mom help
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.
Oh, man, you actually took up my challenge and tried to do it. Truly comedy gold.B1rd wrote:
incoherent logical spaghetti
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:
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.
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
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.B1rd wrote:
people who listen to superficial and shameless music are likely to exhibit the same traits in their own personality
Nobody likes pain, therefore pain is objectively bad, and so is anything that causes it.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.
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:
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.
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.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
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:
Unlike what you say, I don't have an motivations of "elitism" or a desire to elevate myself over other people.
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.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.
The absolute lack of self awareness is truly ironic, I know.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.
Nice throwaway comment. The plastic Fisher-Price table for little kids is over there, this area is for big boys, OK?L-a-m-e-y [ B ] wrote:
still posting????
Because this was a good thread.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..
I agree with you on your view on political correctness. In my opinion many people are way too PC.B1rd wrote:
I don't care to PC up my language.
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.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.
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?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..
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.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.
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%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?
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:
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.
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"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?
You're finally completely on point about something.B1rd wrote:
If you accept than then you may as well just giving up trying to argue anything and accept nihilism.
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.B1rd wrote:
Guess I can just go rape a bunch of kids then, because in my subjective opinion that's not bad.
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:
Saying that nothing is objective is the worse form of intellectual suicide you can commit.
I'm not as cynical and misanthropist as you. I believe you're seeking the truth, but you're misguided.B1rd wrote:
and for those people finding the truth was likely never on their agenda in the first place.
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.M3ATL0V3R wrote:
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:
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.
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.
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 meN0thingSpecial wrote:
That's why it's better to focus on the real life implications of said subjectivity
Well, you were certainly wrong about that, because that's definitely meN0thingSpecial wrote:
Man I thought I was the arrogant pseudo intellectual here
Never denied I wasn't one.B1rd wrote:
You're a fool and a hypocrite. and stuff
Locking only happens when you resort to ad hominem and personal attacks; otherwise, you're good to go.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.
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.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.
Also I would like to add that toning down what you say doesn't make you a sophist. For example: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.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.
This could of been edited to only say "a lot of pop music is trash"B1rd wrote:
a lot of pop music is indisputably trash, and the people who listen to it are most likely trash as well.
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).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.