But what does this prove?cheezstik wrote:
You still eventually have to move your pen or mouse or whatever in the pattern of a square shape. You seeing them as separate circles doesn't change this.
forum
Lower AR reading
posted
Total Posts
268
E m i
Then by your definition I might as well put 4 circles each separated by a 1 minute gap in a square shape and that would be a "pattern".
That you're playing a square pattern, and not 4 single circles.[ Momiji ] wrote:
But what does this prove?cheezstik wrote:
You still eventually have to move your pen or mouse or whatever in the pattern of a square shape. You seeing them as separate circles doesn't change this.
Yep, that would technically be a pattern with breaks in between, but since no one is used to playing 4 circles with 1 minute separating them (this is like what, 1 BPM?) no one would read them as a square pattern, (because who the fuck practices 1 BPM square patterns?) but they would still technically be square patterns.Almost wrote:
Then by your definition I might as well put 4 circles each separated by a 1 minute gap in a square shape and that would be a "pattern".
Patterns are only patterns if they exist in the music as patterns. You guys are looking way too much at the visual portion of this game. Generally if there is a pentagon it is because there are 5 similar notes in a sequence in the music. Seeing that there is a pentagon gives you a clue as to what to expect in the music and how to time the notes. As far as aiming, you are much more likely to straight up miss aim if you try to curve to conform to a spacial pattern so you should be striving to play everything as a series of jumps regardless of the AR you are playing.
E m i
But what does that change if (almost) nobody would consider it a one because they can't even see it, therefore theoretically making the pattern easier to read and execute?cheezstik wrote:
That you're playing a square pattern, and not 4 single circles.
I think we should leave it to the mapperschainpullz wrote:
Patterns are only patterns if they exist in the music as patterns
it is harder to read high density note patterns just like how it is harder to fap to high density male orgies.
Doesn't matter what you see it as, part of playing the pattern is aiming at it and clicking it as well, doesn't matter if you consider it as a square pattern or not, it objectively is. How you read things doesn't make them that way, for example, can't find a quote but a taiko player said something like seeing the pattern RRBRBRBRB and separating it, so it becomes something like RRB RB RB RB will make it easier to read. The fact that you see it like that doesn't mean that it's no longer the pattern RRBRBRBRB.[ Momiji ] wrote:
But what does that change if (almost) nobody would consider it a one because they can't even see it, therefore theoretically making the pattern easier to read and execute?cheezstik wrote:
That you're playing a square pattern, and not 4 single circles.
E m i
So why point out something that's not only blatantly obvious, but also changes nothing?cheezstik wrote:
Doesn't matter what you see it as, part of playing the pattern is aiming at it and clicking it as well, doesn't matter if you consider it as a square pattern or not, it objectively is. How you read things doesn't make them that way, for example, can't find a quote but a taiko player said something like seeing the pattern RRBRBRBRB and separating it, so it becomes something like RRB RB RB RB will make it easier to read. The fact that you see it like that doesn't mean that it's no longer the pattern RRBRBRBRB.
Lol, scroll back a page or two to the part where they are saying the pentagram patterns in the creator aren't pentagram patterns, or where what defines a pattern is how you read it.[ Momiji ] wrote:
So why point out something that's not only blatantly obvious, but also changes nothing?cheezstik wrote:
Doesn't matter what you see it as, part of playing the pattern is aiming at it and clicking it as well, doesn't matter if you consider it as a square pattern or not, it objectively is. How you read things doesn't make them that way, for example, can't find a quote but a taiko player said something like seeing the pattern RRBRBRBRB and separating it, so it becomes something like RRB RB RB RB will make it easier to read. The fact that you see it like that doesn't mean that it's no longer the pattern RRBRBRBRB.
Actually, musically it is very possible that it's not at all the pattern RRBRBRBRB. It all depends on where the emphasis falls. If the accent is on the first R and there are no other accents until after the last B then yes, it is that longer pattern. If the accents split the string into RRB RB RB RB, then it is a completely different pattern. I repeat, you guys are looking at the visual aspect way too much. If we completely ignore the music then everything you are saying is probably right. This isn't whack a mole though, it's a rhythm game.cheezstik wrote:
Doesn't matter what you see it as, part of playing the pattern is aiming at it and clicking it as well, doesn't matter if you consider it as a square pattern or not, it objectively is. How you read things doesn't make them that way, for example, can't find a quote but a taiko player said something like seeing the pattern RRBRBRBRB and separating it, so it becomes something like RRB RB RB RB will make it easier to read. The fact that you see it like that doesn't mean that it's no longer the pattern RRBRBRBRB.
A pattern is what you see on your screen. It doesn't matter if the circles end up making a square shape if you only see 2 circles at a time, what you are given are single jumps. In your example, the taiko player sees a RRBRBRBRB on his screen at 1 point in time so that is the pattern. If he only saw each part separately then the whole thing he played isn't a pattern of RRBRBRBRB, it would be RRB RB RB RB. If we go by your definition, even if there is a gap in between, the whole thing is just 1 pattern. We might as well call a beatmap a pattern because it's just a bunch of circles that you need to trace anyway.
That's situational, and in my hypothetical situation, let's pretend the pattern does have the correct emphasis.chainpullz wrote:
Actually, musically it is very possible that it's not at all the pattern RRBRBRBRB. It all depends on where the emphasis falls. If the accent is on the first R and there are no other accents until after the last B then yes, it is that longer pattern. If the accents split the string into RRB RB RB RB, then it is a completely different pattern. I repeat, you guys are looking at the visual aspect way too much. If we completely ignore the music then everything you are saying is probably right. This isn't whack a mole though, it's a rhythm game.
We could refer to it like that, it would technically be correct, but it's not very practical, cos who can remember whole beatmaps? Referring to the pentagram part is practical and easy cos you know what a pentagram is and it's not so long that you'll forget how a pentagram goes. Maps could be referred to as a single pattern, and the pentagram would be a pattern within that pattern that is easy to identify as a pentagram, a separate pattern.Almost wrote:
A pattern is what you see on your screen. It doesn't matter if the circles end up making a square shape if you only see 2 circles at a time, what you are given are single jumps. In your example, the taiko player sees a RRBRBRBRB on his screen at 1 point in time so that is the pattern. If he only saw each part separately then the whole thing he played isn't a pattern of RRBRBRBRB, it would be RRB RB RB RB. If we go by your definition, even if there is a gap in between, the whole thing is just 1 pattern. We might as well call a beatmap a pattern because it's just a bunch of circles that you need to trace anyway.
The taiko player still eventually played RRBRBRBRB, sure you might want to refer to it as separate patterns as RRB RB RB RB to make it easier to identify but he still technically played the first one as well.
E m i
Yeah, reread it 5 times and I got to the conclusion that either nothing or everything is a pattern. Good luckcheezstik wrote:
Lol, scroll back a page or two to the part where they are saying the pentagram patterns in the creator aren't pentagram patterns, or where what defines a pattern is how you read it.
Basically to sum up: a beatmap is a pattern by itself and things inside this pattern are also patterns. So it's just a massive patternception?
It would actually be quite unnatural to split up the pattern like that if there wasn't some sort of emphasis suggesting the subdivision in that way. Playing it without subdivision would be difficult, but playing it with subdivision would feel out of sync with the music and would much more likely lead to low accuracy. Fortunately music tends to be very alive so long complex patterns almost never show up in actual music. Just for clarification, even though the pattern you described might have (didn't go back and actually count so numbers probably off a bit) 12 notes, it is more likely a pattern consisting of 4 parts: namely, the 4 subdivisions you described.
Yep, exactly. Patternception, I like that word. In 300 years when osu is a way of life, they shall credit professor cheezstik for coming up with the patternception theory.Almost wrote:
Basically to sum up: a beatmap is a pattern by itself and things inside this pattern are also patterns. So it's just a massive patternception?
Srs tho, a pattern could be a beatmap by itself and vice versa, let's say we inserted the whole beatmap of scarlet rose in between freedom dive, I could say, "Yo, that scarlet rose pattern is fkn hard"
In order for "pattern" to mean anything from the perspective of a player, it has to a set of notes that are on the screen at one point in time. If there's a square pattern in which you only see 2 notes at a time, sure you'll move your cursor in a square, but you probably won't even notice you did so because the visual cues on the map will be telling you to move your cursor in one straight line at a time.
If you're primarily a mapper, it might be more useful for you to use "pattern" to refer to any shape you put on the map, regardless of the AR. That's nice, but it's not useful for this discussion at all.
If you're primarily a mapper, it might be more useful for you to use "pattern" to refer to any shape you put on the map, regardless of the AR. That's nice, but it's not useful for this discussion at all.
Narril is a bad nerd
source: lower rank
thats how it works rite?
source: lower rank
thats how it works rite?
Visual patterns aren't useful to this discussion at all... It's literally not a pattern regardless of visual perception of shape if there isn't a corresponding pattern in the music. Maybe this is why Andrea gets so much hate from the ignorant...GhostFrog wrote:
In order for "pattern" to mean anything from the perspective of a player, it has to a set of notes that are on the screen at one point in time. If there's a square pattern in which you only see 2 notes at a time, sure you'll move your cursor in a square, but you probably won't even notice you did so because the visual cues on the map will be telling you to move your cursor in one straight line at a time.
If you're primarily a mapper, it might be more useful for you to use "pattern" to refer to any shape you put on the map, regardless of the AR. That's nice, but it's not useful for this discussion at all.
You. Are. Missing. Every. Point.chainpullz wrote:
Visual patterns aren't useful to this discussion at all... It's literally not a pattern regardless of visual perception of shape if there isn't a corresponding pattern in the music. Maybe this is why Andrea gets so much hate from the ignorant...GhostFrog wrote:
In order for "pattern" to mean anything from the perspective of a player, it has to a set of notes that are on the screen at one point in time. If there's a square pattern in which you only see 2 notes at a time, sure you'll move your cursor in a square, but you probably won't even notice you did so because the visual cues on the map will be telling you to move your cursor in one straight line at a time.
If you're primarily a mapper, it might be more useful for you to use "pattern" to refer to any shape you put on the map, regardless of the AR. That's nice, but it's not useful for this discussion at all.
ur all fat, a circle is a circle, click them and move on with your lives day.
Rhythm. Game.GhostFrog wrote:
You. Are. Missing. Every. Point.
Fat people shouldn't call other people fat.Melt3dCheeze wrote:
ur all fat, a circle is a circle, click them and move on with yourlivesday.
Almost wrote:
Fat people shouldn't call other people fat.Melt3dCheeze wrote:
ur all fat, a circle is a circle, click them and move on with yourlivesday.
You could shit out circles at random intervals on the timeline and arrange them in some shape on the playing field such that they will be seen by the player. That's a pattern. A pattern in a really shitty map.chainpullz wrote:
Rhythm. Game.GhostFrog wrote:
You. Are. Missing. Every. Point.
You could overmap the heck out of a song and map glorious rhythms that go with the bpm but not the song. When you put your hit objects down, you're creating patterns.
Licking Andrea's feet? Well, I sure hope that doesn't become a pattern.
A G&R thread that isn't helpful in any way. Guess that's normal.
Just one guy bickering over definitions because he doesn't want to accept the fact that his reading is poor, because, you know... it's cool to say you have good reading. All you have to do is make it mean whatever you want it to.
Just one guy bickering over definitions because he doesn't want to accept the fact that his reading is poor, because, you know... it's cool to say you have good reading. All you have to do is make it mean whatever you want it to.
I apologize if I don't agree with your whack-a-mole reasoning and am capable of seeing the bigger picture here. We can't all have an analytical mindset I suppose.
Also, if you are referring to me RaneFire, I suck at my formulation of the concept of reading. In fact, I'm worse at my formulation than the commonly accepted whack-a-mole-minded formulation of what reading is. If you are referring to Narrill I will make no further comment on the matter.
Also, if you are referring to me RaneFire, I suck at my formulation of the concept of reading. In fact, I'm worse at my formulation than the commonly accepted whack-a-mole-minded formulation of what reading is. If you are referring to Narrill I will make no further comment on the matter.
What big picture are you seeing, chainpullz? Are you saying that if a map doesn't conform to your standards that it isn't worthy of having patterns? Sorry, but your big picture sucks.
but you don't even read low AR scrub xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDIllkryn wrote:
Narril is a bad nerd
source: lower rank
thats how it works rite?
Let me explain this a bit better:
chainpullz, you're saying that osu! is a "rhythm game" as if that means something more grand than it actually means. Have you ever played an instrument? If you have (and probably even if you haven't), you'll notice that playing osu! isn't like playing a song on an instrument at all. Your goal in osu! isn't to play a song. It's to play a map. That map will contain in it some rhythm dreamed up by the mapper to represent that song...or if it's a really bad map it will contain notes the mapper put in the map because they wanted to. Every "pattern" (by a sensible definition) does go with a rhythm - the rhythm the mapper chose for that pattern. Determining the rhythm that a pattern is mapped to is a component of reading (a component of reading you are affectionately referring to as "whack-a-mole", which, by the way, is a term reserved for the "see a note, hit a note" mentality of high AR). You're acting as if playing osu! is playing "the" rhythm of a song and anything else is wrong and shouldn't be called a pattern when that doesn't even make sense in the context of what osu! is.
chainpullz, you're saying that osu! is a "rhythm game" as if that means something more grand than it actually means. Have you ever played an instrument? If you have (and probably even if you haven't), you'll notice that playing osu! isn't like playing a song on an instrument at all. Your goal in osu! isn't to play a song. It's to play a map. That map will contain in it some rhythm dreamed up by the mapper to represent that song...or if it's a really bad map it will contain notes the mapper put in the map because they wanted to. Every "pattern" (by a sensible definition) does go with a rhythm - the rhythm the mapper chose for that pattern. Determining the rhythm that a pattern is mapped to is a component of reading (a component of reading you are affectionately referring to as "whack-a-mole", which, by the way, is a term reserved for the "see a note, hit a note" mentality of high AR). You're acting as if playing osu! is playing "the" rhythm of a song and anything else is wrong and shouldn't be called a pattern when that doesn't even make sense in the context of what osu! is.
Narrill.chainpullz wrote:
Also, if you are referring to me RaneFire, I suck at my formulation of the concept of reading. In fact, I'm worse at my formulation than the commonly accepted whack-a-mole-minded formulation of what reading is. If you are referring to Narrill I will make no further comment on the matter.
Thread is TL;DR since my last post. Didn't read it properly, so I'm not picking on you.
GhostFrog wrote:
What big picture are you seeing, chainpullz? Are you saying that if a map doesn't conform to your standards that it isn't worthy of having patterns? Sorry, but your big picture sucks.
This is not a triangle. It is 8 abstract shapes that have been arranged on a piece of paper. If you were to take this to be a damaged image, the original image could literally be anything as long as it includes these 8 abstract shapes. You only associate a triangle pattern to this image because you have a preconceived notion of what a triangle pattern is. The same applies to beatmaps. The music is what fills in the gaps in our damaged image of what the music is.
Most maps that are overmapped still conform to the accents and flow of the music. Using this same picture, imagine our damaged image wasn't damaged after all. Overmapping would simply be filling in these empty spaces by connecting the pieces. Our brain will see hear the broken triangle but our subconscious will take what we see from the overmapping and mentally fill in this line as we are listening. If the overmapping is done properly (for example, drawing a straight line instead of inserting something jagged when connecting our parts) then the overmapping will not cause reading issues.
On the other hand, if you insert random garbage into the map then it will be unreadable. Most geometric relations that show up in mapping and overmapping is simply taking a musical pattern, or a properly overmapped version of a musical pattern, and representing it as a commonly recognized shape. Thus by recognizing this visual pattern we get an idea of what to listen for.
Thus when presented with a pentagon your mind processes it as 5 similar notes. It will also likely suggest drawing that shape. You'll find however that if you just try to draw a regular pentagon it will likely come out looking like shit. On the other hand, if you play connect the dots (ie. playing a series of jumps) when given the vertices of a regular pentagon then you will end up with something looking very nice. So this suggests we just always play maps as a sequence of jumps as opposed to trying to play visual patterns.
Proper reading comes from combining these two ideas - recognizing upcoming patterns from their visual representation, and aiming sequences of jumps as opposed to drawing shapes. It is possible to play well without properly reading maps by learning to whack-a-mole accurately with approach circles as well but then switching approach rates turns into a huge mess with calibrating your brain for slower approach circles.
Also keep in mind that MillhioreF has stated in the past that EZ really is a difficulty decreasing mod. He is very talented at proper reading (though he may be slow idk) so he can take advantage of the extra knowledge that having more hitcircles on the screen presents. There is a reason he does not have high difficulty, high AR full combos in his top ranks. Playing at higher AR requires you to be a fast reader if you are going to read them properly because you have less information and must thus be able to recognize the rhythms with imperfect visual cues. In fact, it's probably much easier to just play high AR based off a whack-a-mole approach rate reaction strategy so the mentions of low object density being easier hold truth in this respect. However, this thread is specifically about reading. Properly reading low density is not as trivial as you all make it out to be.
And the point of this debate is?
Basically this entire thread.GhostFrog wrote:
You. Are. Missing. Every. Point.
Also I don't know about other mappers but I like to separate patterns between visual and tactile patterns, and then divide tactile patterns into rhythm and aim.
Bascally the thing is that not all patterns look how they play, and both the aim and rhythm variables of any pattern affect how it feels.
I'm not gonna go into a huge tutorial over this but in a simple example, if you think of a diamond pattern (which is basically a 45 degrees rotated square) you would assume that the way to play it is by going diagonally up to the right, diagonally down to the right and diagonally down to the left, right? But what most players do is, instead of making the sharp angled jumps, they draw more of a circle with their cursor than an actual square. So the visual pattern may be a square, while the tactile-aim pattern is a circle. However, the further you space out the diamond, the more precise the jump has to be, so after a certain point the t-a pattern beThe tactile-rhythm pattern in this case would be four singles, but that's not what this example was about.
By this I mean that how a pattern reads isn't always how a pattern plays, and if you're not aware of that as a mapper then you suck. That said, it is true that the density of objects (as well as new combo usage) affects not only how a player perceives a pattern, but also how they'll play it and how it'll feel for them while playing it. It is much, much easier to snap on AR10 than it is on AR8. This means that a square pattern on AR10 will be played as a square faster than one on AR8, which would probably be played in a more circular motion, especially by players who aren't adept at AR8. Most probably because they can't instantly snap to a note so they'd have to plan the snaps ahead, which they're not capable of due to a lack of low AR practice.
I also think that this is why low AR practice makes high AR easier. If you can snap to AR5, snapping to AR10 is like breathing. You just need the aim/speed to keep up with the map at that point and reading is 0 issue.
they're still trying to figure that outSakura wrote:
And the point of this debate is?
maybe they they need to do some multi page essays to work out their frustrations.
Sakura wrote:
And the point of this debate is?
You know what else is a circle?Tess wrote:
they draw more of a circle with their cursor than an actual square. So the visual pattern may be a square, while the tactile-aim pattern is a circle.
The arguments in this thread.
Maybe we should slow down the AR of it by locking it so people can slow down and chill.