[mapping discussion] "punk mapping"

posted
Total Posts
46
show more
Deva
I tried both maps you linked and id say they are anything but fun.
CXu

jawns wrote:

CXu wrote:

If you want to break spacing rules, do it consistently. What is your reason for mapping 05:44:372 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - differently from 05:48:582 (1,2,3,4,5) - ? What part of the music made you think they were so different you had to change up how you mapped them?

Can you interpret the same thing several ways? Sure, but to a player that part sounds the same, there's no reason it shouldn't follow the same rhythm and general emphasis on notes. If you want to interpret it differently, do it in a different map or if it comes up in a different section of the song.

You're perfectly free break these rules of mapping, but if you're going to do it, make sure you understand how to follow the rules first. You don't start out creating the wackiest music possible; you start by learning the basics. The most important part of mapping is to make sure you convey to the player the logic and the structure of the map, so that while a player might be initially confused the first time they see something, due to the style of the map, consecutive repetitions will be easier understood and played.

Btw, try playing your map with AR7 or something.
The consistent inconsistencies is what I aim towards though. It makes the map more interesting in my opinion, and forces you to stay focused. Another effect of mapping similar parts differently in the same song is, that while you should map what the song emphasizes, you can emphasize parts of the song by mapping it. By emphasizing different parts at different times, you present more layers of the song to the player.
If you're consistently inconsistent, then the inconsistency becomes consistency. A map is either consistent or inconsistent. Your map is inconsistent. There is no consistent inconsistency. While inconsistency isn't bad on its own, it almost always comes together with unpredictability, and that's what your map is mostly.
For example, 03:43:830 (4,5) - and 03:46:752 (4,5) - . They sound identical in the song. Why would you think there should be different spacing? For the sake of being inconsistent? In that case you're just going against the song. To emphasize some other layer? Which layer was emphasized in the first one and which one in the second? And why is that completely clear and understandable to a player playing the map for the very first time, probably also hearing the song for the first time? Did you do it to emphasize the slightly stronger beats in the 2nd section? Then why are you emphasizing that by decreasing the spacing rather than increasing it?

And if the thing above was done because of emphasis, then why 03:49:143 (1,2,3) - are these spaced more or less equally apart? To emphasize (3) by changing... Nothing? Or did you suddenly change layer again, and is no longer following the flute but something else? Why would any player think you were doing that? If you're no longer following the flute, then how come you switch back to it in the same combo right afterwards 03:50:724 (5,6,7,8,9,10) - ? Were players supposed to know?

Furthermore, 03:51:247 (1) - Why are these then the same speed as 03:49:143 (1) - ? They're decreasing in pitch right? Or wait, maybe you weren't following the flute here. I don't actually know what you're trying to follow. Maybe it's that cymbal thing? 03:52:818 (5,6,7) - But the suddenly this seems to follow the drums. Or is it trying to follow the flute again? And 03:53:341 (1,2,3) - why is the spacing so close here anyway? Seems to try following the decrease in pitch for these sections, right? Then why didn't you do the same for 03:51:247 - , and why didn't you make the sliders decrease in speed together with the spacing? Was there anything more important to follow instead at 03:51:247 - that I'm unaware of? 03:54:669 (4) - And how come this is slightly closer to (3) than 03:53:872 (2) - is to (1,3)? Maybe you should've emphasized the guitar at 03:54:138 (3) - as well?

Leaving aside flow for 03:56:263 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - or the other patterns for that matter, what are you trying to emphasize with 03:57:459 (13) - ? There's nothing in the music here. Are you trying to emphasize the nothingness by making a big jump? It's certainly something one could do. Or maybe there's something else here that I don't understand.

Note that this isn't even 15 seconds of your map.

See, there's a lot of things I could come up with to "justify" everything you're doing, or even come up with a bunch of other reasons to map something differently. Where to be consistent, where to be inconsistent. You're just arbitrarily doing one or the other. A map is supposed to be played, and if you can't make the players understand what your map is trying to do, it's not going to get very far.

This map makes sense to you because you know beforehand what layer each section of your map is following. This isn't the case for every other player.

But eh, it seems like you've convinced yourself that your map is perfect, this is a legitimate mapping style and that you know what you're doing, so you go do you.
Topic Starter
jawns

Manysi wrote:

By decreasing, this is what i meant
Each of them has to have lower spacing than the previous. Or at least tell the player that they do.

In mapping the song is already written... thats why this wont work. If you create something that doesnt exist in the music or you represent it differently, it will be bad. I know this well myself not only because i compose music too.

As others said: Learn the basics first. Try to think correctly and maybe you will accomplish something. Think over your reasons twice and have a little doubt in yourself at least. But most importantly, dont refuse the help from others.

There are dumb people like me who have to rely on someone's teaching to improve because they misunderstand/dont get things easily. Maybe you are one of us.

Edit: I am curious and would like to see a video how you defend yourself.
I don't understand why that is a lot different than what I did, or why it would be better. Also, it doesn't "mirror" the part before as well.

I don't think, that it's a question about not understanding for the most part though, but rather just me disagreeing.

Natsu wrote:

did come, because the interesting title, but this map is really Common one, I did saw many like this from new mappers (my first map was like this), try to take advice from more experienced people. Slider shapes like 00:07:957 (4) - are super ugly and the fail blanket 00:07:957 (4,5) - make it looks worst, 00:39:395 (2,3,4) - imperfect triangles (obviously you did want to make it perfect, try Compose >create polygon circles). 03:07:763 (6,7,8) - 01:30:103 (7,8,9) - 02:32:611 (1,2,3,4) - spacing issues, while is fine to don't use spacing at extra/insane diff, it still need to make sense (this is something that you win with time and practice) , is fine if you map for graveyard, but this is far from having enough quality for rank or for being called a mapping style, because as I said before almost every first beatmap is like this.
I'd probably rephrase it as a mapping mentality rather than a mapping style tbh. I realize that "punk mapping" is more about the mentality you go into mapping with, rather than the actual placement of the notes.

In regards to your points about my map:

Slider shapes like 00:07:957 (4) - are super ugly and the fail blanket 00:07:957 (4,5) - make it looks worst
why is this a problem?

00:39:395 (2,3,4) - imperfect triangles (obviously you did want to make it perfect)
what if i didn't?

03:07:763 (6,7,8) - 01:30:103 (7,8,9) - 02:32:611 (1,2,3,4) - spacing issues, while is fine to don't use spacing at extra/insane diff, it still need to make sense
This is honestly not very helpful advice. I have explained why similar parts does make sense (even think I talked about one of the ones you mentioned). If you're gonna say something is an issue or doesn't make sense, at least give a reason why

HK_ wrote:

I tried both maps you linked and id say they are anything but fun.
I don't give a shit

CXu wrote:

jawns wrote:

The consistent inconsistencies is what I aim towards though. It makes the map more interesting in my opinion, and forces you to stay focused. Another effect of mapping similar parts differently in the same song is, that while you should map what the song emphasizes, you can emphasize parts of the song by mapping it. By emphasizing different parts at different times, you present more layers of the song to the player.
If you're consistently inconsistent, then the inconsistency becomes consistency. A map is either consistent or inconsistent. Your map is inconsistent. There is no consistent inconsistency. While inconsistency isn't bad on its own, it almost always comes together with unpredictability, and that's what your map is mostly.
For example, 03:43:830 (4,5) - and 03:46:752 (4,5) - . They sound identical in the song. Why would you think there should be different spacing? For the sake of being inconsistent? In that case you're just going against the song. To emphasize some other layer? Which layer was emphasized in the first one and which one in the second? And why is that completely clear and understandable to a player playing the map for the very first time, probably also hearing the song for the first time? Did you do it to emphasize the slightly stronger beats in the 2nd section? Then why are you emphasizing that by decreasing the spacing rather than increasing it?

And if the thing above was done because of emphasis, then why 03:49:143 (1,2,3) - are these spaced more or less equally apart? To emphasize (3) by changing... Nothing? Or did you suddenly change layer again, and is no longer following the flute but something else? Why would any player think you were doing that? If you're no longer following the flute, then how come you switch back to it in the same combo right afterwards 03:50:724 (5,6,7,8,9,10) - ? Were players supposed to know?

Furthermore, 03:51:247 (1) - Why are these then the same speed as 03:49:143 (1) - ? They're decreasing in pitch right? Or wait, maybe you weren't following the flute here. I don't actually know what you're trying to follow. Maybe it's that cymbal thing? 03:52:818 (5,6,7) - But the suddenly this seems to follow the drums. Or is it trying to follow the flute again? And 03:53:341 (1,2,3) - why is the spacing so close here anyway? Seems to try following the decrease in pitch for these sections, right? Then why didn't you do the same for 03:51:247 - , and why didn't you make the sliders decrease in speed together with the spacing? Was there anything more important to follow instead at 03:51:247 - that I'm unaware of? 03:54:669 (4) - And how come this is slightly closer to (3) than 03:53:872 (2) - is to (1,3)? Maybe you should've emphasized the guitar at 03:54:138 (3) - as well?

Leaving aside flow for 03:56:263 (5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12) - or the other patterns for that matter, what are you trying to emphasize with 03:57:459 (13) - ? There's nothing in the music here. Are you trying to emphasize the nothingness by making a big jump? It's certainly something one could do. Or maybe there's something else here that I don't understand.

Note that this isn't even 15 seconds of your map.

See, there's a lot of things I could come up with to "justify" everything you're doing, or even come up with a bunch of other reasons to map something differently. Where to be consistent, where to be inconsistent. You're just arbitrarily doing one or the other. A map is supposed to be played, and if you can't make the players understand what your map is trying to do, it's not going to get very far.

This map makes sense to you because you know beforehand what layer each section of your map is following. This isn't the case for every other player.

But eh, it seems like you've convinced yourself that your map is perfect, this is a legitimate mapping style and that you know what you're doing, so you go do you.
First of, I'll mention a thing you wrote:
it almost always comes together with unpredictability, and that's what your map is mostly.
Exactly! Unpredictability is what I am aiming towards; something that follows the music, yet forces you to read the map, and be prepared for anything.

This map makes sense to you because you know beforehand what layer each section of your map is following. This isn't the case for every other player.
I've said this multiple times now, but i might as well repeat it: I made this map for myself. I liked it, so I shared it. You can give me advice, if you explain it, and I might agree or disagree.
And most importantly this thread is not about this map! But at least I am a little bit happy, that I've got my initial concern confirmed to some degree...
Okoratu
it's about the mapping style, hence it IS about your map.

You seem to reject everyone who offers to help you so you're most likely a hopeless case.
CXu
This thread is about you thinking you know what you're doing when you clearly don't, and people telling you what you're doing wrong and you refusing to listen to them, thinking for some reason that you somehow found this "new" type of mapping and that we're just being difficult and can't see your side of the argument. We can, because we've ALL been there at one point. The only difference is that we're not being stubborn and closed-minded about it.

And no, unpredictability isn't what you're aiming towards, if it were, it would be impossible to justify anything, other than saying "well it's unpredictable". If you, as you claim, can justify the placement of every note in your map, then being unpredictable can't be what you were trying to be, because the justification would be what makes it predictable.

Also thanks for ignoring 90% of my post and only quoting the few lines that you had an answer to.
Initial concern? What concern, that we're not open to new innovative ways of mapping? Because we are, we're just not open to stupid mapping that's been done by almost every mapper in existence at one point in their mapping career.

And yes, I'm using a harsher tone. If you're going to ignore almost everything I actually say, then I don't have any reason to try sounding super nice either.
Manysi
How can you not see the difference? Spacing is getting lower and lower instead of getting lower rapidly. It has to be smooth yknow. (sry but i cant be cleaner about this)

Anyways, further discussion is pointless since you like going against a wall.like... a... punk??
Just take my life lesson from my previous posts and live your life happily with it.
Endaris
It's always the same though, if you're playing stupid you get tons of serious responses and if you're making (supposedly) smart statements none's going to answer at all.
(see Reditum's thread on slow song choices)
Kenan
This is clearly going nowhere, just lock the topic and be done with this.
Manysi

Endaris wrote:

It's always the same though, if you're playing stupid you get tons of serious responses and if you're making (supposedly) smart statements none's going to answer at all.
(see Reditum's thread on slow song choices)
From my part, i have no idea how to map melodic songs and thats why i have nothing to offer for the discussion. I dont think there is anything wrong with the current state of things though. Its a rhythm game afterall.
Flanster
jawns, can you please not make another post to reply to each person, just put it all in one.
Topic Starter
jawns
I fucking give up. I tried to explain. I tried to be as clear as possible about my intentions. I tried to get a discussion going about mapping in general, and at one point I succeeded. When the discussion moved to my map in particular, I tried to explain why I made the decisions I made, and I tried to explain that I made the map to my own liking and I don't give a fuck if you disagree.
I accepted criticism, however I expected people to accept that I didn't have to agree. They didn't.

I'm tired of being called a bad mapper. Or people telling me I don't know what I'm doing. I can't force you to like my map. You can't force me to dislike it either. I didn't make the map for you to enjoy, so why would I care?

Thanks to anyone who actually helped the discussion. The ones who actually gave some useful insight into mapping.

But to the ones who insulted me and my map, to the ones who couldn't accept that I didn't agree with their criticisms: Go fuck yourselves

You can keep mapping like you've always done, and you can keep telling me I'm doing it wrong...

"Flowers are red, and green leaves are green
There's no need to see flowers any other way
Than the way they always have been seen"

Edit: this thread can be locked. I've got nothing more to say. And clearly, people don't have anything useful to say anymore either
Please sign in to reply.

New reply