error_exe777 wrote:
uhm well, yes i can agree the playability of a map is a very important factor in the "quality" of a map but its not the only factor. just because a map plays well does not mean it adheres to the level needed to reach the ranking criteria. you could create a completely overmapped beatmap and even if its "fun" it doesnt means its rankable per se. i just think blaming everything on just whether it plays well is a really narrow-minded way of looking at the map because quality is not just decided by whether it plays well. if a map has problems, it cannot be disregarded just because it isnt objectively bad to play. if you were to make a vibro map or something that people found fun to play, that doesnt immediately mean its rankable. you have to take into consideration the other factors rather than just immediately assuming something is okay because it plays well. if a section of a map is inconsistent, or illogical, or disregarding the music or false emphasis whatever you want to label, it cannot be brushed to the side just because the target audience doesnt have a problem with it. this map has a problem, and just because it plays well doesnt mean we can just brush it to the side, you know?
I never really say that those are the only component that determine quality, I only emphasize that those factors are really important to gauge whether something as crucial as we thought, or actually it just falls within really grey area where how the interpretation for us.
And I won't really say something is a problem from the start, cause it's still fall to the matter of perception here, hence there's my explanation before on why it actually have purpose and make sense according to the environment that takes part within each situation, section and music in previous part.
Let me take example on those slowdown SVs, while you say it doesn't make sense, the fact is that i checked other ranked std maps and they all do the slowdown in that section. while you might wanna argue it's "other map" and have nothing to do with this, we need to think why they all do that. afterall, you said yourself we need to take other consideration when we try to mapping something, which applies here when the mappers takes another approach of planning and give more thought than what we might think.
You yourself said we need to take other consideration when we try to judge things, and you are true, this map actually takes other consideration from multiple different aspect such as std thing i mentioned, and apply each part based on what the mapper considered will fit or not, that if we actually try to think further on mapper's mind and put into the context, its actually makes sense, consistent and do music justice.
error_exe777 wrote:
quality isnt subjective?? okay, the level of quality differs for each persons map but there is a level of quality you need to reach for a map to be rankable. even pishifat mentioned this in one of his earlier videos iirc. the problem at hand is that there are problems with the map that dent the "quality" of it and letting maps with these problems slip through is where the problem lies. we need to keep this level of quality because the ranked section needs to have that quality. its not subjective at all, anyone can look at a map and determine its quality (if you know what you're doing) and its not like the objective quality of a map differs from person to person. the only thing that differs is the ability to determine the quality of a map. quality is not a person to person basis, its something that is set in stone. and thats why we need to fix these problems because its quite obviously a hinder to the maps quality (in my eyes) and myself and kami have justified why it is. its not like the actual quality of the map is different between me and you for instance, its just down to how we view the map and what we determine as acceptable and not acceptable.
Quality that needs to be reach from the map to be rankable is called by "Ranking Criteria" , it's probably the only thing that we can called objective from quality (even then, it has couple subjective stuffs such as ogg hs and 320kbps mp3 , but that's different topic) , the rest other than that is really subjective.
If we can determine all the thing how the map flows, how the part best interpretated, when we uses SV, how much of it, how much LN , etc, then it will be wrote in RC from long time ago don't you think? But we know we can't do that cause it simply falls too subjectively.
and if quality been set in stone from start, then what we get is one dimensional map that everything's been determined from the start if you really think about it, Why is it? because we know objectively how much SV we have to use, we know objectively whether we need to use 3 or 4 or 5 notes (in 7K) , whether we know objectively that we need to use 121 LNs cause more or less is bad and not allowed, and other possible interpretation falls bad because it goes out from what we call by "objective quality". We want to avoid that at all costs from happening cause that's not what it's supposed to be.