how would this interact with different aspect ratios inluding horizontal and landscape ones though
On horizontal ratios, an object that's partially off-screen on the top or bottom side of the screen will be in the same position relative to the edge of the screen on every ratio, as explained above.i am very gay wrote:
how would this interact with different aspect ratios inluding horizontal and landscape ones though
ok but whats stopping someone from having their monitor set to vertical for maps that usequila wrote:
On horizontal ratios, an object that's partially off-screen on the top or bottom side of the screen will be in the same position relative to the edge of the screen on every ratio, as explained above.i am very gay wrote:
how would this interact with different aspect ratios inluding horizontal and landscape ones though
Well, personally I do like to see this happen.quila wrote:
I understand the concern. You should take a look at my above comment. From testing, I couldn't find any differences between aspect ratios when an object is partially off-screen on the top/bottom side of the screen.- Mahiro - wrote:
this proposal will create massive conflicts arguing about players playing with limited resolution not being able to enjoy maps
All using a vertical resolution would do is deny oneself a part of a map's unique experience. Any competitive advantage would be trivial at most, and an at least noticeable disadvantage would be likely as one would be using an odd resolution they're not used to.i am very gay wrote:
ok but whats stopping someone from having their monitor set to vertical for maps that usequila wrote:
On horizontal ratios, an object that's partially off-screen on the top or bottom side of the screen will be in the same position relative to the edge of the screen on every ratio, as explained above.i am very gay wrote:
how would this interact with different aspect ratios inluding horizontal and landscape ones though
You're likely thinking of maps where sliders are going off-screen for no reason. That's not what this proposal is about. This is about intentional uses. One popular example is the winning entry of the 2016 aspire contest, which at the very end includes some triples that are partially off-screen. This usage was well-received by players even back then because it contributed to their experience in a positive way.- Mahiro - wrote:
Players just are too entitled to wanting to have fun with maps that they even criticise maps for having off-screen sliders
You're right on what I meant. But I just hate it when players restrict mappers to map their own way mapping the sliders are off-screen whether for reason or not just because they can't enjoy it.quila wrote:
You're likely thinking of maps where sliders are going off-screen for no reason. That's not what this proposal is about. This is about intentional uses. One popular example is the winning entry of the 2016 aspire contest, which at the very end includes some triples that are partially off-screen. This usage was well-received by players even back then because it contributed to their experience in a positive way.- Mahiro - wrote:
Players just are too entitled to wanting to have fun with maps that they even criticise maps for having off-screen sliders
Another example is one of my own maps, which has a section with sliders starting partially off-screen on the bottom side for reasons of expression. Though this is necessarily a less-known example - examples are hard to find since this is unrankable - it was well-received by players too. This example is another which indicates that there are ways of using partially off-screen objects which players like and which better their experience of a map.
If you're playing with a mouse (which a lot of ppl do), hitting the border of the screen (e.g. by overshooting a bit) makes your mouse continue moving while the cursor gets stuckI've been playing with mouse for 5 years. I recently played a map by laura- which utilizes partially off-screen objects (beatmapsets/1683355). What you describe didn't happen because I already understand the cursor stops moving at the edge of the screen, and my intuition of where the cursor will be accounts for this.
Objects that are partially offscreen on the top/bottom of the screen will be in the same position relative to the edge regardless of aspect ratio. On the other hand, if an object is partially offscreen on the left/right side of the screen, it's position relative to the edge of the screen will differ on different aspect ratios. Because of this, only the top/bottom sides of the screen should be used for partially off-screen objects to avoid discrepanciesIn other words, the proposal is just meant about objects partially off-screen on the top/bottom sides to avoid what you illustrated.
This is pretty huge even for being least important.UberFazz wrote:
looks like a bug more than a feature
Changing resolutions can cause differences in gameplay between usersIf you mean resolutions that are taller than they are wide, I wrote about this in reply to Naxess. Could you explain why you disagree there?
The change would create a division between maps ranked before and after the change. the "gameplay area" would quite literally expandOutside maps that center design at least in part on reading, there aren't reasons to use partially off-screen objects. Seeing as most maps don't focus on reading beyond trying to be easy to read, it's unclear how this would create a huge divide between past and future maps. Mappers aren't going to be pushing objects off-screen just to have a bit more space to map with at the expense of creating unnecessary reading changes, if that's what you mean.
This could very well mess with people's setups and how they're used to playing the game (for example, my tablet area is only defined in the play area, making off-screen objects literally unhittable)I'm guessing that this will be seen as the most important argument, and it's also a bit complex, so I've given more writing space to it.
feels "gamebreaking" for the aforementioned reason - looks like a bug more than a featureI understand why partially off-screen objects may seem like a design oversight on the surface level. I discussed this with another user earlier today, before this was posted, and brought up how arguably this was true too of the old controversies over maps not focusing on visual appearance. It was true in the sense that this seemed wrong to some players at first, but they came to understand it was a) intentional, b) something others liked, and c) an application of game design philosophies in mapping. The osu playerbase is efficient at communicating with each other and reaching an understanding on things that, to some, seem certainly off at first, and they should be able to clear up any confusion that some players could have.
I know somebody who plays with 1280x1024 resolution, which is 5:4. This was commonly used in office-type monitors and is higher compared to 4:3, which collides with your idea of only allowing vertical offscreen instead of both horizontal and vertical offscreen hitobjects.This isn't true. These objects will be in the same position relative to the edge on all resolutions that are not taller than they are wide. 5:4, 1:1, 4:3, 16:9, etc; it doesn't make a difference.
even if the resolution advantage is trivial, an advantage is still an advantage and is something we'd like to avoidIt looks like this is a point we diverge on. The way I see it, this is small enough that it's irrelevant in the larger picture. Further so when considering how a) maps using this would likely be more experimental by nature and not focuses of competitive play (either in tournaments or from the pp system), and b) there are many sources of (significant) advantage in osu already. Increasing one's resolution on higher CS maps makes them easier to aim for a portion of players, for example; and this is not to mention things which give a universal advantage across maps like skin, hitsound override, input device, etc.
this would mean vertical resolutions would ruin whatever idea the mapper was going forAs mentioned above, this is one reason to not make one's res vertical on these maps. (If someone chooses to anyways, that's of course their choice. What's key is that there's not a discrepancy by default)
as for the setup point, id like to be more specific with what i meant by using myself as an exampleI understood what you meant before. You should be able to slightly decrease osu's resolution be able to reach the bottom edge of the screen without messing with your aim.
"messy visuals" date all the way back to the first map ever ranked (sorry peppy!) so that point seems rather fringeThe point was really just that the osu playerbase is good at spreading info and anyone confused would quickly learn that this is an element used by mappers intentionally, not an oversight in maps' design.
If someone who can ask peppy wants to do so that could also save time from discussing it here, which may ultimately be futile.It's not like you can't contact him yourself. Since you're pretty insistent on pushing this change, and with this being the most likely blocker, I'd suggest you do this first before anything else. You can probably ask him about it during one of the community meetings, or if for whatever reason that isn't possible just highlight or dm him. Do be patient though.
Peppy has given his verdict on this idea already. that said, here's some of the maps from above if you're personally interested. keep in mind, though, that not everyone agrees with the game design philosophy underlying "visual appeal."RyanTheWolf wrote:
This is an interesting idea but i think an example of where this would actually apply would help because i cant visualize offscreen objects being used in a visually appealing way