forum

Is proper aesthetic THAT necessary? and ideas for mapping? (maybe controversial)

posted
Total Posts
10
Topic Starter
yahiro kira
Aesthetics and rhythm choice, both of which make up most of how a beatmap is judged(ignoring patterns).

And UndeadCapulet, A person who defied the aesthetics and rhythm choice and ranked a few maps in the process. But this is not about him.

I'm experimenting, you could say on a mapping technique/style inspired by UC and well very very old maps without making it seem arbitrary. I'm not very good with words so I hope this makes sense.

So the mapping method would be to not concentrate on the aesthetics of the map, but rather on how it feels. I know aesthetics is really important. But in this case; what if we broke the rules of aesthetics, while providing fun to play maps. But i don't mean ignoring aesthetics. You could say, an intentional poor choice of aesthetics so as to provide a fresh experience which I hope if improved upon well could be ranked.
For rhythm choice. I think just following the 'music' kind of like how RLC does or just standard rhythm choices are fine. Not much on this part.
A main strong point of this mapping style would be its ever changing structure(for some songs) and its unpredictability(while still making it very read-able and oddly easy to hit).

More or less the TLDR ver of it
Project Railgun
Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_art_movements

Obviously some styles are more popular than others, and if you're looking for a job (or nomination) certain art styles (or mapping styles) are more desirable than others, but as an artist (mapper) what you want your art (map) to be is ultimately up to you (unless you're working for someone, then they might fire you).
Topic Starter
yahiro kira
Well then. I'm gonna make sorta generic maps and try to rank them but improve on well. the thing I'm trying to make and hopefully rank them too. One day.....
Li Syaoran
with uc, their maps break common aesthetic guidelines as they focus on representing the music more

i'd suggest mapping generically first, to know the rules of mapping before breaking the law
KumiDaiko

Li Syaoran wrote:

with uc, their maps break common aesthetic guidelines as they focus on representing the music more

i'd suggest mapping generically first, to know the rules of mapping before breaking the law
tru
Aiq

Li Syaoran wrote:

with uc, their maps break common aesthetic guidelines as they focus on representing the music more

i'd suggest mapping generically first, to know the rules of mapping before breaking the law
Topic Starter
yahiro kira
ningen shikaku
lewski
Your perspective on this topic seems quite skewed; purely aesthetic mapping is a really small niche. The direction your thoughts are going sounds good, though:

yahiro kira wrote:

how it feels
For most people, what the map feels like is actually an important part of how they both map and evaluate maps. I also want to note that feeling and aesthetics aren't mutually exclusive things to focus on at all. After all, the aesthetic identity of a map is a part of the playing experience and can for example set the mood quite effectively.

However, most of what a map feels like to play comes from the actual gameplay. You already mentioned rhythm, but I don't think you gave enough credit to how much it affects the playing experience. You said "standard rhythm choices are fine," and that's completely true: they aren't offensive to anyone, but they're also not very interesting.

If you want to create a "fresh experience," you need to go beyond "fine" and make something cool.

There's more depth to rhythm than just choosing an instrument and putting circles on sounds. Sometimes you'll want your rhythm to be denser or sparser than what the song offers. Sometimes a sliderend can emphasise a sound better than a clickable object. Sometimes, maybe even fairly often, you'll want to get rid of some of the filler rhythm that's everywhere in modern standard rhythm.

Movement, i.e. how the map makes the player move their cursor, is another big part of gameplay. This is where we get to the heart of what I find odd about your perspective. The description of your idea sounds like movement would be a big part of it, but you don't mention the concept explicitly. The beginning of your post even makes it sound like movement isn't something people usually consider at all.

In reality, though, movement is at the core of the vast majority of maps. For example, maps that are supposed to be easy/comfortable to aim use a lot of simple and comfortable movement, maps that are supposed to be hard/straining to aim use a lot of awkward movement, and mappers who value detailed song representation tend to choose movement that matches what the song feels like to them. (No, these "categories" aren't mutually exclusive or an exhaustive list of everything that exists in the game.)



All that was basically just me trying to figure out why this post bothers me so much, but I hope it still helps you or someone else.

Finally, about the mapping style you want to pursue: I like interesting maps, so I'll support anyone who wants to make stuff that's cool/fresh/interesting to play. Try not to forget that ambition even when you learn new things about mapping. As for the part about breaking the rules, though, I agree with Li Syaoran. There's no meaning in doing that if you haven't mastered the rules first. The better you know the rules, the more effectively you can break them.



@Aiq: that's a really embarrassing thing to post I hope the chuckle you got out of it was worth it
Aiq

lewski wrote:

@Aiq: that's a really embarrassing thing to post I hope the chuckle you got out of it was worth it
tbh i agree
however i just couldnt let that (rather unfunny) joke go to waste considering ive been searching for it on reddit for 30 mins
but oh well
Topic Starter
yahiro kira

lewski wrote:

Your perspective on this topic seems quite skewed; purely aesthetic mapping is a really small niche. The direction your thoughts are going sounds good, though:

yahiro kira wrote:

how it feels
For most people, what the map feels like is actually an important part of how they both map and evaluate maps. I also want to note that feeling and aesthetics aren't mutually exclusive things to focus on at all. After all, the aesthetic identity of a map is a part of the playing experience and can for example set the mood quite effectively.

However, most of what a map feels like to play comes from the actual gameplay. You already mentioned rhythm, but I don't think you gave enough credit to how much it affects the playing experience. You said "standard rhythm choices are fine," and that's completely true: they aren't offensive to anyone, but they're also not very interesting.

If you want to create a "fresh experience," you need to go beyond "fine" and make something cool.

There's more depth to rhythm than just choosing an instrument and putting circles on sounds. Sometimes you'll want your rhythm to be denser or sparser than what the song offers. Sometimes a sliderend can emphasise a sound better than a clickable object. Sometimes, maybe even fairly often, you'll want to get rid of some of the filler rhythm that's everywhere in modern standard rhythm.

Movement, i.e. how the map makes the player move their cursor, is another big part of gameplay. This is where we get to the heart of what I find odd about your perspective. The description of your idea sounds like movement would be a big part of it, but you don't mention the concept explicitly. The beginning of your post even makes it sound like movement isn't something people usually consider at all.

In reality, though, movement is at the core of the vast majority of maps. For example, maps that are supposed to be easy/comfortable to aim use a lot of simple and comfortable movement, maps that are supposed to be hard/straining to aim use a lot of awkward movement, and mappers who value detailed song representation tend to choose movement that matches what the song feels like to them. (No, these "categories" aren't mutually exclusive or an exhaustive list of everything that exists in the game.)



All that was basically just me trying to figure out why this post bothers me so much, but I hope it still helps you or someone else.

Finally, about the mapping style you want to pursue: I like interesting maps, so I'll support anyone who wants to make stuff that's cool/fresh/interesting to play. Try not to forget that ambition even when you learn new things about mapping. As for the part about breaking the rules, though, I agree with Li Syaoran. There's no meaning in doing that if you haven't mastered the rules first. The better you know the rules, the more effectively you can break them.
Yeah. My definiton and my attempt for a concise explaination of what I'm going to pursue was ill-clad. And i think your umm.... extra information really helps clarify things more. And like the other post Mastering basics comes first. Which I'm going to practice doing again, and hopefully it turns out great.

About the rhythm tho, nothing to argue. I would like to add that I like odd rhythms or songs that follow every sound and not make it feel bad.

Not much left to say is it? Unless someone just hates weird un-aesthetic maps for no reason. I have tried to do this with my latest maps. But I'm stepping back a step and restarting as said before :)

In any case. I hope this forum somehow helps some random dude who wants to map something different.

The first sentence that i said that may be quite contradictory and the reason I said is because I think there's some people too concentrated on aesthetics. or rather sometimes people care too much about it imo so yeah sorry if it seemed rough.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply