it is clear that he had good intentions, but since the modder doesn't looks happy with my reasons to deny his suggestions, and also because i was considered to be denying standards of mapping, i edited this post to make a more detailed mod reply.
note that i already linked what really are standards of mapping in my next post, so lets just call the suggestions "modern mapping tendencies" instead of "standards of mapping"
updates to the mod reply are using this color
all of the other colors are the original reply
note that i already linked what really are standards of mapping in my next post, so lets just call the suggestions "modern mapping tendencies" instead of "standards of mapping"
updates to the mod reply are using this color
all of the other colors are the original reply
thanks for the feedbackhi-mei wrote:
I didnt read the thread, however there are few things i wanted to talk about:
hitsounding:
00:57:863 (1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,1) - basically it sounds inconsistent, why:
01:00:363 - 01:02:181 - 01:03:999 - 01:07:635 - i feel like you gotta find a better CHS for these. (don't know what you mean by CHS but i'm happy with those hitsounds, i didn't pick hitsounds specifically for those parts, those hitsounds were used in a lot other places so unless someone send me hitsounds files and i agree that they are better, they are probably not going to be replaced.. so you linked a userpage with a lot of hitsounds, but in my reply i said that i would just wait for someone to directly send me the exact hitsounds that he thinks that are more fitting, so i was trying to say that i would not search everywhere by myself for hitsounds since i'm happy with the current hitsouding. well, i will at least take a look on the library files eventually, who knows.... maybe i actually approve something...)
feels really out of place
01:22:408 - 01:45:249 - stuff like that (slider tick hitsound as common one) feels strange in my opinion, basically ure avoiding rhythm adjustments by some reason? I mean, i played it on my skin without custom hs and i didnt feel anything there anyways. (custom slider tick hitsounding as a common one is an existing mapping technique, it may not be used often nowadays but this doesn't means i can't use it.. i'm mostly mapping vocals, so these spots are not really relevant to map, they being clickable notes are 1000% optional. making any noticeable sound as clickable note usually creates the least creative patterns on the timeline and consequently, the notes structure itself becomes too similar to other people's maps. "If your map could fit in other songs with the same BPM, then your map is bad." NatsumeRin.
i simply put more effort on hitsounding than most people would. most people who maps vocals usually fail to have consistent hitsounding, even for the most basic patterns like claps on white ticks or even finishes on main beats. that's one of the features of my mapping >>>i'm not being lazy>>> i'm actually making stuff to work the way it should, just beacause i'm mapping vocal doesn't means i would ruin my "default hitsounds" like most people would.
(all respect for A r M i N , i don't think the map is bad but i wanted to show at least one exemple for this) https://osu.ppy.sh/s/549421 this map has the "default hitsounds" issues i mentioned on top diff. 00:44:305 (3,4) - he used clap the whole song on a fixed pattern except for this part that was mapped following vocals, i would try to avoid to have this hitsound inconsistency if i mapped the song, just like i'm doing in my song.)
if your map depends on custom hitsounds, it should also support players with their skins, which means it should be fine even with default hitsounds. (my map don't depend on anything in particular, they are just the hitsound style that i chose for the map. now my map is more compatible with "ignore beatmap hitsounds" option)
01:50:703 - looks like an issue here, 01:48:885 - reference (slider tick 01:50:703 - isnt activated?) (doesn't haves the same sound that the activated one have. while both objects are mapped to the vocals, 01:50:703 - doesn't haves the same synthesizer sound as 01:48:885 - so if i still added a custom hitsound for it, i would be "overmapping" the hitsounds. same applies for this other "pair" 01:45:135 (3) - 01:46:499 (6) - )
03:02:635 - sudden change in hitsounding? i cant really understand why tho? (idk about any sudden change, maybe you are talking about the hitsounds following the flute? in this case, the flute started 02:46:499 (1,2,3,4,5) - . your suggestion doesn't makes it clear what you are considering a sudden change since you only posted a timestamp, didn't mention what specific hitsound type or sample or how long this sudden change lasted, so i'm still assuming you were talking about the flute. i added that japanese percussion hitsounds in the ticks where the flute is present, i didn't add any extra japanese percusion sound to "overmap" or "remix" any part in this section, so it's accurately hitsounded imo.)
04:33:317 (1,2,3) - this stuff is actually cool ( )
rhythm:
honestly, i dont get why is this a break 00:30:590 -
like... what?
00:30:590 - it is a progression which is started 00:00:818 - from the very beginning, i have no idea why is this not mapped (this might be your own preference, the break is fitting, i don't like the idea of mapping this part because aside from the loud kicks, there is no difference between this part and the one i mapped (that is very repetitive already), asking someone to map this small part for me would be weird since i would be mapping 80% of the song. there is countless examples of maps with similar breaks. i'll just provide some exemples, Lily - Scarlet Rose, the two breaks keep the fast paced rhythm and val could have mapped if he wanted, he actually mapped the ending that has the exact same melody, just with a different pitch. Konuko - Toumei Elegy, G's Insane has a break on a very fast paced part while the slow intro was fully mapped. Another diff did almost the same thing, but mapped a bit more than G's the other diff's also have different breaks.
some diff't don't even have breaks. Mitsuki Nakae - Ouka Enbu same as before... so basically every mapper may have it's own opinion on where breaks are fitting, i personally don't agree with some of the ones i linked)
02:19:681 - honestly, im strongly against such stuff. youre mapping strong beat on a slider tick, yea thats beacuse of vocals, but t doesnt mean u cant map 2 layers at the same time. (as i said before, this is an existing mapping technique, some people may like it others not, this applies to any mapping technique,and anything else. As i said before, my priority is to map vocals, mapping too many rhythms at the same time would make this part to be like a 1/2 1/4 spam, so the vocal feeling would be lost in that mess. that's the thing about rhythm games, you don't follow all possible rhythms, or there wouldn't be rhythm at all.)
beat here is stronger and more distinguished than vocals. basically i would do the following:
02:39:681 - in this part such stuff like 02:41:044 - is okay, because this part is calm. but when it comes to regular/kiai parts I dont think its an option to oversimplify the rhythm. (^)
03:04:113 - i just noticed, that these things arent mapped by some reason. not saying anything yet about it, however you probably oversimplified the rhythm too much (imo) (they are repetitive and land on unusual ticks, mapping them would make a lot more difficult to map vocals.)
05:31:726 - man, this stuff is really oversimplified, its a start of new measure under the slider tick. like, wtf (there is only two relevant rhythms to follow aside from the beats... the flute and the back vocals. there is no flute in this part until 05:31:726 - so i'm just mapping the vocals until it's most fitting)
structure:
01:26:044 (1,2,3,4,5) - stuff like that might be properly placed on hexagrid like im showing: (i'd rather keep since my goal is to increase spacing note by note, your suggestion only haves increasing spacing after 3)
basically you should copy-paste 01:26:044 (1,2) - these two and rotate them by -120*
here is a code:02:15:817 (5) - is off a bit, not lining up with 02:14:681 (2,3,4) - you have to move the entire pattern to the left-down to make 5 fitting in the playfield. (i will try to move 5 a bit instead since it seems like it's gonna be enough space for this fix, i don't know if i will be able to make it perfect, this is actually kinda difficult to confirm since they are not perfectly staight with x or y )60,60,86044,5,8,0:0:0:0:
133,71,86272,1,0,0:0:0:0:
87,129,86499,1,8,0:0:0:0:
206,82,86726,1,0,0:0:0:0:
114,198,86953,2,0,P|162:255|250:271,1,138,10|0,0:0|0:0,0:0:0:0:
05:33:999 (3,4) - and 04:58:090 (2,1) - seems inconsistent (inconsistent to what?)
05:46:499 (2,3) - i cant really tell its a 1/4s depending on how they look distance-wise. 05:46:840 (4,5) - same here. referense: 05:50:476 (3,4) - (the only 1/6's that i have in this map are 01:08:317 (4,1) - and they are both mapped as click-able 1/1. so the player is not supposed to expect 1/3's or 1/6's at all, since the whole song is mostly common rhythm 1/1 1/2 1/4... . to be honest i don't get why you used 05:50:476 (3,4) - as referehce since it's a stack. you can't compare a 1.30x DS 1/4 double with a stacked 1/4 double, because a stack usually don't mean that the object will always have a specific rhythm, people use stacks of all types of rhythm, and in the same song, and even in the same section if the mapper thinks that it's fitting. what i mean is that notes with 1/4 rhythm and 1.30 distance snap should be compared to notes with 1/4 rhythm and a distance snap that is big enough to not be a "stack based" placement (like 01:04:681 (1,2,3,4) - ), because stacking is a design choice. perfect stacks (0.0x distance snap) are not even mentined as distance issue on aimod, even if you stack notes with different rhythm in the same stack.
you didn't really mention 1/6's or 1/3's but this is what came to my mind, because i don't have any 1/2 notes placed this way, the closest we get of a 1/2 having that small distance is 04:14:226 (1,2,3,4) - but it's a slow part, and the objects are not even touching, so yeah, they are different enough. also this part of the song is kinda jumpy, so objects that are placed that close should be expected to be 1/4's imo.)
aesthetics:
01:33:317 (2,1) - might consider removing the overlap. the easiest way to make the map look clean is to make sure that the visual distance between active/fading out objects is equal, if you cant avoid 2 objects overlapping each other - the best option is to make them blanketing/paralleling/stacking on each other. (unlike the old (OOOOLD) default skin, the current one behaves in a way that makes overlaps to not be a big deal at all. this overlap is really small, has about 1 second difference between the objects, and the note placement will change the focus of the player to other 4 spots before returning to the spot where the overlap happens.)
02:49:567 (6,4) - ^
02:54:226 (4,2) - ^
03:00:135 (2,2) - ^
03:41:272 (3,3) - ^
03:53:658 (4,2) - ^
05:14:226 (5,3) - ^
04:55:590 (2,2) - ^
05:28:772 (1,4) - ^
05:57:863 (7) - ^ (some overlaps might be avoidable, but i still don't think it's a big deal to keep them, as i said in the earlier reply, the OOOOLD skin (i didn't expain perfectly, it's not really the skin, but the actual way the old client used to handle the skins behavior, not only the default skin, i think) didn't handle overlaps like the current skin, so they really should be considered bad things in the past, since they really could look bad and certainly affected negatively the gameplay . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GtzoWDfFiZI this is not the old default skin but this is how the overlaps used to be in the past (the hitbursts stay in front of the next objects), people did complain about overlaps in the past just the same way as you are doing now, but still a lot of maps got ranked with overlaps. what i'm saying is that nowadays we have a default skin (and client) that handles overlaps much better than in the past so there is no need to worry about overlaps that much.
apparently, osu!laser will handle overlaps even better by fading the slider bodies as we progress...
let's not forget that many users plays with their own skins nowadays, and they usually include a invisible 300 hitburst.)
02:02:408 - nc maybe? its a different sound measure (it's still the same instrument as the previous notes)
03:36:953 - ^
03:51:499 (4) - ^
04:36:953 (4) - ^
04:51:499 (3) - ^
05:36:044 (6) - ^
04:46:044 - white combo? you havent used it before. so as i can assume, its used for vocals-only 05:08:544 (1) - like this? however 05:16:044 (1) - here are the beats. ( the beats just land on the exact same spots as those back vocals. yes you are right, i use white combo specifically for back vocals. don't forget that the beats are present in the whole song, but only a few parts has back vocals that stands out enough.)
04:56:044 (1,2,3,4) - imo, you can make them more precise: (your version looks okay too but mines is more fitting to old style mapping imo. what i mean is that this sharp curve makes it clear that it was made using the new slider algorithm that makes perfect slider curves. yeah we did have perfect slider curves like yours but they were more difficult to do with bezier sliders, so a lot of people were stubborn on improving slider shapes... i don't think my version is bad and i think it's more fitting to the general design.)
overall it plays nice, a bit too slow for me but w/e i guess. the ideas youre pushing are interesting, however the way they were executed is kinda poor. maybe ill become a bn soon so you can consider me for further help.
gl!