forum

Franz Liszt - La Campanella (8 Bit Remix)

posted
Total Posts
125
show more
Stefan
Love the original song. And then in MIDI? Hell yea!
LMT
Hi just dropping by to say it's so good.
thanks for reading.
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre
awesome
Cryptic
As promised, I'm here.

Grand Etude
  1. 00:04:008 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Why did you stop changing the direction the 2,3 is tilted? Based on previous patterns 2,3 would be CTRL+H'd. Also, 2,3 should be NC'd in both parts to continue NC consistency.
  2. 00:06:108 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Conceptually this entire pattern is a mess. Musically speaking: there is an octave been 1,2 - 2,3 are the same note, and there are two octaves between 3,4. The first issue here is spacing, as if you base this on pitch at all, (which you should considering you put same-pitched notes stacking on top of each other), then 3,4 should have approximately twice the spacing that 1,2 does. Additionally, 5 is the same note as 2,3, but 7 is not the same note at all! However, with 7, you gave it a placement which is similar to the 2,3,5 patterning, making it seem as if 7 has the same pitch, which it does not. Overall I think that this pattern doesn't accurately reflect the music.
  3. That point basically thoroughly repeats itself through the rest of the map with incorrect spacing in relation to pitch shift and not observing your own stacking policies.
  4. 00:21:558 (8) - Places like here are the exact same note, so they'd be better represented as a triple probably.
  5. 00:22:458 (6) - This pattern doesn't work like in did in the other places. See, at the beginning you were able to play the kick as something that works due to both notes falling on the slider head, whereas here only one note falls on the head, making this sound very dissonant. I'd find something that better represents the music, because this is definitely not equivalent to 00:08:058 (6,1) - there and the other places prior to this seciton.
  6. 00:23:358 (6,1) - You're missing an entire note by using this pattern on the 1/8th tick which once again, really leaves this feeling empty. When you first requested this mod from me about a month ago you said that you thought we viewed music in similar ways. I disagree, as you're not really changing your patterns as the music changes. I think your interpretation is only halfway complete to what I would consider a proper interpretation of a song as complex as this.
  7. Repeat those points a lot again.
  8. 00:37:908 (1,2,3,4,1) - I think not having any additional spacing on the 00:38:208 (1) - really underplays the music here. A chord hits on that 1 and the beat is definitely stronger than the previous, yet you give it the same spacing consistently throughout this section. I think a more accurate representation would be a very condensed acceleration and decceleration stream, as if you listen to the music, its essentially just a simple up and down, walking motion. (But its definitely not a constant as your streams seem to convey.)
  9. 00:41:508 (1,2,3,4,1) - Suddenly straight streams! You basically stick with these for no apparent reason which is kind of bland, as the consistency is lacking.
  10. 00:47:133 - this is super easy to represent with a kick or something and yet you ignore these, I'm not quit sure why but it ends up making the rhythm feel empty.
  11. 00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I like how these are essentially the same pattern except with different spacing. Once again, you aren't properly adhering to the polices established earlier in the map with pitch stacking and DS changes. In fact, its weird because 00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - is basically the exact opposite of what it should be whereas 00:52:608 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - is correct for the most part.
  12. I don't know, I think I'm done here. My current mod tells you the consistency/conceptual issues I saw throughout the map using a few places as reference. Me only modding this much saves me a lot of time, especially since I get the feeling most of this will end up being denied (as my points require you to majorly overhaul most of your map).
Good luck.
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre

Cryptic wrote:

As promised, I'm here.

00:04:008 (1,2,3,1,2,3) - Why did you stop changing the direction the 2,3 is tilted? Based on previous patterns 2,3 would be CTRL+H'd. Also, 2,3 should be NC'd in both parts to continue NC consistency. Fixed.

00:06:108 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - Conceptually this entire pattern is a mess. Musically speaking: there is an octave been 1,2 - 2,3 are the same note, and there are two octaves between 3,4. I don't really get where did you find a 2 octave length, since the sheet music says like this:
Do you see these 2 red circles? They are 3 and 4. And the length between them is 1 octave.

00:21:558 (8) - Places like here are the exact same note, so they'd be better represented as a triple probably.
No. Because a note on a blue tick is Grace Note. I can't allow myself to set a grace note as a solo note, because technically (as a piano player) it matches better with a slider.

00:22:458 (6) - This pattern doesn't work like in did in the other places. See, at the beginning you were able to play the kick as something that works due to both notes falling on the slider head, whereas here only one note falls on the head, making this sound very dissonant. I'd find something that better represents the music, because this is definitely not equivalent to 00:08:058 (6,1) - there and the other places prior to this seciton. I don't really get what you meant. Since even at 00:08:058 - the note doesn't land on the slider head. A difference in spacing between first and second part you have mentioned isn't that critical and plays flawlessly (i have tested this map with many players)

00:23:358 (6,1) - You're missing an entire note by using this pattern on the 1/8th tick which once again, really leaves this feeling empty. When you first requested this mod from me about a month ago you said that you thought we viewed music in similar ways. I disagree, as you're not really changing your patterns as the music changes. I think your interpretation is only halfway complete to what I would consider a proper interpretation of a song as complex as this. I know about this and i skipped this on purpose because it affects in a dramatic way on gameplay, which gives much more useless hardness as it should has. Long story short - it's not that hard to play it on piano, but it would be quiet weird in osu!game.

00:37:908 (1,2,3,4,1) - I think not having any additional spacing on the 00:38:208 (1) - really underplays the music here. A chord hits on that 1 and the beat is definitely stronger than the previous, yet you give it the same spacing consistently throughout this section. I think a more accurate representation would be a very condensed acceleration and decceleration stream, as if you listen to the music, its essentially just a simple up and down, walking motion. (But its definitely not a constant as your streams seem to convey.) You should not forget, that a FULL interpritaion of this etude may cause full of unrankable/unplayable stuff, as you know. Sometimes i've needed to switch from one logic (interpritation) to another (my style). But however, that part is a hybrid of one and second, since i tried to follow the etude interpritation and to let it work according to my style.

00:41:508 (1,2,3,4,1) - Suddenly straight streams! You basically stick with these for no apparent reason which is kind of bland, as the consistency is lacking. Dude, you're paying too much attention on "consistency" It's way too nazi.
00:47:133 - this is super easy to represent with a kick or something and yet you ignore these, I'm not quit sure why but it ends up making the rhythm feel empty. Probably we have a different feel about this etude. There is a difference between how it listens and how it FEELS exactly, right? Try to play it, for me this goes flawless.

00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I like how these are essentially the same pattern except with different spacing. Once again, you aren't properly adhering to the polices established earlier in the map with pitch stacking and DS changes. In fact, its weird because 00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - is basically the exact opposite of what it should be whereas 00:52:608 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - is correct for the most part. Can you give any images with more detalied information about this, since i don't really get what is wrong with 00:51:708, since it doesn't really differ from other similar patterns.

I don't know, I think I'm done here. My current mod tells you the consistency/conceptual issues I saw throughout the map using a few places as reference. Me only modding this much saves me a lot of time, especially since I get the feeling most of this will end up being denied (as my points require you to majorly overhaul most of your map). This probably ends up with different view on this piece. Before mapping this i spent many months to learn it

Good luck. Thanks ~ <3
7ambda
Can you blanket 02:17:808 (1) better in Fabulous?
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre

F1r3tar wrote:

Can you blanket 02:17:808 (1) better in Fabulous?
blanket how? There are no blanket to blanket.
7ambda

Louis Cyphre wrote:

blanket how? There are no blanket to blanket.
Sorry, I meant to say make the slider look better than how currently is.



The parts that touch itself (or nearly) make the slider look ugly imo. Of course, you're always free to disagree.
Monstrata
Grand Etude

00:07:158 (8) - I'm not really a fan of how you're using kicksliders here. You play them just like you would a circle... click and release. Play-wise it just feels so similar to all the other circle jumps you already use here. I would use triplets instead for some rhythmic diversity. Applies to other sliders in this section too.
00:18:408 (1,2,3,4) - This is good. Spacing increase for pitch. Match this with a lower spacing on 00:19:008 (1,2) - though, otherwise you lose the effect completely due to how large these two jumps are.
00:19:908 (1,2,3,4) - How about flipping 00:19:308 (1,2,3,4) - and using the same spacing design here? It fits the melody anyways. Just an idea.
00:35:508 (1) - Not going to position it lower like 480||242 and complete the pattern?
00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I don't see why the spacing increases going into the second pattern. If anything, it should decrease due to the lack of instruments on the second iteration..
00:55:308 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - ^
01:00:408 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) - Can't really explain your intention for using different patterns and spacings here.
01:01:308 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - The spacing here is quite inconsistent too.
01:02:058 (2) - No emphasis onto this note?
01:05:808 (5,6) - Jumping from sliderhead to sliderhead doesnt seem like a good idea imo. It creates too big of a jump difference. Slider > Slider jumps are far easier than circle > circle jumps
01:07:008 (1,2,3,4) - Carrying on from the previous point, the spacing you use for 3>4 becomes so large that it overshadows your jumps from 01:07:908 - onward... 01:07:908 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - These make a lot of sense, and play really well, but following 01:07:608 (3,4) - they lose their importance.
01:11:208 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - These are just way too big for no reason :P.
01:21:858 (6,1) - Continuing on about the kicksliders from my first point, you can see how emphasis is really lost onto 1 because you use kicksliders isntead of triplets.
02:00:108 (2) - Going by your NC pattern, you should be NC"ing here. 02:00:408 (1) - Remove NC and NC 02:00:708 (4) - instead.
02:27:108 (6,7,1,2,3,4) - These felt really cluttered together, Can you spread the pattern out more?

Second half of the map is a looot better. Really, nothing to say. Good job.

Magnificent

00:16:233 (5) - Spacing is inconsistent here.
00:22:458 (4) - You were doing so well ;c. I really think triplets are better. You introduced the sectio with a triplet too, with 00:21:558 (1,2,1) - .
00:57:408 (2,1,2) - I think these overlaps are too close. They were hard to read for me.
00:58:608 (1,2) - I would swap NC's and maybe consider NC spam on 00:58:908 - etc... every 2 notes so players are more aware of the spacing increase pattern.
01:51:708 (1,2,3) - Somehow, this curve just looks really irregular to me, like you didnt use a slider conversion tool here or something xP.
01:57:333 (4,1) - Spacing appears irregular compared to the stream.
02:23:208 (1,2,3) - Uneven spacing.
02:23:808 (2) - ^ I guess since you scaled the pattern up, all of them end up being slightly off xP.
02:28:608 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - This felt really lame. How about going back to 1/4 repeats again or something? You built up to this part with a lot of jumps with increasing spacing so I think people are expecting something a bit more dense.
02:33:858 - Was this break intentional?
03:01:083 (2) - Remove this and begin the stream when the piano begins (on 03:01:158 - ).
03:02:733 (12,1) - This jsut isn't good imo. Putting a 1/4 jump like this really messes up players.
03:04:526 (6,1) - ^

Fabulous

00:18:858 - How about mapping this? Maybe put the circle in the center of the triangle? Hmm it seems like you neglect this note later too, I don't think this is a good choice though xP. Maybe you have a reason tho.
00:22:308 (5,1) - Good. Do the same for 00:23:208 (3,1) - with the overlap?
00:31:308 (3,1) - Overlap here can be better too.
00:51:258 (4,6) - This is quite close together. It's closer than 00:50:958 (2,5) - so you might want to space them farther for that symmetriy pattern,
01:19:908 (3,1) - Overlap can be more precise here too. 01:17:208 (6,1) - This is good.
01:21:708 (3,1) - ^
02:17:808 (1) - This can be a lot better honestly. The slider-borders are so uneven.

Intense

01:04:908 (1,2) - It's really easy to mistake this for a 1/2 jump because a note on 01:05:058 - definitely exists, and the spacing really resembles a 1/2 jump like 01:03:708 (3,1) -
01:06:558 (2,1) - I think this jump is way too big. Make it smaller because the pitch continues to go up and up, yet the spacings you use later aren't as large.
03:08:806 (1) - Can you rotate the slider a bit more, or make the head more visible? It's hard to tell whether you should go clockwise or counterclockwise because the head and tail are really close together and theyre obstructed.

Tough

00:04:008 (1,2,1,2) - Blankets can be better.
00:20:658 (2,1) - ^
00:34:308 (1) - Okay this is definitely unrankable because of how ambiguous the slider-track is. There is no inside edge to the slider at all, so you can't tell where to go just by looking at the slider.

Average

Good.

Soft

03:48:406 (1) - This is not enough spinner recovery time imo. You should have 4 beats (one full measure) of break for a beginner. It doesn't help that the next circle is almost at the edge of the screen. If you won't change the spinner length, then please make the circle near the center of the screen.

[]

Alright, that should be all. I'm concerned about the highest two diff's still... I'll see what you have to say first though, and whether you plan on making changes etc...
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre
Grand Etude

00:07:158 (8) - I'm not really a fan of how you're using kicksliders here. You play them just like you would a circle... click and release. Play-wise it just feels so similar to all the other circle jumps you already use here. I would use triplets instead for some rhythmic diversity. Applies to other sliders in this section too.
I can't use triplets, because those notes are grace notes which are suppose to hit easy and smooth.
00:18:408 (1,2,3,4) - This is good. Spacing increase for pitch. Match this with a lower spacing on 00:19:008 (1,2) - though, otherwise you lose the effect completely due to how large these two jumps are. Agreed, fixed.
00:19:908 (1,2,3,4) - How about flipping 00:19:308 (1,2,3,4) - and using the same spacing design here? It fits the melody anyways. Just an idea. Well, why not. Fixed
00:35:508 (1) - Not going to position it lower like 480||242 and complete the pattern? I don't know why did you set exactly 480/242 while 492/252 goes in a perfect way. So yea, changed position to 492/252
00:51:708 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - I don't see why the spacing increases going into the second pattern. If anything, it should decrease due to the lack of instruments on the second iteration.. It increases because notes are going one by one in a lower octave, same in the next combo set which goes down in a higher octave.
00:55:308 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5,6) - ^ Same here
01:00:408 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,1,2,1,2) - Can't really explain your intention for using different patterns and spacings here. Hmm, easy. Because notes are going down and they are no jumps inbetween them
01:01:308 (1,2,3,4,1,2) - The spacing here is quite inconsistent too. Here i agree, it's too much as it should be. Fixed
01:02:058 (2) - No emphasis onto this note? fox example? :0
01:05:808 (5,6) - Jumping from sliderhead to sliderhead doesnt seem like a good idea imo. It creates too big of a jump difference. Slider > Slider jumps are far easier than circle > circle jumps. It supposed to be like that, since each slider represents the left hand notes, while higher notes, which has a great gap goes on the right hand. That's why each set of 2 cirles supposed to be a great jumps.
01:07:008 (1,2,3,4) - Carrying on from the previous point, the spacing you use for 3>4 becomes so large that it overshadows your jumps from 01:07:908 - onward... 01:07:908 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1,2) - These make a lot of sense, and play really well, but following 01:07:608 (3,4) - they lose their importance. The section which starts from 01:07:908 (1) - is a section with different logic. Probably you didn't like how it goes from Heavy to Light, but it supposed like that, since once again it's another section with different usage of notes. I had an idea to completely remove sliders from these 2 sections, but it would give way too much hardness for players. So yeah.
01:11:208 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - These are just way too big for no reason :P. 2 octave jumps. They are not hard, really.
01:21:858 (6,1) - Continuing on about the kicksliders from my first point, you can see how emphasis is really lost onto 1 because you use kicksliders isntead of triplets. Once again, it's a grace note again, they should go light and smooth.
02:00:108 (2) - Going by your NC pattern, you should be NC"ing here. 02:00:408 (1) - Remove NC and NC 02:00:708 (4) - instead. Agreed, Fixed
02:27:108 (6,7,1,2,3,4) - These felt really cluttered together, Can you spread the pattern out more? Sure, fixed

Magnificent

00:16:233 (5) - Spacing is inconsistent here. Oops, fixed
00:22:458 (4) - You were doing so well ;c. I really think triplets are better. You introduced the sectio with a triplet too, with 00:21:558 (1,2,1) - . Replaced ALL sliders with triplets. I did so
00:57:408 (2,1,2) - I think these overlaps are too close. They were hard to read for me. Hmm, i don't really get what meant. There are no overlaps here... :/
00:58:608 (1,2) - I would swap NC's and maybe consider NC spam on 00:58:908 - etc... every 2 notes so players are more aware of the spacing increase pattern. Yea, that's cool, done in that way.
01:51:708 (1,2,3) - Somehow, this curve just looks really irregular to me, like you didnt use a slider conversion tool here or something xP. Fixed
01:57:333 (4,1) - Spacing appears irregular compared to the stream. Fixed
02:23:208 (1,2,3) - Uneven spacing. The spacing goes just more and more greater.
02:23:808 (2) - ^ I guess since you scaled the pattern up, all of them end up being slightly off xP. I didn't really get what you mean :/
02:28:608 (1,2,3,1,2,3,1) - This felt really lame. How about going back to 1/4 repeats again or something? You built up to this part with a lot of jumps with increasing spacing so I think people are expecting something a bit more dense. It's just a continues repeating pattern, it should be mapped like something really special imo.
02:33:858 - Was this break intentional? Yea.
03:01:083 (2) - Remove this and begin the stream when the piano begins (on 03:01:158 - ). Shame on me, yea, fixed.
03:02:733 (12,1) - This jsut isn't good imo. Putting a 1/4 jump like this really messes up players. decreased the distance
03:04:526 (6,1) - ^ Fixed


00:18:858 - How about mapping this? Maybe put the circle in the center of the triangle? Hmm it seems like you neglect this note later too, I don't think this is a good choice though xP. Maybe you have a reason tho. I just wanted to follow main theme without additional melisms like Liszt really like to include ;)
00:22:308 (5,1) - Good. Do the same for 00:23:208 (3,1) - with the overlap? fixed
00:31:308 (3,1) - Overlap here can be better too. I see no problem with this
00:51:258 (4,6) - This is quite close together. It's closer than 00:50:958 (2,5) - so you might want to space them farther for that symmetriy pattern, Fixed
01:21:708 (3,1) - ^ fixed
02:17:808 (1) - This can be a lot better honestly. The slider-borders are so uneven. Fixed


Intense
01:04:908 (1,2) - It's really easy to mistake this for a 1/2 jump because a note on 01:05:058 - definitely exists, and the spacing really resembles a 1/2 jump like 01:03:708 (3,1) - added a circle at 01:05:058 (2) -
01:06:558 (2,1) - I think this jump is way too big. Make it smaller because the pitch continues to go up and up, yet the spacings you use later aren't as large.
fixed
03:08:806 (1) - Can you rotate the slider a bit more, or make the head more visible? It's hard to tell whether you should go clockwise or counterclockwise because the head and tail are really close together and theyre obstructed. fixed
The rest in other difficulties are fixed. In Soft i've decreased the spinner length and the unrankble slider in Tough is done in another way. Thanks for the check!
-Nya-
Heya~ M4M here. First off, I won't be able to mod the last two diffs since their star ratings are extremely high and I can't even map diffs that are that difficult and I can't even play them without failing. But don't worry, my song for M4M won't be more than 4 diffs.

General:
  1. The timing in the “magnificent” diff is inconsistent with the other diffs.
  2. Your current filesize is quite big. I suggest trying to lower the size of your BG’s or just convert them to jpeg format. Currently their sizes are quite large, ranging from 1mb.
  3. You can uncheck widescreen support in all diffs, if necessary, since you don’t have a SB.

Fabulous:
  1. 00:04:308 (2,2) –Perhaps add new combo’s here to emphasize the change in the sound, like you did here: 00:01:308 (1,1) –
  2. 00:07:233 –You can place a note here to emphasize that beat. Feels a bit weird to leave it empty since the beat/sound sounds strong.
  3. 00:08:133 - ^, etc. Perhaps you don’t have to place them everywhere.
  4. 00:15:108 (3) –With this current shape of the slider, flow can be a bit uncomfortable. Perhaps try something like this instead:
  5. 00:17:208 (5) –Add a combo here to be consistent with the previous combo patterns.
  6. 00:27:258 (4,5) –Check the flow again. Will be better if you place the slider like this:
  7. 01:39:408 (2,1) –Perfect the stack on the tail? Will look neater imo.
  8. 01:49:608 (1) –I don’t really understand this new combo since there’s nothing different in the music that will suggest a new combo here.
  9. 01:52:908 (5) –Add new combo here to be consistent with 01:49:308 (1) –
  10. 02:29:208 (1,1,1,1,1) –All the new combo’s here are being overused imo. If there’s nothing that changes in the music that will support a new combo, then rather don’t add new combo’s.
  11. 03:29:506 (1) –To be consistent with 03:25:306 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) – I think it would be better to add a new combo there.
  12. 03:31:306 (5) –Same thing here. To be consistent with 03:27:706 (1,2) – rather add a new combo there.

Intense:
  1. 00:04:308 (2,2) –Same as in the previous diff. Add new combo’s like you did in the previous part for that same similar beat.
  2. 00:28:608 (3,1,3,1,3,1,3,1) – I’m not sure if it’s just me, but the spacings here look different each time. Since the beat is the same for these patterns rather keep the spacing consistent. Especially 00:31:308 (3,1) – looks much different than the rest.
  3. 00:37:908 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) – Same here. Some of them look much differently spaced than the others. Use the same distance spacing for these patterns.
  4. 00:50:658 –It really feels/sounds as if a note is needed here. You also mapped that similar note here: 00:54:858 –
  5. 02:29:208 (1,1,1,1,1) –Same as in the “fabulous” diff. Not all these combo’s are needed imo.
  6. 03:37:006 (1,1,1,1,1,1) –Unnecessary combo’s.
  7. 04:17:806 (2,2,2,2) –I think there should be new combo’s here to be consistent with 04:16:006 (1) – or just remove the new combo here 04:16:006 (1) –



Tough:
    1. 00:46:908 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) –All of these circles in a row can get a bit tiring even for a Hard player. I suggest changing some of them into short sliders, just for variety. Perhaps 00:47:808 (3,4,3,4,3,4) – just those few.
    2. 01:09:858 (1,1,1,1,1) –In the previous two diffs that I had modded, you didn’t place this many new combo’s after one another in this section of the song, so rather remove some of the new combo’s since there is nothing in the music that changes to support these new combo’s.
    3. 01:57:108 (1) –Perhaps remove new combo here so 01:57:408 (2) – is a combo on its own.
    4. 02:09:108 (2) –Shouldn’t there be a new combo here to be consistent with the other similar patterns.
    5. 02:29:208 (1,1,1,1,1) –Same argument as in other two diffs.
    6. 02:36:258 (2,1) –Perhaps stack here on the tail to make the pattern look neater.
    7. 02:37:458 (1,2) –Why is the distance between these two objects so small? Seems a bit odd.
    8. 03:29:656 (1) –The rhythm that this slider is following sounds a bit weird to me. Maybe something like this instead:
    9. 03:59:206 (1) –Nazi, but just move this slider a bit to the left for better flow from 03:59:056 (3) –

Average:
  1. 00:18:408 (2) –Just move this tail a teensy bit upwards to have better flow from 00:18:108 (1) – Same with 00:19:308 (2) – Just move the tail a bit to the left. It’ll look something like this:
  2. 01:36:408 (3,4) –These two circles on their own might make it a bit difficult for beginners to read the rhythm. Perhaps change (3) into a slider to make the pattern more readable:
  3. 03:54:706 (1) –I don’t really understand why this slider is a combo on its own. Either remove new combo here or remove new combo here 03:55:606 (1) –

Soft:
  1. 00:06:108 (1) –Since it’s possible to snap this circle normally, I highly suggest you do since the spacing must be consistent throughout the entire diff. Beginners might get confused with the current spacing.
  2. 00:13:608 (1) –I think you are missing a soft-whistle hitsound on the tail of this slider.
  3. 00:19:008 (1,1) –Unnecessary comboing imo.
  4. 01:40:908 (1) –This spinner end is not snapped properly.
  5. 03:10:606 (1) –I think this slider can also be spaced normally. 1.0X

The diffs that I had modded looks really nice. Just a few combo’s and placements that can still be improved I guess, but other than that this set looks good~
Good Luck~ :D
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre

-Nya- wrote:

Heya~ M4M here. First off, I won't be able to mod the last two diffs since their star ratings are extremely high and I can't even map diffs that are that difficult and I can't even play them without failing. But don't worry, my song for M4M won't be more than 4 diffs. I absolutely don't care about the difficulty amount and length :P

General:
  1. The timing in the “magnificent” diff is inconsistent with the other diffs. Oops, fixed
  2. Your current filesize is quite big. I suggest trying to lower the size of your BG’s or just convert them to jpeg format. Currently their sizes are quite large, ranging from 1mb. converted to jpg
  3. You can uncheck widescreen support in all diffs, if necessary, since you don’t have a SB.
yup

Fabulous:
  1. 00:04:308 (2,2) –Perhaps add new combo’s here to emphasize the change in the sound, like you did here: 00:01:308 (1,1) – actually nope, since it's a waltz pattern
  2. 00:07:233 –You can place a note here to emphasize that beat. Feels a bit weird to leave it empty since the beat/sound sounds strong. That note is considered as melism
  3. 00:08:133 - ^, etc. Perhaps you don’t have to place them everywhere. done
  4. 00:15:108 (3) –With this current shape of the slider, flow can be a bit uncomfortable. Perhaps try something like this instead: I don't really see any issues with this
  5. 00:17:208 (5) –Add a combo here to be consistent with the previous combo patterns. done
  6. 00:27:258 (4,5) –Check the flow again. Will be better if you place the slider like this: ^
  7. 01:39:408 (2,1) –Perfect the stack on the tail? Will look neater imo. I don't like perfect stacks of tail (yea, probably i'm strage :D)
  8. 01:49:608 (1) –I don’t really understand this new combo since there’s nothing different in the music that will suggest a new combo here. Because it changes to 1/3
  9. 01:52:908 (5) –Add new combo here to be consistent with 01:49:308 (1) – yea
  10. 02:29:208 (1,1,1,1,1) –All the new combo’s here are being overused imo. If there’s nothing that changes in the music that will support a new combo, then rather don’t add new combo’s. It's just a combo spam, it's cool and fits for me really nice :P
  11. 03:29:506 (1) –To be consistent with 03:25:306 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10) – I think it would be better to add a new combo there. I don't get it
  12. 03:31:306 (5) –Same thing here. To be consistent with 03:27:706 (1,2) – rather add a new combo there.
^


Intense:
  1. 00:04:308 (2,2) –Same as in the previous diff. Add new combo’s like you did in the previous part for that same similar beat. ^
  2. 00:28:608 (3,1,3,1,3,1,3,1) – I’m not sure if it’s just me, but the spacings here look different each time. Since the beat is the same for these patterns rather keep the spacing consistent. Especially 00:31:308 (3,1) – looks much different than the rest. hm?
  3. 00:37:908 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) – Same here. Some of them look much differently spaced than the others. Use the same distance spacing for these patterns. ^
  4. 00:50:658 –It really feels/sounds as if a note is needed here. You also mapped that similar note here: 00:54:858 – melism
  5. 02:29:208 (1,1,1,1,1) –Same as in the “fabulous” diff. Not all these combo’s are needed imo. ^
  6. 03:37:006 (1,1,1,1,1,1) –Unnecessary combo’s. ^
  7. 04:17:806 (2,2,2,2) –I think there should be new combo’s here to be consistent with 04:16:006 (1) – or just remove the new combo here 04:16:006 (1) –
removed new combo from 04:16:006.



Tough:
    1. 00:46:908 (1,2,3,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3,4,5,1,2,3) –All of these circles in a row can get a bit tiring even for a Hard player. I suggest changing some of them into short sliders, just for variety. Perhaps 00:47:808 (3,4,3,4,3,4) – just those few. I don't know, but even such an intermediate player like me gets it perfectly
    2. 01:09:858 (1,1,1,1,1) –In the previous two diffs that I had modded, you didn’t place this many new combo’s after one another in this section of the song, so rather remove some of the new combo’s since there is nothing in the music that changes to support these new combo’s. removed
    3. 01:57:108 (1) –Perhaps remove new combo here so 01:57:408 (2) – is a combo on its own. yup
    4. 02:09:108 (2) –Shouldn’t there be a new combo here to be consistent with the other similar patterns. yea
    5. 02:29:208 (1,1,1,1,1) –Same argument as in other two diffs. ^
    6. 02:36:258 (2,1) –Perhaps stack here on the tail to make the pattern look neater. i don't like stacks on the tail
    7. 02:37:458 (1,2) –Why is the distance between these two objects so small? Seems a bit odd. fixed
    8. 03:29:656 (1) –The rhythm that this slider is following sounds a bit weird to me. Maybe something like this instead: fixed
    9. 03:59:206 (1) –Nazi, but just move this slider a bit to the left for better flow from 03:59:056 (3) –
fixed

Average:
  1. 00:18:408 (2) –Just move this tail a teensy bit upwards to have better flow from 00:18:108 (1) – Same with 00:19:308 (2) – Just move the tail a bit to the left. It’ll look something like this: fixed
  2. 01:36:408 (3,4) –These two circles on their own might make it a bit difficult for beginners to read the rhythm. Perhaps change (3) into a slider to make the pattern more readable: fixed
  3. 03:54:706 (1) –I don’t really understand why this slider is a combo on its own. Either remove new combo here or remove new combo here 03:55:606 (1) –
done in another way

Soft:
  1. 00:06:108 (1) –Since it’s possible to snap this circle normally, I highly suggest you do since the spacing must be consistent throughout the entire diff. Beginners might get confused with the current spacing. fixed
  2. 00:13:608 (1) –I think you are missing a soft-whistle hitsound on the tail of this slider. yea
  3. 00:19:008 (1,1) –Unnecessary comboing imo. fixed
  4. 01:40:908 (1) –This spinner end is not snapped properly. corrected
  5. 03:10:606 (1) –I think this slider can also be spaced normally. 1.0X I believe it's well enough ok, i'll consider your suggestion

The diffs that I had modded looks really nice. Just a few combo’s and placements that can still be improved I guess, but other than that this set looks good~
Good Luck~ :D
MouseEasy


I playtested it and i think that the part starting from 02:49:008 (1) - to 03:01:008 (1) - on [Grand Etude] is readable, just uncommon patterns but i'm sure the mapper knows what he's doing.
Granje
о.о/ I have tested this map and i have not found any pattern unreadable. another thing that not every pattern I can pass purely but this is the problem of my fingers, not a map=)
Elysion


Playtested, everything is easily readable: the difficulty comes in finger control.
Treat the slider-stack patterns 02:49:008 (1) for example, as really really quick jumps from the slider beginning to the double stacks.
Those patterns are unusual but make sense.
Kynan


Really awesome map, but like everyone said, the part at 02:49:008 (1) - is "readable" but is unplayable pretty much... IT MAKES SENSE but it's a "what the fuck am I supposed to do here" kind of pattern.
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre
thanks a lot for opinions and testplays guys
Leaf

testplay
If you are clear on this map, you will get in rsi lol
01:48:408 (1) - almost player miss this part, you'll have to think about different styles
01:11:208 (1) - not bad this

※just my think :)
-GN
on the hard parts:

01:09:558 (1,2,3,4,5,6,1,2,3,4,5) - this being one circle shorter than expected throws people off when trying to hit the next jumps, but it's not something you should change. it's just a matter of paying attention, not particularly hard to read

02:49:008 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - onwards - absolutely brutal pattern. not hard to read at all, but physically being able to hit it is another matter entirely, at least properly. i don't think you should change it even if it's a challenge, as it's a well designed one that can still be handled in multiple ways. it's fun to play.

Kaine
Hi
01:11:208 (1,2) - This is great, but a little too hard imo; while it IS one of the most intense parts in the song, I don't think that a pattern of such harshness is needed. It's perfectly readable tho IMO
01:51:708 (1) - 02:50:208 (1) - Jesus christ these patterns are hard to play. But yet again, great way to represent the music and perfectly playable, just takes some getting used to ;o

God knows where my first plays are, I've formatted several times since then lol
Neliel
Yo
Everything in this map fits the music perfectly. Most patterns play really well.
02:49:008 (1) - fits perfectly, challenging, but not impossible. Any change to this pattern would kill its perfection. I really tried coming up with a way to change it, but I cant think of anything that goes along with the music as well as this does.
Cyllinus
What happened to the hitsound that said "excellent"? I thought that was really neat.
02:30:408 (1) -
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre

Cyllinus wrote:

What happened to the hitsound that said "excellent"? I thought that was really neat.
02:30:408 (1) -
A very good question my dear friend. Some weeks ago i had to remove it, because particular members of qualification team said me that it's random and it has to be removed, since it has no sense. I was trying to prove that this is actually good and sounds perfect to the flow, but since nobody said a word about it's goodness i just thought it's my imagination and only i enjoy this kind of stuff. However, a BIG bold however, since you, a person who enjoyed this, have mentioned it's absense, i'll put it right back!

Also: Thanks a lot for testplaying guys!

EDIT: Easter egg will be added in extra package
Monstrata
Looks good now. Here's your bubble!
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre
-GN
good luck!

(i enjoyed that "excellent" too, keep it)
Sonnyc
Average.
00:42:408 (3,1) - Do you think this overlap is avoidable? It doesn't feel good in readability/visuals.
00:50:808 (1) - Wouldn't removing nc fit your symmetry pattern better?
02:17:808 (2) - Mind NC? It would emphasize the unique slider shape better.
03:28:906 (2) - Is the whistle inside the slide intended? It feels really noisy.
03:33:106 (2) - Having multiple reverses felt too boring compared to the music. Something different happens around 03:37:606. I think you could catch that instead of a long reverse.

Grand.
The correct way to write this diff's name would be "Grande Etude", with the "e" at the end of "grand". "Etude" is a feminine noun so you have to make the adjective "grand" agree accordingly
mind replying the above concern?
00:16:908 (5) - Is this placement intended? Personally, placing somewhere between at 00:16:308 (1,3) would feel more balanced. The current placement feels less relation in your combo.
02:32:808 - Is this sudden hitsound intended? It feels a little too loud currently.
04:23:506 (2) - Mind adding a new combo? Having a follow point after 04:22:606 (1) felt somewhat inconsistent.z

This mapset is awesome.
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre
00:16:908 (5) - Is this placement intended? Personally, placing somewhere between at 00:16:308 (1,3) would feel more balanced. The current placement feels less relation in your combo.
well, 3 and 5 are same notes, but placing them each in one stack doesn't look batter, so yea, i'll fix it as you said.
02:32:808 - Is this sudden hitsound intended? It feels a little too loud currently.
Oops, fixed
and added new combo
03:33:106 (2) - Having multiple reverses felt too boring compared to the music. Something different happens around 03:37:606. I think you could catch that instead of a long reverse.
Actually nothing different happens around mentioned section, it just goes down and down. I want to keep this. The rest on Average has been fixed. Pattern at 00:41:000+ was fixed by re-moving these objects 00:41:508 (1,2,3,1) - . Also fixed NC to make it similar to previous patterns.


And thanks for stars <3
Sonnyc
Nominated.
Monstrata
Qualified.
Shurelia
WHoaAAAAAAAA


edit : mfw most of the tester are top players . (mostly 2 digits rank)
Myxo
Congratz :3
Natsu
nice! congratz 8-)
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre
Thanks everyone <3
Kynan
HERE WE GO :O
Bence
artist name in original language not included smh
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre

Bence wrote:

artist name in original language not included smh
Liszt Ferenc?
Cremation
the Original name is : Liszt Ferenc
Constantine
puush mirror link for extras

vk download links were pretty slow for my ISP so
Topic Starter
Louis Cyphre

Constantine wrote:

puush mirror link for extras

vk download links were pretty slow for my ISP so
changed to puush link. Works now?
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply