It would make sense. If you see a custom difficulty name, then you would know it's an Insane, because only Insanes can have special difficulty names. I would prefer this to upsetting mappers over trivial things.

And I really hate to be the devil's advocate here again, but only having Insane diff "special" about naming is something that's not that logical.

TheVileOne wrote:

It would make sense. If you see a custom difficulty name, then you would know it's an Insane, because only Insanes can have special difficulty names.

What if a highest diff is a hard? It's clearly not insane so it's not allowed to use the name, right? That's dumb.

TheVileOne wrote:

I would prefer this to upsetting mappers over trivial things.

Obviously not trivial when you have a huge shitstorm about this everywhere. I do agree with you though, I find this trivial.

Though, I really see no reason why would Insanes get special treatment here, when you could have all difficulties named different to the standard naming convention and still be recognizable. That's just the rule shooting itself in the foot because it's illogical.

I'm all for custom names though, but I really disagree about Insanes having the only special treatment here.

There is also one less significant underlying problem here and that is the difficulty people consider "extra", or "extreme". Now, people consider them as a new category, but they are also not Insane. Right?
We have no criteria for that kind of difficulty, and I would agree for them to be considered as "Insane" though, but for the purpose of the discussion, it's a valid question which might need an answer sometime.

A point that was not addressed the last time this was brought up for discussion: why are Insane difficulty maps the only ones with the special treatment? If the new (read: better) star system is to be implemented, "proper" difficulty naming will be obsolete. Why, then, are we limited to using custom difficulty names for Insane level maps only?

From a skilled player's point of view, you may see a high range of difficulty in 5 star rated maps (which is an inherent problem with the current star system), but perhaps you fail to see the potential range of difficulty in 4 or even 4.5 star rated maps, simply because you play them all with ease regardless. To advocate this further, if a song had 4 difficulties, but in terms of the star system, had a spread of ENNN, how would you go about resolving the issue regarding custom difficulty names for the upper of the two Normal difficulties?

Perhaps the abolition of difficulty names altogether can resolve this issue, if we were to actually get a star system that could accurately denote the difficulty of the map just by reading the .osu file.

Edit: dude do you have to ninja me everywhere?

Tom said he was working to add TP in star rating. If it gets added, diff names wouldn't be a problem anymore.

So do you guys think that this rule would be overturned completely if that happens?

I'd rather discuss it once it happens then.

I mean, with the current unclear proposal, what can stop me from naming my Insane "Normal+"? It's really stupid and obvious why it shouldn't be allowed, but the current rule would allow it haha.

I think naming an Insane "Normal+" would fall under the category of mislabelling a difficulty name, which has generally not been a problem so no specific rule has been created against it but it could be done if necessary.

As for the "why only Insane difficulties" question, this rule was created as a compromise between peppy's viewpoint and how difficulty naming has generally gone up to this point. I would also agree with allowing free difficulty naming again if the team agrees this would be a better proposal (even better if the new star system is accurate enough).

What we're trying to set here isn't a perfect situation: it's just so we get things with a standard while the new star system doesn't come out. Right now we're having a few maps unranked because of this and other maps get ranked with no problem and have the exact same issues. Double standards are unacceptable and we should get rid of them.

Haven't there been instances of maps where players have labelled the difficulty name while also indicating a numeric value? I've seen this in osu!mania a few times where someone will list difficulty name (LV. x) and difficulty name 2 (LV. x+1), (etc). The unfortunate issue is of values themselves lack coherency and are likely subjective.

I can't say that I fully agree with fully free difficulty naming, but yes, there should be some sort of consistent naming system. I imagine that it would be quite difficult to sort a group of maps by difficulty so that left is easiest and right is hardest (or vice versa)?

Why do you always have to wait until a map is ranked to realize this kind of stuff? Maps wouldn't have to be unranked if modders and BATs pointed out clearly unrankable points (i.e. difficulty naming). There should be no doubts when it comes to ranking imo, and that should apply to cases like this.

Lust wrote:

Why do you always have to wait until a map is ranked to realize this kind of stuff? Maps wouldn't have to be unranked if modders and BATs pointed out clearly unrankable points (i.e. difficulty naming). There should be no doubts when it comes to ranking imo, and that should apply to cases like this.

Because we currently don't have rules such as this one, so some BATs think it's fine and rank it.

A BAT should know full well if a difficulty name is appropriate or not. Even if he or she is even slightly unsure, there is an entire team of them to consult over it. or maybe im expecting too much idk probably hehe lol xddddd

We are straying a bit off topic, so as a reply to SG's rule amendment, I'm all for it as long as it doesn't muddle the waters too much. Clarity is nice and all (Extra and Extreme being very clear distinctions) but custom difficulties can work their way back in through this as well.

It gets a bit more messy with multiple difficulty names too, like if I have Normal/Hard/Insane/0108/Banana/xxSomeWordsxx. It might be good to limit it to one special difficulty name per set, representing the highest-difficulty Insane.

Lust wrote:

A BAT should know full well if a difficulty name is appropriate or not. Even if he or she is even slightly unsure, there is an entire team of them to consult over it. or maybe im expecting too much idk probably hehe lol xddddd

It's because we have a full team that people have different opinions and standards, so we need these discussions to make things consistent.

Actually, I don't mind a spread like this (Easy / Normal / Hard / RLC / Pokie / Rin / Skystar) because as long as it is clear that custom difficulty names indicate Insane, then it basically shows "These are four interpretations of an Insane from different mappers, and here are the lower difficulties as well." The difficulty naming guide in the beatmap description also helps differentiate the higher difficulties.

I have also added a deadline for finalisation in the first post and points of contention so that the discussion can reach an endpoint, and the proposed rule will be revised to reflect the general consensus reached in the thread.

Complete leniency would be quite silly imo. Supporting for the partial allowance in custom diff name though.

Let me elaborate my points better. I am not talking about that stuff because I want to nitpick, I am talking like this because it leaves loopholes in the system, and having something done on a case per case basis is not a standard and can only create problems (why is that map allowed to do this and map x isn't, drama, etc).

The main issue we are facing here is mainly what do we exactly agree with. While I personally really don't care how people call their diffs, from a more professional and logical view I can concur that leaving Insane diffs have special treatment only is not a good thing, nor a good compromise. Let me explain.

Situation 1:
A person has 3 diff mapset where a Hard is the highest diff. While it's completely clear which diff is hardest, even if easy and normals were labeled normally, would you really forbid the person to use a custom difficulty name? This is why this rule can be nonsense.

Situation 2:
Let's say a mapset has 4 diffs in the mapset, but 2 diffs are hards. This gets tricky because if you solved the unfairness above, you would allow it here as well. If you have one diff named Hard, the other one Bananas, which one is harder? Is Bananas an Insane? A workaround would be if one diff uses a standard name, the other one should have too. However, this is also mutual with Insanes, so if you have one diff have "Insane" in the name, others should have it too. This is where the rule gets complicated and shoots itself in the foot.

Situation 3:
A mapset has multiple hards or normals, or one is a collab, and it has an Insane diff. Is the Insane diff one really the one that should get special treatment here? While the collab can be like "collab hard" or "collab normal", what if there are multiple hards and a guest Insane? You would have, let's say lolcubes' Hard, but the insane can be called whatever, 0108, rlc, derpson, etc. Is this fair treatment? I don't really think so.

I could go on and on thinking of scenarios where there can be a loophole to be exploited, the fact is you just can't cover every single case in this rule properly. If you could, the rule would be way too long and way to exclusive to stay a rule, and would be a guideline noone would follow instead.

If you solve the situations on a case per case basis, you still don't have a rule because the system is unclear then. Why would someone's decision be valued higher than the concrete text we all have written? That's double standards.

While, as I said, don't really care about naming and actually support freestyle naming, the best thing to follow would definitely be:
p/2725713

This is clear and there are no exceptions.
Until the difficulty thing gets solved ofcourse.

Using custom difficulty names are fine as long as it's a synonym of said word - or if it's definitely clear enough. Using difficulty naming from games if not that clear enough is to disallow (Couch Potato - Contestant - Gladiator - Hero - Exterminator... Tell me if you understand.)
For example:

Easy/Medium/Difficult vs. Easy/Normal/Hard vs. Light/Standard/Heavy
However, lolcubes' point is not to ignore. Insane difficulties do not need special treatment.

A small question: Is mixing up the guestmapper's name and the difficulty name allowed under current conditions ? As in, puns or other neat naming.
for example, let a mapper called Noru-Da and he wants to make an hard. is Noru-Dhard allowed ? It gives hard, and his name. or, I make a Crazy diff (which could be allowed as Crazy is clear enough), and I call it CraZyoda. Is it ok ?

Using the native language's song to name difficulties for example, is it ok as well ?

There are countless situations where the area is unclear.

but we can agree that using diff names that show no clear increase are a no. mapsets that use a theme - say stuff like miya no tengoku to jigoku, where we have [Baka], [Ecchi], [Sukebe], [Hentai]... that makes almost no sense to what diff it is.

Blue Dragon wrote:

What we're trying to set here isn't a perfect situation: it's just so we get things with a standard while the new star system doesn't come out. Right now we're having a few maps unranked because of this and other maps get ranked with no problem and have the exact same issues. Double standards are unacceptable and we should get rid of them.

Score is connected with star as I know,If I get it right,New star system will make whole osu a mess.

Divide ENH with out Insane is enough I think,We can try,It likes
1~3 E
3~4 N
4~5 H
5~∞ I
I is too large._.
It should be divide to 2 parts

Oh well this topic again, okay: Since the amount of Non-Insane Difficulties with no clear Difficulty names increases this rule has been set. And with very good reason, because this is decided since two years ago. Many just ignored that. It's okay.. when the Expert is called individually, like on Lapfoxed Forever. This looks more as clean and logical to me. While I am not a real friend of Mapsets like Kakuzetsu Thanatos. With or without Beatmap description I wouldn't recommened such a Difficulty name setting.

lolcubes wrote:

I mean, with the current unclear proposal, what can stop me from naming my Insane "Normal+"? It's really stupid and obvious why it shouldn't be allowed, but the current rule would allow it haha.

Why should we allow such a inaccurate difficulty name? We should try to find a better solution instead this one. In the best case this never should have exist but the mapper of this difficulty should be pointed out of the issue that the Difficulty is too hard and complicated for the Normal Difficulty category.

[CSGA]Ar3sgice wrote:

Tom said he was working to add TP in star rating. If it gets added, diff names wouldn't be a problem anymore.

+1

Stefan wrote:

Oh well this topic again, okay: Since the amount of Non-Insane Difficulties with no clear Difficulty names increases this rule has been set. And with very good reason, because this is decided since two years ago. Many just ignored that.

Nope. It got finalized, but with completely different wording.

Personally, i don't see any problems about custom diff names as long as mapper have a way to explain difficulty level (I can't understand why explaining difficulty at Creator's Words doesn't work - what's wrong with that? If star rating itself works not crear enough then explaining in Creator's Words should works perfectly imo.)

I agree with SG's suggestiong thought. By the way, as a little note i think Marathon maps should be mentiored in this new rule/guideline too - since Marathon maps have no difficulty spread forcing mappers to use only "Marathon" diff name seems unnesessary. It actually feels a bit unfair that Marathon maps with not "Marathon" diff name have only 25 mb filesize limit.

Why not only to Insane+(Extras)? It would make more sense imo.

_Gezo_ wrote:

A small question: Is mixing up the guestmapper's name and the difficulty name allowed under current conditions ? As in, puns or other neat naming.
for example, let a mapper called Noru-Da and he wants to make an hard. is Noru-Dhard allowed ? It gives hard, and his name. or, I make a Crazy diff (which could be allowed as Crazy is clear enough), and I call it CraZyoda. Is it ok ?

I thought this was okay? @_@

Sieg wrote:

Why not only to Insane+(Extras)? It would make more sense imo.

I already thought about this idea but then people don't want that Insane and Expert Difficulties should be treated specially.

Alright, looking over the thread, here is another possible compromise to address the "why only Insane" point:
The idea behind this is that a good number of players will want to play the hardest difficulty only, and the rest will want to pick a difficulty that is appropriate to them. With this wording, it should be clear for both of them. As it relates to peppy's post, the average human player can understand what difficulty the map is by reading the difficulty name, without knowing the mapper, and without special knowledge of a niche topic. It only assumes that they either know the rule that the difficulty with a special name is the hardest, or have the reasoning necessary to figure it out, which can be assumed under the phrase "average human player".

To address _Gezo_'s question, combining a mapper and difficulty's name is currently allowed and still will be under the new proposed rules.

Average human players can see Star Difficulty (WIP Afaik), the length, the number of objects, the maximum score. I think this is enough as to assess how difficult the map is. Even with the verbal help some Insanes will be easier than some Hards.

Therefore I find all rule changes devoted to diff names unnecessary. The only feeling I get is that the rule is making fun of players, considering them dumb.
Still it's better than it was suggested earlier.

SapphireGhost wrote:

Alright, looking over the thread, here is another possible compromise to address the "why only Insane" point:

A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the mapper's hardest difficulty. Guest difficulties must be labelled with the mapper's name and their level of difficulty. Marathon maps with a single difficulty are allowed free naming.

To address _Gezo_'s question, combining a mapper and difficulty's name is currently allowed and still will be under the new proposed rules.

That seems to be the most logical and the best solution.

SapphireGhost wrote:

Guest difficulties must be labelled with the mapper's name and their level of difficulty.

Don't agree with this as much, I think it should be kept as it is now, so the mapper can choose between leaving it in the diff name or in the map description. Rest is perfect to me.

Then why dont you put explanation for diff names to the information area on beatmap?

Example:

Blah2 collab >> Hard
What123 >> Insane
8000 >> extra

Why not? Because you care to lazy people that just click download and don't read the whole description?

Then add new rule. For every custom diff names that considered as unknownable names for some players, a mapper should add some description to information area for sake of normal / newbie / original players on top of the description, and no spoiler thing.

Like https://osu.ppy.sh/b/260349

One collab normal diff considered as hard on star rating..
The mapper put some description for the diff to inform the players that the diff was normal

If this is still unallowed, i more like to prefer this way:

Whispering > Easy
Talking > Normal
Screaming/Yell > Hard
Blahblah etc etc

As long as it was recognized to other normal players / gamers

But not using specific names such an anime character, specific thing on some games element

Sorry for bad english.

I would bring up use common sense, but I would assume people would say that they won't agree.

I agree with the original post, on the basis of common sense like raging bull just said. It seems like the arguments against it are assuming that people will try and abuse this for no reason other than the fact that they "technically" can. That sort of illogical screwing with the system is what the modding and ranking process is for.

Removing the ability for guest difficulties to name differently I think defeats the purpose of the rule change altogether, since this seems to be mainly geared towards the unique difficulty names that only pop up at the insane level, like 0108, Skystar, Rin, and so on.

also

SapphireGhost wrote:

Difficulty spread naming such as "Blue / Red / White" is still unacceptable

whoops..sorry XD

I support this.

In fact, since the 2 old rules have been removed (no-more-than-3-Insane-diff rule and no-more-than-8-diff rule), there are many more maps that have various Insane (or Extra) diff. So allowing custom diff names on the highest diffs will make sense.

btw I think the following diff names should be allowed (I am not sure if they are rankable now)

Case 1. [o0o] [o1o] [o2o] [o3o] <- one of my favourite diffname sets! 
Case 2. [Easy] [Easy^2] [Easy^3] [Easy^4] <- Obvious enough and nice!
Case 3. [orz] [boring] [relaxing] [xxx](e.g. DaRRi MIx / Kirby Mix / Remix / 0108 Style / NTR(rin) / Skystar / ... ) 

I'm not a fan (anymore) of custom diff names, but if this is going to be a thing, I'd restrict it to only Insane (and higher) , so the change is uniform, not because giving it a special treatment, this way any player would relate a non-common name only with an Insane difficulty. Allowing it to Hard diffs will end in a mess. And about restricting the custom name to the mapper is silly imo, as Easy>A's Normal>Hard>B's Insane>Custom Name>C's Extra, just looks inconsistent and unprofessional in some way. Either you allow custom for guests, or none at all.

384059043 wrote:

Case 3. [orz] [boring] [relaxing] [xxx](e.g. DaRRi MIx / Kirby Mix / Remix / 0108 Style / NTR(rin) / Skystar / ... ) 

I honestly find orz unfitting compared to the rest of the Spread. But.. it's a single case. However as long the Name spread makes sense and fits together - I find it's a extreme mess if you decide to call your Difficulties as Easy > Medium > Hyper > Crazy because it's a mix of various Name sets which looks extremly stupid and nonsense - the examples which 384059043 has named can be used well.

DakeDekaane wrote:

And about restricting the custom name to the mapper is silly imo, as Easy>A's Normal>Hard>B's Insane>Custom Name>C's Extra, just looks inconsistent and unprofessional in some way. Either you allow custom for guests, or none at all.

It's an issue by the Star Rating that things like these happen. In the normal case, the own Insane/Expert Difficulty would be set as the last Difficulty by the creator to shown it as the toughest challenge. This of course doesn't goes to every Mapset but I guess you understand what I want to say.

I think difficulties should be divied by 6part
Easy Normal Hard Insane Extra
I think Insane and Other could be divide from Hard by improve star rating system,And it mostly 5 stars,We can only make them move havier instead of change star rating.
Easy Normal Hard Insane should what it should named,but Extra could be named freely.
Because who can play Extra must be a experenced player.
Same as Oni.

Okay, let's try revising again with the new feedback.

So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.

Isn't that just the same as
?

those wrote:

Isn't that just the same as

?

Is this an artistic statement or might I be missing something?

Edit: It's both.

My stance on difficulty names is that if you do this I'll kill you:

Anime Girl 1
Anime Girl 2
Anime Girl 3
Anime Girl 4
Anime Girl 5

That's about it, really. I keep it simple.

it is the same as just

SapphireGhost wrote:

Mapsets with a complete set of custom difficulty names that can be understood by the player are also acceptable.

Can we clarify this statement a bit? "can be understood by the player" is quite ambiguous.

I'm fine with the principle behind the current proposal though.

SapphireGhost wrote:

So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.

Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.

Blue Dragon wrote:

SapphireGhost wrote:

So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.

Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.

My thoughts exactly.

SapphireGhost wrote:

Okay, let's try revising again with the new feedback.

A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in the set. The mapper's hardest difficulty and guest difficulties of a similar level may use custom difficulty names. Mapsets with a complete set of custom difficulty names that can be understood by the player are also acceptable. Marathon maps with a single difficulty are allowed free naming.

So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.

I'd restrict it to one difficulty, whether it's the mapper's or a GD

Blue Dragon wrote:

SapphireGhost wrote:

So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.

Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.

tbh who can always tell exactly which of the Insane diffs are harder and should be marked with harder names?

I'm supporting the OP.

Blue Dragon wrote:

SapphireGhost wrote:

So now Easy / Normal / Hard / Special / RLC is acceptable, and the two specially named difficulties are assumed to be Insane/Extra level. This allows guest difficulties to also use custom names without confusing the player.

Doesn't this also allow mapsets such as Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin / RLC / Skystar / 0108 / Nogard / Lesjuh / Nold? I thought that's what we were trying to avoid.

Why should this be not allowed, though? I think it looks a lot better than Easy / Normal / Hard / Rin's Insane / RLC's Insane / Skystar's Insane / 0108's Insane / Nogard's Insane / Lesjuh's Insane / Nold's Insane mapset, which is just as confusing. The rule only allows special naming for the hardest level, so anyone can easily tell that the special name means the hardest difficulty level, with different mappers mapping them. And by removing the repetitive "Insane" or "Extra" in the difficulty name, the difficulty names looks a lot cleaner and easier to read.

It looks like the biggest difference of opinion is between excepting the mapper's hardest difficulty or the hardest level of difficulty in the set. Personally, I agree with Loli -[Koinuri]'s reasoning and I'm open to Blue Dragon/UnderminE providing more reasons as to why they want to disallow it. To try to clarify on Kytoxid's point I revised it again:


February 26, 2014 Edit: Since the tentative deadline has been reached, the rule will be set to go into the Ranking Criteria in about a week should no groundbreaking counterarguments arise. For the time being, difficulty naming that follows this pending rule should be deemed as acceptable. Lastly and as always, everything is up for discussion again once the new star system is implemented and its accuracy can be determined.

I don't really have any groundbreaking arguments against it, I just thought that these mapsets were exactly the reason that peppy said the rule had to be changed in the first place.

Although I do agree with this, has anyone notified peppy about this?

SapphireGhost wrote:

February 26, 2014 Edit: Since the tentative deadline has been reached, the rule will be set to go into the Ranking Criteria in about a week should no groundbreaking counterarguments arise. For the time being, difficulty naming that follows this pending rule should be deemed as acceptable. Lastly and as always, everything is up for discussion again once the new star system is implemented and its accuracy can be determined.

Should be finalized already, isn't it?