I would like to preface by saying that, yes, I'm creating this thread in a self-indulgent manner and to air my thoughts on this subject. However, it is a subject that comes up a lot, there can be lots of conflicting and misunderstood opinions in regards to this, and there are many open-ended up discussions in #modhelp and the forum. While this can be a heated topic of discussion, I also believe that containing it within this thread could encourage more focused interaction and possibly even reduce an overflow of needless discussion in channels and topics.

I will also say that, yes, I do get ticked off about this, but I'm also very open to the concepts of artistic freedom and self expression. After all, that is how different styles come about and how innovation can happen. With that in mind, I will do my best to make my opening post unbiased, so I will consider any/every critical response, assuming that this gets any attention. Please be aware that I do not want to see trolls or inconsiderate posts in this thread. I can't do anything beyond chewing people out, but I would greatly appreciate it if any of the staff could assist me with this. I genuinely want to see serious, thoughtful discussion in this thread.

Background/Abstract

Due to the freeform and open nature of osu! maps, there is almost no restriction on how maps can be presented. Because of the scope for variance, osu! has ended up with maps which cater to many differing tastes, which has resulted in map styles coming across as offensive to several people. From my perspective, there are two main representations of these styles: Intuitive, freeform mapping and pure self-expression that's more "in the moment" and Planned, often thoroughly structured mapping. As well as this, there is also the consideration of how technically correct a map is in a purely gameplay-based way, based on immediate clarity and even how "professional" a map looks.

Freeform/Abstract Approaches

From my observations, this is generally the result of a purely "artistic" approach, which involves the mapper following their gut instincts and feeling the music and their immediate mouse movements as they go along. Mappers who use this approach aren't necessarily as bothered about a map's appearance and stylistic flair, instead focusing on a purely gameplay-derived perspective and more or less wanting to make mouse movement feel as fluid and comfortable as possible (or, in some cases, the opposite in the name of challenge).

In regards to interpretation, the mapper may place a lot of value in the emphasis of certain moments in the music, ergo they may push experimentation to its limits and impose some of their desires as an elaboration on what the music implies. This may be something as simple as creating very edgy flow or using "musical flow" with lots of spacing variation, or it could be overmapping that creates extra rhythms to complement the music. [N.B. "Overmapping" is not a pejorative, but a mere descriptor for succinct clarity]. Artistic expression and experimentation could also result in creating as much challenge as one feels they can get away with, as well as creating some very unusual visual styles which can vary from chaotic, to outright odd, or even offensive to some.

As somebody who doesn't practice the style myself, I can't claim to be entirely knowledgeable about it--however, I know what I see when I play a map and I believe that my observations have enough logic behind them.

Planned, Technical Approaches

The other side of this is when a mapper may want to focus much more on the clarity of how rhythms are presented, e.g. by means of regular spacing and clean presentation. The epitome of this is "iNiS style," so-called because iNiS, the creator of 'Elite Beat Agents' and 'Osu! Tatakae! Ouendan,' created their games' maps with a casual audience in mind, thus making thorough use of repetition over similar phrases and keeping patterns extremely clean and readable--perhaps a very clinical, but also very pretty, approach.

In addition to regular spacing, there is a strong focus on making patterns, sections and indeed entire maps as balanced and attractive/inoffensive as possible. There may be a strictly "back to basics" approach used, as an attempt to convey exactly what the music implies--nothing too unexpected or jarring, precise and steady manipulation of flow to complement specific rhythms and pitch, and using very specific methods of presentation for different sections. For example, the chorus would be more attractive to the eye, appear more rigid and be repeated outright through the song--or, indeed, repeat patterns over the same refrains within the chorus. Additionally, with the emphasis on presentation, this approach could be intended to come across as more "professional," in order to provide something more approachable for casual players.

Argument: What is "Art," Ranking and Where do we Draw the Line?

[N.B.This contains my subjective take on the matter, which has been influenced by my own experiences in my own mapping and playing/modding others.]

Rant time (if any particular parts of this are deemed as inflammatory, then I will remove or reword them). I have seen plenty of mappers describe their own styles as "creative" or "artistic," or otherwise talk about their appreciation of art as a concept. I really do believe that art is important--as mentioned in my preface, it is how we express ourselves in maps and make them stylish. As such, I often refer to style in maps as artistic, i.e. applying the visual/instinctive aspect as an embellishment to carefully planned bit of game design. That's the simplest way I can describe this in a nutshell.

On the extreme end of "art" as a concept, there are seemingly no explicit rules nor limitations when creating a map. Anything goes--if it provides something for players to click, or it satisfies the mapper's need to express themselves, then there are no objective means of critique. As well as this, it also hinges on the notion that mapping need not be difficult and that mapping should be approached as a hobby.

Unfortunately, my mindset and personal approach lead me to believe that "art," "freedom" and "expressiveness" can become diluted to mere buzzwords and excuses, in many cases being used as a way for the mapper to shield themselves from unfavourable criticism. Along with many others, I firmly believe that osu! as a game should be approached as such, and that while music as an art is abstract, it needs to be conveyed logically in map form. Additionally, I believe that every competent mapper should always be trying to push every aspect of their mapping--not just challenge, not just gameplay; the entire picture, ranging from how well-made it appears and how tastefully, logically and accessibly it comes across.

Note that I do not mind in the slightest when people only want to have fun with their mapping and make it silly for the sake of it, but I do not believe that this fully unrestrained approach should be allowed to filter into the ranking system. I feel that it's important for the game's official content to be scrutinised and evaluated by how it would look to a casual outsider. This is a growing concern to me, because I have seen /v/ threads and other people in general say things like, "The maps are shit" or, as I believe Renard said, "It's like an ugly "Ouendan."' I'd much rather that the game could have something to keep things in check and prevent its presented works from alienating too many people. This is more of an anecdotal thing, but I've read enough opinions.

As well as this, even if we were to take a purely artistic and holistic view of the general experience, we are still mapping with something else as a basis to follow-the music. Whichever song we choose, there are obvious cues which steer the direction of a map and what in particular should be followed. We can impose flow and style approaches to interpret it for the gameplay experience, but there are still set note values and pacing cues which do not change. As such, I generally believe that every aspect of a map has to relate directly to the music and should always be justified as such.

Even when we compare the visual aspect of osu! to such artworks as paintings, we must consider that art itself--whether it's drawn, danced or the music that's being mapped--has rules. Lots of rules. These rules can be used to achieve a specific style, enhance the experience or guide the consumer into focusing on different points. As such, the sentiment that beatmapping is art and art has no rules is demonstrably and intrinsically false. Whether the rules are accepted universally or a matter of personal habits, there are rules somewhere.

I'll say it again: "There are no rules" is bunk. That is my opinion. See of it what you will.

Since there are rules in some form, I believe that, if nothing else, mappers should at least accept any and all suggestions which may actually serve their style and intended results, even if it's a case of making abstract/chaotic patterns look nicer or feel more consistent/build into the bigger picture (in the linked article, there is specific reference to things like lines and rules of space). If we were to be solely artists, then we may as well analyse maps similarly to paintings and photographs (or dance routines... Or the music that's being mapped).

Since this is a game and thus everything comes down to gameplay, I believe that everything in a map should be justified by it, regardless of how much personal flair goes into a map.

________


I open this discussion to the floor. As mappers and players, where do you stand? Why, if at all, do you consider maps the way you do? As I said, I want this post to encourage well-reasoned and considerate discussion, with the intention that people are exposed more to different viewpoints in a manner which can be viewed openly by everybody, at any time.

I feel so passionate about this subject because I want osu! to evolve in a way that focuses on every mapper putting in the maximum effort to learn, improve and produce the best maps possible, taking enough pride in their work to be always improving both their maps and their ways of interacting with the community. This was a fairly impulsive post and I might regret it later, but I felt it best to put all of my thoughts into words and to provide a consolidated area for everybody to be heard.

If anybody wants things simplified, ask me about specifics or maybe I'll figure out how to tl;dr this overload of text.

Ought to be translated.

Good morning read.

Faust wrote:

Ought to be translated.

Good morning read.

I would love that. If this post ends up being pinned or otherwise becoming a heightened topic of discussion, then anything that aids people's understanding would be a positive step for the community.

Distinction: Rhythm, factual, denoted, reproducible, observable.
Music, abstract, arbitrary, relatable, short-lived

osu! is a >Rhythm< game.
Gameplay thus dictates things should be based around >Rhythm<.
However, "gameplay" is an obscure term and needs to be split up.
=> Atmosphere, overall feeling of a map
=> Meaning, the intended way the mapper wants the player to relate to the map
=> Playability, the way the technical execution of the map is done by the player
=> Design, the way a map looks (patterns, custom art, storyboard/video)

That, which most people seem to think of when talking about "gameplay" is playability, ie technical execution.
This execution should follow the rhythm, as this is the basic instinct of roughly every reasoning human being. How closely, in what ways, its up to the mapper.

Things that generally seem to be based around the Music rather than the rhythm are: Design and Atmosphere.
Im sad to be having to note that in most maps, Meaning is based around the rhythm (fe dictating difficulty through quick execution => Big Black and comparable maps, abstract: talking about trying to make hard maps by picking fast songs, difficulty (among other things) becomes an end, not a means to an end) when the rhythm part of the game is mostly bent towards playability. I think this is mostly due to a lack of interest/motivation to actually think about how you want to get a certain song/feeling across, and just map along the rhythm however it flows for you, and I could probably list examples of this from virtually every popular mapper. This is imho the root cause for stale, boring, repetitive seen-one-seem-em-all maps (Charles445 is an excellent example of this).

Best Regards

Everyone who has observed any of my maps knows that I am not really bound to structure in mapping.... my style is freestyle, but composed to make sense, not just hard shit. Gameplay, as you so elegantly put it, is what I am aim for.
Actually, what some people might call nonsense actually feels satisfying to the creator of the map. It is a kind of relief, a means of presenting whatsoever is in your mind right at that time.

Deed and I we have discussed this topic thoroughly, many times, and as we have discovered ourselves, both have benefits and disadvantages... just a matter of how you cope with each and every issue that turns up.

IMO, it's variance that this "technical" style lacks. Most of the time, it brings along a large bandwidth of copy-pasting techniques, naming two important ones:
... 1) Copying single objects or patterns.
... 2) Copying entire sections and stanzas.

In case 2), since sections are entirely repeated (with minor changes made, like object or hitsound changes), not much variance is created with the help of C&P.

... What is variance?

Variance comes from latin (varius, which literally means different, differing). I link the word "variation" with difference. Not change, but difference.
Sections where you don't even have to look to see difference. Not to repeat sections until you can say "oh, that just changed", but constantly "what is this? this is new".


Variance doesn't justify chaos, though. It does not represent what most anime maps have nowadays: the full beam of "I-am-just-showing-my-style."
It lies within the fact that sometimes, the term "variance" is misunderstood or can have multiple meanings.



Not that I know too much about all of this. I'm just sure I do.

To be edited soon.

Since it's 2 AM and I am not feeling like I could come up with a very elaborately worded post at the time but still want to bring points down, I'll just quote myself a bit, mainly about how I think mappers should pay more attention (and credit) to the original artists and their work and not just go like "yeah whatever I'll just do anything or smth, doesn't have to go with the song except for the BPM anyways".

I have had a conversation with Scorpiour about the whole "mapping is art" mindset a while ago and what people seem to generally misunderstand is "following the song = not being individual/creative".
The point is, you can be yourself and be creative, but please do it on songs that feature it and go well with it, not ones that you literally overlay with your map and leave barely anything left of -.mapping is 'art', but it is not on it's own; without the music, there would be no osu and there would be no maps, so if you really like the song you are mapping (which you should), you should also respect what it does and credit/feature the original artist's work with what you do.

You're not being a from-scratch creator here but an additive and (supposedly) complimenting composer - what you do is not completely independant of the song (or should not be, considering why would you pick it then) and not a first-hand artform.
If you want to fully and completely live out "your style" and "innovation", then you will have to create your own songs for that - you rely on artist's music, so you should at least have the decency to respect them and their work and not just go "lol this is the internet I can do what I want you can't tell me what to do no matter what reasons you give me" (like some people like to put it on occasions).

La Cataline did this even though she managed to go with the songs she was usually mapping very well and managed to fit her style to those, so if you really want to be innovative and don't make any compromise about your style, then create something that is completely your own work.

Again, the highest value in mapping - at least to me - is to make it fit; make it fit with the music you chose, because this is a rhythm game and as a mapper it's your duty and 'mission' to credit the artists whose music you put into the game (similar stuff goes for players and any form of "customer" relation); some sort of ethics in circle clicking, heh.

Art in beatmaps? Very interesting topic of discussion indeed, and not something to be discussed lightly (not for me, at any rate). I think talking about something like this requires a lot of questions and introspection. I mean, if you're going to discuss something as abstract as art, boy are you in for it. Please keep in mind that everything below is my own opinion and should be treated as such.

Osu! is not just a rhythm game, and treating it as such would not be a good approach to judging it. It is a visual game as well, and that aspect of it is key to how beatmaps work. If a beatmap follows the BPM and the song's rhythm correctly, but looks choppy or ugly at points, then players will have something to say about that. Just look at any mod post on a beatmap in pending. Odds are, you'll see something like "make this slider prettier" or "this blanket/overlap burns my eyes." Does this mean that all beatmaps have to be pretty? No, of course not. If an oddly-shaped slider fits with something in the music, or just goes with the singer's voice, then why not have a crooked slider. (Again, note that 'ugly' is very very subjective and everyone has different standards of beauty.) Nevertheless, if the majority of people are against you on something, it is probably best to change or alter it in some way to make it more accepted. Why? Because there's a reason Rankability Rules/Guidelines exist. Osu! is played by many many people. The rules attempt to make each and every ranked beatmap adhere to a certain standard of quality, so that World War III doesn't start over controversial beatmaps. Obviously, it's impossible to please everybody. But this does not mean that you can use it as an excuse to keep a beatmap that most people dislike the way it is. Allow me to clarify.
If you have mapped something a certain way, and want to keep it that way, for whatever reason, you need to make sure it adheres to the rules as best you can. Don't break rules! If there is something you reaaally want to keep that is unrankable, ask someone for help on how to achieve the effect you want without breaking the rules. It can probably be done. Don't say something like "oh, you hate it because it's different, blah blah blah." Using "my beatmap is art" as an excuse for breaking the Ranking rules is not something that is acceptable If you want your beatmap to be ranked, I mean, there's rules for a reason, right?
Wow, I droned on for no reason there.
On the whole 'beatmaps as art' subject, I think it can be pulled off incredibly well when executed properly. Just look at Centipede. Holy shit, if that's not art then I don't know. But the key thing here is that no one is expecting anyone to play Centipede. It's not meant to be played (I hope). It's meant to be watched, and treated as a visual exercise. That doesn't mean that beatmaps as art are unplayable/unrankable. Because osu! is a visual as well as a rhythm game, there are of course beatmaps which flow with the music and are meant to be enjoyed a certain way.

In regards to interpretation, the mapper may place a lot of value in the emphasis of certain moments in the music, ergo they may push experimentation to its limits and impose some of their desires as an elaboration on what the music implies.

As far as artistic approach goes, I don't particularly think too deep into my mapping. I'm a horrible mapper, and I'm not good at making things look good. Where do we draw the line between an 'artistic' beatmap and a 'normal' one? The word artistic is thrown around commonly in regard to mapping styles which are considered odd, or outright weird. If a mapper thinks a song sounds chaotic, and puts AR4 on the Insane difficulty to try and express that in his map, that's not really going to be appreciated by too many players. (Again, my opinion here) But, if that's what the song expresses to the mapper, why not map like that? If it's meant to be played, but is created impossible (notes on the same tick, blah blah), or if it's simply created to make something controversial, then we have a problem. But the main thing to note here is that no one's mapping style should be criticized unless their map is going for ranking/approval. If a song is mapped a way the mapper likes to express himself, big deal. Unless it's going for ranking, it's not your job to throw your opinion at someone. Even if you want to, do it politely.
So the problem then lies with beatmaps which are going for ranking/approval, and are stuck because modders want something changed and the mapper doesn't want to go for it because he wants to keep it the way it is. As I've already said (and sorry for repeating), don't use "art" as an excuse for something which players dislike. D33d mentioned that as Osu! is a video game, mapping should mostly be based around gameplay. (Mostly. Having everything centered around gameplay is rather monotonous and not a recommended approach either.) He's absolutely right. Games have rules. Art has rules too.

Since there are rules in some form, I believe that, if nothing else, mappers should at least accept any and all suggestions which may actually serve their style and intended results, even if it's a case of making abstract/chaotic patterns look nicer or feel more consistent/build into the bigger picture (in the linked article, there is specific reference to things like lines and rules of space). If we were to be solely artists, then we may as well analyse maps similarly to paintings and photographs (or dance routines... Or the music that's being mapped

Even if you disagree, and think that art is just an expression of something that someone wants expressed, and shouldn't be bound by rules, this is a game. Pure art beatmaps are tough to pull off as a playable map of rankable caliber.
To sum up this stupidly huge nonsensical wall of text, I think that how something is mapped should not matter at all unless it's going for rank. If it is, then the mapper should consider what modders and players tell him about his map. He won't be the only one playing it, and he needs to understand that. No matter how much the map means to him personally, no matter how perfectly it expresses what he wanted to express, if it doesn't meet ranking criteria, it probably needs changes. This is a game. If gameplay in a map is sacrificed excessively for visual expression or something like that, then I do not believe it should be ranked. Artistic quality (not just how pretty it looks, but other stuff too) shouldn't be a criteria for ranking. This does not mean I hate maps which were intentionally created as a deviation from standard gameplay. Low AR, High CS doesn't bother me. I don't hate "different" maps.

tl;dr- I don't think beatmaps as art is a stupid concept, or an unrealistic one. I think it can work sometimes. I don't think such beatmaps should be ranked unless they follow the rules/guidelines. I have no problem with them otherwise. I'm very lenient on how things are mapped.

Everything I said above applies to beatmaps which try to be "artistic" (that word is too goddamned generalized), and beatmaps in general. I am not much of a modder, because I don't have a lot of problems with beatmapping in general. I don't hate low AR. I don't hate high AR. I don't hate bad spacing (though it can be irritating), small circles, huge jumps, long streams or straight sliders. I'm not good at the game. But I accept everything about a beatmap, so long as I can follow the music. If I can't.........well, if you manage to make me hate (not dislike, but actually hate) a beatmap, then damn. I honestly want to see that product.
Another reminder that this is all my personal opinion. I haven't written everything I believe here. This is a brief summary (oh yes, believe me, this is brief) of my opinions about beatmapping and art within maps. Love it or hate it, I'd love to know what you think. Seriously.

Guys please, if you want people to read this you have to word it better. I personally read all of it but I have no life.

Points need to be short and clear else nobody is going to bother.

Liiraye wrote:

Guys please, if you want people to read this you have to word it better. I personally read all of it but I have no life.

Points need to be short and clear else nobody is going to bother.

I set out assuming that this would be the case, but I at least wanted to cover all of my bases to start it off, then see how committed other people would be to a serious discussion. Given that people can sometimes engage in extremely lengthy discussions around the forum and ingame chat, it's obvious enough that they're capable and willing of typing and reading a lot of text. Hopefully, this thread can stick around anyway, so that those who care may peruse it whenever they like.

I read all of it.

I can't say that it was a good read.

Don't think of me as a troll, but I believe that using the excuse that your map is "Artistic" because you don't want to change it is as superficial and disgusting as attempting to change something the mapper honestly believes to fit with the song for him because you believe it isn't good for gameplay.

Mappers map songs they love. Y'know, songs mean a lot to people. People should map how they feel like when listening to the song. This is not an excuse to map unrankable shit and if they want to go for ranking or approval, sure, there are standards that need to be followed, but there's no reason to go to either extreme here.

I don't believe -everything- in a map should be able to be justified from a gameplay perspective, as you have said.
Obviously, I don't believe -everything- in a map should be justified or excused as "Artistic freedom" by ignoring what the song is.

But people feel songs differently, and thus map differently. Yes, every single mapper should be open and listen to all recommendations (This is fairly obvious), but sometimes there are things you don't want to change because that's just what the song feels for you, even if it doesn't necessarily look "pretty" from a gameplay perspective.

This whole thread feels like an argument between two differing ends that don't seem to realize they should just hug the middle ground.

Then again, I am a newbie osu player who has barely gotten into mapping while also being a dumb male teenager. Take my words however you want.

Asking for middle ground is like proposing 2.5 as the solution to the sum of 1 and 1, when two sides argue 2 and 3 as correct answers. Something in mapping simply cannot "kinda" happen "sometimes" and not for the rest of the time. People have to learn to accept that there are defined factors in mapping.

There's enough freedom as is. The only bottom line there should be is that whatever you want to do, make sure your song choice supports it. If you want the player to hear a rhythm in your hitsounding track that isn't featured in a song that you are mapping, you are either (a) mapping the wrong song, or (b) not supporting that osu! is a rhythm game. Alternatively, compose your own music, and map that. Surely you can't do that wrongly, now, can you?

I fully agree with those

I personally like to do the freestyle type of mapping, i come up with patterns and rhythms on the spot. but the bottom line is that as soon as your map stops following the music, you are going too far into ur own imagination.

Mapping could be either an Art or a Science. But both sides need to put enough respect into the song's original rhythms.

As soon as you start adding your own weird beats in, i wouldn't even consider it a dedicated art anymore. just randomness

Jenny wrote:

Again, the highest value in mapping - at least to me - is to make it fit; make it fit with the music you chose, because this is a rhythm game and as a mapper it's your duty and 'mission' to credit the artists whose music you put into the game (similar stuff goes for players and any form of "customer" relation); some sort of ethics in circle clicking, heh.

Might aswell pick up and add onto that again (from the opening post of my Mapping Tips thread):

While I do not believe that there is only one "correct" style to map, I am of the firm belief that certain guidelines ("rules", if you will) should at least always be considered and evaluated as for how much sense their logical consequences would for your map (beatpattern and pattern); as a rule of thumb, you should aim to always have a reason that you can relate to the music at any point in the future for anything you are mapping and if you ever see yourself (or anyone) resort to the likes of "it's just my style I am being an individual" without giving any song-related backup for their arguments, you'll probably smell something's not exactly as it should be (aimed towards being).