1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Beatmap Graveyard
show more
posted
arrogance is only going to make people not want to deal with you man, chill out
posted

captin1 wrote:

arrogance is only going to make people not want to deal with you man, chill out
Along with the saltiness I did raise some points that are general, is that wrong?

But anyway, what is the solution to my case? Fixing the issues stated in the mods? Although imo they don't really matter since they don't affect the gameplay at all? Honest question.
posted
word of advice from someone who has gone through map drama: stop posting.

take a day or two, recollect your thoughts and stop getting caught up in the moment. this doesn't need to get solved right this minute. be patient, take a step back, and look at your map again. you'll either find: a. some of the points raised are valid and can be worth taking into account or b. you'll be able to come up with better and more concrete reasons for doing things other than "this is my style" or "x mapper did it so why can't i"
posted

Avishay wrote:

Because it doesn't really matter? I felt like using this pattern in this part just because it felt right to me, both of those patterns work for the song and there's no real reason to exclude the use of one of them.

Avishay wrote:

captin1 wrote:

arrogance is only going to make people not want to deal with you man, chill out
But anyway, what is the solution to my case? Fixing the issues stated in the mods? Although imo they don't really matter since they don't affect the gameplay at all? Honest question.
But it does matter and it does affect gameplay. If it didn't, I wouldn't have taken my precious neet time to try and explain this to you. You can't use a consistent pattern on 9/10 parts and then when the same part comes up again you decide to "feel" and leave it blank, making an anti jump. Does that make sense to you? Can you explain your pattern without saying you felt it was "ok"?
If both patterns work fine then why are you doing one pattern for all but one of those parts? Why are you being so stubborn about something so incredibly unnecessary?

The response you gave me + the fact that you don't even know or try to understand what other people find to be bad/sloppy about your map when they explain it only fortifies my statement. Your map just screams inexperienced and you need to get your head out of the gutter bro. Because even though I say I find it inexperienced, I do think you have some cool and somewhat original ideas going on as well, so don't get defensive when I try to help you please.


Again, I hate modding
posted

Nube wrote:

But it does matter and it does affect gameplay. If it didn't, I wouldn't have taken my precious neet time to try and explain this to you. You can't use a consistent pattern on 9/10 parts and then when the same part comes up again you decide to "feel" and leave it blank, making an anti jump. Does that make sense to you? Can you explain your pattern without saying you felt it was "ok"?
If both patterns work fine then why are you doing one pattern for all but one of those parts? Why are you being so stubborn about something so incredibly unnecessary?

The response you gave me + the fact that you don't even know or try to understand what other people find to be bad/sloppy about your map when they explain it only fortifies my statement. Your map just screams inexperienced and you need to get your head out of the gutter bro. Because even though I say I find it inexperienced, I do think you have some cool and somewhat original ideas going on as well, so don't get defensive when I try to help you please.


Again, I hate modding
The stuff you are saying do make sense, it's like that because the pattern overall was different, a note used to exist at 03:05:218, but I removed it due to the DQ, regardless if I wanted to have it or not. But honestly, the patterns at 00:59:293 (1) - and 03:04:093 (1) - are completely different, is there a reason to use the same slider? The latter is more intense and has bigger spacing, how is it mandatory to do the same as before, how does it feel bad playing? I would understand if those patterns were identical excluding that slider..

I'll take captin's advice for now.
posted

a loli wrote:

Feb wrote:

actually genryuu kaiko has premanent 1/4's but the sounds are imo not very audible.
No it does not.
not permanent yes - the slower parts aren't.
posted

Railey2 wrote:

Smokeman wrote:
Man look...

You don't rly have to rank a map... noone is forcing you...

This is a more polite way to tell him to go fuck himself. No more of that please. He makes a point about double standards and favoritism, and that is something to be addressed, regardless of him wanting to rank a map or not.
No, This is a more polite way of telling him to take a min to chill. I tell him that because in the end of the day he wont gain anything from ranking his map but the feeling of self accomplishment (and internet fame for a day or two). Yes he recaps all of the ranking proccess we have so far and tries to blend in some perpective. I am not denying that. It's just that i was more concerned about the way he viewed criticism from other mappers than the whole ranking drama process every once in a while.

Railey2 wrote:

Smokeman wrote:
All the statements should be made according to logical conclusions from the orginal work, which means even tho there are countles interpretations there is just one (or rarely a few) which is (are) more "right" then all the others. Does this mean you are wrong? By all means NO... but you arent right either... noone can be. Infact you can only get close to the "truth" with your interpretation (or theory) until someone falsifies it. Depending on the extent you have to either modify it or simply dismiss it completely.

ok, so let me entangle that.
- When we interpret art, the interpretation should be based on the original and it should be linked to it through logic
- There are countless interpretations
- Some are more right than others
- You aren't wrong
- You aren't right
- Nobody can be right
- you are right until you are falsified
- the one who falsified you is more right than you, hence why you have to follow his lead and change your interpretation that is not right and not wrong, so you can make it more right, except nobody can be right in the first place, although the one who falsified you is more right than you. It should also be logical.

I don't even know what you were getting at with that, honestly. That whole paragraph is a contradictory mess.
damn it was too late for that shit yesterday... Hope i can rephrase it

- interpretation or Statemnts based on logical conlusions from the piece of art
- As many interpretations as there are ppl and time in the world BUT...
- when i talk about "more right" i meant more logical or more grounded in that regard
- being less grounded doesnt mean you aren't wrong
- but being more grounded makes the interpretation more "believable" (or acceptable)
- which means, if you look at an interpretation which is more believabe than one which takes 4 detours around the work of art to make a statement.
- That doesnt mean you can interpret what ever you feel like. If the logical conclusion is wrong, well this just leads to a wrong interpretation.
- OK now i fucked up: i tried to tie in the definition of the scientific method... (fml it was late) I wanted to get to the point where even a logic based interpretation can be wrong, but when that happens you dont simply dismiss it (again depends on the severity of the problem). problem is this doesnt apply well on mapping so lets just forget that.

Railey2 wrote:

Smokeman wrote:
IF your interpretation looks "flawed" or not "quite there yet" in the eyes of clearly more experienced ppl, then you should reconcider what you are doing here. NOONE wants to fuck your shit up. NOONE will gain anything from that. All these ppl modding and giving suggestions do it because they love doing this: mapping songs and helping others.

Now this is something I can get behind. Listen to experience, for it most likely knows better than you do.
The second thing you said is disagreeable again though. People gain something from fucking shit up, and if you observe them for a bit you see that very clearly. They have personal grudges, suck up to other people, or just enjoy their power. They defend their own opinions vigorously once they are out instead of backing down in an argument, because nothing is harder than admitting that you were wrong. That can lead to pretty nasty situations, where the one with less power has no other option left than following along. Generally, there can be plenty of reasons why people fuck shit up. Not to say that QAT's are essentially evil, but they aren't angels either. They are human, and humans tend to be unfair every once in a while. You got to look out for that, and not deny it by saying "but they don't have nothing to gain".
Why shouldnt you listen to experience... rly...
Ofc you shouldnt blindly follow your elders or smth just because they know more, but not listening to someone who clearly knows better than you is plain ignorance...

i still believe in society a little bit. We arent all assholes you know.

Railey2 wrote:

Smokeman wrote:
if you cant accept that then just dont rank it man.

One last time, please please stop with this sentiment. This is what a system looks like that can't accept criticism and change.
"oh you think theres something wrong with the system and you feel like it could be improved? Hah, fuck off then"
That is not what you want. Definitely not.
IMO the system isnt corrupt. I am also a strong believer of everyone speaking out his thoughts. I got surprised you read that sentiment out of the post tho (i was quite shoked dude).

to genralize: a ranked map is the same as any other map. A couple of ppl just took some time to look at it and gave it some rankings and tagged it as "ranked". So in the core a ranked map is the same as a graveyarded map. But To get this nice tag with the score boards you need to be ready for criticism from the community. If you think these ppl are assholes and only aim to harm you, then why the fuck would you want that useless tag. Why would you want to gift this shitty community your masterpiece. But if you think these ppl have the intention of helping you make your map better then accepting their opinions about your product shouldn't be a issue. The process rly isnt that difficult either. You post, they mod, you evaluate, BNs evaluate, and if all goes well.. voilà it is ranked and everyone is happy.
posted

Spaghetti wrote:

You're arguing over spilled milk.
posted
Hopefully this gets re-qualified soon xD finally found this song mapped!~
I so love this song and the map is very fun to play
at least it manages to eliminate boredom of the song itself :)
Good luck :oops:
posted
Alright, clean head, let's do this.
posted

ohad1881 wrote:

00:07:693 (1) - why here did you put a nc on the strong beat and 00:02:893 and 00:05:293 you didn't? Hm.. I'd say because the NCs are indicators for pattern changes.
00:35:893 (1) - i don't see a reason for this nc Alright.
00:40:843 (4) - you are leading to a strong vocal here so why stop the flow and stack? 3 is the strong beat, therefore the jump between 00:40:543 (2,3) - , however 4 is not as strong, and it feels like a leftover, a stack goes well because I am able to do an other jump with the vocals right after.
01:00:493 (3) - nc? 01:00:043 (1) - here remove The better choice indeed, rearranged some NCs here.
01:01:694 (5) - i feel like you should give more emphasis on this by a bit spacing it, it's to close and weird to play imo. There's no justification for emphasization here.
01:06:493 (1) - ^^ Sure.
01:09:343 (2) - ^^ I could but I feel like it's forcing it too much, I slowed down with the pascing from here 01:07:693 (1) - and then resumed it here 01:10:993 (1) - . I think leaving it as it is is the better choice.
01:19:543 (8,9,1) - you are leading to a big place with a lot of vocals here, i feel you should show it by spacing it much more. mb you can stack the end of 01:19:693 (1) - with 01:19:243 (6) . Actually this goes nicely for various other reasons as well, changed.
01:22:093 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,1,2,1) - seems like here you ignored what is coming next, you are leading to something big so why not showing it, i really think you should space this part a bit like here 03:26:893 (5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,6,7) - It could work, but how am I ignoring what's coming next? The pattern is pretty intense. The first pattern has more back and forth movements compared to the second one, and both has special looking structure.
01:49:693 (1) - way to close for this vocal imo. I agree, changed some other pattern so it became like that, fixed.
01:52:093 (4) - nc here and also space it. NC V, no spacing change.
01:54:118 (2,3) - i saw a lot of problems with this one, so i can suggest to make this slider 01:53:893 (1) end here 01:54:118 (and mb you can silence the end) Pattern changed.
02:06:493 (1,2,3,4) - you can space every note in gradation, the vocals are becoming stronger every note. If I wanted to do that I'd follow the drums, but I am following the ringing sounds which stay the same.
02:26:293 (4) - ctrl g? strong beat. Sure.
02:37:093 (3) - you can make it more symmetrical. Should be better now.
03:12:943 (4,5,6) - space it Why? I don't think it is justified.
04:05:293 (1) - you can improve it, use grid snap. Too lazy, symmetry is hard, it looks almost perfect.
04:16:093 (7) - nc? sure.
04:43:993 (1,2) - switch nc? v
04:59:793 (7) - move this slider here 04:59:743 ? Nope, the slider is snapped correctly.
i do feel you can be more consistent in this, and you should check your emphasis on some notes in and before the hype parts.
but as irre wrote, about the huge problem of the consistency of this map and the overmapping, i feel like he is wrong, it should be improved of course,but it's not a huge deal... vocals are ok with the emphasis of notes, i didn't see a lot of overmapping actually, and about the consistency, he might not made the same patterns, but he didn't skip vocals, he used spacing and emphasis properly, so i don't see a big problem here tbh.

so what can i say, my speeches will be useless, like every other speeches of an unknown person that no one gives a shit about what he will say, gl avishay.
Thanks, I'll just see what I can do it to improve it now.
posted
ok how to get people to comment here?
posted
m4m

I don't know how to mod this. but, I testplayed and I hope more nice play.


  1. 00:40:693 (3,4) - make jump. more fun and fit song. My suggest (3) move (x:76 y:264), (4) move (x:164 y:384)
  2. 00:52:393 (2,3) - why 1/8? took drum echo? I want circle. But, you want keep 1/8, i recommend slider end reduce volume.. so, fit song.
  3. 01:17:293 (1) - slider head, Samplest:Normal and add finish. This sound too big Cymbals part. It's fit.



which is loved by some and hated by others. I know feel. but, i can't speak english almost. so, how to explanation.
but, Let's clear a hurdle.
good luck!
posted
Applied all of those (lowered sliderend volumes on 2nd thingy).

Thanks.
posted
花たん - ハジメテノオト

Edit:

you shouldn't give me KD ……

i can't pass the map , but i love the song :D
posted

Narcissu wrote:

花たん - ハジメテノオト
I guess I'll add those to the tags since there's no Romaji (?) in the album.
posted
Hi for the M4M :v


[Beginning]

Intro feels a bit too crazy imo xD I kinda expected this to be a slower section kinda like 04:40:093 - and then it picks up in the verses. I feel in general that would give it a bit more sense of direction but up to you.

00:05:293 (3) - NC since it's kinda similar to 00:03:643 (1,2,1) -

00:09:493 (1) - Also remove NC. Sure the slider slows down and looks similar to the previous one but for that reason alone people would give you trouble tbh. Considering it's going the opposite direction as the previous slider and it's not SUPER slow to the point where it would cause confusion the NC doesn't do much other than remove the followpoint and then give you three 1 combo sections which is meh.

00:52:393 (2,3) - Feels overmapped to me. Pretty sure you would think so too since you did mute the slider ends :v Two normal 1/2 jumps would do just fine here.

00:54:943 (5) - Would be cool if you centered it on that diamond/triangle thing. Pretty sure you could make it work

01:01:093 (4) - Might be nice to make this a 3/4 slider and a note at 01:01:393 - so the next vocal thing is a clickable object instead of holding through it. Plus then you'd be able to NC that object so you can keep a 4/1 NC pattern going again.

01:03:493 (5,6) - This would be really cool if you ctrl+g'd each slider individually so that you have a circular flow going from slider to slider. Currently they flow a bit awkwardly. Also based on how 01:02:893 (3,4) - do that circular effect already it would be nice for the next two sliders to continue it. The four jump notes right after wouldn't be too hard to reposition without changing the rest of the notes.

01:50:893 (1,2) - Might sound better to follow the drums like you did at 01:48:493 (1,2,3) - but it might be a bit tricky so maybe not :v

03:11:893 (1) - Add clap to head. Sounds cool

03:14:593 (6) - Soft addition on the slider tail sounds cool too imo :v

03:15:493 (4) - I think this was supposed to be soft whistle/addition? Same with 03:16:993 (3) - and 03:20:293 (3) -

03:24:493 (1,2) - Could've totally been a 2/1 slider like 01:19:693 (1) -

03:31:243 (6) - I don't know if this is true or not but some people say this is unrankable to have active hitsounds in the sliderbody because it's unexpected feedback. To avoid any issues this would be better as a shorter slider into a triplet like the hitsounds indicate.

03:46:993 (4,5) - Kinda expected an antijump with this pause tbh. That's the pattern I saw for the most part before anyway.

04:56:893 (1,2) - Looks nicer if 2 was stacked under 1 slider end or if you did it with a bit of spacing like 04:58:093 (1,1) - maybe


Map has a lot of interesting patterns and the jumps are pretty fun. Idk though to me it feels like I'm playing 200 bpm yuikonnu jpop stuff instead of 100 bpm slow ballad music xD I kinda expected less movement and somewhat slower sliders but that's just me I guess. Probably doing that would be to make it way easier though and I don't think you want that :v


Anyway hope this helps. Good luck! :)
posted

Side wrote:

Hi for the M4M :v


[Beginning]

Intro feels a bit too crazy imo xD I kinda expected this to be a slower section kinda like 04:40:093 - and then it picks up in the verses. I feel in general that would give it a bit more sense of direction but up to you. The ending is slightly energetic and the ending has none, well we could give million reasons for each side but I prefer having it this way.

00:05:293 (3) - NC since it's kinda similar to 00:03:643 (1,2,1) - Erm, fine :P It was suggested before and it doesn't really matter does it.

00:09:493 (1) - Also remove NC. Sure the slider slows down and looks similar to the previous one but for that reason alone people would give you trouble tbh. Considering it's going the opposite direction as the previous slider and it's not SUPER slow to the point where it would cause confusion the NC doesn't do much other than remove the followpoint and then give you three 1 combo sections which is meh. Alright.

00:52:393 (2,3) - Feels overmapped to me. Pretty sure you would think so too since you did mute the slider ends :v Two normal 1/2 jumps would do just fine here. I guess I will do something else since this was mentioned in the past as well.

00:54:943 (5) - Would be cool if you centered it on that diamond/triangle thing. Pretty sure you could make it work Cool.

01:01:093 (4) - Might be nice to make this a 3/4 slider and a note at 01:01:393 - so the next vocal thing is a clickable object instead of holding through it. Plus then you'd be able to NC that object so you can keep a 4/1 NC pattern going again. That's nice, I am not sure if I should mute the slider end since I don't use this pattern much in such rhythms.

01:03:493 (5,6) - This would be really cool if you ctrl+g'd each slider individually so that you have a circular flow going from slider to slider. Currently they flow a bit awkwardly. Also based on how 01:02:893 (3,4) - do that circular effect already it would be nice for the next two sliders to continue it. The four jump notes right after wouldn't be too hard to reposition without changing the rest of the notes. Redesigned pattern.

01:50:893 (1,2) - Might sound better to follow the drums like you did at 01:48:493 (1,2,3) - but it might be a bit tricky so maybe not :v I'll leave it as it is then :P

03:11:893 (1) - Add clap to head. Sounds cool Cool artificial rhythm.

03:14:593 (6) - Soft addition on the slider tail sounds cool too imo :v Sure.

03:15:493 (4) - I think this was supposed to be soft whistle/addition? Same with 03:16:993 (3) - and 03:20:293 (3) - To be fair I can't quite see much difference with my stereo but it makes more sense so alright.

03:24:493 (1,2) - Could've totally been a 2/1 slider like 01:19:693 (1) - Could've been, but I wanted something different :P

03:31:243 (6) - I don't know if this is true or not but some people say this is unrankable to have active hitsounds in the sliderbody because it's unexpected feedback. To avoid any issues this would be better as a shorter slider into a triplet like the hitsounds indicate. If that's really unrankable I'll change it, but I'm pretty sure I've seen it before and that's why I am using it.

03:46:993 (4,5) - Kinda expected an antijump with this pause tbh. That's the pattern I saw for the most part before anyway. You are right, antijump is expected here and I couldn't pinpoint what felt slightly wrong here for me, redesigned pattern to support antijump

04:56:893 (1,2) - Looks nicer if 2 was stacked under 1 slider end or if you did it with a bit of spacing like 04:58:093 (1,1) - maybe That's a nice idea.


Map has a lot of interesting patterns and the jumps are pretty fun. Idk though to me it feels like I'm playing 200 bpm yuikonnu jpop stuff instead of 100 bpm slow ballad music xD I kinda expected less movement and somewhat slower sliders but that's just me I guess. Probably doing that would be to make it way easier though and I don't think you want that :v Well yeah I never had the intention of slow map and song, I don't really like playing nor mapping those, energy and intensity that goes along with the song is fun, which is what I aim for.


Anyway hope this helps. Good luck! :)
Thanks! :)
posted
Alright so, since the situation calmed down, I went over the original DQ post, went over the map again, NCs seem fine, there are no 1/8 which can be considered bad or unfitting, they are either completely fit with the vocals or rhythm, or creating a better rhythm such as 01:08:143 (2,3) - .

As this was the main issue, I will try pushing it forward again.
posted
00:38:593 (4,1) - Such low ds
00:50:893 (1,2,3,4,5) - Way too forced
00:51:868 (5) - Remove whistle from body please
00:56:443 (6,7,1) - DS is a bit confusing here, same spacing, different rhythm
01:00:193 (6) - Silence end?
01:01:093 (4) - ^^
01:13:693 (1) - ^^
01:53:293 (1,1) - Might be difficult to read, space the circle closer to the slider
02:43:093 (3) - Drum sample feels weird, as it isn't used otherwhere
02:47:218 (6) - Sure this is there? The other 1/8 feel fine, but this one is a bit weird
03:16:393 (1,2,3,1) - Feels forced, and the end feel weird (if you don't change it to make it less forced, at least silence the ends)
04:24:943 (3,1) - ^^

Call me
show more
Please sign in to reply.