community forum

[mapping discussion] "punk mapping"

posted
Total Posts
46
Topic Starter
jawns
Hi, I am Jawns, and I have recently posted a similar topic on reddit, but then realized, that i hadn't actually posted it to the place, designed for mappers to see these things...

(i made a yotube video as well, discussing this subject, if anybody is interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Wqbz3g_j2Q )

So, basically...
As you all know, there are some ways of mapping, that are common and considered "good mapping" (after all, this is the mapping techniques forum)...
However, i recently tried to see, whether what is considered "good mapping" is what i have the most fun playing, and I've come to the conclusion: No, not necessarily.

The point were it stood out to me the most, was after I finished my first mapset p/4528557#p4528557. The first map i mapped, the most difficult one, stands out a lot, as i at no point used distance snap, which is quite obvious. While the other maps are still a bit all over the place (it is my first mapset after all) they at least use distance snap, and they are clearly "makes a bit more sense" or whatever...
So I was surprised, that after playing through them all again, that I preferred the first map, despite it being so "random".

When I decided on what to map next, I decided to map it in a similar style. I didn't want to think about "flow" or "good patterns" or spacing or anything like that, I just wanted to map what I felt would fit the music. I decided to call this way of mapping "punk mapping": forget about the rules. Don't care about what anybody else is thinking.

This is the map I ended up with: t/418161

Now, after making it, I've played through it a few times, and (being completely biased here, i know) I enjoyed the crap out of it, and that was really my only goad. In fact, it might be the map I currently have the most fun playing in general.

Despite this, the map I'm currently mapping, is one where i focus more on what is generally considered good mapping: Good flow, consistent spacing ect. This is because of two reasons:
1. I feel like if I understand "regular" mapping better, i might be able to apply this knowledge to my "punk maps"
2. A lot of people, after playing the "punk maps", will assume i have no idea what I'm doing. If I make a bunch of normal maps, or maybe even get a few ranked, I can at least point to them.

If you've managed to read everything up to this point, congratulations! and also thank you...
But you probably wonder what the point of all this is.

Well, there are a few things i would like to discuss:

1: Do you think anybody else, besides me, would consider my map fun to play, or am I just weird...?
2: Do we sometimes focus too much on what is considered "good mapping" rather than what is actually fun to play?
3: Can maps that don't follow these "rules" be fun to play anyway; are there anything that objectively makes a mad good or bad, or is mapping entirely subjective?
4: Is it important to know how to follow the rules, even if your usual style is consistently breaking them?
Endaris
Most of all I'm curious where you read what "good mapping" is and what it is supposed to be.
I've digged myself through the entire wiki and the relevant subforums here and I didn't see anywhere anything written about how to make a map good so I eventually had to come up with my own definition and opinion on mapping.

And sure, RC doesn't define which maps are fun to play.
I didn't find your pain in the ass fun to play though because I don't enjoy maps that go ham just for the sake of going ham. It's not particularly bad but when I'm mapping I'm always aware of the fact that I want my map to be playable and enjoyable by more people than just me.
Topic Starter
jawns

Endaris wrote:

Most of all I'm curious where you read what "good mapping" is and what it is supposed to be.
I've digged myself through the entire wiki and the relevant subforums here and I didn't see anywhere anything written about how to make a map good so I eventually had to come up with my own definition and opinion on mapping.

And sure, RC doesn't define which maps are fun to play.
I didn't find your pain in the ass fun to play though because I don't enjoy maps that go ham just for the sake of going ham. It's not particularly bad but when I'm mapping I'm always aware of the fact that I want my map to be playable and enjoyable by more people than just me.
Sure, there's no clear definition of what is "good mapping", however there are a few things that are often repeated.
One of the most common ones is "good flow" and even though this is extremely vague, I'm pretty sure a lot of my maps doesn't follow great flow. There have been a few posts trying to describe what is good flow, and none of them seem to fit my map.
Another common one is consistent distance snapping. If you look at my velvet green map, the distances changes quite severely quite often. I even sometimes map similar sections, with different spacing. This is, as i said, because i think music can be interpreted in multiple ways when mapping, and I don't think it is wrong to use different interpretations throughout the song.
And finally, someone would probably argue that the rhythm of my velvet green map is too inconsistent. This is because of two reasons.
One, because I sometimes follow different instruments simultaneously, rapidly changing between following the vocals and the guitar for example (like in the verse of velvet green).
Two, because I map similar sections, with slightly different rhythms. This is for the same reason as before, because you can interpret what beats that are emphasized in different ways.

I have come to terms with, that my mapping style is definitely not for everyone, but thanks for your opinion anyway. I will probably still mainly make maps I myself find enjoyable, just in case there's at least one other person out there who would like it too!
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply