Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion

rigorous definitions of upper level mapping terminology

posted
Total Posts
5
powerplayer75
81 posts
Joined May 2020
Topic Starter
powerplayer75
has anyone ever actually come up with good definitions for phrases like "idea", "concept", "structure", "mapping style"?

ive asked around several times but i only gained a sense of what people are talking about, and i personally cannot explain if i was asked.

im looking for non-recursive definitions that use already clearly defined mapping terms on the "lower level" such as objects, timing point, borrowed music terminology, etc.

my main reason for asking really is just, im trying to rigorously understand what differentiates a rankable and non-rankable map (no, i dont mean ranking criteria)
lewski
1,309 posts
Joined September 2014
lewski
"idea" literally just uses a standard English definition, I don't think I've ever seen any ambiguity with this word

Google wrote:

a concept or mental impression.
"concept" should mostly be the same way when used in a vacuum (i.e. it's synonymous with "idea"), although there's also the notion of a "concept map", which is commonly understood to be a map that leans heavily on an overarching limitation (often called the map's concept or gimmick), for example Mo's Zetsubou no Fuchi

Google wrote:

an abstract idea; a general notion.
"structure" is a lost cause because somewhat commonly used definitions range from "whether the map just looks good" to "how all the ideas in the map fit together" and further still to "the (theoretical) intensity curve of the map compared to that of the song"; the term has zero value unless the person who brings it up also defines it or the definition is easy to infer from context

"style" is just plain English again (the emphasised part is my own addition meant to hammer the point home)

Google wrote:

  1. a way of painting, writing, composing, building, mapping, etc., characteristic of a particular period, place, person, or movement.
  2. a distinctive appearance, typically determined by the principles according to which something is designed.
Last edited by lewski , edited 1 time in total.
powerplayer75
81 posts
Joined May 2020
Topic Starter
powerplayer75

lewski wrote:

"idea" literally just uses a standard English definition, I don't think I've ever seen any ambiguity with this word
ambiguity of idea came to me when people talk about different "ideas" in a map. mostly when i was watching pishis videos.

otherwise, idk i just didnt feel like i completely understood what these meant in a mapping context. thanks for your response.
Scotty
Nomination Assessment Team
282 posts
Joined October 2017
Scotty

powerplayer75 wrote:

my main reason for asking really is just, im trying to rigorously understand what differentiates a rankable and non-rankable map (no, i dont mean ranking criteria)
i don't think there's an answer to this. standards among BNs just vary so much and preferences not necessarily tied to map quality are a big factor too. there's definitely an unwritten "quality" standard to some extent but it's not something fixed and is obfuscated by all these other factors that it's not of much benefit for mappers to think about tbh
clayton
1,905 posts
Joined November 2013
clayton
all of those words are inherently broad and they may be used in different ways to convey different things. context is everything.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 5