatigue . I saw almost half of them letting me modify the shape of the stream . I can't guarantee it's the right change. Maybe I'll regret it later .Because you have to understand the shape, the stream of the flow. The size of the rotation. everything is a way. Maybe we can change that and make it easier for the players .but for players, that might not be a good thing .Maybe someone plays this map just for pp. In fact, these changes have indeed been done. But are you sure we need to make this compromise for this part of the player? In my opinion, it doesn't make any difference to completing a map for pp. I didn't blame anything, but... why don't we decorate something? For example, there are some difficult places. Isn't it a pleasure? Some people would say, "you don't make these changes. This map is already difficult. Why don't you lower it?!" In fact, this subtle change .It's an attitude .I don't want to compromise with everyone. I don't want to compromise with ppmapping .I just want players play maps for map instead of playing maps for pp
Well, i can point out some things that look a little "messy" to me like :Well it would be better if you tidy up some patterns concerning the distance between objects. Randomly using distance to emphasize wrongly the strongest notes doesn't really give quality to your map. The other way round, using proper emphasis makes your map very good, comfortable and pleasant to play.
- 00:23:224 (1,2) - Here i don't really understand why you stack these objects when the whole section has spaced objects because if you want to properly emphasize vocals, then these objects should be distant. You stacked 00:23:974 (4,5) - to follow the song and not vocals which is more suitable than stacking 00:23:224 (1,2) - to follow vocals imo. If you plan to follow vocals then don't stack objects, it would give a better impression.
00:23:374 (2,3,4) - I thought what they meant was already obvious ... This triangle is following the guitar, because the three sounds are similar .00:23:674 (3,4) - if follow the vocals, this place should be a 1/1 slider- 00:26:824 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - The strongest note here 00:27:424 (1) - is just played with a low distance between 00:27:274 (4,1) - . So it is not really emphasized. And it looks like you prefered to emphasize vocals instead with the highest distance between 00:27:424 (1,2,3) - so it can be possible and it works. Concerning visual and structure, the way they are placed just looks like they are "thrown" away with a random distance between them, at least if you make the distance consistent between 00:26:824 (1,2,3) - , between 00:27:124 (3,4,1) - , it would be better.
emmm...00:27:424 (1,2) - I modified their location .fix.but This irregular quadrilateral is a pendulum that I often use .no fixed spacing. This is a shape similar to an equilateral quadrilateral, but it is more fluid than the quadrilateral due to its uneven spacing. The fixed spacing will increase the difficulty- 00:29:224 (1,2,3,4) - the same idea as ^, it also looks like they are thrown away. same
- 00:40:024 (1,2,3,4) - ^ same.but some changes in position
- 00:56:224 (1,2,3) - ^ , when you add a lower distance between 00:56:374 (2,3) - compared to the distance between 00:56:224 (1,2) - when the strongest note to emphasize is 00:56:524 (3) - so there should be more distance 00:56:374 (2,3) - or an equal distance as 00:56:224 (1,2) - .
fix- 04:41:674 (3,4,5,6) - ^ fix
- 04:51:274 (5,1) - The distance between them should be higher or equal to 04:50:974 (4,5) - , because the strongest note is on 04:51:424 (1) - which should be emphasized better. The low distance doesn't really do it.
fix
I don't really ask you to remap some parts (concerning the placement), but it would be nice to make things more tidied up at least. If i take another chinese reference, popner, "Sometimes remapping can be more useful than hundreds of moddings.".
Now that you made your stream shapes better, you should make your patterns more tidy, and then your map will be really nice.
No kd because you already kd my previous post (when i said no kd on it lol)
sure.that's right.fixF1r3tar wrote:
02:36:724 (5) - You should nudge this to the left. Looks kind of weird.
I have unified your opinion. At least for now, I think it has no other problemsMir wrote:
Humhh.. I'm just curious about some things. Firstly I think consistency is quite important and this map is kinda consistent but there's one major thing that I'm sort of not quite getting.
- 00:46:024 - The kiai here has the same vocals going "EXTRACTION ZOOONE" a lot yea? But the rhythm and everything is completely different than what you did for 01:36:874 - namely the streams like 01:36:874 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14) - don't appear in the first kiai at 00:46:024 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,1,2) - there's a lot of rhythm variation here. (There's also not two snares on 00:47:824 (1,2) - there's just one so maybe remove the hitsound for the other?) I think this breaks consistency quite a lot when you introduce a completely different way of mapping the second kiai than the first then do it again for the last kiai 04:29:524 (3,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,1,2) - namely the increasing spacing stream thing. There's a lot of variation in rhythm where the song stayed the same. I get that you want to keep it interesting but I can assure you varying the way you place patterns and whatnot should avoid boring the player anyways.
00:45:874 (11,12,1) - hummm...It was a mistake. I didn't find it before .the subtle changes are in NC and 0.1 in DS .fixIn fact, there are three different mapping changes. The other section is 01:36:124 (1) - 01:56:224 (1) - .04:29:674 (1) - There are some big changes, but there should be no problem now
Umh, yeah. I just think that the consistency could be improved (regardless of rhythm it's more the concept of the accelerating streams that just doesn't really show itself until second kiai) perhaps if you did the decreasing/increasing spacing earlier on for 00:45:124 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5) - or similar where you do something like this for the first stream even that would already be an improvement imo. (also I think 00:45:874 (11) - should have an NC on it right?) 00:47:074 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,1) - Something like this maybe? You can definitely do it with 00:49:924 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - and so on.
- 03:18:124 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - As fieryrage (albeit somewhat fiercely) mentioned, this concept is quite unexpected and looks very inconsistent when it's not done for 03:19:324 (3,4,5,6,7,8) - where the sounds are quite similar. There are also places earlier in the map where you can introduce this so it's not super sudden like for example stacking 00:48:274 (2,1) - ? This might be a stretch but you can probably use additive hitsounding to introduce this as early as 00:04:624 (2,1) - if you do this (note I silenced the slidertail) and add a clap maybe on the 3 instead. Idk it's just an idea. At least if you introduce it really early you can avoid unfair breaks later cuz it's already been established as a present concept in the map.
thx fod modmelloe wrote:
tl;dr at bottom
hi! the hitsounds are cool, i like that you use hi-hats to emphasize when the singer sings "zone" (and other parts of the vocals). stream spacing is mapped to the vocals too which i enjoy a lot
the hi-hats are a little loud though, i suggest that you lower the volume a little bit. or you can make it so the hi hats fade out with every "zone" since the singer's "zone" gets softer toward the end. right now the hi hats start at 90% volume, maybe you could diminish the volume so that it starts at 80% and slowly goes down to 50%? or something along those lines. ZOOONnnee. also, i suggest that you avoid using too many hi-hats in other places, so that the wall of hi-hats can be reserved for vocals.
hummm..fix
i do think that your general aesthetics could use some polishing. individually each note might not seem to matter that much, but many slightly misplaced notes and roughly-shaped streams will affect the players/mapper's overall sense of the map, which is actually very important.
some examples: 01:51:874 (7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15) - this whole stream, shape-wise, isn't very pretty. the right side bulges out a little, and the top side is flat. if it looked smoother and rounder, it'd look a lot nicer. 00:54:574 (5,6,7,8,9) - this stream is flat on the left, when i think it'd look a lot nicer when round.
another example is 01:11:074 (2) - this, and 04:52:474 (2) - . sliders like this will look VERY messy if not done exactly right. the 1st and 3rd segments of the slider should be equal in length, and parallel, or it will appear sloppy. i suggest you create one perfect version and copy paste that through the rest of the map, and rotate/flip when needed.
same to 01:51:874 (7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15) - 00:54:574 (5,6,7,8,9) -I really don't want to change these. Because everyone has different tastes. It's not really necessary. I tried to compromise .some fix
regarding consistency, HW is certainly one of the most consistent mappers out there. with each of her maps she generally picks a couple of interesting patterns (deconstruction star), or one overarching aesthetic choice (tsubaki) and sticks with that for her entire map. every one of her maps is incredibly internally consistent. one pattern to reflect one part of the song. structurally speaking it's very minimalist (like handsome, except his maps are minimalist in structure AND in pattern). HW will have some slight variations in her patterns throughout her map, but they aren't very major and they're still governed by an overall consistency. mapping is a pretty flexible artform (all artforms are), but the one rule that should be followed 99% of the time is consistency. the other 1% of the time is for very weird songs, which extraction zone is not, and for very experimental mapping that i've never seen anyone do yet.
tl;dr
hitsounding is cool in that they accentuate vocals, but lower the volume and maybe make the "zoone" hitsounds fade out slowly instead of ending abruptly. and maybe make it so that you don't use hi-hats often except when there are vocals to accentuate
first thing to do is to polish up your aesthetics. aesthetics plays a large part in forming a player's impression of the "identity" of the map, which is the #1 most important thing. also, the #1 strongest tool in forming identity is to keep consistency.
anyways those are just my opinions, good luck!
fixF1r3tar wrote:
Another quick suggestion. 01:56:374 (1) seems unnecessarily long. You could end it at 02:03:124 and start a spinner on the white tick.
