Mun wrote:

what the shit is this thread lmao

Lmao ikr

N0thingSpecial wrote:

Mun wrote:

what the shit is this thread lmao

Lmao ikr

ikr

Railey2 wrote:

"It's obvious that if you use a strict arbitrary formula to create "art", it won't be good, because the virtues of creative endeavors are, among other things, that they are the product of creative effort, they are expressive and unique."
You're saying that following the pp-mapping formula leaves mappers almost no creative freedom? That's simply wrong. If that was true, farm maps would be way more similar to one another than they really are.
Talking about strict formulas.. Did you know that this set form was one of the greatest selling points of classical music? And people loved it! Only because you have some rules/a general framework, doesn't mean that creative freedom is dead.

B1rd wrote:

Your claim that farm maps have a "fun factor" that is separate from the PP they give is completely unfounded.

One sentence in and it's already bullshit.

Did you just choose to ignore my Red like roses and Highscore examples? N0thingSpecial made another example with Ame to Asphalt.

But it's unfounded, sure. Why do I even argue with People like you? Don't post here again, you're obviously just trying to spin this the way you want. I won't entertain you any further.


"but a lot of pop music is indisputably trash, and the people who listen to it are most likely trash as well."
holy shit my dude. You really are an asshole.

"Considering that music is to a large degree a reflection of your own soul, people who listen to superficial and shameless music are likely to exhibit the same traits in their own personality."
you know for with most other people I'd just say that this is trolling and move on, but you've really done a great job at being consistently crazy over the years. I've seen many hilariously stupid things, but this is something else.

Any so your rant ends on the inevitable and predictable note of accusing people who have a different opinion than you of being "assholes" and being "crazy". It really is a testament to how much of a small man you are, you can't even conclude an argument without trying to invalidate the other's argument with a slew of ad hominems. Pretty much everyone else in this thread can be mature and reasonable, why can't you?

I may have misworded my opening sentence, it's not that PP maps aren't fun at all, what I meant is that, unlike what you have been saying, there is no evidence that their popularity is not based to a very large degree on the fact that they are farm maps. you've made a lot of fault assumptions in your argument. You assume that jump maps = farm maps when that evidently isn't the case. Atama No Taisou is jump map. Red Like Roses wouldn't be a farm map if it were ranked, it is very different to farm maps. When was the last time you have seen patterns like this in farm maps? Back when Airman and Senketsu no Chikai were farm maps? I adore structured jump sequences, but that's not what we get in today's maps, because jumps like those actually take real skill to complete, unlike the generic fullscreen jumps you see today. The only reason Ame to Asphalt is a farm map is because - due to the music allowing it - all of the jumps are at the end and you can still get a lot of PP if you miss. And I don't know why you ignored it but I already addressed Highscore - it isn't even that good of a farm map. Your argument is fallacious because your examples of maps that are supposedly PP maps while also being good quality aren't even archetypical farm maps. Real farm maps are maps like Hitorigoto, which hardly anyone plays if they aren't trying to farm PP. Sometimes good maps and farm maps coincide, but it's more of a coincidence that anything

Your other error is making arguments about what people intrinsically find fun without accounting for the variable of players' preferences that have been shaped by their past experiences of playing in a system shaped by the PPv2 meta.

Well I've spent a few hours on techincal maps and old maps here and there, i really like them, but my opinion on Miraizu is the same.
That map is as farmy as it gets, but I wound't say that the ppv2 system has brainwashed me.

But it's okay B1rd we love you even if you're an elitist.

For the record, I'm definitely a stupid little pleb , that's for sure.

Railey2 wrote:

stuff

hey do you think my maps are good i'm curious as to how you compare them to comfortable, easy-to-play "fun" maps tanks

Regarding B1rd's argument and nao's argument, I have to actually agree.

Naotoshi wrote:

It's completely possible to map a generic pop song in a way that doesn't abuse sharp angles and comfortable movement and extreme rhythm simplification and low SV and giant 5 second diffspikes.

People just don't, they map it like I said, and got popular for it. So everyone else tried the same thing and now 90% of maps are the exact same formula with no uniqueness, all because the PP system rewards the maps with easy flow and rhythm and retarded high spacing in one part of the map.

This is basically it. Of course, there are cases where jump maps are actually fun, like the Roses are red map, but now-a-days its just boring, or "generic," patterns with large jumps in the chorus for the PP. Players don't appreciate the map, they appreciate the large amount of pp rewarded, which then gives the mapper the blind vision of "Oh, they like my maps? Well, I'll just map more of it." At this point is where the issue pops up.

"When exactly did we decide that this is a bad thing"

When it began affecting the diversity of mapping.

"Some people seem to share the delusion that the biggest reason why the meta shifted towards simple jumpy patterns is that pp gave people the "wrong" incentives. What even is a "wrong incentive?""

The "wrong incentive" is the large amount of PP given to players. Players like the pp rewarded, so they continue to play the map until they get the largest amount of PP possible in that said map. As long as they're getting recognition, most mappers (Not all) will continue to map "pp maps" because people actually play it. Of course, other mappers will follow, just to get recognition for their maps, or just for the "memes." Now, the bad side isn't the players or the mappers, but the PP. It is what drives the players to play the map, in turn the mapper wants to map what players want to play. Its just one large continuous loop, hence the continued phrase of "pp is ruining mapping."

A good example of this is the infamous hai tai map. A lot of negative comments, Not only mappers but players too. The map is honestly just terrible, so how did it end up in top 5 most played maps within 24 hours for a long period of time? Because the pp rewarded drives the players to play the map constantly, just to get that PP. And when other mappers see that other mapper's creation are getting attention, they'll want to follow that too. Why do you think theres an issue in the diversity of mapping.

"People actually seek out simple jumpy maps even when they are removed from pp."

So, what about the maps that have the "exact same formula?" The ones that have no uniqueness, boring. Will people come back to those too? You can best assume that players have no drive (being pp) to play the maps and just forget about it. You're misunderstanding jump maps for "generic pp maps."

"pp was never the problem, the problem is you. You don't care enough about what people enjoy."

That IS the issue, players care about pp, which is why mappers CONTINUED to map "generic pp maps."

Deny it as much as you want, it all comes down to the issue with PPv2.

B1rd wrote:

Considering that music is to a large degree a reflection of your own soul, people who listen to superficial and shameless music are likely to exhibit the same traits in their own personality.

B1rd wrote:

a lot of pop music is indisputably trash, and the people who listen to it are most likely trash as well.

I agree with some of your points but think you went a bit far here. I don't like most pop music either but making serious judgments on a person based on their music preference is ridiculous. It's like saying video games are for kids so if you play video games you are a man child and you should get more manly hobbies like golf and woodworking.

Its fine to judge a person based off of their music tastes but calling them "trash" i.e less than human, is a bit much.

I don't care to PC up my language. Obviously not all pop music is the same, but if someone listens so songs whose lyrics basically amount to "SEX, SEX, HAVE PROMISCUOUS SEX" - of which many definitely exist - then "trash" would be my initial impression of that person. Likewise, "manchild" would likely be an accurate description for a man who spends all his time playing video games well past his 30s.

I always wonder, if there's so much backlash on pp mapping from both the players and the mapping community why hasn't it stopped? Is the mapping community a whole bunch of edgy masochist who just likes being infamous for pp mapping (which I don't blame you for thinking that cause monstrata exist).

Rather than thinking ppv2 gave bad incentive, did we even give incentive to be innovative? I personally feel the mapping scene has devolved into experienced mappers bashing new comers who is still trying out different mapping concept, who's maps are obviously 99% unimaginative bullshit. Jump map's standards has pretty much stayed the same for the past 2-3 years, and you smack them with maps from 2017 rrtyui of course you would think modern pp maps are unimaginative. The gap in variety between "unimaginative" jump maps and unconventional maps is just getting larger, think if dark flight dreamer and bakunana testroyer was ranked today, would it still get the popularity it gets back when pp map bashing wasn't so prominent, in fact I'm willing to bet if you take cbcc back 3 years ago it wouldn't get as much hate as today.

So I have a hypothesis, is ppv2 really the whole reason maps are unimaginative today, or is it our standards are just higher than ever?

Ongaku wrote:

most mappers (Not all) will continue to map "pp maps" because people actually play it.

This is really illogical if you think about, with today's mentality, mappers just don't give a shit if their maps are played or not, I can imagine fycho mapped haitai just like how he had map for the past few years, ranked it and forget about it, that's just my assumption of course but can you really say pp mappers expect huge positive popularity from player base when their maps are in fact pp maps.

hence the "(not all)" part. I didnt want to shove all mappers into one group. Of course there are mappers with different mentality, but the issue still stands. Why else would they map "pp maps?" Players are always looking to improve. As long as they gain ranks via pp, they'll continue to play "pp maps."

Of course, our standards today are pretty questionable, since we have various opinions on how the state of mapping is today. You may be right that there are no incentive for innovation, but is the incentive more important for the mapper or player?

It could also be the fact that "creative" maps are too controversial, not encouraged. New concepts being denied by the mapping community while maybe the player base support it. Of course, theres a fine line between creative and unrankable maps, thats what the RC is for.

Maybe the Incentive for players are larger than the mappers incentive (if it even exists).

N0thingSpecial wrote:

This is really illogical if you think about, with today's mentality, mappers just don't give a shit if their maps are played or not, I can imagine fycho mapped haitai just like how he had map for the past few years, ranked it and forget about it, that's just my assumption of course but can you really say pp mappers expect huge positive popularity from player base when their maps are in fact pp maps.

This is just untrue. Mappers, most mappers that is, care a lot about how popular their maps are. It doesn't really matter about the "anti-PP mentality" which exists only in a relatively vocal minority of the playerbase and mapping community - if you draw a comparison to movies, most producers care more about the performance in the box office rather than critical review. In other words, a lot of mapper don't care if their maps are deemed "unimaginative", as long as their maps are still popular. And the problem with this is that it shifts the status quo of mapping in the direction of PP mapping, and mappers who don't want to make PP maps have to fight extra hard to get their maps ranked.

There is really no need to complicate the issue. The fact is, PPv2 creates a demand for a certain type of map - an unimaginative, dull PP map - and mappers cater to that demand. Think about before PPv2 was implemented: the top players didn't compete over PP maps, they competed over a large variety of maps that had interesting characteristics that lent themselves to competition. Maps like Atama no Taisou, Red Goose, Freedom Dive, Airman, et cetera. In other words, pre-PPv2, people chose the popular maps, but now, PPv2 chooses the popular maps. Not that the former system was perfect - instead of creating an incentive for PP, that system created an incentive for score.

Honestly, I think the game and mapping would be a lot better without all the systems that measure skill in an arbitrary way. It's just impossible to create a system that perfectly measures the difficulty of maps and patterns withing those maps. And so subsequently, any system that uses an algorithm to measure skill will always prioritise some elements over others, and the elements of mapping that aren't favoured will be left in the dust. I'd rather we just dispense with all these systems and let people choose what maps they want to play.

To provide an account of my own personal experience, I really low old low-AR mapping. The problem is, today's meta doesn't think that low-AR reading is a valuable skill. And so if a mapper tries to create a low AR map, they will likely get told in one way or another that they need to increase the AR or the map won't be ranked, because PPv2 doesn't reward low AR and so barely anyone plays it, and so people are biased against it. Remember this map? t/257876

This is from a taiko players perspective but I imagine other modes would be in a similiar state.

I don't think pp has an healthy effect on mapping, it makes people inclined to use specific patterns/map a specific way to help keep their maps relevant. I don't think this is a good thing cause it simply makes maps less unique and interesting, it hampers innovation and makes a lot of maps look uninspired.

If you don't think this is bad...I mean, I guess you're free to enjoy this state of mapping and pp mapping style, but it sure has an impact on maps which creates less variety, which I think is just not a good thing.

short and sweet.

B1rd wrote:

This is just untrue. Mappers, most mappers that is, care a lot about how popular their maps are. It doesn't really matter about the "anti-PP mentality" which exists only in a relatively vocal minority of the playerbase and mapping community - if you draw a comparison to movies, most producers care more about the performance in the box office rather than critical review. In other words, a lot of mapper don't care if their maps are deemed "unimaginative", as long as their maps are still popular. And the problem with this is that it shifts the status quo of mapping in the direction of PP mapping, and mappers who don't want to make PP maps have to fight extra hard to get their maps ranked.

The quotes I didn't include are objectifying the current issue here, so I don't really have anything to argue against.

This quote though, you still have to realise movie is entirely different from mapping cause of what's at stake, people's livelihood are dependent on the popularity of their creation, not mapping though, hence why I said there's no incentive to change the status quo. Even the modding environment encourage not listening to other's opinions if you can make a good enough justification. Mappers rank their maps cause they think they're good, popularity is a complete after thought.

Have you ever heard a new mapper that was so persistent in ranking their first map say "I want to get my map ranked cause I want the entire playe base to enjoy it", I didn't, most of the time their reasons are "I want to rank this map cause I think the map is good enough for rank"

The concept of movie making and mapping generally the same thing though. You create something, you want people to see it, in this case, play it. Popularity can be an after thought, but can also be a reason to map.

The creator may say their map is "good enough for rank," but thats still up to the community and the RC to decide. You are generally mapping for the playerbase to enjoy. Whats the point of mapping if no one wants to play it? Of course, there are probably a minority of people who think otherwise, but there are a lot more ways for players to enjoy maps aside from "pp mapping," but due to the "wrong incentive," diversity practically fell out of place and "pp maps" have taken over for the most part.

I agree. I find it tedious to argue when we can't even agree on axioms like "mappers care about the popularity of their maps".

or just stop mapping, stop playing, and become a popular superstar everyone adores at off topic

to make sure I am not a shitposter >> I have to agree completely with ongaku's post so I have nothing to say

Well, the pp system is flawed and only rewards specific skills which leads to people making maps revolving around these said skills in order for the majority of players to play them and some mappers go as far as to abuse these flaws to make "farm maps". Personally I don't see osu as a competitive game and don't really care about rankings so i just won't play a map if i dont like it but im guessing others who take this game more seriously might feel forced to play specific maps in order to stay competitive. It's mostly aim that is required nowadays in some cases streaming stamina as well but skills such as reading/ability to play complex rhythms etc. are not needed anymore. ( this map is an exception i guess ). So to me it seems like mappers only make their maps "mechanically" hard since it's the only thing that increases star rating.

B1rd wrote:

Here comes social justice warrior to the rescue, to explain to us all that having mapping standards - or standards in general - are, in fact, a result of patriarchy and white nationalists!

Are you seriously so intellectually lazy that you really thought that's what I meant?

My actual point is that the every piece of the underlying logic and reasoning you used to form your opinion is toxic, and that the exact same reasoning you're using very easily leads to stuff way more terrible than being an egotistical douche about art. You have the scary combination of having illusory superiority on a mostly subjective matter, and the simultaneous belief of being a threatened minority. People who think just like the way you are right now are legendary for their ability to cause problems for everyone else.

You heard it folks, Vivaldi's Four Seasons is not actually a masterpiece, any more than Justin Bieber's Baby is masterpiece, it's all up to the eye of the beholder :^)

You're right, it's not. Please attempt to prove otherwise. I would really love to watch you try to objectify the subjective and slowly come to the realization that your music is only a "masterpiece" for the exact same reasons that Baby is a masterpiece (popularity), except the people who like one or the other have different values. Go ahead, shoulder the impossible task of proving your emotions are objectively superior.

Oh, while I'm here, I can very easily explain why pp maps are fun. They make the objectively difficult subjectively easy. You like maps that make the objectively easy subjectively difficult. Explain to me how this makes your taste in maps superior. Spoiler: it also doesn't.

this is giving me a headache

Shiirn wrote:

Railey2 wrote:

stuff

hey do you think my maps are good i'm curious as to how you compare them to comfortable, easy-to-play "fun" maps tanks

To me, technical stuff is fun when I can play it moderately well.

I'm a pretty decent player myself so I can say that I liked playing most of them. Except the final diff of routing, that one was simply too hard to be fun to me. Can't claim that I played all of your maps. Koan Sound is pretty dope, though.

I really dig your choice of music in general. Great taste.


Anyway, I agree with Philisophikal. B1rd would probably argue that complexity means that something must be better, which is a completely arbitrary standard just like popularity or the quality of something being more purple than something else.

Naotoshi wrote:

It's completely possible to map a generic pop song in a way that doesn't abuse sharp angles and comfortable movement and extreme rhythm simplification and low SV and giant 5 second diffspikes.

And that's exactly what I've been talking about. Why do you feel the need to frame sharp angles, diffspikes, rhythm simplification and low SV as something that is "abuse", as something that is "bad"? Sure, they became more widely used for a reason (ppv2), but does that automatically make them bad?

- Diffspikes create tension and make a map more fun to many people, more fun that a map that always stays the same in difficulty.

- Sharp angles make jumps easier to hit, which is satisfying to the player.

- Low SV means that you won't have to flail around trying not to sliderbreak, which many people hate.

- Rhythm simplification means that you can just tap tap without thinking much about exact timing or wondering how the fuck exactly you got that 100 on that weird quadruple over there.


All of the techniques you mentioned make a map more comfortable, exciting or fun to lots of players, and yet you feel the need to frame them as "abuse"?
Again, why is pp mapping a bad thing? Am I simply a shitty person for liking Tarpey - Close Call (Near Miss)?



Lastly, I'm wondering if mapping variety is affected as everyone claims it is. Can someone go ahead and actually prove that we get less variety than we used to? Looking into the "recently ranked" section, there seems to be lots of vastly different stuff floating around, alternating maps, technical maps, simple chill maps, pp maps, crazy hard 7*'s, marathons...

N0thingSpecial wrote:

Vice versa, the players are under the impression that mappers who map for FREE, should comply to player's demand, FOR FREE is the problem here, the incentive is not there, you can make up stuff like satisfaction of social acceptance but that's a superficial reason.

So I would assume mappers take the "game developer" approach, make what they think is good, that of course includes ridiculous time wasting game like sheep similuator (fun maps), but ultimately you want to make something with quality, something well thought out (good maps), even successful rhythm games like deemo and voez does that, some players would completely disregard the thought put into both games, and still enjoy it, but it's probably safer to just assume players would take notice of all the visual and game design choices they made, enjoy it as a rhythm game, not a piano simiulator.

I disagree. The whole ranking process is a system that was set into place for a singular purpose: To deliver great content to players so that THEY can enjoy the game to it's fullest extent. If you eat up the resources of said system by taking the time of the people that work for it, your mapping should be 100% in line with the objective of the system: Creating fun for the player.


Now if you're just mapping around on your own, you can obviously do what you want. But if you try to get maps ranked, you should think about the player first. If you see mapping as your personal song-reflection art project, you're certainly missing the point.

This doesn't mean that the end result can't be good. I'm sure pishi has many fans that like his mapping for what it is. Personally, I find that it gets quite stale. Some of his maps are plain boring to me, the Shelter-one he showed in his video included.

If the wrong ideas infiltrate the process itself, we end up with Shiirn having to re-map his Routing map for 71 years. And that's bad as well.

"If you eat up the resources of said system by taking the time of the people that work for it, your mapping should be 100% in line with the objective of the system: Creating fun for the player."

Thats exactly why the PP system is flawed. The "Fun" for players at the moment is earning ranks via pp. The players should appreciate the map AND the mapper for it's fun in terms of gameplay, not in terms of earning pp. You need to look at this on both sides, not one side. Both mappers and players are affected by the current pp system. And yes, some maps can be fun with sharp angles and large jumps, but it's where those are used that causes the issue of "abusing sharp angles and comfortable movement and extreme rhythm simplification and low SV and giant 5 second diffspikes."

Another way that affects mapping is the "map does not reflect it's Star Rating (In which case is also debatable)" due to very "Easy" patterns in 80% of the map, then having 'extremely large jumps" that causes the diff spike to go up. Of course, there are cases where this is supported, but largely it is abused for those simple "TV size maps."

This is bad because this encourages the "simple, basic, boring intro" and then "large jumps that increase SR for that PP" in maps.

tl;dr Players look forward to PP, not the map. When mappers find that their maps are being played and "appreciated," they will of course map more "pp maps" because its what got them their "popularity." Like i said before, PP is affecting both the player and the mapper.

Ongaku wrote:

Thats exactly why the PP system is flawed. The "Fun" for players at the moment is earning ranks via pp. The players should appreciate the map AND the mapper for it's fun in terms of gameplay, not in terms of earning pp.

"Hey you! You're having fun all wrong! You should be doing it my way! My values are better than yours!"

See also: http://orteil.dashnet.org/cookieclicker/

Of course, contradicting myself, it can be argued that the fun is improving, in which case "improving your rank." But this is negatively impacting the state of mapping.

Not once did i ever say that "my values are better than yours." Don't make it sound like I say shit like that.

But this is negatively impacting the state of mapping.

For you.

Not once did i ever say that "my values are better than yours." Don't make it sound like I say shit like that.

When you say that someone should and should not like this or that, its very clearly implied that's what you think, whether you realize it or not.

Philosofikal wrote:

But this is negatively impacting the state of mapping.

For you.

Not once did i ever say that "my values are better than yours." Don't make it sound like I say shit like that.

When you're saying that someone should and should not like this or that, its very clearly implied that's what you think, whether you realize it or not.

"For you."

For me? When did I become a target of this topic. You sound very personal in something that should be public. Are you also implying that the mapping community should not have a say in this?

I might have phrased it incorrectly by using "should," but regardless, my statement still stands. I'll rephrase it, "Thats exactly why the PP system is flawed. The "Fun" for players at the moment is earning ranks via pp. The players CAN appreciate the map AND the mapper for it's fun in terms of gameplay, not in terms of earning pp, but chooses not to because they find more satisfaction in earning PP."

Some people might appreciate a more steady influx of farm maps.

Farming and gaining ranks is great fun to a great number of people. Now you can go all B1rd on us and say that farming is akin to listen to "mindless pop-Music" and appreciating good map-song reflection is akin to listening to Vivaldi, or you could just accept that people have different standards, enjoy different things, and at the end of the day there seems to be a majority that is being served efficiently by the mappers.

And the whole idea that variety is significantly affected is questionable. Maybe we do need someone doing a proper statistical analysis to point out that it's actually affected.

Ongaku wrote:

"For you."

For me? When did I become a target of this topic. You sound very personal in something that should be public. Are you also implying that the mapping community should not have a say in this?

I might have phrased it incorrectly by using "should," but regardless, my statement still stands. I'll rephrase it, "Thats exactly why the PP system is flawed. The "Fun" for players at the moment is earning ranks via pp. The players CAN appreciate the map AND the mapper for it's fun in terms of gameplay, not in terms of earning pp, but chooses not to because they find more satisfaction in earning PP."

I'm going to keep saying that until you stop giving your opinion as fact.

The purpose of mapping is to get people to play the game. You know what the best maps are? The ones that get played and make people play the game. That's pretty much the closest thing anyone can objectively point to as an unquestionably positive attribute. For better or worse, the primary objective of any organizational body is to be self-sustaining.

mmm tbh players have a different perspective of mapping, they really don't care much if the map fit the song properly, concepts etc. That's why I don't think a discussion about mapping between players and mappers is any good-

Philosofikal wrote:

I'm going to keep saying that until you giving your opinion as fact.

The purpose of mapping is to get people to play the game. You know what the best maps are? The ones that get played and make people play the game. That's pretty much the closest thing objectively point to and say "hey, this is an unquestionably positive attribute". For better or worse, the primary objective of any organzizational body is to be self-sustaining.

"The purpose of mapping is to get people to play the game."

Yes, but you're entirely disregarding the mapper's PoV in this situation.

"You know what the best maps are? The ones that get played and make people play the game."

You know why diversity is important? because it keeps everything new and interesting. Maps that repeats the same forumla, in this case, the "abuse sharp angles and comfortable movement and extreme rhythm simplification and low SV and giant 5 second diffspikes." Eventually people will grow tired of it and the game will end up dying due to lack of "creativity," which is why WE, as mappers, are trying to encourage unique mapping concepts.

We are also players, not just only mappers.

Natsu wrote:

mmm tbh players have a different perspective of mapping, they really don't care much if the map fit the song properly, concepts etc. That's why I don't think a discussion about mapping between players and mappers is any good-

Thats probably also one of the issues, lack of communication.

Ongaku wrote:

Philosofikal wrote:

I'm going to keep saying that until you giving your opinion as fact.

The purpose of mapping is to get people to play the game. You know what the best maps are? The ones that get played and make people play the game. That's pretty much the closest thing objectively point to and say "hey, this is an unquestionably positive attribute". For better or worse, the primary objective of any organzizational body is to be self-sustaining.

"The purpose of mapping is to get people to play the game."

Yes, but you're entirely disregarding the mapper's PoV in this situation.

What is stopping mappers from making whatever they want as long as it adheres to technical guidelines? Do they believe that they have an entitlement to popularity just because they made a map? Why are they mapping just to get popular?

"You know what the best maps are? The ones that get played and make people play the game."

You know why diversity is important? because it keeps everything new and interesting. Maps that repeats the same forumla, in this case, the "abuse sharp angles and comfortable movement and extreme rhythm simplification and low SV and giant 5 second diffspikes." Eventually people I will grow tired of it and the game will end up dying due to lack of "creativity."

No, they won't, because they have different values than yours.

I guess now you've shifted to "they have these values because they are immature players, they'll eventually see my superior values"?

"What is stopping mappers from making whatever they want as long as it adheres to technical guidelines? Do they believe that they have an entitlement to popularity just because they made a map?"

We can make what ever we want, nothing will stop us. What stops us is if we want to rank that, we must adhere to the guidelines. We must compromise, we accept to do so once we "want to rank a map." Which is where the modding system comes in. Currently, modding v2 is being tested, so we do know that the system is being improved.

Of course, not all of us would expect popularity, but I myself and many other mappers, hope that our maps won't go noticed.


"No, they won't, because they have different values than yours. I guess now you've shifted to "they have these values because they are immature players"."

You say people have different values, yet you use your values to represent the entire player base. You forget we mappers are also players.

Philosofikal wrote:

B1rd wrote:

Here comes social justice warrior to the rescue, to explain to us all that having mapping standards - or standards in general - are, in fact, a result of patriarchy and white nationalists!

Are you seriously so intellectually lazy that you really thought that's what I meant?

My actual point is that the every piece of the underlying logic and reasoning you used to form your opinion is toxic, and that the exact same reasoning you're using very easily leads to stuff way more terrible than being an egotistical douche about art. You have the scary combination of having illusory superiority on a mostly subjective matter, and the simultaneous belief of being a threatened minority. People who think just like the way you are right now are legendary for their ability to cause problems for everyone else.

You heard it folks, Vivaldi's Four Seasons is not actually a masterpiece, any more than Justin Bieber's Baby is masterpiece, it's all up to the eye of the beholder :^)

You're right, it's not. Please attempt to prove otherwise. I would really love to watch you try to objectify the subjective and slowly come to the realization that your music is only a "masterpiece" for the exact same reasons that Baby is a masterpiece (popularity), except the people who like one or the other have different values. Go ahead, shoulder the impossible task of proving your emotions are objectively superior.

Oh, while I'm here, I can very easily explain why pp maps are fun. They make the objectively difficult subjectively easy.

You like maps that make the objectively easy subjectively difficult.

Why do you think that I was derogatory towards you when you try to imply that people having a discussion about criticisms of PPv2 have the same underlying psychology as white supremacists? Your pathology of a social justice warrior sticks out like a sore thumb, it's laughable to think your "ideas" could be constructive in any way.

Now, what are these evil ideas that I have that are so problematic? Well, that's the idea that good is intrinsically good and bad is intrinsically bad. Good could roughly be defined as pleasure - not necessarily pleasure of the hedonistic kind but the kind that is more wholesome - and bad could be defined as pain. Of course you could do a lot more to elaborate on those definitions but simplified terms will do for the sake of the argument. Once you have accepted that simple premise you can use those values to make value judgements of deeds and entities and infer morality. And you really can't dispute that premise, it doesn't matter what your beliefs or values are, no one likes pain and being the recipient of unnecessary suffering. Thus, we can make the conclusion that some emotions and values are superior to others. Those values which are beneficial to yourself and society are good, and vice versa.

Now you might say that "interpretation of music is subjective", and it is to a certain degree, but not infinitely so like you seem to imply. There is only a finite amount of plausible interpretations of a given piece of art, and in the case of music, those variables are things like the harmony and melody, speed and intensity, complexity, the effort and skill required to produce, the historical and cultural context, et cetera. Classical music is more complex, it has more variation in the melodies that compliment each other in an overarching structure. It takes great talent, skill, discipline and sacrifice to create; composers and musicians often dedicate their whole lives to creating music that others will love. And due to the aforementioned traits, it inspires different emotions than that of Justin Bieber's music: it inspires admiration of the beauty of the world and the desire to strive to the ideal of human greatness; that is, spending your whole life doing something truly worthwhile to create something of value to your fellow man. Because classical music is an embodiment of that - it's a reveling of beauty and a celebration of humanity. The same cannot be said about Justin Bieber's music, which inspires vapid teenage girls to worship a horrible role model. It doesn't take great skill to create or produce, often songs like this aren't even written by the artists who supposedly wrote it, the music is all electronically generated according to some general algorithms, and the vocalist is assisted with autotune. Then it is mass-marketed to the masses to ensure popularity. I could elaborate a lot more on what values and emotions different kinds of music invoke, but suffice it to say, Vivaldi's Four Seasons inspire more noble, better, and more worthwhile values than Justin Bieber's songs.

Unlike what you say, I don't have an motivations of "elitism" or a desire to elevate myself over other people. My motivation stems from my love of beauty, of which people like you say don't exist, or would say that a turd has more beauty than a rose if enough people thought that. No, I'd definitely say that post-modernists like you have done far more harm to our society than people like me.

Railey2 wrote:

Anyway, I agree with Philisophikal. B1rd would probably argue that complexity means that something must be better, which is a completely arbitrary standard just like popularity or the quality of something being more purple than something else.

"Songs by Justin Bieber are just as much masterpieces as compositions by Vivaldi, because complexity is an arbitrary criteria and popularity is the only real measurement of quality"

-Railey, 2017

It's amazing what intellectual sinkholes one can find themselves in when they let their bigotry and arrogance get in the way of truth and reasoning. Keep on following your friend here and see where it gets you.

Natsu wrote:

mmm tbh players have a different perspective of mapping, they really don't care much if the map fit the song properly, concepts etc. That's why I don't think a discussion about mapping between players and mappers is any good-

Yeah pretty much. At least i don't care at all.
Really old maps also don't fit the music but oh boy there is much fun to be had playing those.
But i wouldn't say aesthetics matter that much, even though most pp maps are perfect in that.

Shiirn wrote:
hey do you think my maps are good i'm curious as to how you compare them to comfortable, easy-to-play "fun" maps tanks

Railey2 wrote:
To me, technical stuff is fun when I can play it moderately well.

I'm a pretty decent player myself so I can say that I liked playing most of them. Except the final diff of routing, that one was simply too hard to be fun to me. Can't claim that I played all of your maps. Koan Sound is pretty dope, though.

I really dig your choice of music in general. Great taste.

If i may add something here, then i'd say that as far as gimmicky maps are concerned i really like the chinese mappers.
From western mappers pretty much only Shiirn and ktgster maps are the ones that I find really fun.
Anything hollow wings puts out is quite fun, 09kami is also amazing. Maybe i just like chinese mappers. I guess i let skystar pass.
I'm not sure if we can consider pishi maps technical, but i really don't like those.Nothing against pishi but I find Milan maps to be quite unfun aswell and they look pretty similiar to me.

Priti, and rlc are pretty popular but meh, i don't know man.
Maybe I'm just biased cuz i suck ass on high bpm.

I don't think it ruins mapping because mappers can do what they want. It's more about ruining the game for everyone who cares about pp.

Having the strongest positive feedback game mechanic in the game be biased towards the same things for so long does condition people to enjoy those things. The more biased the pp system is, the smaller the subset of mapping styles the ones who like pp the most are driven to play.

"I don't think it ruins mapping because mappers can do what they want. It's more about ruining the game for everyone who cares about pp."

Yes, mappers and players can do what they want, but the issue isn't about what the player or mapper wants, but the PP that is influencing what they want. Players want more pp, mappers want more recognition (in other terms, for players to keep playing their maps). There are many ways for a mapper to gain recognition, but the best way for players to gain ranks is through "pp maps", so they'll keep playing them. The incentive for the playerbase is just larger than the mapper's incentive to encourage/map diversely, all because the current system that offers the playerbase too much.

Think of it as, uh, a drug that was supposed to help people, but they end up abusing it and it began affecting everyone around you negatively, just less serious.

okay so uhhhh

speaking as a mapper of quite a long time (i like to think of myself as "experienced" as a mapper and modder, while i never really dedicated myself physically enough to be able to play, I understand quite a bit about how maps play in general)

i'd like to point out that during the era before ppv1 and ppv2, mapping was 100% about how players experienced the map - not how well it played, not how much fun it was, but how it expressed the music and what kind of cool ideas or interesting functions it can do to represent the music

in other words, mappers mapped their maps to be played and to provide an experience to the player - yes, most often that vague "fun" everyone tries to race after - and practically ignored all concepts regarding score or difficulty - except when the purpose of the map was expressly to be a challenge in one way or another (the famous BIG BLACK challenging jumping, my infamous chipscape challenging stamina and reading). because there was no "official" metric to judge anything by, and the star rating system capped out an extremely easy-to-hit 5*, people judged every map based off its own merit and comparing it to other maps. literally the only number people cared anything about in mapping was the number of plays they got, and even then it was only a "wow this did way better/worse than i thought" kind of thing

with an official metric being introduced in ppv2, mapping naturally was influenced by this, no matter what anyone might say otherwise - how often do you ever see anti-jumps, or stacked streams, or other such techniques that are completely invisible to the difficulty metric? techniques that evoked emotional or visceral responses in players, knowledge that was only useful for mapping for the player, these fell to the wayside - what became important was numbers - star rating, difficulty settings, pp results, accuracy and its effect on pp, and things like that

mapping became about mapping for the rating system and its perception of player experience, rather than experimenting and figuring out how players really felt via peer review and experience.


Numbers became more important to mapping than people.


and if you can't see how this might be kind of a bad idea then you clearly can't be convinced by anything

Railey2 wrote:

I disagree. The whole ranking process is a system that was set into place for a singular purpose: To deliver great content to players so that THEY can enjoy the game to it's fullest extent. If you eat up the resources of said system by taking the time of the people that work for it, your mapping should be 100% in line with the objective of the system: Creating fun for the player.


Now if you're just mapping around on your own, you can obviously do what you want. But if you try to get maps ranked, you should think about the player first. If you see mapping as your personal song-reflection art project, you're certainly missing the point.

This doesn't mean that the end result can't be good. I'm sure pishi has many fans that like his mapping for what it is. Personally, I find that it gets quite stale. Some of his maps are plain boring to me, the Shelter-one he showed in his video included.

If the wrong ideas infiltrate the process itself, we end up with Shiirn having to re-map his Routing map for 71 years. And that's bad as well.

You seem to forget that there are other people like me who actually likes the shelter map. I should rephrase, there is no incentive to cater to a specific group of players

The ranking process is to ensure quality while keeping mapper's intention in mind, that's why shelter was ranked in the first place, pishifat is catering to people who enjoys to have emotional feedback from maps, modders and beatmap nominators recognize that and polish his map while keeping the emotional aspect of the map

just wait for moddingv2 to kick in and loved to get revamped so then you can have maps that people will have complimented with whatever thing moddingv2 calls it and then it becomes liked and then you can see all the maps that people really like and why they like it and then you can be like "nah i don't like it when maps do that" or "yeah i like it when maps do that" and then you can add more maps to your folder

it'd be nice if they added on a "new loved maps" thing too on the side like they have for ranked maps and most played ranked maps, just so people can know about it

but then the problem is that those loved maps aren't ranked and people want rank because i love pp and it's too bad a map can't be both loved and ranked because that wouldn't make sense

and then another problem is that there are unranked maps that deserve a spot in the sun and the requirement for loved might be so high that entry isn't frequent (which, it should be, since loved is quite the title).

approved revamp? yet another category for cool unranked maps? :thinking:

Gonna try to keep this concise because honestly reading through the entirety of this thread is pretty pointless already.

I think the bigger complaint isn't about maps giving pp. We still have plenty of creative maps etc. What is suffering is the variety within the less creative pop song maps. As has probably been pointed out, the "pp maps" have all converged on a very very specific formula. Mappers that mapped pop songs nicely but that were still reasonable to farm include rizia (wkyik), laurier, cryo, and pre-miraizu fycho among others.

Most of the people who are complaining about pp mapping don't actually enjoy the more creative maps and the furthest they stray from their pop songs is post-2105 skystar style mapping. When it comes to things like shiirn/byfar/etc. they typically don't find as much enjoyment (judging based off how long they spend playing these kinds of maps before switching to more normal maps). While I don't fully agree with Railey he does make a few agreeable points.

Oh dear, let me keep this simple as possible because this thread is no different than a 70 page legal document read at this point.

While everyone is begging for mapping meta to be more diverse, stop and consider where we came from and what we tried to solve. We came from an era where maps were poorly timed, had awful flow, at even had mappers troll players on slider ends once upon every several maps. Since then, we started coming out with maps that have better timing, better flow, and less gimmicks to screw the player over. This improvement in mapping allows to create maps that have good jumps at higher BPM. Most players want to go play faster maps that are easier regardless of pp. That's why you have lobbies full of 100k ranks playing 6* maps, and those who map for pp just do it for popularity and memes because modders let them. It's more fun to go fast and be good at it, and players will take any map that allows them to. I will be looking forward to the time when the next monstrata cracks out a readable 180BPM 1/8 jump map that flows and works. Until then, just map what you like.

abraker wrote:

Oh dear, let me keep this simple as possible because this thread is no different than a 70 page legal document read at this point.

While everyone is begging for mapping meta to be more diverse, stop and consider where we came from and what we tried to solve. We came from an era where maps were poorly timed, had awful flow, at even had mappers troll players on slider ends once upon every several maps. Since then, we started coming out with maps that have better timing, better flow, and less gimmicks to screw the player over. This improvement in mapping allows to create maps that have good jumps at higher BPM. Most players want to go play faster maps that are easier regardless of pp. That's why you have lobbies full of 100k ranks playing 6* maps, and those who map for pp just do it for popularity and memes because modders let them. It's more fun to go fast and be good at it, and players will take any map that allows them to. I will be looking forward to the time when the next monstrata cracks out a readable 180BPM 1/8 jump map that flows and works. Until then, just map what you like.

Nothing in your post is relevant to the discussion at hand. PPv2 had nothing to do with maps getting better that's just a result of natural progression and mappers getting better."Fast maps" also have nothing necessarily to do with farm maps. The fast maps you see in multiplayer are rarely farm maps, and in fact, in multiplayer farm maps are usually pretty rare, which goes to show what people like to play when they're not farming for PP.

B1rd wrote:

Nothing in your post is relevant to the discussion at hand.

Calling the shot? Ok this better be good, let's see where this will go.

B1rd wrote:

PPv2 had nothing to do with maps getting better that's just a result of natural progression and mappers getting better.

That's what I am trying to say. Thank you.

B1rd wrote:

"Fast maps" also have nothing necessarily to do with farm maps.

Yes, correct! It's just the desire to play faster stuff while being good at it. You don't need it to be ranked, although it does help bring its popularity to be found and played in multi, but that's besides the point.

B1rd wrote:

The fast maps you see in multiplayer are rarely farm maps, and in fact, in multiplayer farm maps are usually pretty rare, which goes to show what people like to play when they're not farming for PP.

You can't really have a 100k rank player do a 6* like I said and call it a farm map, can you?

I am not sure if you wanted to go against my point and ended up shooting yourself in the leg, or you tried to agree in a way it looks an arguement against my point, but whatever it is, you've done it well.

If you didn't understand the point of my post, let me repeat, Nothing in your post was relevant to the discussion at hand. You can somehow write a whole paragraph of analysis and still miss the point entirely, and then go into a whole derisive tirade because I pointed out that fact. Your argumentation methods leave a lot to be desired.

B1rd wrote:

If you didn't understand the point of my post, let me repeat, Nothing in your post was relevant to the discussion at hand. You can somehow write a whole paragraph of analysis and still miss the point entirely, and then go into a whole derisive tirade because I pointed out that fact. Your argumentation methods leave a lot to be desired.

Please stop posting in my thread, i mean it. Abrakers post was perfectly topical, he backed me up in regard to my claim that pp-mapping (aka readable easy to hit jumps) are intrinsically fun to play. That was one of the, if not THE main point of my thread: Don't just dismiss easy to hit readable jumps as a shit-meta that is worth nothing and harms the game/community. I would know, I wrote the thing. Sometimes i really don't know what's going on in your head.

Yeah yeah i said that i wouldn't entertain you further, and so far i did well not responding to you, but holy cow i seriously can't look at this.

Protip: you don't own the thread, you have absolutely no authority to tell me if I can or cannot post in it.

And regarding your claim that abraker was backing up your point, he wasn't, as he said, jump spam maps =/= farm maps.

B1rd wrote:

Protip: you don't own the thread, you have absolutely no authority to tell me if I can or cannot post in it.

And regarding your claim that abraker was backing up your point, he wasn't, as he said, jump spam maps =/= farm maps.

"Most players want to go play faster maps that are easier regardless of pp." is what abraker said.

This is exactly the point I was making with Highscore and Red like roses in my opening post, so yeah this is 100% in line with what I'm saying. Now shush.


But ok, I'll give it to you again, from my opening post, just to make sure you really can't misunderstand:
"to most players, simple jumpy patterns and nice generic music are more fun than [art]. People actually seek out simple jumpy maps even when they are removed from pp."

Now here, again, is what abraker said:
"Most players want to go play faster maps that are easier regardless of pp. [...] It's more fun to go fast and be good at it, and players will take any map that allows them to. I will be looking forward to the time when the next monstrata cracks out a readable 180BPM 1/8 jump map that flows and works."

Farm maps are included in that, but it's not limited to them. Either way, he's backing a point I made in the opening post.


Now go tell abraker another time that he's off-Topic. I'm done with this.

I've got another piece of advice: if you don't want to respond to someone, just don't. Don't take half a dozen posts to tell them you're going to stop talking to them. But by all means, just go and quit the thread now that so many people have come out in disagreement to you.

You don't seem to be operating on the same logical basis as the rest of us. I have rebutted that line of reasoning many times, so have other people. You seem to have a big impediment to your logic that has its roots in some sort of bias or another. To restate something that has already been stated many times already, no one is disputing the fact that people like to "go fast", although we could dispute the motivating factors behind that. But the fact is that fast maps only have a moderate degree of correlation with farm maps. The majority of farm maps are relatively slow and only have a few large difficulty spikes. Saying that people naturally like fast maps absolutely does not back up your point that people would play the maps that are now farm maps in absence of PPv2. This is evidenced by the fact that when people play in multiplayer it's quite rare they will play actual farm maps. This shows that there is a large divide between what people play "for fun" and what people play when they want PP.

mom help

Hey guys! There are thousands of musical genres. But let me just pick only one so i can suck my bro's dicks.
If the song it's already mapped 897737263 times, better. So i don't have to risk chosing one.
If the patterns i'm using are a copy paste from other maps, better. I don't have to risk placing circles.
If everybody knows the song from an anime even better than show other people the music what i like. Even better than make a good map, so people can understand what i feel listening the music what i like.

Same songs, same musical genre, same mapping style... It's more about lack of personality than PP/rank system.
PP system just make the standart/meta. It's not PP system fault almost all farm maps are the same. If AR7 old map style become the PP meta, almost no one would keep making the actual mapping style. But will start a new AR7 farm copy paste maps due to people lack of personality trying to make everybody happy instead do what they like and evolve their own style.

I don't really like maps like CBCC, that qualify themselves as a meme map.
Moreover, there is some points I don't like & some I like the maps with 80 Insane difficulty & 30 Extras.

Why I like it?
I enjoy the fact that there is a lot of diffs, cause it allows EACH guest diffs to be different, cause we all have a different perception on mapping. Usually, you can see that on a lot (but not all) of maps that had multiple Insanes/Extra, use different style. For instance, different rhythm, different speed, etc...

Why I dislike it?
I sometimes dislike those kind of maps, because sometimes, it's made on a song that has a really basic rhythm. Let's take as an example "CBCC" (I'm not hating on it). When you look at the map, you notice that there is a looooot of diffs. But when you look closely, you notice that most of the rhythm is somehow similar on all the diffs, and once you play one Insane diffs, it sounds like you played all of them. In my opinion, this map was made for meme and to create a PP farm by making a lot of diffs.

My conclusion
I think that the PP itself is not a problem, but the way that people abuse of it in their mapping is. (I agree I kinda contradict myself... )

Anyway, as long as it still has player that have fun on it, then I think it's not a problem, it just kinda "foul" the real player's skill.

chainpullz wrote:

Gonna try to keep this concise because honestly reading through the entirety of this thread is pretty pointless already.

I think the bigger complaint isn't about maps giving pp. We still have plenty of creative maps etc. What is suffering is the variety within the less creative pop song maps. As has probably been pointed out, the "pp maps" have all converged on a very very specific formula. Mappers that mapped pop songs nicely but that were still reasonable to farm include rizia (wkyik), laurier, cryo, and pre-miraizu fycho among others.

Most of the people who are complaining about pp mapping don't actually enjoy the more creative maps and the furthest they stray from their pop songs is post-2105 skystar style mapping. When it comes to things like shiirn/byfar/etc. they typically don't find as much enjoyment (judging based off how long they spend playing these kinds of maps before switching to more normal maps). While I don't fully agree with Railey he does make a few agreeable points.

I think you missed the point. You're right that it's not about "maps giving pp," its that maps gives too much pp.

THIS IS EXTREMELY TL:DR. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.

B1rd wrote:

incoherent logical spaghetti

Oh, man, you actually took up my challenge and tried to do it. Truly comedy gold.

Strap in to your seats everyone, and grab some popcorn because this is going to be a hell of a ride.



Before we get to that, I need to refute this irritatingly persistent criticism of myself lest it stick and continue to malign me:

B1rd wrote:

Why do you think that I was derogatory towards you when you try to imply that people having a discussion about criticisms of PPv2 have the same underlying psychology as white supremacists? Your pathology of a social justice warrior sticks out like a sore thumb, it's laughable to think your "ideas" could be constructive in any way.

First, since you are apparently incapable of understanding nuance of any kind, it's not what you're critiquing, but why and how you're doing it. I don't see how pointing out the underlying ad hominem fallacy and insecurity that drives those groups, and relating it to your argument against art, is unreasonable when you, specifically, say things like this:

B1rd wrote:

your beloved plebs aren't always the most enlightened and discerning in whatever behaviour they choose to partake in

B1rd wrote:

a lot of pop music is indisputably trash, and the people who listen to it are most likely trash as well

B1rd wrote:

people who listen to superficial and shameless music are likely to exhibit the same traits in their own personality

Yes, if I like things you don't like, I am literally trash. Basically, you might say, sub-human? Definitely not Nazi-style thinking in any way.

It's worth noting I made my assertion before you even posted, so it's a little amusing to me that you essentially pwalked right into my assertion.

Second, you did not actually address my argument in any way. You see this? You're at the third rung at best. My argument is an address of how you are approaching the issue and why it's wrong on a fundamental level, even if you are being too superficial (intentionally or not) to understand it. Where is that on the chart again?

Third, if you knew me, you would know that the idea of me, personally, being an SJW is ridiculous. This is me making fun of a radical feminist yesterday. I've been a 4chan user for ten years, I couldn't give less of a shit about social justice specifically when there are people from all walks of life that need taking down a notch.

- - - - - - - - - - -

Now, let's get to breaking down the meat of your argument, which is one of the most absolutely cringe worthy things I have ever read on this forum.

B1rd wrote:

Now, what are these evil ideas that I have that are so problematic? Well, that's the idea that good is intrinsically good and bad is intrinsically bad. Good could roughly be defined as pleasure - not necessarily pleasure of the hedonistic kind but the kind that is more wholesome - and bad could be defined as pain. Of course you could do a lot more to elaborate on those definitions but simplified terms will do for the sake of the argument. Once you have accepted that simple premise you can use those values to make value judgements of deeds and entities and infer morality. And you really can't dispute that premise, it doesn't matter what your beliefs or values are, no one likes pain and being the recipient of unnecessary suffering. Thus, we can make the conclusion that some emotions and values are superior to others. Those values which are beneficial to yourself and society are good, and vice versa.

Nobody likes pain, therefore pain is objectively bad, and so is anything that causes it.

http://existentialcomics.com/comic/42

B1rd wrote:

Now you might say that "interpretation of music is subjective", and it is to a certain degree, but not infinitely so like you seem to imply. There is only a finite amount of plausible interpretations of a given piece of art, and in the case of music, those variables are things like the harmony and melody, speed and intensity, complexity, the effort and skill required to produce, the historical and cultural context, et cetera. Classical music is more complex, it has more variation in the melodies that compliment each other in an overarching structure. It takes great talent, skill, discipline and sacrifice to create; composers and musicians often dedicate their whole lives to creating music that others will love.

Absolutely none of the traits you have just listed have anything to do with the value of a piece of music. According to you, this is pretty much the best piece of music ever made. Pack it up and go home Beethoven, some random guy on YouTube has solved music.

B1rd wrote:

And due to the aforementioned traits, it inspires different emotions than that of Justin Bieber's music: it inspires admiration of the beauty of the world and the desire to strive to the ideal of human greatness; that is, spending your whole life doing something truly worthwhile to create something of value to your fellow man. Because classical music is an embodiment of that - it's a reveling of beauty and a celebration of humanity. The same cannot be said about Justin Bieber's music, which inspires vapid teenage girls to worship a horrible role model. It doesn't take great skill to create or produce, often songs like this aren't even written by the artists who supposedly wrote it, the music is all electronically generated according to some general algorithms, and the vocalist is assisted with autotune. Then it is mass-marketed to the masses to ensure popularity. I could elaborate a lot more on what values and emotions different kinds of music invoke, but suffice it to say, Vivaldi's Four Seasons inspire more noble, better, and more worthwhile values than Justin Bieber's songs

A complete and total fail. The purpose of music, and art in general, is to communicate emotion. You may feel different emotions from the same piece of art depending on the perspective you see it at.



The creation of good music may be inspired by constructive virtues, but that does not mean that those virtues create good music, or that good music only come from these virtues. The worst kind of art is not the art that makes you feel bad, but the kind of art that is so totally devoid of resonance that it makes you feel nothing. Something can be so bad, it's good!

I have the interesting experience of being good friends with a large group of highly talented musicians, and it is mind blowing some of the music they just shit out as random audio doodles. Some of the best music I have heard in my entire life has been made in the span of a few hours at a whim. With that experience, to me, the assertion that good music only comes from self-sacrifice and hard work is just pure bullshit. Good music comes from the invisible brilliancy of having just the right perspective to communicate a concept.

https://imgur.com/uMjPV5V

B1rd wrote:

Unlike what you say, I don't have an motivations of "elitism" or a desire to elevate myself over other people.

I'm not an elitist, but here I am telling you that everything you think you like is actually shit, and you are shit for liking it. Sure.

B1rd wrote:

My motivation stems from my love of beauty, of which people like you say don't exist, or would say that a turd has more beauty than a rose if enough people thought that. No, I'd definitely say that post-modernists like you have done far more harm to our society than people like me.

How fascinating that you can claim to hate something you have a poor understanding of. Postmodernism is not about the notion that quality is derived from popularity, postmodernism is about the idea that all experiences are fundamentally equal, whether they are good or bad. Postmodernism does not say that nothing is beautiful, postmodernism says beauty is subjective, not objective, and that there is beauty in everything, if you look at it from the right viewpoint. This is pretty much the stance that people take when they say that old maps are not inherently bad maps.

If you want to learn what postmodernism actually is, watch this. Skip to 8:48 if you are boring.

I don't even know how to react to your assertion that "postmodernists have done harm to society" considering what a throwaway comment it is, being incredibly vague and completely unsupported by evidence or example. Who even knows what that was supposed to mean.

B1rd wrote:

It's amazing what intellectual sinkholes one can find themselves in when they let their bigotry and arrogance get in the way of truth and reasoning.

The absolute lack of self awareness is truly ironic, I know.

You know what would be really amazing though, considering what a self-congratulatory slog that was to tear apart?

still posting????

Philosofikal wrote:

At this point Philosofikal's topic is completely irrelevant to the one at hand. If you wanna take it personal, take it somehwere else..

L-a-m-e-y [ B ] wrote:

still posting????

Nice throwaway comment. The plastic Fisher-Price table for little kids is over there, this area is for big boys, OK?

EDIT: lol I looked at your comment history and I really shouldn't have even given you the credibility of a reply. My comment was more on point than I originally thought.

Ongaku wrote:

At this point Philosofikal's topic is completely irrelevant to the one at hand. If you wanna take it personal, take it somehwere else..

Because this was a good thread.

Philosofikal wrote:

L-a-m-e-y [ B ] wrote:

still posting????

Nice throwaway comment. The plastic Fisher-Price table for little kids is over there, this area is for big boys, OK?

holy who fed salt to this guy

Aaaaaaand looks like this thread has devolved into personal attacks. Looks likely that it could get locked soon.

B1rd wrote:

I don't care to PC up my language.

I agree with you on your view on political correctness. In my opinion many people are way too PC.

However when you are trying to convince someone else with a different opinion that doesn't know you, you have to use language that will provoke less of an emotional response.

Save your non PC opinions for people you know (or tone it down) because in this environment you will just start arguments that focus more on trying to win, rather than trying to work together to find the truth.

Ongaku wrote:

I think you missed the point. You're right that it's not about "maps giving pp," its that maps gives too much pp.

I mean, there are going to be those maps no matter what you do (if player rankings exist) and that follows simply from the well ordering principle. There were maps that gave "too much" pp even back in like 2013 and 2014, the years people tend to look back upon with fond memories.

Welp, this thread was an interesting read. Almost forgot I was in class!
I don't really have much to add to the topic at hand, as everything has basically been said AND dissected within this thread.
But hey, gotta love how intelligent discussion can just fall into mindless rabble in the space of a few hours, right?

Ongaku wrote:

At this point Philosofikal's topic is completely irrelevant to the one at hand. If you wanna take it personal, take it somehwere else..

It's not irrelevant. He is essentially saying that everything is subjective. How can you argue that PP maps are good or bad if nothing is objectively good or bad?

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

I agree with you on your view on political correctness. In my opinion many people are way too PC.

However when you are trying to convince someone else with a different opinion that doesn't know you, you have to use language that will provoke less of an emotional response.

Save your non PC opinions for people you know (or tone it down) because in this environment you will just start arguments that focus more on trying to win, rather than trying to work together to find the truth.

I'm not a sophist and never will be. Also it's amusing to trigger people with offhand comments, and for those people finding the truth was likely never on their agenda in the first place.

Railey2 wrote:

What do all these players have in common? They enjoy the simple stuff.
Any thoughts about how to serve all these people, whose existence you just overlooked?

by helping them not encounter disproportionately hard maps when their 5.17 star map has a 13 note 270bpm stream and the highest acc on it is 98.72%

181.13pp good job Random 2 Digit Player Who I Don't Know

B1rd wrote:

I'm not a sophist and never will be. Also it's amusing to trigger people with offhand comments, and for those people finding the truth was likely never on their agenda in the first place.

Why are you not a sophist? I assume its not because you want to be morally right since you enjoy triggering people who you think deserve it.

B1rd wrote:

It's not irrelevant. He is essentially saying that everything is subjective. How can you argue that PP maps are good or bad if nothing is objectively good or bad?

In theory nothing is objectively good or bad, by defining something as bad or good it already falls in the category of subjectivty. That's why it's better to focus on the real life implications of said subjectivity instead of circle jerking on the idea "hurr durr your opinion is invalid cause it's subjective"

Come on you're the guy who clearly thinks about thinking stop miss using words like objectivity and axiom lol

Guess I can just go rape a bunch of kids then, because in my subjective opinion that's not bad.

Saying that nothing is objective is the worse form of intellectual suicide you can commit. If you accept than then you may as well just giving up trying to argue anything and accept nihilism. Rather, it's self-evident to anyone but over-educated idiots that good and bad exist and aren't just subject to individual whim.

B1rd wrote:

If you accept than then you may as well just giving up trying to argue anything and accept nihilism.

You're finally completely on point about something.

Arguing is completely pointless if you're seeking to change someone's mind. In fact, an argument, due to the way that human minds and emotional systems are constructed, is pretty much the exact opposite of the correct environment for fostering authenitc changes in belief. Changing your mind in an argument is seen as revealing a weakness in oneself. The only useful point of arguing with anyone is to test your own beliefs, which is why I wrote my post to you. There wasn't one second where I thought that anything I said, or anything I coupld possibly conceive of to say, could change your mind. I don't even care if you understood it or even read it. I wrote all that crap entirely to prove myself to myself, and I did, and I continue to argue with you not to change your mind, but only to sharpen my own as an exercise.

See: https://youtu.be/Tp1eZdtkdQM?t=35s, until 1:12.

B1rd wrote:

Guess I can just go rape a bunch of kids then, because in my subjective opinion that's not bad.

What if I told you that there are indigenous human societies where what we see as child rape is actually an integral part of their belief systems, and that they more or less function just fine? Pretty much all ethics can be relative if you put them into the correct context. I don't believe in moral truths, just universally held beliefs. Even science only hopes to approach the smallest probability of error, instead of certainty. There is such a thing as the problem of inductive reasoning.

Be sure to mention in your response that what I said clearly means I support child rape, even though it doesn't. Even I buy into some of the values pressed upon me by the sociey I'm a part of.

B1rd wrote:

Saying that nothing is objective is the worse form of intellectual suicide you can commit.

Actually, it's the complete opposite. It gives you the intellectual freedom to analyze your own personal values and construct a belief system that fits them from the ground up to become your own person. You wouldn't understand that as you place your emotional security in intellectual objectivity. If nothing has inherent meaning, then you have to find meaning on your own, and I think that is scary to you.

B1rd wrote:

and for those people finding the truth was likely never on their agenda in the first place.

I'm not as cynical and misanthropist as you. I believe you're seeking the truth, but you're misguided.

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

B1rd wrote:

I'm not a sophist and never will be. Also it's amusing to trigger people with offhand comments, and for those people finding the truth was likely never on their agenda in the first place.

Why are you not a sophist? I assume its not because you want to be morally right since you enjoy triggering people who you think deserve it.

It's because they want to be intellectually superior without any of the hard work. Being a sophist would require arguing with people who can actually carry their own mental weight around.

B1rd wrote:

Guess I can just go rape a bunch of kids then, because in my subjective opinion that's not bad.

Saying that nothing is objective is the worse form of intellectual suicide you can commit. If you accept than then you may as well just giving up trying to argue anything and accept nihilism. Rather, it's self-evident to anyone but over-educated idiots that good and bad exist and aren't just subject to individual whim.

N0thingSpecial wrote:

That's why it's better to focus on the real life implications of said subjectivity

It's like you didn't bother to read, trying to box something into objectivity is even more closed minded and death to thinking from multiple perspectives, boxing everything to subjectivity is death to thinking at all tbh cause at that point nothing has any meaning, hence you look at the implications of thinking with both subjectivity and objectivity in mind. Man I thought I was the arrogant pseudo intellectual here B1rd you manage impress me

N0thingSpecial wrote:

Man I thought I was the arrogant pseudo intellectual here

Well, you were certainly wrong about that, because that's definitely me

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA LETS COMPARE E PENIS

You're a fool and a hypocrite. Here you are grandstanding on a platform and in a society that necessitates that millions of assumptions about the nature of the reality were correct. Yes I'm sure there were or are countries that think or though that child rape is perfectly fine. And you know why we don't hear about those countries? Because they failed. The fundamental assumptions that they rested their society on didn't work, and so they were overtaken by societies and cultures that got those fundamental assumptions right.

Provide you want to live, and not die, and live a good and meaningful life, rather than suffer in torment, there are rules that you must follow and it doesn't matter if you acknowledged them or not because they still exist regardless. You can't build a rocket and fly in to space without using the scientific method. You can't live happily and peaceful in a culture that condones wanton murder. The culture of the West is built upon thousands of years of trial and error to become the thriving and most dominant culture in the world, and that's not only due to our knowledge about that nature of physical reality, but the intricacies of our culture, our societal norms, our religion - all these things have been built up because they help us function as a society. This is where morality comes from: it is not something you "make up" by choosing your own arbitrary set of values, it's essentially a system of beliefs that relies on the idea that good exists, and helps you seek it out. Is the system and culture we have now perfect? No, but it's the best we have. The function of philosophy to examine our systems and improve them. It's not to tear down all of the progress we have achieved so far like idiots like so you seem intent on doing.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools

I would be more than happy to continue this over PM, but at this point I smell a thread lock incoming because we've essentially hijacked the whole thread with the argument.

B1rd wrote:

You're a fool and a hypocrite. and stuff

Never denied I wasn't one.

And congratulations you just further proved my point on the implication part of my argument, and you're the perfect example of the implication of a relatively healthy upbringing society.
So now can we lock thread cause we basically almost discussed every single point every time a thread like this appear and we're not really looking for a solution also this is kinda pointless

Philosofikal wrote:

I would be more than happy to continue this over PM, but at this point I smell a thread lock incoming because we've essentially hijacked the whole thread with the argument.

Locking only happens when you resort to ad hominem and personal attacks; otherwise, you're good to go.

The post wasn't directed at you, and I'm not sure what you're on about regardless. I don't see why this thread needs to be locked, even if we have pretty much come to a conclusion (or as much as we can anyway in a place like this) over the main topic, there are still plenty of tangentially related points to talk about, even if I probably won't be bothered. Regardless, any sort of semi-intelligent discussion to be had hardly take less precedence over the inane questions that make up the majority of activity in the Godforsaken subforum.

The past two or three dozen posts is kind of allegorical for mapping criticism as a whole, actually. Start at the topic of "x is bad and I don't like it" and it gradually devolves into massively conflated exposition about tangential topics with only vague association to the actual issue being covered.

I've been of the opinion for years that beatmaps are essentially what you choose to make of them - for better, or worse. Some mappers will cater their style towards increasing whatever progression metric of the time is popular, others will spend their efforts on artistic direction or creative design, others still will do a bit of both and end up somewhere in the middle.

The only thing concerning about this is when the systemic pressure bears down too heavily on anything considered "non-standard", which from what I've seen in the past month or so of reacquainting with the BN/QAT scene, isn't that big of a deal. A variety of maps get qualified, and while the mapping scene is certainly slightly homogenised towards these pp-favorable, progression-centered maps, it isn't skewed to the point of alternative styles being excessively threatened, I think.

We can still probably do better, though. The move to promote "better" maps via Spotlights is a good step forward as I honestly believe that curated content and ranking 'seasons' are the way forward as far as osu! progression is concerned, and if we begin showing precedence to maps that are just simply well made instead of adhering to a particular style or meta, we're bound to see a revival in the interest for these alternative styles.

Or maybe we won't, and perhaps "pp mapping" is just the natural terminus at which the stylistic development of "common" mapping ends. Either way, I'm not hugely concerned.

Ephemeral wrote:

I've been of the opinion for years that beatmaps are essentially what you choose to make of them - for better, or worse. Some mappers will cater their style towards increasing whatever progression metric of the time is popular, others will spend their efforts on artistic direction or creative design, others still will do a bit of both and end up somewhere in the middle.

The only thing concerning about this is when the systemic pressure bears down too heavily on anything considered "non-standard", which from what I've seen in the past month or so of reacquainting with the BN/QAT scene, isn't that big of a deal. A variety of maps get qualified, and while the mapping scene is certainly slightly homogenised towards these pp-favorable, progression-centered maps, it isn't skewed to the point of alternative styles being excessively threatened, I think.

We can still probably do better, though. The move to promote "better" maps via Spotlights is a good step forward as I honestly believe that curated content and ranking 'seasons' are the way forward as far as osu! progression is concerned, and if we begin showing precedence to maps that are just simply well made instead of adhering to a particular style or meta, we're bound to see a revival in the interest for these alternative styles.

Or maybe we won't, and perhaps "pp mapping" is just the natural terminus at which the stylistic development of "common" mapping ends. Either way, I'm not hugely concerned.

People make maps for more or less the same reason play games. Some people make maps to have a social experience. Some people make maps to express something about themselves. Some people make maps to game the system. None of these motivations are wrong as long as there is room for everyone.

People who get their knickers in a bunch about pp mapping are people basically saying that it's wrong to play games to win.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2006-03-20

And as far as unjustified personal attacks/namecalling goes... there's only really one person here whose arguments are mainly based on that.

Ekam says hi.

B1rd wrote:

M3ATL0V3R wrote:

I agree with you on your view on political correctness. In my opinion many people are way too PC.

However when you are trying to convince someone else with a different opinion that doesn't know you, you have to use language that will provoke less of an emotional response.

Save your non PC opinions for people you know (or tone it down) because in this environment you will just start arguments that focus more on trying to win, rather than trying to work together to find the truth.

I'm not a sophist and never will be. Also it's amusing to trigger people with offhand comments, and for those people finding the truth was likely never on their agenda in the first place.

Also I would like to add that toning down what you say doesn't make you a sophist. For example:

B1rd wrote:

a lot of pop music is indisputably trash, and the people who listen to it are most likely trash as well.

This could of been edited to only say "a lot of pop music is trash"

This still gets your point across without being unnecessarily condescending. Saying that its indisputable is not accurate since music taste is subjective and calling a group of people trash based on something subjective is also unnecessary.

Pop music is trash for the same reason PP maps are trash. Lack of creativity and lack of values. Say what you want but I'm not going back on my point.

Good post!

Actually, PP ruined my enjoyment of simple jumpy maps. I don't play maps like Remote Control and others (except when they're unranked) because I'd rather gain PP through maps that are hard to get PP from (not that I'm succeeding). It means I care enough about getting pretty PP scores that I actively avoid some maps I find fun to play. That's kinda weird.

Railey2 wrote:

Reflecting a song isn't the purpose of a map, the purpose follows its function, and its function is that it serves the player as a means to enjoy the game. It's simple really. Song-reflection is merely a byproduct of the main-function: The providing of fun, enjoyment.
The fact that he got this wrong really is concerning.

I reacted when Phisi said that the mappers perspective is "the best way to judge a map". And I react when you say that enjoyment is the best way to judge a map (if I understand you correctly).

"best" is way to score something on a scale. It means it's at the top of that scale. If you don't specify what scale you're talking about, or you're being vague because you don't actually know what scale you're talking about (realist ethics in a nutshell), you're talking nonsense.

You can judge a map based on how well it reflects a song and you can judge a map based on how much enjoyment it produces, and you don't need to specify which perspective is "the best". If you do, at least clarify what the perspective is best at.