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

[duplicate] [Proposal] Increase the minimum dimensions required for a background image for ranked

posted
Total Posts
8
Hydria
1,247 posts
Joined April 2011
Topic Starter
Hydria
Currently, under wiki/en/Ranking_Criteria#video-and-background it states that:

The following are requirements for background images:
  1. Minimum width: 160px
  2. Minimum height: 120px
Realistically, I don't think any BN/NAT would ever nominate a map with such a low quality background. At the absolute minimum it should be 1:1 with the game's lowest resolution, so I propose the following change:

The following are requirements for background images:
  1. Minimum width: 800px
  2. Minimum height: 600px
Ryu Sei
2,900 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
Lowkey agree this. Even if the beatmap's background is just a bunch of pixel arts, increasing the lower limit will make sure that the background's aesthetics and detail retained.
Eni
1,437 posts
Joined May 2013
Eni
Has there been a recent example of a mapper pushing a low quality background? As far as I can tell, whether this proposal gets accepted or not will have no real world impact and seems like bikeshedding.
Hydria
1,247 posts
Joined April 2011
Topic Starter
Hydria

Project Railgun wrote:

Has there been a recent example of a mapper pushing a low quality background?
I can't say I pay enough attention to the ranking scene to definitively answer that, but it does stop any future attempt at it at the very least
Protastic101
1,170 posts
Joined July 2015
Protastic101

Project Railgun wrote:

Has there been a recent example of a mapper pushing a low quality background? As far as I can tell, whether this proposal gets accepted or not will have no real world impact and seems like bikeshedding.
Made me look up what "bikeshedding" was, TIL. Likewise with Hydria, I don't think there's been a map hitting ranked with a super low res background, but 800x600px is a much more reasonable lower bound that the current 160x120px. It's a trivial proposal, but making the edit to the RC is just as trivial so I'd argue it's still worth changing.
lewski
1,346 posts
Joined September 2014
lewski
community/forums/topics/997606

tldr 160x120 is just the smallest size that doesn't cause technical issues in stable

realistically only solid colour backgrounds etc are going to be that small because anything more detailed will look horrible at that kind of resolution but forcing backgrounds that look fine at 160x120 to be larger is really just a waste of space

we also have a guideline about quality already so i dont think theres any need to double down when no cases of the guideline not doing its job have even been brought up

Ranking Criteria > Video and background > Guidelines wrote:

Background images and videos in a beatmap should be of reasonable quality. Try to find the original source and avoid unnecessary upscaling or file size bloating.
also 800x600 is literally meaningless: if some bad actors were to try to fight the quality guideline by pushing a terrible background that technically matches the minimum dimensions, the background would still look terrible at 800x600

if (and that's a big if, because ive seen no reason to believe that it's the case right now) we ever need to tighten the background quality standards by flat out raising the minimum dimensions, we should just go all the way to 1440x1080 where a 4:3 background will actually look decent
Last edited by lewski , edited 1 time in total.
Protastic101
1,170 posts
Joined July 2015
Protastic101
Closing and moving this as lewski brought up past precedent where a similar discussion was already had and finalized.
ilyagay
1 post
Joined November 2022
ilyagay

Ryu Sei wrote:

Lowkey agree this. Even if the beatmap's background is just a bunch of pixel arts, increasing the lower limit will make sure that the background's aesthetics and detail retained.
я гей
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 8