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

[invalid] [Proposal] Require song's release year in tags, if known

posted
Total Posts
22
fluxie31
325 posts
Joined December 2016
Topic Starter
fluxie31
Posted in tandem with https://github.com/ppy/osu-web/issues/10873

I think this should be a thing since I find a song's release year to be an important piece of metadata. It's something I've been doing since I started ranking maps 2 years ago, and I would love to see it be picked up by the rest of the community.
PouletFurtif
260 posts
Joined December 2011
PouletFurtif
agree with no particular reason :^)
fieryrage
osu! Champion / Elite Nominator II
1,404 posts
Joined November 2013
fieryrage
neutral on this

i don't rly think it's a necessity if i'm gonna be entirely honest, it feels like it'd clutter up the tags especially considering you can then technically count re-releases (so there would be 2 years in the tags) etc. i feel like it'd just end up being a mess

it doesn't hurt though
fluxie31
325 posts
Joined December 2016
Topic Starter
fluxie31
i think the original studio release year should be the year that counts, unless it's specifically a re-recording/cover (remasters like the 2004 remaster of Rumours by Fleetwood Mac don't count)
Nao Tomori
Nomination Assessment Team
3,105 posts
Joined December 2014
Nao Tomori
would also include album name (if applicable) since that seems like a natural follow on
Drum-Hitnormal
Beatmap Nominator
1,708 posts
Joined March 2011
Drum-Hitnormal
dont find it to be required, seems optional.

when a group of people sing a song, we dont even enforce all member of the group be added in tags, why force release year

also harder to search song where title looks like a year/contains numbers
Last edited by Drum-Hitnormal , edited 1 time in total.
fluxie31
325 posts
Joined December 2016
Topic Starter
fluxie31

Drum-Hitnormal wrote:

dont find it to be required, seems optional.

when a group of people sing a song, we dont even enforce all member of the group be added in tags, why force release year
This argument makes no sense because while there can be multiple people involved in a song, the song only has a single release year. I'm trying so hard to not laugh lowkey

Nao Tomori wrote:

would also include album name (if applicable) since that seems like a natural follow on
I already do this. I don't see why other people wouldn't. I wouldn't be opposed to it either.
Last edited by fluxie31 , edited 2 times in total.
Shad0wStar
Global Moderator
170 posts
Joined April 2020
Shad0wStar
not opposed to this, and it’s probably nice to have! but in terms of being required i’m not too sure. perhaps this could be implemented as a guideline?
fluxie31
325 posts
Joined December 2016
Topic Starter
fluxie31

Shad0wStar wrote:

not opposed to this, and it’s probably nice to have! but in terms of being required i’m not too sure. perhaps this could be implemented as a guideline?
Part of why I think it should be required is cuz ideally it'd be another field like Genre and Language, and since those are both required for rank I think year should be too.

Obviously I'm way ahead of myself since there's no year field (yet) but I think it would be a nicety. :P
Last edited by fluxie31 , edited 1 time in total.
Aljotzi
89 posts
Joined July 2017
Aljotzi
If it were implemented as a thing similar to lang and genre -- having it's own separate section on the beatmap page, it should be required, otherwise, I see it as something that should be supplemental unless there are multiple recordings. So a song originally recorded in 1998 and then re-recorded in 2012 would be required to have a year tag distinguishing the recording year. If there is only 1 recording, it is just a nice thing to have.
RandomeLoL
Nomination Assessment Team
211 posts
Joined September 2015
RandomeLoL
I am not against encouraging properly tagging Beatmaps. But I believe the current solution of "just plastering everything on the tags" is a bit archaic by today's standards. Plus:

  1. This is already encouraged as a Guideline. I don't believe there's much of a reason to step it up to a Rule. Nor that is necessary to be turbo-specific on what's required to have.
  2. There's a lot of information regarding tracks that's as important or more important than just the release year. If we were to start "enforcing" these kinds of things, I believe more should be warranted (Album name, album code, etc...)
In short, I don't think this is currently needed as it technically already is covered and encouraged by the Guideline linked above. Starting to enforce these as a Rule would not be viable either.

But it'd be fancy to see a tagging system akin to how mp3 tagging tools work, with a way to have everything nifty placed on its field. But that's a whole 'nother can of worms.
Ryu Sei
2,892 posts
Joined October 2013
Ryu Sei
Don't see why this should be a rule. We already have a catch-all guideline for that like the previous post mentioned.
AJT
534 posts
Joined August 2013
AJT

Shad0wStar wrote:

not opposed to this, and it’s probably nice to have! but in terms of being required i’m not too sure. perhaps this could be implemented as a guideline?
That would effectively make it a rule because “I don’t want to” is not a sufficient reason to ignore a guideline

Regarding the proposal, I don’t think I’ve ever wanted to know that piece of information about a map’s song, so my inclination would personally be that it shouldn’t be a forced tag, although I’m not vehemently opposed. The same goes for tagging albums (although this one might be a more useful thing to force especially for popular artists)

However, the idea of being able to search a year and get a bunch of songs made in that year seems neat (even if we are like a million maps too late). I think the ideal state of affairs would be a system akin to the one in Randome’s screenshot.
Last edited by AJT , edited 1 time in total.
-Flashlight-
Beatmap Nominator
548 posts
Joined February 2017
-Flashlight-

fluxie31 wrote:

I'm trying so hard to not laugh lowkey
that's definitely not a way to respond to people that disagree with your proposal.

in fact, yes, a song can be released/re-released multiple times, or sometimes the release year may be unknown, or it might be different depending on the song's version (and the version used might be unclear). all this can make adding a year (or years) confusing. what if a song was first released in an album and was then released years later as a single, what year do i use? what if i did the edit for a song myself? do i use the original year? does it depend on how much i edited the song? (do cut versions count here?) what if i didn't release it anywhere? what about unreleased or unused songs? what about song compilations using songs from multiple years? would i need to include dozens of different years in tags?

overall i think there are too many nuances and this information is just unnecessary in my opinion. unlike information like genre or even album name, release year is a too broad tag and not a defining aspect of a song. i don't think adding them optionally is needed, so i'm even more opposed to requiring it.
Molybdenum
165 posts
Joined June 2019
Molybdenum
I think this would be better as a guideline, rather than a requirement.
A reason this could be counter productive is because as songs age, they eventually get re-releases with differently mixed audio, which can cause contradictions. (Fake example) "Hivie - This song is about taiko" was initially released in 2018, re-released in 2020 with better audio, and released again in 2024 as part of an "all the classics" album.
-Hitomi
Beatmap Nominator
313 posts
Joined November 2019
-Hitomi
Neutral on this one. Might go as guideline instead of "being required", there are some cases when the song song was re-uploaded multiple time in different years, which will make it quite confusing since u either
will have to add all of the dates or figure out the initial/final one. Also, I dont think the majority of ppl really care about the year the song was released rather than the actual song title/artist name. And things like album name would be much more encouraged to have tbh.
Last edited by -Hitomi , edited 3 times in total.
Arzenvald
4,056 posts
Joined July 2013
Arzenvald
neutral towards disagree. for me personally, as it currently stands right now, metadata shenanigans' ranking criteria isn't the most beginner friendly thing to do, let alone for other people. we search the links, we put the links, we have modders bns and mods to help, but people might still miss a thing or two.

consider if adding this into 'rule' on top of the current ones might (or might not) add more complication to the ranking process. although year of release is more likely to be much easier to search & confirm, i'd say it might be better suited as guideline.
h3oCharles
1,496 posts
Joined July 2016
h3oCharles
should be a guideline, otherwise neutral

also booru-style metadata would make this much more digestible
furry hater
816 posts
Joined September 2017
furry hater
netrual if it's about rereleases of versions that aren't specified

for example (worst one but i tried):

https://carseatheadrest.bandcamp.com/album/twin-fantasy
https://carseatheadrest.bandcamp.com/album/twin-fantasy-2

even though the song titles are the same, they both sound different and thus could need the year tag,

other than that, it's pretty useless
Last edited by furry hater , edited 1 time in total.
fluxie31
325 posts
Joined December 2016
Topic Starter
fluxie31
i stopped caring
RandomeLoL
Nomination Assessment Team
211 posts
Joined September 2015
RandomeLoL
Closing the proposal then, marking it as "Invalid" given the overall perception to it was Negative / Neutral-
fluxie31
325 posts
Joined December 2016
Topic Starter
fluxie31
whatever
Please sign in to reply.

New reply

0
1 / 22