ktgster wrote:
A lot of NC usage here looks very random. In fact, most of those NC changes are due to the SV changes you use throughout the whole map. There are basically no indications to this and your only way to read these are intuition and NC's. Changes like 02:27:266 (1) and 02:49:766 (2) are barely even needed. Also do not NC spam 02:16:357 (1,1,1,1) and many other parts similar to this. They are improper usages of NCing
What defines "proper usage of NCing"? For me, I believe that NCs are appropriate wherever the mapper feels that there is a separation between patterns. In this sense, I think that the NCing here works especially well; there's a lot of separation in patterns because the instrumentation shifts frequently and dramatically. The frequent NCs reinforce this aspect of the song.
ktgster wrote:
The map is also very inconsistent in both note placements and consistency. Sections like 02:54:993 - have no thought behind them and are probably just there to look cool.
Please don't say that this has no thought behind them. For all you know, the mapper could have spent days on this single section.
ktgster wrote:
Then when you have parts like 02:58:857 (2,3,4,5,1) - , it makes me wonder why such spacing would be there when the spacing should normally be smaller.
What do you mean by "the spacing should normally be smaller"? There's nothing wrong with not doing what "should normally be". The spacing here is totally readable and it's impossible to confuse this with another timing like, say, 1/2.
ktgster wrote:
Parts like 01:35:448 (3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - also feel weird to play since nothing represents back and forth patterns.
There's a synth in the background that plays the same note at a 1/2 rhythm. I'm not Hanzer so I can't speak about his intentions, but the way I see it, the back and forth stacks here are meant to bring some of that repetitiveness to the player's attention; it's just exposing and focusing on another layer of the musical landscape of this section.
ktgster wrote:
02:16:357 (1,1,1,1) - This is a pretty major complaint here. There's really no point using such 1/8 spacing with sliders. It is a huge surprise to about any player since you're putting it at a pretty soft part.
This is not a relaxing map to play through; it's a map full of diverse patterns which are supposed to capture the synthetic diversity of the soundscape of this song. This is a map that strives to be unpredictable, and in my opinion that's exactly what makes it so fun. On the other hand, so much of the playerbase is used to predictable mapping that it seems to have become some sort of requirement. If a map isn't FCable on the first try, people start having issues.
Why should a map be fully cleared on the first attempt? Demanding that inevitably demands that the map conform to a certain structure; specifically, the structure that players are used to playing through. This has the consequence of stifling innovation. Unfortunately, players aren't used to playing through every pattern in existence; when presented with something new, of course it's going to be unfamiliar for players, and unfamiliarity is after all the main cause of unreadability. But innovation, and unfamiliarity with it, are what keep gameplay from becoming boring and mundane.
ktgster wrote:
You also have to snap back and forth due to the sharp movement from (2) to the 4th (1's). Just gotta say, these are actually really annoying to play and feel forced down in the map for players to break. All the 1/4 jumps are not even as ridiculous as this. Remember that maps should always aim for the map to be readable and not have the person memorize.
Readability is always something to strive for, but in the end what matters is that the map is enjoyable. Like Hanzer said, this is a game first and foremost, and so mapping should always be focused on producing something fun, above all else. While perfectly readable maps could be fun in a sense, those are also typically the maps that people tend to play once and then forget about, leaving the map to forever languish in their ever-growing collection of play-once maps. After all, once you've completely conquered a map, there's not much incentive to go back and play through it again, unless you're just feeling the need to show off your skill to yourself or to others. Where's the fun in solving a puzzle when you already know the solution?
When a new map appears for ranking, players need to be less concerned about how FCable it is (i.e., how much PP they could reliably obtain from it) and more concerned about how fun and replayable it is. In terms of replayability, this map is unique and there's no other map that offers quite the same experience as this one does. That in itself leads to players playing this map over and over, just for that unique experience.
ktgster wrote:
IMO, this map is pretty ridiculous. It's creative and such, but you're basically forcing this creativity into this map. Due to this, you miss the whole point of playing the song. Right now, I could mute the song and the whole map would be no different than if I had the music turned on.
What? The map would be totally unplayable if you muted the music; please try it yourself.
Creativity in osu mapping is different from creativity in most other forms of art. While you are usually given free reign over your work in visual arts, music composition, or prose and poetry, mapping in osu will always be working within boundaries that have been defined by others (unless of course, you yourself composed the song that you're mapping). But I believe that these boundaries should not be viewed as strict limitations.
Too many mappers nowadays concern themselves only with what "makes sense with the music". While this is important (osu is a rhythm game of course), I don't think that it's the answer to every mapping scenario. After all, the majority of songs were not composed just to be mapped in osu. A mapper, whose primary concern should be in creating something that's enjoyable for players, should not be afraid to deviate from what "makes sense with the music" in order to produce something more conducive to fun. That's exactly what creativity is: anyone can take a song and make a map that fits the music; only a creative mapper can take a song, exceed the boundaries, and produce something that is unique and undeniably their own.
Judging from the comments, this map isn't fun for everyone. That's perfectly okay; a map doesn't have to be fun for the entire playerbase. Players aren't forced to play this map; there are plenty more maps out there to enjoy. But what's important is that this map offers a fresh and innovative experience, and that's definitely something that nobody can truly deny. Many players seem to enjoy this quite a bit; me being one of them, of course. I've never played anything quite like it.
If you force changes onto this map, you risk destroying exactly what makes this map a unique experience, and hence what makes this map a fun experience. This is a map that pushes boundaries. If you kill this map, you only make the walls harder to climb.
, I need to improve my play skills... anyways congrats!
