yes we cant - wh

posted
Total Posts
151
show more
Topic Starter
Maeglwn

blahpy wrote:

Maeglwn wrote:

thats the point of the map
tfw memes are an excuse to rank bad mapping
its not a bad map. it's also not an excuse. you should really stop being so negative, I'm not going to deal with it on my map
Charles445
First let's start with what is usually the goal of a joke map.
To be funny! Get some laughs, that's always nice.

In order for a joke map to be ranked, however, it has to focus on a very important detail.
It must strive for good gameplay.

If a joke map has poor mapping, it stops being funny and ends up being a hassle to those involved in playing it.
The joke of how absurd the song or storyboard is will be overshadowed by its bad mapping decisions.

Everybody makes mistakes in maps.
A lot of maps have problems, and that is usually because the mapper was unaware that they were issues. Accidents, as they are called.
The problem with this set is that it has bad gameplay on purpose.


The map is deliberately designed to play poorly, which quite frankly is pretty appalling to see coming from those closely connected to the team.
This set really shouldn't stay qualified, as not only is it poor itself, but it sets a bad precedent for other maps like it.
Mismagius

Charles445 wrote:

First let's start with what is usually the goal of a joke map.
To be funny! Get some laughs, that's always nice.

In order for a joke map to be ranked, however, it has to focus on a very important detail.
It must strive for good gameplay.

If a joke map has poor mapping, it stops being funny and ends up being a hassle to those involved in playing it.
The joke of how absurd the song or storyboard is will be overshadowed by its bad mapping decisions.

Everybody makes mistakes in maps.
A lot of maps have problems, and that is usually because the mapper was unaware that they were issues. Accidents, as they are called.
The problem with this set is that it has bad gameplay on purpose.


The map is deliberately designed to play poorly, which quite frankly is pretty appalling to see coming from those closely connected to the team.
This set really shouldn't stay qualified, as not only is it poor itself, but it sets a bad precedent for other maps like it.
if by "poor" you mean "hard to read because of low AR" then oh dear, that must be the first time I disagree with you completely.
The map was designed to be hard to read and aim. It's called a challenge, and as streaming and aiming are considered skills, reading also should be.
Topic Starter
Maeglwn

Charles445 wrote:

First let's start with what is usually the goal of a joke map.
To be funny! Get some laughs, that's always nice.

In order for a joke map to be ranked, however, it has to focus on a very important detail.
It must strive for good gameplay.

If a joke map has poor mapping, it stops being funny and ends up being a hassle to those involved in playing it.
The joke of how absurd the song or storyboard is will be overshadowed by its bad mapping decisions.

Everybody makes mistakes in maps.
A lot of maps have problems, and that is usually because the mapper was unaware that they were issues. Accidents, as they are called.
The problem with this set is that it has bad gameplay on purpose.


The map is deliberately designed to play poorly, which quite frankly is pretty appalling to see coming from those closely connected to the team.
This set really shouldn't stay qualified, as not only is it poor itself, but it sets a bad precedent for other maps like it.
the set is not poor in the slightest. are we not allowed to qualify ar7 anymore just because people aren't good at playing it?

its absolutely fine and I already asked several QATs way before I went for rank with this. ar7 doesn't make for bad gameplay. it just makes for people complaining that it's not the same map as everybody else maps

you'll live

you're also putting the entire set based on one of the 4 extras. and if you seriously think that cs2/cs4/cs7 is also an issue then there's way different problems
Sophia
I actually really like how some difficulties are mapped to make a bit of a joke of what's the trend and be purposefully hard to read or "unliked" because of various reasons (Irre's CS7 or BD's AR7) and I don't really mind it at all, since I do enjoy these settings...

But I do get a bit confused that maps like this still get ranked faster than actual serious maps that have been around for a long long time and are still waiting for a bubble.
Starry-
This map did serve it's purpose and it's really subjective on what you call enjoyable. Low AR =/= unenjoyable.
If this map just had a bunch of generic CS4 AR9 settings on diffs it'll just be completely boring anyways considering it's length.

I'm speaking as a player here (being a mania BN), and I don't usually speak on map threads like this, but if this is disqualified due to the settings then I'll be really disappointed since I really enjoy the map how it is right now.

Just my views anyways. I know there would be a lot of controversy about the AR7 difficulty but not to the point of calling the whole mapset poor.
Topic Starter
Maeglwn

Dm1321 wrote:

I actually really like how some difficulties are mapped to make a bit of a joke of what's the trend and be purposefully hard to read or "unliked" because of various reasons (Irre's CS7 or BD's AR7) and I don't really mind it at all, since I do enjoy these settings...

But I do get a bit confused that maps like this still get ranked faster than actual serious maps that have been around for a long long time and are still waiting for a bubble.
map ranking isn't based on how much they deserve it, it's based on 1) number of ranked maps from the people ranking it, 2) general quality, 3) people involved in the mapset, and 4) most importantly, how fast you can find BNs

Starry- wrote:

This map did serve it's purpose and it's really subjective on what you call enjoyable. Low AR =/= unenjoyable.
If this map just had a bunch of generic CS4 AR9 settings on diffs it'll just be completely boring anyways considering it's length.

I'm speaking as a player here (being a mania BN), and I don't usually speak on map threads like this, but if this is disqualified due to the settings then I'll be really disappointed since I really enjoy the map how it is right now.

Just my views anyways. I know there would be a lot of controversy about the AR7 difficulty but not to the point of calling the whole mapset poor.
thank you, I appreciate that
blahpy

Blue Dragon wrote:

if by "poor" you mean "hard to read because of low AR" then oh dear, that must be the first time I disagree with you completely.
The map was designed to be hard to read and aim. It's called a challenge, and as streaming and aiming are considered skills, reading also should be.
I don't think he is referring to the AR. The AR is not an issue here. The issue is that you intentionally used patterns which aren't by any means rankable (because they are bad) and then use "but it's an epic meme map and intended to be shit xD xD xD" as an excuse for ranking poor mapping. Remember that there's nothing wrong with mapping for the graveyard if you want to make maps that are not suitable for ranking.

Maeglwn wrote:

you should really stop being so negative, I'm not going to deal with it on my map
I really hope you aren't implying that you'll abuse your moderator powers to remove legitimate criticism.
Mismagius

blahpy wrote:

(because they are bad)

legitimate criticism.
"they are objectively bad, it's not my opinion, it's a fact! this is legitimate criticism!"
Topic Starter
Maeglwn

Blue Dragon wrote:

blahpy wrote:

(because they are bad)

legitimate criticism.
"they are objectively bad, it's not my opinion, it's a fact! this is legitimate criticism!"
this describes how I feel pretty well

unless criticism is constructive its not helpful or wanted
blahpy

Maeglwn wrote:

unless criticism is constructive its not helpful or wanted
Okay I'll spell it out for you:

[BD's Extra]00:10:250 (1,1,1,2,3) - these sliders are 1/4 apart and playing them requires unnatural movement with a ridiculous amount of speed up / slow down, you could fix them by making them 1/2 apart or putting them closer together

the rest of the map, as i've said several times, is fine imo and fun to play

Blue Dragon wrote:

"they are objectively bad, it's not my opinion, it's a fact! this is legitimate criticism!"
Man, by this logic any piece of shit map could get ranked if one person considers it good. (Not calling your map shit, it isn't, but there are plenty of unranked maps that are shit)
Henri
The map is deliberately designed to play poorly, which quite frankly is pretty appalling to see coming from those closely connected to the team.
This set really shouldn't stay qualified, as not only is it poor itself, but it sets a bad precedent for other maps like it.
I agree. If completely unfitting difficulty parameters like the ar7 on bds diff and cs7 on irres are rankable, it sets a huge negative impact as an example and attitude towards the mapping community..
I mean after this, if a nominator or QAT says "This difficulty has ar9 but you should change it to ar 9.5". It loses all its credibility if the mapper can just post a link to this maps thread saying "Oh then why is this ranked?"
Topic Starter
Maeglwn

Sotajumala wrote:

The map is deliberately designed to play poorly, which quite frankly is pretty appalling to see coming from those closely connected to the team.
This set really shouldn't stay qualified, as not only is it poor itself, but it sets a bad precedent for other maps like it.
I agree. If completely unfitting difficulty parameters like the ar7 on bds diff and cs7 on irres are rankable, it sets a huge negative impact as an example and attitude towards the mapping community..
I mean after this, if a nominator or QAT says "This difficulty has ar9 but you should change it to ar 9.5". It loses all its credibility if the mapper can just post a link to this maps thread saying "Oh then why is this ranked?"
cs7 diffs have been being ranked all year

its okay, I'm sure that all of the complaints are going to get this unranked

if this gets unranked I'm graveyarding it
Vuelo Eluko
every single diff has the mappers name in it
talk about spitting in the eye of that ranking criteria that i thought was supposed to prevent that
Topic Starter
Maeglwn

Riince wrote:

every single diff has the mappers name in it
talk about spitting in the eye of that ranking criteria that i thought was supposed to prevent that
What? You can have the mappers name in the difficulty name as long as its referencing ownership, not something like "BLUE DRAGON STYLE"
Vuelo Eluko
i guess i misunderstood it then or i didnt read enough of the thread to where it got to that point
Loctav
Sorry everyone, but on behalf of the team we must disqualify this mapset over the insufficient quality across multiple difficulties.

The issue of this mapset comes from a variety of issues; unpolished and inconsistent patterns, missing combo colors, highly doubltful choice in difficulty settings, iffy gameplay, needless overlaps in the normal, very obnoxious hitsounding, and the list goes on. This is not a mapset we would like to include in our official beatmap listing.

Lets start from the most attention-grabbing "problems" this set has. The top diffs have a lot of bad gameplay elements and are poorly mapped in many places. It all looks very random and unpolished. Was this ever intended to be ranked? We hope not. This is not the definition of quality we hope to bring to the game. Here is what we found to be very problematic to each of the diffs in question

[BD's Extra]
The centerpiece of this map is the glorious AR7 and slower slider velocity that you employed. Not only has it been selected as a gesture towards doubtful gameplay and design, it makes the whole experience unnecessarily awkward. This difficulty needs AR9, at least. There are plenty of forced patterns that are awkward and downright hard to play not because of intelligent design, rather to forced difficulty. The jumps and patterns are very inconsistent in places which leads to painful motions and play. It is quite bad, to be frank - especially at the end. Here are some issues found from internal discussions
  • 00:07:481 (1,2,1) - Pattern does not flow well at all, the movement is way too sharp to be enjoyable - especially with this slow slider velocity
  1. 00:12:096 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - Due to the slowness of the song, there is little to no momentum to jump between these cross-screen patterns resulting in very awkward and forced gameplay
  2. 00:15:789 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4) - The inconsistent spacing within these jump patterns lead to awkward play tbh. We've got a huge cross-screen jump 00:15:789 (1,2) - here but when the beat actually calls for larger spacing, it actually shortens as in 00:16:020 (2,3,4) - here. Occurs 00:16:712 (5,6,7,8) - here and 00:17:866 (2,3,4) - here
  3. 00:23:173 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) - Pattern plays iffy. The mixture of circles, sliders, and varied spacing forces the player into very awkward movements. Coupled with the slow slider velocity, there is next to no momentum for the player to base their movements
  4. 00:25:481 (3,4,5) - The flow break here is hard to play, due to the bpm and ar it feels really forced
  5. 00:28:020 (9,10,11,12,13,14) - These stacks kill the momentum required to move around in this pattern


This difficulty needs heavy revision in order to be remotely ready for ranking status. We strongly recommend you consider redoing large portions of the map or remapping, because as it stands now it is certainly not anywhere near acceptable

[Extra]
This difficulty is just downright badly mapped. There is just too much wrong in here. Weird rhythms, uninteresting and inaccuracte pattern construction, and varying difficulty all contribute to the mediocre nature of this difficulty. Needs more improvement and revision, possible even remap. Here are some concerns from our internal discussion
  1. 00:07:481 (5,6) - Sounds and plays a bit awkwardly due to no prominent sound on 00:07:827 - except for some vocal stress. Rhythm would be much better if 00:07:827 (6) - was moved to the white tick after it, the following slider deleted, and two 1/4 circles or something added afterwards
  2. 00:06:558 (1,2) - These two little circles kill the momentum moving forward, maybe recommend spacing these out a little more
  3. 00:10:250 (1,2,3) - The slider shape construction is rather poor
  4. 00:14:866 (5,6,7) - Same issue here with the rhythm
  5. 00:15:558 (7) - Slider plays a bit awkward due to the speed of the slider and its shape, the slider scrunches up too much and quite frankly it looks bad
  6. 00:18:558 (3,4,5) - Same rhythm issue
  7. The whole kiai itself is just one ongoing problem. The patterns barely have any rhyme or reason as to why they are placed. The random nature of this causes for very, very confusing gameplay.
  8. 00:33:327 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - This regularly spaced stream plays very awkwardly in comparison to the rest of the diff. It slows down the play a lot and the momentum from the previous pattern is killed
  9. 00:34:250 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - The closeness and scrunched-up nature of the pattern is a bit too tight. Should be spaced out more and try to feature more around the playfield


Asphyxia and Irre's diffs spare the harsh words and criticisms, they are very well mapped except for the fact of the difficulty settings. Apart of them being sufficiently good maps per se, this is not the way you introduce this kind of "special mapping" into this community. In this constellation, it rather appears like a joke and not like a serious attempt to map CS2 or CS7 maps.

[MooChan's Insane]
This diff suffers from general flow and rhythm problems similar to the Extra. A lot of improvements need to be made here, especially in areas where the spacing changes cause flow and momentum breaks. The hitsounding is honestly awful with the finish spam everywhere
  1. 00:01:020 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1) - Random and inconsistent spacing changes where the song doesn't call for it appear all throughout this pattern.
  2. 00:04:712 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Another instance of random placement, it is all quite ugly looking. The patterns are almost confusing due to how random the movements and patterns are
  3. 00:08:404 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11) - Suddenly the 1/4 spacing changes here, creating a lot of confusion - such kind of patterns do not meet our quality expectations.
  4. This section and the kiai suffers the same issue as in the Extra. This cluttered construction leads to confusing patterns and gameplay


[Normal]
The normal as a whole lacks of quality in all odds and ends. The difficulty is rampant with issues, especially stemming from needless and confusing overlaps and rhythms.
  1. 00:07:481 (3) - Repeat should definitely be on the white tick, as it stands now it is very underwhelming
  2. 00:14:866 (3) - ^
  3. 00:18:558 (2) - ^
  4. 00:07:481 (3,2) - Weird slider shapes that could be made loads smoother
  5. 00:14:866 (3) - Pointless slider shape that just looks ugly
  6. 00:25:943 (2) - ^
  7. 00:02:866 (1) - Confusing overlap with the end of 00:01:020 (1) -
  8. 00:18:558 (2) - Unnecessary overlapping
  9. 00:30:558 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - This pattern has no place in the lowest diff of a mapset, it is way too difficult given the nature of the play + overlapping


There are also a myriad of other issues found in the difficulties not mentioned. Clearly, this map should not be ranked given the circumstances. It is quite the disappointment to see several members of the staff involved with this, as it sends hundreds of wrong messages to the community. This sets a bad example, a staff member is supposed to be a representation of the game. This is not quality, and it is a shame to see such a thing attempt to make it to rank. It is basically a "fuck you to all the mappers out there who toil endlessly to have their (arguably better) maps ranked, we are staff members, we can do whatever we want!". This is not what we need. And this is what I herefore prohibit.
xxdeathx
Ranking this was about as safe as Genryuu Kaiko..
PatZar
"rekt"
-[ Dumpling ]-
ripperino in peace
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply