forum

[Proposal] Allow well-considered and intentional use of partially off-screen objects

posted
Total Posts
34
Topic Starter
quila
Hello everyone. This is a proposal to modernize the way that the ranking criteria treats partially off-screen objects.

Design philosophy in mapping has diversified and evolved significantly over time. Right now, reading is widely considered a legitimate source of game difficulty and expression, as well as a legitimate skill which players can develop. Over the past years, we have seen many maps ranked which utilize reading as a form of expression and/or challenge, and these maps have been positively received by players and mappers alike.

In alignment with this, the ranking criteria should be updated to reflect this consensus on reading where it can. One apparent part of the ranking criteria that can be improved in this way is the way it approaches partially off-screen objects. As it stands, there's one rule against partially off-screen objects, which includes the original reasoning behind it:
Hit objects that are even partially off-screen can create reading difficulties.
As detailed above, this reasoning is misaligned with the way reading is seen nowadays and reflects an outdated design philosophy. As such, this proposal suggests the rule be updated to allow for well-considered use of partially off-screen objects.

This does not mean that the average map will have partially off-screen objects scattered throughout for no reason. What it means is that we can create maps which intentionally use partially off-screen objects as a part of their design and appeal.

Thanks for reading. For the sake of clear discussion, this post doesn't include specific suggestions about how to reword current rules. Instead, it can act as a place to discuss the idea behind it. Once/if an agreement is met, then at that point we can transition into wordings.
McEndu
But off-screen hitobjects can make aesthetics awful, I think?

As most players use 16:9 or other widescreen aspect ratios, I won't object to hitobjects that are partially offscreen on the x axis. Partially offscreen on the y axis is not something I would appreciate.
Topic Starter
quila
As most players use 16:9 or other widescreen aspect ratios, I won't object to hitobjects that are partially offscreen on the x axis. Partially offscreen on the y axis is not something I would appreciate.
Agreed. This is something I was planning to bring up later. Thank you for pointing this out.

To be sure we're on the same page, objects that are partially offscreen on the top/bottom of the screen will be in the same position 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 discrepancies
Sophie Twilight
As much I like to use off-screen sliders in my maps, this proposal will create massive conflicts arguing about players playing with limited resolution not being able to enjoy maps etc etc.

Better to stay as it is.
Topic Starter
quila

- Mahiro - wrote:

this proposal will create massive conflicts arguing about players playing with limited resolution not being able to enjoy maps
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.
McEndu
Note that osu!std is designed with a 4:3 aspect ratio in mind, as it was the most common aspect ratio in 2007.
1103
I agree with this proposal. I think it can add some flavor to those mappers that can actually handle it in their repertoire
Allice
Based. Upvote. Anti-downvote. Read it
i am very gay
how would this interact with different aspect ratios inluding horizontal and landscape ones though
Topic Starter
quila

i am very gay wrote:

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

quila wrote:

i am very gay wrote:

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.
ok but whats stopping someone from having their monitor set to vertical for maps that use

the whole purpose of having things on 4:3 is to make it so that all users are on a fair playing field when it comes to what is on screen for them or not and this rule would make it unfair against laptop players or people with monitors that they cant flip
Sophie Twilight

quila wrote:

- Mahiro - wrote:

this proposal will create massive conflicts arguing about players playing with limited resolution not being able to enjoy maps
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.
Well, personally I do like to see this happen.
Players just are too entitled to wanting to have fun with maps that they even criticise maps for having off-screen sliders when the maps are NOT even aimed for ranked, like it is a crime making sliders off-screen.
Like, do I even give a shit you want to have fun? Can't have fun? Don't play.

This causes quite restrictions on mappers to map with smaller playfield.
Topic Starter
quila

i am very gay wrote:

quila wrote:

i am very gay wrote:

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.
ok but whats stopping someone from having their monitor set to vertical for maps that use
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.

- 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 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.

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.
Project Railgun
In my Derive Me, Maybe? I use an off-screen slider at 01:56:707 (1) - to emphasize the rebound of "crazy" in the lyrics. The idea is that both 4:3 and 16:9 users play a "crazy" slider (even if it isn't off-screen in 16:9) since 16:9 players will feel unusual while playing a slider outside the typical grid most maps conform to.

I believe this exertion of unusualness on the player is a useful tool for mapping expression.
Sophie Twilight

quila wrote:

- 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 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.

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.
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.

I get it that majority of maps exist to provide content for players to enjoy, but don't apply the same to the maps that are not primarily meant for that.
laura-
Fully agree with the proposal. Allowing off-screen objects could open the door to really interesting concepts
Ryu Sei
It's an interesting 'gimmick' for me as a beginner osu! player, and I'd like to see it to be applied well. Just because it's partially off-screen, if it does make the map interesting, I won't refuse it. That's a thing I will appreciate at most.
Naxess
Reading isn't really what I'd consider the main reason for the rule existing, but rather aim.

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 stuck. This throwing off your hand-eye coordination and causing a frustrating gameplay experience is something I'd say outweighs the potential coolness factor of it being a reading challenge.

It does also make it harder to scale osu! in terms of platforms, since clicking partially offscreen stuff with touch devices may be difficult if there's an incline at the edges.

Besides, I'm pretty sure hit objects being fully on the screen is a core principle that ppy wants to keep. So if this does go anywhere it may or may not be shut down during review, just so you're prepared for that.
Topic Starter
quila
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 stuck
I'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.

No mapping technique transfers over to touch-pad gameplay with the intended effect. It's normal for playing maps to be easier or harder and feel different when playing on those devices. The idea that they might be completely unhittable because of overhangs is fair, but for potential future ports of osu, it seems it would be simple to have objects on the very edge of the screen be tapped when the player presses close to them. There are various other possibilities for handling these cases on touch devices as well (e.g loading objects closer to the inside of the screen when far enough away).

I appreciate the prompt feedback though.
Naxess
Been pondering on this for a bit.

Things like



being easier to play and read than



does defeat the principle of no one having a competitive advantage due to resolution.

The current rule maintains this by ensuring everything stays within 4:3, and thereby is consistent with 16:9/16:10. Abandoning that consistency seems wrong, but maybe that's just me. You may want to ask peppy and other NAT for their thoughts, considering how this fundamentally changes gameplay.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply