Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Ranking Criteria
  5. Finalized/Denied Amendments

[Proposal] Add standardisation for slowed down tracks

posted
Total Posts
7
AJT
551 posts
Joined August 2013
Topic Starter
AJT
The current rulings only cover how to format the metadata if you artificially (or otherwise) speed up a song:

  1. If a song has been edited to have a higher tempo, use a (Sped Up Ver.) marker at the end of the current title. If there is an existing sped up version marker in the title, replace it with (Sped Up Ver.). Sped up songs in Techno, Trance, Dance, or other similar genres must use a (Nightcore Mix) marker instead.
    Note: For tracks which are both cut and sped up, combine their markers into (Sped Up & Cut Ver.) or (Nightcore & Cut Ver.).

Inversely, it makes sense to have a similar rule for slowing down a song, instead of just being ambiguous, thus I propose:

  1. If a song has been edited to have a lower tempo, use a (Slowed Down Ver.) marker at the end of the current title. If there is an existing slowed down version marker in the title, replace it with (Slowed Down Ver.).
    Note: For tracks which are both cut and slowed down, combine their markers into (Slowed Down & Cut Ver.).

Answers to potential concerns that sprung to mind immediately:
a) Isn't this too rare to legislate?
- I'd imagine this is why it wasn't done initially, however I have seen people asking about this from time to time and I think it makes perfect sense to standardise if Sped Up Ver. is standardised, as it's the same type of thing in the opposite direction.
b) Wouldn't this tacitly encourage slowing down songs which seems like something we shouldn't encourage?
- Firstly it's already allowed, just without any explicit metadata ruling. Also, slowing down a song to meet spread rules is already explicitly mentioned in this guideline as something that shouldn't be done, so I don't think that would be a concern either.

I welcome any other concerns/thoughts
Last edited by AJT , edited 1 time in total.
Quenlla
Beatmap Nominator
124 posts
Joined July 2014
Quenlla
Definitely vouching for this, makes a lot of sense since it's basically the complementary to Sped Up Ver.

Maps like beatmapsets/1706878#mania/3487740 which use slowed versions of songs for non-spread purposes should have a clear, standardised way to indicate that the song has been artificially slowed down, otherwise it would be misleading. Therefore an explicit marker like this is definitely for the better.
Noffy
Nomination Assessment Team
1,685 posts
Joined April 2012
Noffy
This should already be covered with

If the creator of the beatmap has remixed or covered the song, they are free to name it appropriately to signal that this song is a special version. In this case the original songs should still be clearly indicated in the title or tags in order for players to be able to search for the original songs.

And if the slowed down version is from elsewhere just use what the original uploader did


Too niche to really warrant its own specific thing when said niche cases can already make themselves clear with allowances
Last edited by Noffy , edited 1 time in total.
AJT
551 posts
Joined August 2013
Topic Starter
AJT

Noffy wrote:

This should already be covered with

If the creator of the beatmap has remixed or covered the song, they are free to name it appropriately to signal that this song is a special version. In this case the original songs should still be clearly indicated in the title or tags in order for players to be able to search for the original songs.

And if the slowed down version is from elsewhere just use what the original uploader did


Too niche to really warrant its own specific thing when said niche cases can already make themselves clear with allowances
It covers it, but it doesn't necessitate any consistency between the identical remix method for different songs, which is what I thought at least some of the aim for (Sped Up Ver.) markers was—I'd imagine that by the time the game ends there would be a nonzero amount of Slowed Down Ver. songs mapped that would be helpful to be grouped together, after all once one person does it it's likely that more will, etc. I'm not opposed to revisiting this after the fact, though
apollodw
325 posts
Joined January 2017
apollodw
i can agree with standardising this, but it makes me wonder whether we should figure out a way of standardising markers in general that would be future-proof to more markers spawning in
bluirre
836 posts
Joined March 2021
bluirre
would be nice if wherever ‘ver.’ is, it’d have to be changed into ‘Ver.’ like this maps title looks inconsistent but is correct beatmapsets/1420652#osu/2931853
pishifat
osu! Paragon
3,812 posts
Joined August 2013
pishifat

AJT wrote:

a) Isn't this too rare to legislate?
yes + noffy's reply means it really doesn't need a place in the rc (unless it somehow becomes a relevant issue in the future, but that isn't the case for now)
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 7