@uc and celerih the issue is a limit of 1:30 kills many maps TECHNICALLY that are 1:27. Most anime tv size openings are 1:27ish so why kill cuts that are also 1:27 that's the main point I at least am trying to make here. (1:27 being and example) You can make a cut with an intro chorus and outro and not be 30 seconds. So it's a win win cuz minute cuts with intro/outro are allowed like https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/807850#osu/1695382 but wack 30 second cuts like uta intro ver aren't.

ALSO we should force intro and outro imo since i mean if you are cutting from a full version the song should have a start and end section you can use lol (for lack of better term im sure theres music words for the intro and outro)

I don't how we are going from Cut songs should have at least one chorus and transition segment (intro/outro). To the wack 30 second cuts. This proposal would keep those dead but also allow cuts that aren't completely wack.

@uc I don't know of anything that's under a minute and can have intro chorus and outro but I know of cuts that are 1 minute and are fine under the second guideline "Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song." But break "Cuts should not be shorter than 1:30."


https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/874345#osu/1827432 | Full version 4:08
48 seconds before chorus
10 second chorus
10 seconds after chorus
68 seconds total

another example is
https://osu.ppy.sh/b/2164997 | Full Version 3:15
30 seconds before chorus
22 second chorus
17 seconds after
69 seconds total heh 69

has the same song structure (for lack of better term) as something like
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/732101#osu/1544786 is an official cut
50 seconds before chorus
30 second chorus
9 seconds after

If the cuts are well made and don't sound trash/have weird mid-song fade-outs it's fine to cut the song down to any lengh in my opinion.

my opinion on this matter is that i agree that the cut length should be shorter but not removed entirely. i think having the length requirement be adjusted to 1 minute would be fine, although it just causes the slippery slope of 'what if i can make good 50 second cuts' ect. but you could probably readjust the wording to say 'cuts should be close to or above 60 seconds.' the type of cuts that wouldn't benefit from this would be mostly on sped up vers of already short songs or really bad cuts. about the proposed changes with the transitions you should force having both intro and outro since having a 20 second intro and 20 second chorus with no outro is fine according to the wording. and at the same time, as a mapper, i think they they would perceive doing a fade out is fine as an 'outro' to the song. overall, i figure to most people these are the type of 'lazy/bad' cuts that the proposal for length tried to avoid, so to remove it entirely would still be allowing these to exist as there would be basically no restrictions to how you could do your cuts.

i support this, let's see if this get somewhere.

This just seems like another attack on quality beatmaps by pandering to lazy people. Just map the whole song and stop trying to destroy the artist’s intent.

Pretty much, no

I support this, even tho 60 seconds should be the bare minimum

isn't this fine as a guideline? follow it most of the time, break it for good exceptions. the 1:30 limit is completely arbitrary but I think it's okay cuz generally nobody likes playing cuts shorter than the typical tv size

"good exceptions" would be like Nevo's examples in this thread

--

that being said, if you wanted to convert this guideline into a rule, I think Nevo's suggestions would work well for it.

clayton wrote:

isn't this fine as a guideline? follow it most of the time, break it for good exceptions. the 1:30 limit is completely arbitrary but I think it's okay cuz generally nobody likes playing cuts shorter than the typical tv size

"good exceptions" would be like Nevo's examples in this thread

--

that being said, if you wanted to convert this guideline into a rule, I think Nevo's suggestions would work well for it.

The point of this proposal is that an arbitrary number limits what is allowed to do and what isn't, no matter if it's good or not. People can use the current guideline to stop cuts below 1:30 to be ranked, even if they are good quality and don't misrepresent the song's structure.

guidelines don't change what's allowed if you have a good reason to ignore them. having a good quality cut is a good reason to ignore this one

it sounds like you might be in favor of rewording it into a rule then? I'm not against that but it seems needlessly high-effort if what we have now is working fine

clayton wrote:

guidelines don't change what's allowed if you have a good reason to ignore them. having a good quality cut is a good reason to ignore this one

Yes, it's a good reason to break the guideline but people tend to have different opinions on what is good and what isn't. Plus, the current wording doesn't say anything about quality, it lumps all cuts shorter than 1:30 together and says they "cause unsatisfying play experiences and are generally seen as disrespectful to the artists".

clayton wrote:

it sounds like you might be in favor of rewording it into a rule then? I'm not against that but it seems needlessly high-effort if what we have now is working fine

Definitely not, a rule would be too strict for such a subjective topic.

...yeah, the guideline's not supposed to say anything about quality, it's just the length thing. it's up to BNs to tell if a cut shorter than 1:30 is worth putting in ranked

so I'm confused why we're even talking about changing this, has there been some issue with the current guideline? are there any maps that never made it to ranked with their cut despite being widely accepted as okay? all of the OP examples could've just been cut anyway and they would've been allowed for the provided reasons

clayton wrote:

...yeah, the guideline's not supposed to say anything about quality, it's just the length thing. it's up to BNs to tell if a cut shorter than 1:30 is worth putting in ranked

so I'm confused why we're even talking about changing this, has there been some issue with the current guideline? are there any maps that never made it to ranked with their cut despite being widely accepted as okay? all of the OP examples could've just been cut anyway and they would've been allowed for the provided reasons

I don't know exactly since I obviously can't keep track of all maps but I saw this map getting bubbled like 2 months ago (by the creator of this proposal) and it's now graveyarded. Now I'm not saying that it's because of the length because there is nothing in the discussion page that would imply it, but if someone wanted, they could point it out and in the case of a BN they could even veto the mapset because of it. And that could happen to any cut below 1:30. I personally think this cut is fine because the sections match the full song quite well, even if it's really short. Also the fact that it's a faster version of the song reduces the length so that should be kept in mind, but it's something that the current guideline doesn't take into account.

im not sure how to proceed with this thread since there's some clear disagreement on how it should be handled. if anything i'd go with what clayton wrote, allowing cuts that are reasonable but slightly below the 1:30 threshold based on subjectiveinterpretationofquality. idk how many people want really short cuts back, but if it's desired, removing the guideline would work for that instead of rewording to the proposed thing (which could have a lot of different interpretations as it is currently)

so should something happen here? or is no talking a sign to archive the thread?

Yea idk why these threads die every time but I still think something needs to be changed about the current guideline because most mappers and BNs now think that all cuts below 1:30 are straight up unrankable (someone I know even dropped their mapset because it was a 1:27 cut) and that shouldn't be the case. As I and several other people have said a while ago, the length limit doesn't indicate quality and should therefore be removed. Instead of it we need to define what makes a cut good or bad. This could either be implemented in a new guideline or in the other existing guideline about cuts:

RC wrote:

Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song. Cuts that make significant changes to the overall listening experience of the song are very misleading and often cause unsatisfying play experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.

I think this guideline already covers most low quality cuts but I guess a more detailed definition could be added.

hi pishifat and other guys, i was going to bump this these days and i will tell my opinion again about current guideline:

1) imo 1:30 limit time can't be defined as the only representive threshold length for a song when each song can have different length structure, for example a cut lower than 1:30 can still represent most of the song if the full version itself is already short (having short beginning segment, kiai, etc.) so I personally find it pretty dumb to put all song structures in the same basket of ''1:30 the only representive length for a song''. example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yVhsGMp9t7Q , cut: https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/807850#osu/1695382

2) obviously none wants dumb cuts back that jump directly to a kiai but we can simply avoid that with the current guideline:

''Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song. Cuts that make significant changes to the overall listening experience of the song are very misleading and often cause unsatisfying play experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.'' It covers the sudden bad cuts case pretty decently already with the first sentences, I dont see any practical usefulness of the 1:30 length limit for this case by having the above guideline only.

Most of us explained already on why this 1:30 isn't realistic to write it down in a guideline for different structured song lengths with the above posts so I find it pointless to explain things again unless you want me to write down my thoughts again.

That's pretty much it to be honest, if we are gonna remove the 1:30 thingy from the guideline we can still avoid the really bad cuts that jump to kiais etc. , I think none is losing anything from that.

My final proposals:

1) remove this ''Cuts should not be shorter than 1:30. These often cause unsatisfying play experiences and are generally seen as disrespectful to the artists. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.''

and keep this ''Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song. Cuts that make significant changes to the overall listening experience of the song are very misleading and often cause unsatisfying play experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.''

2) We can reword the 1:30 thing in a way that people dont read it with the impression that the 1:30 length is objectively the ideal and acceptable one only, thats the feeling that im getting at least from the current guideline. Most mappers nowdays think that anything shorter than 1:30 isnt acceptable.

Nikakis wrote:

My final proposals:

1) remove this ''Cuts should not be shorter than 1:30. These often cause unsatisfying play experiences and are generally seen as disrespectful to the artists. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.''

and keep this ''Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song. Cuts that make significant changes to the overall listening experience of the song are very misleading and often cause unsatisfying play experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.''

2) We can reword the 1:30 thing in a way that people dont read it with the impression that the 1:30 length is objectively the ideal and acceptable one only, thats the feeling that im getting at least from the current guideline. Most mappers nowdays think that anything shorter than 1:30 isnt acceptable.

if keeping only the second of these rules, it may help to include an example of what's okay cut-wise (like intro+verse+chorus+outro). even if it doesnt apply to every song since not every song is structured so simply, it gives a general idea of how much of a song should be included, and usually ends up being close to 1:30 for average songs(?).

does anyone agree with this? and if so, how would it be worded?

Including such an example sounds okay, but if you want a more general definition of how songs should be cut, adding something like this would also be helpful:

RC proposal wrote:

Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song, as well as the integrity and order of its core sections. Cuts that make significant changes to the overall listening experience of the song are very misleading and often cause unsatisfying play experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.

I'm not sure if this wording is clear, but the intention is that cuts should start/end before/after a section and not in the middle of it and that changing the order or removing one of the main sections should also not happen. For example if the song consists of verse + pre-chorus + chorus, removing the pre-chorus would not be acceptable, however leaving out the guitar solo or the bridge would be okay.
This would hopefully allow using good cuts that are below 1:30 again while restricting low quality ones.

i think putting segments examples like intro, prechorus, chorus, bridge, etc. lead in too much confusion and things get more complicated. imo the sentence of the current guideline ''Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song.'' pretty much tells you already that your cut's structure should consist the main impression and structure of the full version by not editing the segments' order differently from the original version. so imo we dont need to reword the current guideline any better as it pretty much covers the extreme cases of bad cuts.

if we still need to reword it I guess that the small sentece of haruki makes it a bit more clear, although I still believe that it could be simplified more so its easier to understand:

''Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song. Cuts that change the structure of the full song can lead to mispresentation of it and often cause unsatisfying listening and playing experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.''

went with this wording

- **Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song.** Cuts that change the structure of the full song (such as excluding or rearranging a song's intro/verse/chorus/outro) can lead to mispresentation of it and often cause unsatisfying playing experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.

i still feel like including at least some example of song structure is important. otherwise it's super easy to argue that many 30s cuts are fine because there's no clear terms

https://github.com/ppy/osu-wiki/pull/3015

merged