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

A change from ranking guideline to a rule.

posted
Total Posts
36
jeff sensei
16 posts
Joined July 2018
Topic Starter
jeff sensei
I think the Guideline "All circles and slider heads should be snapped to distinct sounds in the music. Adding hit objects where there is no musical cue to justify them can result in unfitting rhythms." should be changed to a Rule because I think it's one of, if not the most important "rule" every mapper should follow. The map that first got me looking up this rule/guideline is beatmapsets/659328#osu/1442631 this map Aeril's Expert diff. At 00:37:121 there is a burst that so blatantly doesn't follow this guideline by having a burst on 1 trumpet note. There are more maps that brake this guideline but not as noticeably (still shouldn't be allowed) and some maps had to change triples because "no distinct sound". So essentially you could just place random objects on the map (which by these rules would be rankable) and hope for BN RNG.
Conclusion: I don't want more maps in osu! that don't follow the music/have objects in the map that don't correspond to any sounds in the music so I think that guideline should be changed to a rule.

Last edited by jeff sensei , edited 2 times in total.
Nao Tomori
Nomination Assessment Team
3,089 posts
Joined December 2014
Nao Tomori
agreed, mappers are supposed to be mapping to the song not making up random stuff with no regard for what the artist was doing!
UndeadCapulet
1,100 posts
Joined April 2013
UndeadCapulet
welcome to the forums! make sure when you post ranking criteria suggestions that you include your proposed change in your thread's title.

this will never be made into a rule simply due to many instance of sounds not having distinct starts and the mapper needing to approximate or improvise. even excluding that, additive rhythming (placing beats where the song has none) has been a relatively common practice for many many years and has resulted in many extremely popular and highly praised sets from both the players' and mappers' perspectives. that being said, these rhythms are often difficult to execute in a way that feels fitting as you said, which is why we have this as a guideline, so it can be left to the modding community and the bng to ensure they are reasonable. i hope that makes sense ^^'

(also not sure how to tell you this but your example timestamp has a clear 1/6 drumroll there, that stream isnt mapping the brass)
qwt
954 posts
Joined January 2020
qwt
disagree some song fit overmapping
enneya
Nomination Assessment Team
374 posts
Joined October 2017
enneya
?
Uberzolik
osu! Alumni
291 posts
Joined January 2012
Uberzolik
lasse is shaking in fear of this RC change
Sophie Twilight
517 posts
Joined October 2019
Sophie Twilight
When the 1 forum post guy gets replied by UC and BNs
Belladonna
77 posts
Joined February 2018
Belladonna
.
Last edited by Belladonna , edited 1 time in total.
Zelzatter Zero
3,962 posts
Joined October 2016
Zelzatter Zero
the whole mapping scene is shook rn
Reflexed
58 posts
Joined July 2016
Reflexed
fort's, kalibe's and lasse's maps are now gone 🦀🦀🦀🦀
Balto
119 posts
Joined August 2016
Balto
this would kill a lot of creativity in mapping
jeff sensei
16 posts
Joined July 2018
Topic Starter
jeff sensei

UndeadCapulet wrote:

welcome to the forums! make sure when you post ranking criteria suggestions that you include your proposed change in your thread's title.

this will never be made into a rule simply due to many instance of sounds not having distinct starts and the mapper needing to approximate or improvise. even excluding that, additive rhythming (placing beats where the song has none) has been a relatively common practice for many many years and has resulted in many extremely popular and highly praised sets from both the players' and mappers' perspectives. that being said, these rhythms are often difficult to execute in a way that feels fitting as you said, which is why we have this as a guideline, so it can be left to the modding community and the bng to ensure they are reasonable. i hope that makes sense ^^'

(also not sure how to tell you this but your example timestamp has a clear 1/6 drumroll there, that stream isnt mapping the brass)
Yeah sry it's my first time posting.
Yeah ok if the osu! community agrees with additive rhythming than it's ok but I still disagree. I would rather play a map where every object is supported by a sound. Also I heard that little section like 20+ times (without hitsounds of course) and I just don't hear a drumroll. Thanks for the reply.


Tubby Custard wrote:

disagree some song fit overmapping
overmapping is fine as long as every object is supported by a sound in the song.
Last edited by jeff sensei , edited 1 time in total.
despacito1
43 posts
Joined August 2018
despacito1

ratokkoy wrote:

this would kill a lot of creativity in mapping
its not creative to straight up place notes where there isnt a sound thats just schizophrenia mapping
Shii
379 posts
Joined October 2016
Shii

despacito1 wrote:

ratokkoy wrote:

this would kill a lot of creativity in mapping
its not creative to straight up place notes where there isnt a sound thats just schizophrenia mapping
TIL that myself, Lasse and God knows how many other mappers all engage in "schizophrenia mapping". Frankly, that's an incredibly inappropriate comment to make.

I wholly agree with ratokkoy, especially given that both of my currently qualified maps break this guideline to some degree.

Needless to say, I disagree with this "proposal", as there are more than a few useful applications of improvised/additive rhythm that both benefit mappers and players alike.
Mononymous
209 posts
Joined July 2018
Mononymous
Really agreed with Shii, some instruments that is used in a song (like pianos) are really complex and you have to use a lot of different snappings if you want to map it accurately instead of justifying the rhythm because apparently simplifying rhythm for playability is "schizophrenia mapping" but that's besides the point.

just accurately mapping everything is really just a bad idea because 1. you need to accurate, like 100%, 2. playability is just thrown out of the windows and knowing the players, they would complain about having to tap at an advanced pace that isn't even introduced in the song before.

overall, I really don't get about this "proposal" about having to map accurately, as it's more of a mapper's choice to either simplify rhythm or accurately place rhythm (most likely simplifying) not to mention, overmapping can also be used to express the songs, like the part where the songs is at the strongest, so it can be justified overall.
Last edited by Mononymous , edited 3 times in total.
despacito1
43 posts
Joined August 2018
despacito1

Mononymous wrote:

Really agreed with Shii, some instruments that is used in a song (like pianos) are really complex and you have to use a lot of different snappings if you want to map it accurately instead of justifying the rhythm because apparently simplifying rhythm for playability is "schizophrenia mapping" but that's besides the point.

just accurately mapping everything is really just a bad idea because 1. you need to accurate, like 100%, 2. playability is just thrown out of the windows and knowing the players, they would complain about having to tap at an advanced pace that isn't even introduced in the song before.

overall, I really don't get about this "proposal" about having to map accurately, as it's more of a mapper's choice to either simplify rhythm or accurately place rhythm (most likely simplifying) not to mention, overmapping can also be used to express the songs, like the part where the songs is at the strongest, so it can be justified overall.

Shii wrote:

despacito1 wrote:

ratokkoy wrote:

this would kill a lot of creativity in mapping
its not creative to straight up place notes where there isnt a sound thats just schizophrenia mapping
TIL that myself, Lasse and God knows how many other mappers all engage in "schizophrenia mapping". Frankly, that's an incredibly inappropriate comment to make.

I wholly agree with ratokkoy, especially given that both of my currently qualified maps break this guideline to some degree.

Needless to say, I disagree with this "proposal", as there are more than a few useful applications of improvised/additive rhythm that both benefit mappers and players alike.
to shii:
gonna make it clear here that i see overmapping and placing objects where theres no sound as different things

if representing the song requires overmapping then do go ahead and overmap ofc

wasnt quite aware of the impact of the statement i made sorry about that.

to mononymous:

saying that accurately mapping the song is a bad idea kinda just defeats the purpose of (at least) the top diff of a spread

playability is too subjective of an argument to make in general
Mononymous
209 posts
Joined July 2018
Mononymous

despacito1 wrote:

to mononymous:

saying that accurately mapping the song is a bad idea kinda just defeats the purpose of (at least) the top diff of a spread

playability is too subjective of an argument to make in general
Hmm, maybe I wasn't clear enough, I apologize, while playability is subjective, it still doesn't change the fact that it plays a big role when it comes to mapping of course, and I didn't mean to say, accurately mapping the song is a bad thing, but overall just mapping something that is really off (like some piano solos) can provide a lot of confusion to a player, yes you may need to accurately map to the song, but it's just that some parts of the songs that is really off (like it uses frequent different snappings) can really be a bad idea and that's why some people simplify the rhythm while making it justifiable.
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris

Mononymous wrote:

but it's just that some parts of the songs that is really off (like it uses frequent different snappings) can really be a bad idea and that's why some people simplify the rhythm while making it justifiable.
A simplified rhythm still hits on snaps that actually have sounds, just not all of them and leaves out the potentially problematic ones or puts them on passive hitsounds.
What you seem to describe is more of an improvised rhythm, not a simplified one.

If there are actual snapping problems it just screams for timing ranking criteria too.
Overall i think your arguments make very little sense.

Personally i tend to be in favor of this proposal, it's something at the very core of what makes beatmapping different from centipede and when we still had a dedicated QAT maps would get DQd over mapping clicks with no sounds too so it's not particularly new either.
Last edited by Endaris , edited 1 time in total.
realy0_
1,731 posts
Joined August 2016
realy0_
hard disagree as making this as a rule with the way it's worded as this would ban improvisation, a common mapping technique

if you are talking just about rhythm that are completely unfitting to the music, just use this rule from the taiko rc instead then :

Every note must be clearly assignable to a musical layer or layer unit it tries to represent, be it to enhance a layer the song provides, or be it an additional layer improvised by the mapper. Do not improvise in a fashion that shifts the pace, contradicts the general music movement or misinterprets the song's current intensity. Improvising must either enhance a current layer of the song or add a new one. Otherwise, relation to the song is given up and this contradicts the main purpose of a rhythm game.
that way it doesn't interfere with simplfied rhythms and improvisation which are beneficial to the maps most of the time
Last edited by realy0_ , edited 2 times in total.
aiq
924 posts
Joined February 2019
aiq

jeff sensei wrote:

Tubby Custard wrote:

disagree some song fit overmapping
overmapping is fine as long as every object is supported by a sound in the song.
umm
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 36