Guest
home
beatmaps
rankings
community
store
help
forum
  1. Forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Mapping Discussion
  4. Mapping Techniques

[mapping discussion] "punk mapping"

posted
Total Posts
46
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
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
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
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.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
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!
Myxo
osu! Alumni
3,103 posts
Joined December 2012
Myxo
Believe me, if you'll ever get to the point where you have a few ranked maps you will look back at your first map and you won't find it fun anymore, you will just think it's bad.

Also, I wouldn't call this kind of mapping "punk mapping", I'd call it "newbie mapping" because most mappers start with something like this.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

Desperate-kun wrote:

Believe me, if you'll ever get to the point where you have a few ranked maps you will look back at your first map and you won't find it fun anymore, you will just think it's bad.

Also, I wouldn't call this kind of mapping "punk mapping", I'd call it "newbie mapping" because most mappers start with something like this.
Well, there's the obvious difference, that I am mapping this way on purpose, and not because I don't know any better
Myxo
osu! Alumni
3,103 posts
Joined December 2012
Myxo
You are making too much of a science out of it though. There are thousands of maps like this in the Pending / Graveyarded sections and most come from first time mappers. It doesn't take much effort to make a map that's fun to play when it's literally just random objects placed on the screen.

Take this advice, multiple times I've seen new mappers thinking that their own maps are something unique / particularly fun, when they were just fun to themselves because they were proud of having made a map. The best way to go would be to aim for maps that are both fun AND make sense with the music.

Good luck with whatever way you will be taking though.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

Desperate-kun wrote:

You are making too much of a science out of it though. There are thousands of maps like this in the Pending / Graveyarded sections and most come from first time mappers. It doesn't take much effort to make a map that's fun to play when it's literally just random objects placed on the screen.

Take this advice, multiple times I've seen new mappers thinking that their own maps are something unique / particularly fun, when they were just fun to themselves because they were proud of having made a map. The best way to go would be to aim for maps that are both fun AND make sense with the music.

Good luck with whatever way you will be taking though.
But my point is, that the map makes great sense with the music. Every note is placed with the music in mind, even more so than playability
winber1
4,520 posts
Joined February 2010
winber1
With my new found power, I will say this...

This is like the purest form of cognitive dissonance ever.

Perhaps you do like your map, whether or not it's because you are only looking at the positive sides, but first off the only reason readability and flow makes any sense to you for this map is because you mapped it and even if you don't have it memorized, subconsciously you generally where to move to hit notes. Try playing something similar to your map but mapped someone completely different and try to make sense of that map. I don't have any examples, but trust me you will not understand it at all.

You say you are doing this "on purpose." Okay then, show me, can you map what we general community call "good maps?" Or at least maps that flow, have consistency, and in general make use of reasonable distance snapping? Can you please map something normal, but can be considered good? You say you have captured everything you want with the music in mind, and I can very confidently say that is not true from years of experience, not in osu, but in music as well. You will never be able to see every single interpretation, but you still might prefer what you have.

And you seem to be under the impression consistent distance snapping creates good flow and good overall maps, which is also completely untrue. Most extra maps completely disregard distance snapping, as do I when I map, but it's about knowing good times when use larger spacing and when to use smaller spacing. The maps you have literally have the same type of jumps and spacing throughout the whole map. It would make more sense if you could tone down certain slower sections to emphasize its calmness and increase jumps in exciting sections to emphasize its impact.

Alright, perhaps you really like large spacing and you find that fun. I often do too, but then I would not choose something like velvet green to map insanely large jumps. I would try to find a song that I see fit for jumps like these, and that's what I do before I even choose a song. Your previous song Needles makes much more sense with large ass jumps, for instance.Mapping is a style of art, and although it's not too hard to get into, there are many things to think about before, during, and after the mapping process.

If you think I still don't understand what you are doing, then so be it. There are many ways to emphasize the music and use large spacing in an elegant manner, and while doing so also being extremely unique. Not many mappers have the unique aspect down, but there are a few where I can almost immediately tell who this was by, because they had developed something unique to their style, while still maintaining playability, fun, and challenge.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

winber1 wrote:

With my new found power, I will say this...

This is like the purest form of cognitive dissonance ever.

Perhaps you do like your map, whether or not it's because you are only looking at the positive sides, but first off the only reason readability and flow makes any sense to you for this map is because you mapped it and even if you don't have it memorized, subconsciously you generally where to move to hit notes. Try playing something similar to your map but mapped someone completely different and try to make sense of that map. I don't have any examples, but trust me you will not understand it at all.

You say you are doing this "on purpose." Okay then, show me, can you map what we general community call "good maps?" Or at least maps that flow, have consistency, and in general make use of reasonable distance snapping? Can you please map something normal, but can be considered good? You say you have captured everything you want with the music in mind, and I can very confidently say that is not true from years of experience, not in osu, but in music as well. You will never be able to see every single interpretation, but you still might prefer what you have.
As I think I wrote at one point, I am currently making a more "common" map. I feel like I'm almost going ztrot territory in terms of not doing anything out of the ordinary with it, and I hope it will be considered good as a more "normal" map.

In regards to experience, I have only about a year or so experience with osu! and even less experience with mapping. However, I've been playing music for 12 years. I've composed music for probably about 8 years. I'm currently taking the highest level music class in my school, and I've applied for a high level music school. I think it's safe to say I have enough musical experience.

And you seem to be under the impression consistent distance snapping creates good flow and good overall maps, which is also completely untrue. Most extra maps completely disregard distance snapping, as do I when I map, but it's about knowing good times when use larger spacing and when to use smaller spacing. The maps you have literally have the same type of jumps and spacing throughout the whole map. It would make more sense if you could tone down certain slower sections to emphasize its calmness and increase jumps in exciting sections to emphasize its impact.
When I talk about consistent distance snapping or similar, I mean more consistent than what I make. There's one point where I have 3 notes on a line, spaced evenly on the timeline, however with much more distance between the two last ones, than the two first ones. I don't think you would ever see this kind of spacing in a ranked map.

"The maps you have literally have the same type of jumps and spacing throughout the whole map" really? This might be true with the needles map, it was my first map after all, but with Velvet Green, I made a very clear distinction between the calm verses and chorus, and the instrumental bits. It starts off quite difficult in the intro, calms down with the chorus and verse, and clearly spikes up in difficulty during the long instrumental bit in the middle.

Alright, perhaps you really like large spacing and you find that fun. I often do too, but then I would not choose something like velvet green to map insanely large jumps. I would try to find a song that I see fit for jumps like these, and that's what I do before I even choose a song. Your previous song Needles makes much more sense with large ass jumps, for instance.Mapping is a style of art, and although it's not too hard to get into, there are many things to think about before, during, and after the mapping process.
I didn't start mapping Velvet Green with the mindset "I want to map big ass jumps". It's just what felt natural to map.
"Mapping is a style of art" and as with all art, it is subjective. We can discuss how bad or good this map is for whatever reasons, but at the end of the day, it's my piece of art, and if I think it's perfect, it is.

If you think I still don't understand what you are doing, then so be it. There are many ways to emphasize the music and use large spacing in an elegant manner, and while doing so also being extremely unique. Not many mappers have the unique aspect down, but there are a few where I can almost immediately tell who this was by, because they had developed something unique to their style, while still maintaining playability, fun, and challenge.
"while still maintaining playability, fun, and challenge." Again, the map is both playable fun and challenging to me, and ultimately that's the most important thing.
Okoayu
Nomination Assessment Team / Elite Nominator
4,957 posts
Joined May 2012
Okoayu
then why do you ask for opinions if you only value your own and defend against everyone who thinks differently?
Like all you did so far was saying that you find your map fun to play, hurray. I don't think your mindset in combination with this thread makes sense as you're actively looking for citicism with this thread and then tell everyone who brings forward arguments to basically go away lol.

to answer your few questions

1. I feel like if I understand "regular" mapping better, i might be able to apply this knowledge to my "punk maps".
Idk maybe once you understand regular mapping better you will stop making 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.
good luck.

1: Do you think anybody else, besides me, would consider my map fun to play, or am I just weird...?
There are a few people who enjoy clicking literally random objects (don't defend your map, if someone plays it and it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to them that's their opinion), I'm not one of them.

2: Do we sometimes focus too much on what is considered "good mapping" rather than what is actually fun to play?
Good mapping and fun to play should never cancel each other out, if you make something you find boring under the concepts you grasp as good mapping you're doing something wrong.

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?
You're asking if art is entirely subjective..?

4: Is it important to know how to follow the rules, even if your usual style is consistently breaking them?
The basic rules, if you're referring to the ranking criteria it would ideally only tell you how to make a non-broken map. Most of the rules and disqualifications happen for a reason, like they developed throughout years and are actually in a process of a major overhaul. If you refer to >rules of good mapping<, these don't exist, to each their own. Some people love some mappers while others absolutely hate them and they still get stuff ranked.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

Okoratu wrote:

then why do you ask for opinions if you only value your own and defend against everyone who thinks differently?
Like all you did so far was saying that you find your map fun to play, hurray. I don't think your mindset in combination with this thread makes sense as you're actively looking for citicism with this thread and then tell everyone who brings forward arguments to basically go away lol.
I feel that is a misconception of my intention with the thread, as I said this is meant for discussion rather than straight up criticism. If i was only looking for criticism, I would have simply typed the link to the map threat and "mod ples".
As this is for discussion, it's fairly obvious that I have already formed my opinion on the matter, and it will probably take a lot to change it. However, I don't think that's a reason not to discuss it. I obviously hope to influence the opinion of others, and perhaps I will change my opinion as well.
Furthermore, I don't think there's any discussion of the issue (or what I consider an issue), that some "trends" or "unwritten rules" can make people think poorly about an otherwise good map, and maybe even discourage mappers to experiment with their mapping.

And if it looks like I'm somehow trying to discourage further discussion, I'm very sorry, since that is definitely not the case. Honestly, I was waiting and hoping winber would respond to my points in my last reply. I'm always willing to discuss things further, even if I don't agree.

to answer your few questions

1. I feel like if I understand "regular" mapping better, i might be able to apply this knowledge to my "punk maps".
Idk maybe once you understand regular mapping better you will stop making punk maps
I've honestly already gone a bit away from that idea, since, in all honesty, I don't think I can improve much on the Velvet Green map by using more common mapping techniques/ideas. I'd rather just keep mapping the way I do, and hopefully it will evolve naturally that way.

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.
good luck.
Thanks!

1: Do you think anybody else, besides me, would consider my map fun to play, or am I just weird...?
There are a few people who enjoy clicking literally random objects (don't defend your map, if someone plays it and it doesn't make any sense whatsoever to them that's their opinion), I'm not one of them.
As I've said, everything in the map makes sense to me (I've even considered making a video going over every single note), however I've come to terms with, that it doesn't make sense to a lot of other people. I will still try to explain why it makes sense, and I will also take criticism, as long as it doesn't just point out what is bad, but also WHY it is bad. But I do understand that ultimately I can't force people to like the map, like people can't force me to dislike it. I do feel, though, that me wanting to share something I'm proud of, with people that hopefully likes it the same way as I do is only natural.

2: Do we sometimes focus too much on what is considered "good mapping" rather than what is actually fun to play?
Good mapping and fun to play should never cancel each other out, if you make something you find boring under the concepts you grasp as good mapping you're doing something wrong.
What I mean with this question is more like: "can a map be fun even if it does not follow "good mapping". What I mean is, if you mod something, and you see something that doesn't look like good mapping, you might look at it and think "that's bad", however when playing it, it turns out that it actually works.
Or if you are a mapper, you might focus more on what is "good mapping", while you could perhaps have done something a bit out of the ordinary, that wound perhaps work even better.

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?
You're asking if art is entirely subjective..?
Kinda, but kinda not. We like to think that all art forms are purely subjective, but there are always things that will be considered "better art". For beatmapping, an example could be, if the map isn't timed properly. Most people would agree, that that is a "bad beatmap". How far does these rules go, before it becomes subjective? If a map follows good flow and good spacing, chances are, it will probably be considered a good map, however can a map that doesn't follow good flow and spacing, be good as well, or even as good or better? That's my opinion anyway

4: Is it important to know how to follow the rules, even if your usual style is consistently breaking them?
The basic rules, if you're referring to the ranking criteria it would ideally only tell you how to make a non-broken map. Most of the rules and disqualifications happen for a reason, like they developed throughout years and are actually in a process of a major overhaul. If you refer to >rules of good mapping<, these don't exist, to each their own. Some people love some mappers while others absolutely hate them and they still get stuff ranked.
I would disagree, I would say there are some unwritten "rules of good mapping". There's an entire page on the wiki, with mapping techniques you can apply to your maps, that are considered "good", or at least "not bad". There are a few forum posts dedicated to what is considered "good flow" and what isn't.

For an example of these rules in action, I'll refer to Xexxar's map My hero t/397698/start=180. This map (as you probably know) was disqualified, one of the reasons being, the hardest difficulty is too hard, and thus doesn't fit the song. That's a very arbitrary reason in my opinion; I personally found it to fit the song quite well, and as was also pointed out, difficulty is subjective, depending on who is playing the map. However, it seemed like a lot of people agreed, that the map was simply too hard. To me, there didn't really seem to be any reason for this, apart from that's just the way it is: hence why I think it's kind of an unwritten rule.

But I guess my main argument really boils down to this: There are a lot of unwritten rules, but there seems to be more "dos" than "don'ts" (apart from the example above). My question is, though, is a map that doesn't do the "dos" always bad?

Thank you for you response btw, this is more the kind of discussion I was hoping to get with this thread.
Okoayu
Nomination Assessment Team / Elite Nominator
4,957 posts
Joined May 2012
Okoayu
It's actually funny because you remind me a bit of myself in 2012 except that I mapped for myself and didn't make threads asking about what people think about the style I used in a certain map. But in the very beginning I thought that everything i placed makes sense with the song. My own creation seemed logical to me as I made it by playtesting it a lot and thought about the song when placing notes. Whenever I gave it to other people they went like "uhh this somehow works, but it's weird". After some time (more like after about 1.5 years of doing that) I started to mod others' maps because I hoped to find out why my own maps seem so dull and lame to me, the more I did that the more I became aware of the conceptual and rhythmical flaws in my earlier maps and started to dislike them for that reason even more, but I had a point to work from towards making something that other people can understand, predict and maybe also enjoy.

---

Just like mainstream media, there are mainstream mapping techniques, people just started collecting them to have a compendium, most of them only work in certain contexts and are terrible in others. Believe it or not people copy other people's ideas because they like their ideas and incorporate them into their own work by mixing it with their interpretations.

If you have to explain why your map makes sense it probably doesn't, lol. If you map for yourself, that's fine! It only has to make sense to you yourself, you don't have to defend it to anyone, after all you made it for yourself!

If you map for other people you should aim to make something that follows a song and is predictable / understandable by other people as well and in order to do that you need to study what's predictable for people, which is easily done by looking at techniques, patterns and setups of maps you enjoy playing. If you aim to get a map ranked, you won't be doing it for yourself nor will you be the one who plays it the most, others will. Others will have opinions on your map, your style, your setup. If they don't understand what you were trying to express you probably failed to convey what you felt when placing objects.

As for your art argument it's just outright dumb to compare cubism with hyper-realism, each art style stands on its own and is defined by its own rules and regulations, while certain styles are popular, others are unique or in a niche because only a few people follow them. Timing is a technical part and therefore a bad argument for something subjective, it has to be correct otherwise the map will feel really retarded when playing it. The creative part of mapping is placing objects to the music and making them interact with each other in certain ways with certain motives. Basically most general Rules in the RC just define "a non-broken beatmap". Your map can still be boring af / rhythmically wrong, but not technically broken when following these regulations.
And yes each mapper and player probably defines for themselves what spacing styles, visual styles and song genres they like.

The only "unwritten" rule is make sense to other people probably. Flow is subjective, placement is subjective people just collect commonly used ideas because they seem to like collecting ideas which work well for them.

Xexxar's map used higher spacing what apparently most people deemed acceptable for the song (yes, this is subjective! People like being biased! You also are biased towards the style in that map, otherwise this thread wouldn't exist!) and someone came to the thread and explained their opinion, this happens and is encouraged in qualified maps. Since a discussion was going on while it was qualified, it was pulled out of qualification to continue discussing without having time pressure, that's mainly all there is to it. I personally didn't think it's overboard or anything, but didn't like it either and Xexxar decided to stop trying to get it requalified for now or something.

The making sense part is not written down because it's mostly something that people develop upon gaining more experience with the editor. This is what makes mapping fun, different people interpret the same song differently and both interpretations can work very well next to each other for many people!
If your interpretation of a song gets mainly people asking "what the fuck are you doing there? This is so unpredictable that it feels really random to me", then that means that
  1. they aren't skilled enough to comprehend the map
  2. your map is too complicated for your target audience
  3. your map lacks an understandable concept for anyone who can't read your mind


Idk if any of this contributes to your discussion, as I'm basically saying something similar to winber but with less provoking wording lol.
Last edited by Okoayu , edited 2 times in total.
N0thingSpecial
2,355 posts
Joined November 2015
N0thingSpecial
Do you think anybody else, besides me, would consider my map fun to play, or am I just weird...?
Your map is like the abstract art of mapping, and right now I feel like mapping is at its renaissance period where everything needs to be justified aesthetically and practically, the "by the community for the community" mindset. i would feel like your mapping style just won't fit velvet green, it feels more like dubstep kind of mapping where there are large fluctuation in spacing, I actually have a friend who enjoys unorthodox maps, but all of the maps are unranked,

Do we sometimes focus too much on what is considered "good mapping" rather than what is actually fun to play?
As I said before, no. The "good" mapping style is like this today cause the community find it fun.

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?
coughHollow Wingscough Yes they can. but if you want your map ranked you either 1) appeal to the majority 2) have fuk ton of kudosu

Is it important to know how to follow the rules, even if your usual style is consistently breaking them?
never been there, don't know how to answer this.

FYI: I have 0 kudosu
winber1
4,520 posts
Joined February 2010
winber1

jawns wrote:

Honestly, I was waiting and hoping winber would respond to my points in my last reply.
I did not reply because I don't really have much else to say to you. You talk about trying to get discussion and not criticism, but to be fair, you know almost no one will appreciate the map and that everyone will probably think you don't know what you're doing, yet you expect us not to criticize. If not outright criticizing, it will be a discussion on criticisms.

The reason I have not much else to say is because art is subjective, and you can go do whatever the hell you want that makes you happy. If you ever want to somehow join the community of mapping, you really need to start hammering down specifics and details. If not, as Okoratu said, do as you please. You say you can explain properly why each note is there, and perhaps maybe with enough time you can, but at the same time with enough time I can easily explain why that doesn't make sense.

However, I do completely agree with you on Xexxar's map that the map is perfectly fine and entertaining to play. The only reason I think people were bitching about it is because half of them were inexperienced weeaboos who couldn't play the map properly cuz they missed like half of the jumps. On the same note, I will also say that I explained it incorrectly and exaggerated when I said your map is literally completely spaced the same. It was more of a problem of consistency with sections, and you often had anti-spacing and large jumps that could have been transitioned into more smoothly. I don't know how much you thought about actual playability and transitions into notes, but they way the cursor moves is always quite important, and I personally would make sure I don't repeat similar movements over and over again nor add really awkward patterns and shapes. In your case, you use essentially one type of movement, and it's usually in a zig-zaggy type of feel and/or triangle type of feel. What I felt worked much better with Xexxar's map is his consistency with his spacing. He didn't add all this random anti-spacing and changing rhythm in his piece, which obviously has a lot to do with the song choice itself, but can be accommodated through mapping. And in my opinion, his map is much more aesthetically pleasing as the notes and patterns he uses are clear. Even with varying spacing, you can make interesting patterns, and I do that a lot with my maps.

I actually had a phase similar to you where I was like "I'm not changing anything if you say it looks ugly." And even I thought the sliders were slightly ugly, but I did it because I felt like many mappers previously had used sliders that were "less than par" and I liked them a lot, so for a few maps I just tried not to care too much about aesthetics and just run with it. I'm recently to really feel that although the maps weren't terrible, I personally did not like them, and I don't think I should force myself to be "unaesthetic" so to speak. If you know how to and can make nice patterns and shapes, you really should if it matches your style. I was trying to force something that wasn't me onto myself.
Last edited by winber1 , edited 2 times in total.
neonat
Beatmap Nominator
3,535 posts
Joined April 2012
neonat

jawns wrote:

But I guess my main argument really boils down to this: There are a lot of unwritten rules, but there seems to be more "dos" than "don'ts" (apart from the example above). My question is, though, is a map that doesn't do the "dos" always bad?
Depends on what those "dos" are I guess, also those are mainly just to get things ranked also lol. You don't need to care about anything if it's just made without any of such intentions.

N0thingSpecial wrote:

2) have fuk ton of kudosu
That doesn't matter one bit
N0thingSpecial
2,355 posts
Joined November 2015
N0thingSpecial

neonat wrote:

N0thingSpecial wrote:

2) have fuk ton of kudosu
That doesn't matter one bit
oops, but would it be right to say that experienced mappers have more freedom to experiment?
_koinuri
451 posts
Joined June 2012
_koinuri

N0thingSpecial wrote:

oops, but would it be right to say that experienced mappers have more freedom to experiment?
The experienced mappers doesn't have more freedom to experiment; they just have the basics necessary to experiment. New mappers doesn't do well experimenting because through the experimenting process, they violate something you should never violate, such as emphasis using jumps, basic flows, etc etc. Instead of being "creative", they are being "erroneous".
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns
Whoa, this certainly got a lot of attention... Thanks to everyone for replying!

Okoratu wrote:

It's actually funny because you remind me a bit of myself in 2012 except that I mapped for myself and didn't make threads asking about what people think about the style I used in a certain map. But in the very beginning I thought that everything i placed makes sense with the song. My own creation seemed logical to me as I made it by playtesting it a lot and thought about the song when placing notes. Whenever I gave it to other people they went like "uhh this somehow works, but it's weird". After some time (more like after about 1.5 years of doing that) I started to mod others' maps because I hoped to find out why my own maps seem so dull and lame to me, the more I did that the more I became aware of the conceptual and rhythmical flaws in my earlier maps and started to dislike them for that reason even more, but I had a point to work from towards making something that other people can understand, predict and maybe also enjoy.

---
Cut most of the quote to save space...

Yeah, I guess that kinda sounds like me. I have a hard time imagining me not liking the map in a few months though, or even years, since I enjoy playing it so much. However, the reason I like the map might be because I like the way the song is evolving, since my map follows that at least to some extend (and also I think it's a great song in general).

I guess the way I map is similar to how I work with art in general. I make something I like, and share it in the hope that other people will like it as well, rather than make something I think other people will like in the first place. This is probably the reason my mas don't make sense to a lot of other people (and one reason I don't like mainstream media in general).

But judging from the replies, it does seem like people might not be as biased as I initially thought, which is cool :)

N0thingSpecial wrote:

Do you think anybody else, besides me, would consider my map fun to play, or am I just weird...?
Your map is like the abstract art of mapping, and right now I feel like mapping is at its renaissance period where everything needs to be justified aesthetically and practically, the "by the community for the community" mindset. i would feel like your mapping style just won't fit velvet green, it feels more like dubstep kind of mapping where there are large fluctuation in spacing, I actually have a friend who enjoys unorthodox maps, but all of the maps are unranked,

Do we sometimes focus too much on what is considered "good mapping" rather than what is actually fun to play?
As I said before, no. The "good" mapping style is like this today cause the community find it fun.

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?
coughHollow Wingscough Yes they can. but if you want your map ranked you either 1) appeal to the majority 2) have fuk ton of kudosu

Is it important to know how to follow the rules, even if your usual style is consistently breaking them?
never been there, don't know how to answer this.

FYI: I have 0 kudosu
Don't really think I have anything to reply with, apart from your points seem to make sense, and I mostly agree with them.

Btw, would be cool if you or your friend had any recommendations on unorthodox maps :)
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris
Use the edit-button.
Thank you.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

winber1 wrote:

jawns wrote:

Honestly, I was waiting and hoping winber would respond to my points in my last reply.
I did not reply because I don't really have much else to say to you. You talk about trying to get discussion and not criticism, but to be fair, you know almost no one will appreciate the map and that everyone will probably think you don't know what you're doing, yet you expect us not to criticize. If not outright criticizing, it will be a discussion on criticisms.

The reason I have not much else to say is because art is subjective, and you can go do whatever the hell you want that makes you happy. If you ever want to somehow join the community of mapping, you really need to start hammering down specifics and details. If not, as Okoratu said, do as you please. You say you can explain properly why each note is there, and perhaps maybe with enough time you can, but at the same time with enough time I can easily explain why that doesn't make sense.
Deleted most of the quote to save space.

First of all, I'm not at all upset about you not replying in the first place, I can see why my quote might have looked a bit passive/aggressive, that was in no way intentional.

I kinda disagree about the "discussion/criticism" thing, since I feel like the discussion is already about mapping mentality in general, and not focused on my map, or my mapping style in particular. I also think I've changed my opinion a bit already, which is a successful discussion in my opinion.

I didn't want to compare my map to Xexxar's map, I just used it as an example. I think they are fundamentally different, as you said, I don't really focus on aesthetic at all, however that might change in the future. I'm definitely not as reluctant to change as before.

neonat wrote:

jawns wrote:

But I guess my main argument really boils down to this: There are a lot of unwritten rules, but there seems to be more "dos" than "don'ts" (apart from the example above). My question is, though, is a map that doesn't do the "dos" always bad?
Depends on what those "dos" are I guess, also those are mainly just to get things ranked also lol. You don't need to care about anything if it's just made without any of such intentions.

N0thingSpecial wrote:

2) have fuk ton of kudosu
That doesn't matter one bit
I was more talking about bias, that some think there are things you should always (or almost always) do, and might automatically think less of a map, if it doesn't do those things.

However, I definitely don't think people are nearly as biased, as I thought before
Okoayu
Nomination Assessment Team / Elite Nominator
4,957 posts
Joined May 2012
Okoayu

Endaris wrote:

Use the edit-button.
Thank you.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

-[Koinuri] wrote:

N0thingSpecial wrote:

oops, but would it be right to say that experienced mappers have more freedom to experiment?
The experienced mappers doesn't have more freedom to experiment; they just have the basics necessary to experiment. New mappers doesn't do well experimenting because through the experimenting process, they violate something you should never violate, such as emphasis using jumps, basic flows, etc etc. Instead of being "creative", they are being "erroneous".
This is what I mean by "unwritten rules". I don't agree with the idea, that there are thing you should never violate, especially since these concepts seems quite vague.
Okoayu
Nomination Assessment Team / Elite Nominator
4,957 posts
Joined May 2012
Okoayu
"a beat in the song is stressed so stress it somehow in your map to follow the song!"
how vague is this
Endaris
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
Endaris

Okoratu wrote:

"a beat in the song is stressed so stress it somehow in your map to follow the song!"
how vague is this
Many ways lead to Rome.
Except for the one where you don't stress it at all.
That's like not even starting to go one of the many ways.
Luvdic
2,113 posts
Joined July 2009
Luvdic
It's okay jawns, I know how it feels when people thinks that your maps are weird. Apparently I am one of the weird mappers too.

Also don't feel so down, you never know if by 2020 this style will become the norm!

In more seriousness though, I am someone that believes that shapes and consistency is what gives structure to a map, and you already have consistency, so try to improve your shapes in your patterns.
Manysi
336 posts
Joined July 2014
Manysi
Dude, you will be alone in this world with your current mentality. By that i mean the community wont support you, and your ''punk maps'' which is mainly because you refuse critisism. You will get bored of this sooner or later and maybe want to map properly. Take my word, its just a matter of time when you stop or the community will disinherit you if you even mess with them.

Ok, this was too harsh. But i have a very good reason to discourage you from what you are about to do.
I had the same mentality about a year ago when i started mapping. I also thought my maps are great but only because i wasnt able to read them. (couldnt even fc hards) I wanted to map 5* or more and i cant find the words how bad of a decision it was. My maps looked nice but didnt make any logical sense. This affected my whole career in mapping. The moment i got bored of it and wanted to make stuff that i can actually play i had to face reality... I was like: ''wtf is wrong, why do i struggle playing this?'' then I created a discussion in here like you. I thought its the spacing, people ofc didnt understand what i was missing so i had to map for 5 more months to finally realize.

I would say you are safe as long as you dont get lost inside your head and think what you do is special and nobody experienced the same. The difference is they didnt take their first impressions seriously. They were realistic enough to see that they dont know shit as newbies. You are not the special snowflake, at least not yet.

The best advice i can give your is to read this first: t/239778/ then try to analyze older (2010-2011) maps. Keep in mind that what you feel like fitting the music will make little sense most of the time. You have to do it technically by following instruments and try to represent them.
For example pick one like drums for a section and swap to guitar if it gets the dominance. You are free to experiment as long as you make sense with it.
Ask people for further help and accept their advice if you see they are experienced. Hope i could help,good luck!
_koinuri
451 posts
Joined June 2012
_koinuri

jawns wrote:

-[Koinuri] wrote:

The experienced mappers doesn't have more freedom to experiment; they just have the basics necessary to experiment. New mappers doesn't do well experimenting because through the experimenting process, they violate something you should never violate, such as emphasis using jumps, basic flows, etc etc. Instead of being "creative", they are being "erroneous".
This is what I mean by "unwritten rules". I don't agree with the idea, that there are thing you should never violate, especially since these concepts seems quite vague.
There's always going to be "unwritten rules" we have to follow in anything, even in arts. Take music for example. It has a lot of theorems on which notes to use, and we don't use many of the 20k hz ish range we can hear because it's already been established by bunch of people that they usually suck and you won't end up with something nice using them. osu! community has slowly developed some rules to address things that work or doesn't work the same way. Some of these can be broken on certain occasion if done right, but you can assume it's going to be bad for the most part.

Additionally, there's one super important rule in osu! you should NEVER break when you're mapping a song, which is "maps should always compliment the song it's mapped to". You can't make a quiet part the hardest section, you can't add streams where there are no sounds, etc. These "unwritten rules" are mostly based on this idea.

I assume you mentioned spacing in your first post because some people pointed that out on your first map. Problem with having large spacing for entire map like your "punk mapping", is that a random sections here and there has huge jumps only the hardest part should have. It makes the hardest part feel normal in comparison and ends up not standing out. It's kind of like how 100% white is theoretically the brightest, but white with shadow look significantly brighter. That's why you need "shadows" in your map aka easier parts with smaller distance, so your hardest part will actually be the hardest. And this is why it's one of an "unwritten rule". By failing to properly making the strongest parts stand out, you are violating the one rule you can't break.

There's nothing vague about these "rules". Through more experience in mapping, you'll realize that they all have valid reasoning behind them.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

Endaris wrote:

Okoratu wrote:

"a beat in the song is stressed so stress it somehow in your map to follow the song!"
how vague is this
Many ways lead to Rome.
Except for the one where you don't stress it at all.
That's like not even starting to go one of the many ways.
Yeah, that's why I find it vague. One person can say "this best is stressed in the song, why is it not stressed in your map?", while someone else can say "I don't thin that beat is stressed in the song" or "I think that beat is stressed enough in the map". I think that leads back to the idea off mapping being purely subjective, but the way it was presented in the post, looked to me like it was an objective rule.

Xanandra wrote:

It's okay jawns, I know how it feels when people thinks that your maps are weird. Apparently I am one of the weird mappers too.

Also don't feel so down, you never know if by 2020 this style will become the norm!

In more seriousness though, I am someone that believes that shapes and consistency is what gives structure to a map, and you already have consistency, so try to improve your shapes in your patterns.
thanks for the advice!

Manysi wrote:

Dude, you will be alone in this world with your current mentality. By that i mean the community wont support you, and your ''punk maps'' which is mainly because you refuse critisism. You will get bored of this sooner or later and maybe want to map properly. Take my word, its just a matter of time when you stop or the community will disinherit you if you even mess with them.

Ok, this was too harsh. But i have a very good reason to discourage you from what you are about to do.
I had the same mentality about a year ago when i started mapping. I also thought my maps are great but only because i wasnt able to read them. (couldnt even fc hards) I wanted to map 5* or more and i cant find the words how bad of a decision it was. My maps looked nice but didnt make any logical sense. This affected my whole career in mapping. The moment i got bored of it and wanted to make stuff that i can actually play i had to face reality... I was like: ''wtf is wrong, why do i struggle playing this?'' then I created a discussion in here like you. I thought its the spacing, people ofc didnt understand what i was missing so i had to map for 5 more months to finally realize.

I would say you are safe as long as you dont get lost inside your head and think what you do is special and nobody experienced the same. The difference is they didnt take their first impressions seriously. They were realistic enough to see that they dont know shit as newbies. You are not the special snowflake, at least not yet.

The best advice i can give your is to read this first: t/239778/ then try to analyze older (2010-2011) maps. Keep in mind that what you feel like fitting the music will make little sense most of the time. You have to do it technically by following instruments and try to represent them.
For example pick one like drums for a section and swap to guitar if it gets the dominance. You are free to experiment as long as you make sense with it.
Ask people for further help and accept their advice if you see they are experienced. Hope i could help,good luck!
I think the reason I have a hard time taking criticism, is because I don't feel I have yet gotten any good criticism. I even wrote in the description of Velvet Green: "If you mention the distance spacing, you better have a damn good argument to why it should be changed, besides "It's too inconsistent!"".

People might say stuff like "it doesn't make sense" or "the spacing is bad", but they never seem to give any reasons to do so. I've never liked the idea, that you should blindly take any criticism from anyone who is more experienced than you, when it comes to any creative art form really.

Another reason is, that I enjoy playing the map so much, I honestly don't think I've enjoyed any map as much as this one. Some might argue, that the map is a bit out of my skill level, and I admit, I do have to put on NF when playing it, but I am generally quite good at reading difficult map (I have defeated airman). I can play every part of the song well, apart from the hardest part in the middle.

But if anybody has any criticism, they are willing to explain well, I'll be happy to take it to heart. And if I disagree, it's probably because I have reason to do so.

-[Koinuri] wrote:

jawns wrote:

This is what I mean by "unwritten rules". I don't agree with the idea, that there are thing you should never violate, especially since these concepts seems quite vague.
There's always going to be "unwritten rules" we have to follow in anything, even in arts. Take music for example. It has a lot of theorems on which notes to use, and we don't use many of the 20k hz ish range we can hear because it's already been established by bunch of people that they usually suck and you won't end up with something nice using them. osu! community has slowly developed some rules to address things that work or doesn't work the same way. Some of these can be broken on certain occasion if done right, but you can assume it's going to be bad for the most part.

Additionally, there's one super important rule in osu! you should NEVER break when you're mapping a song, which is "maps should always compliment the song it's mapped to". You can't make a quiet part the hardest section, you can't add streams where there are no sounds, etc. These "unwritten rules" are mostly based on this idea.

I assume you mentioned spacing in your first post because some people pointed that out on your first map. Problem with having large spacing for entire map like your "punk mapping", is that a random sections here and there has huge jumps only the hardest part should have. It makes the hardest part feel normal in comparison and ends up not standing out. It's kind of like how 100% white is theoretically the brightest, but white with shadow look significantly brighter. That's why you need "shadows" in your map aka easier parts with smaller distance, so your hardest part will actually be the hardest. And this is why it's one of an "unwritten rule". By failing to properly making the strongest parts stand out, you are violating the one rule you can't break.

There's nothing vague about these "rules". Through more experience in mapping, you'll realize that they all have valid reasoning behind them.
I agree that a lot of music is based on theorems, and ideas like dividing the song up in fours or threes. This is the reason these two time signatures are the most common, for some reason music made this way is naturally pleasing to listen to.
However, there's also tons and tons of good music, that break these rules, and are amazing, not just despite them breaking these rules, but sometimes because they are breaking these rules. A good example, is coincidentally Velvet Green. The song for the most part doesn't seem to follow a specific time signature, and the rules of music says: "you have to follow a time signature, otherwise the rhythm makes no sense". This song breaks the rule, and it ended up being amazing because of it.

I agree with the "maps should always compliment the song it's mapped to" statement, however there is a clear problem with it. Since both music and mapping is subjective, it's more or less impossible to say that something doesn't compliment the song. The only real time I think you can say that, is when there are hitcircles where there is no music; otherwise it's completely up to the interpretation of the mapper.

And in regards to my own map, I really can't see how everything is so hard that the hardest parts don't stand out. There are a clear difference between the instrumental parts (harder), and the verse/chorus (a lot easier), and in the middle bit, where the BPM increases significantly, it becomes a lot more difficult. I tried removing that bit, and the star rating decreased to 6.18!

And while all these unwritten rules have valid reasons behind them, there can also be valid reasons to break them.
N0thingSpecial
2,355 posts
Joined November 2015
N0thingSpecial
My Friend says he's not to keen on your map.
Manysi
336 posts
Joined July 2014
Manysi
I can say good things. Seems like thats what you wanna hear.
There is something charming about your map that i cant describe. (Idk might be the music or just nostalgia.) And its pretty good compared to my first one.

You didnt give feedback that you understood what i told you. I guess i have to tell you once more: take the path that many others have already taken, or at least start on that. You wont regret it.

Though i feel the compulsion to help you with what i know.

"If you mention the distance spacing, you better have a damn good argument to why it should be changed, besides "It's too inconsistent!"".
00:03:725 (1,2) - 1/1 spacing -> 00:04:178 (3,4) - 1/2. From 3 to 4 is a bigger distance than 1 to 2. This is not inconsistent, its stupid. How am i supposed to tell the difference? You can say: but if you listen to the music... I know. The thing is you have to make it clear to the player what spacing you use. This is a common mistake what almost EVERY new mapper make.

00:04:027 (2,3,4) - is a group of beats with increasing pitch with nothing else happening, right? Then why did you space 4 much further away? This applies to your entire map. It didnt make sense, you had no reason to do this. You should group beats of the same kind and not make random spacing.
Maybe you wanted to make a similar to the previous at 00:04:933 (6,7,8) - because thats the same but only with decreasing pitch.

I could go on for several hours about the mistakes you made but i dont have time for that. As for timing, i would have choosen a song played to metronome to begin with. This kind of stuff is incredibly hard to pull off and i have to admit you did a great job.
_koinuri
451 posts
Joined June 2012
_koinuri

jawns wrote:

And in regards to my own map, I really can't see how everything is so hard that the hardest parts don't stand out. There are a clear difference between the instrumental parts (harder), and the verse/chorus (a lot easier), and in the middle bit, where the BPM increases significantly, it becomes a lot more difficult. I tried removing that bit, and the star rating decreased to 6.18!
In this statement, you've admitted to the existence of one of the rules you have to follow, and stated that you (in your opinion) followed that rule. So my point still stands. Some rules can't be broken. I'll address reason on why you're breaking it later on.

jawns wrote:

I agree that a lot of music is based on theorems, and ideas like dividing the song up in fours or threes. This is the reason these two time signatures are the most common, for some reason music made this way is naturally pleasing to listen to.
However, there's also tons and tons of good music, that break these rules, and are amazing, not just despite them breaking these rules, but sometimes because they are breaking these rules. A good example, is coincidentally Velvet Green. The song for the most part doesn't seem to follow a specific time signature, and the rules of music says: "you have to follow a time signature, otherwise the rhythm makes no sense". This song breaks the rule, and it ended up being amazing because of it.
I realize that, that's why I added this statement at the end of the paragraph:

-[Koinuri] wrote:

Some of these can be broken on certain occasion if done right, but you can assume it's going to be bad for the most part.
The key term is "if done right" and "going to be bad for the most part". That song probably breaks rules correctly to make it interesting (I don't really feel like checking your timing). However, did you break them correctly? Can you defend your patterns with valid reasoning based on the song you're mapping to? Without your defense, it'll just wind up as "just another failed attempt to break a rule".

In addition to Manysi's little mod, can you defend:
01:09:215 (5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - This jump is as difficult as the some of the jumps made in previous kiai. Are you saying that this section is as intense as the previous kiai? And are you saying that this section (00:29:698 (5,6,7,8,9,10)) isn't as intense?
02:21:693 (1,2,3) - What about this one? This is THE biggest jump in the entire map. Is this note so strong that it deserves this gigantic jump? Is it THE strongest note?
03:07:763 (6,7) - Second largest spacing. same question as point 2. Additionally, this is one of the very few place you used 1/4 sliders on. What makes this and other 1/4 (such as 03:58:920 (5)) so different that you used a technique you didn't use in the entire map?
03:26:312 (1,2,3,4,5) - The last note's spacing is 3 times as large as the other note. Is it that special?
03:40:908 (1,2,3) - Why is this completely different from 03:42:502 (1,2,3,4)?

Like Manysi said, I can probably point out stuff in your map all day and still not be done.

Yes, many mappers can interpret songs differently. That's where styles comes from. But majority of your spacing is an error, not creativity. It's plain impossible to "interpret" the notes the same way you claim to have interpreted with your mapping technique.
CXu
osu! Alumni
3,558 posts
Joined March 2009
CXu
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.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

Manysi wrote:

I can say good things. Seems like thats what you wanna hear.
There is something charming about your map that i cant describe. (Idk might be the music or just nostalgia.) And its pretty good compared to my first one.

You didnt give feedback that you understood what i told you. I guess i have to tell you once more: take the path that many others have already taken, or at least start on that. You wont regret it.

Though i feel the compulsion to help you with what i know.

"If you mention the distance spacing, you better have a damn good argument to why it should be changed, besides "It's too inconsistent!"".
00:03:725 (1,2) - 1/1 spacing -> 00:04:178 (3,4) - 1/2. From 3 to 4 is a bigger distance than 1 to 2. This is not inconsistent, its stupid. How am i supposed to tell the difference? You can say: but if you listen to the music... I know. The thing is you have to make it clear to the player what spacing you use. This is a common mistake what almost EVERY new mapper make.

00:04:027 (2,3,4) - is a group of beats with increasing pitch with nothing else happening, right? Then why did you space 4 much further away? This applies to your entire map. It didnt make sense, you had no reason to do this. You should group beats of the same kind and not make random spacing.
Maybe you wanted to make a similar to the previous at 00:04:933 (6,7,8) - because thats the same but only with decreasing pitch.

I could go on for several hours about the mistakes you made but i dont have time for that. As for timing, i would have choosen a song played to metronome to begin with. This kind of stuff is incredibly hard to pull off and i have to admit you did a great job.
In regards to following the same path as others, there's a few reasons, why I dislike the idea.
The first reason is just the way I work creatively. You can compare it to the way I write music: I'm completely self taught, and I am only now applying to get some education, and some proper knowledge. If working this way worked for composing, why shouldn't it work for beatmapping?

The second reason is, that I just like my own map that much. I kinda feel like "why should I do what other mappers tell me, when my map is better?". Because I really think it is. And as I mentioned before, I just want to make the map as enjoyable for me as possible, and then hope other people will like it as much as me. I don't think I'll ever want to make beatmaps in any other way.

In regards to the points about my map, thank you first of all, this is the first time anybody has ever criticized my map, and provided an explanation...

...but that still doesn't mean I'm not gonna defend it!

"If you mention the distance spacing, you better have a damn good argument to why it should be changed, besides "It's too inconsistent!"".
00:03:725 (1,2) - 1/1 spacing -> 00:04:178 (3,4) - 1/2. From 3 to 4 is a bigger distance than 1 to 2. This is not inconsistent, its stupid. How am i supposed to tell the difference? You can say: but if you listen to the music... I know. The thing is you have to make it clear to the player what spacing you use. This is a common mistake what almost EVERY new mapper make.

00:04:027 (2,3,4) - is a group of beats with increasing pitch with nothing else happening, right? Then why did you space 4 much further away? This applies to your entire map. It didnt make sense, you had no reason to do this. You should group beats of the same kind and not make random spacing.
Maybe you wanted to make a similar to the previous at 00:04:933 (6,7,8) - because thats the same but only with decreasing pitch.
I'm gonna address both points simultaneously: You kinda pointed it out yourself. I mapped the 1 as it's own note, and 2,3,4 as a separate part, where the distance increases as the pitch increases. Then same can be said about 5,6,7,8: 5 being on it's own, 6,7,8 decreasing in spacing as the pitch decreases. This might make more sense, if i make a nc on 2, so it's clear that 1 is on it's own, or 5, so it's clear that the two parts are basically opposites, but I feel like all the notes makes sense together as well, and too many nc's will just be more confusing
If you (or anybody) wants to discuss this particular map further, I'd recommend the map's thread, as that was not my intention with this thread

Edit: typo

-[Koinuri] wrote:

-[Koinuri] wrote:

Some of these can be broken on certain occasion if done right, but you can assume it's going to be bad for the most part.
The key term is "if done right" and "going to be bad for the most part". That song probably breaks rules correctly to make it interesting (I don't really feel like checking your timing). However, did you break them correctly? Can you defend your patterns with valid reasoning based on the song you're mapping to? Without your defense, it'll just wind up as "just another failed attempt to break a rule".
Well, I haven't had the chance to defend the map yet! I did suggest making a video defending every single note placement, yet I was advised against that. So here it goes:

In addition to Manysi's little mod, can you defend:
01:09:215 (5,6,7,8,9,10,1) - This jump is as difficult as the some of the jumps made in previous kiai. Are you saying that this section is as intense as the previous kiai? And are you saying that this section (00:29:698 (5,6,7,8,9,10)) isn't as intense? It might not be as intense, but since it's just after a calm bit, and followed by a calm bit, it seems more intense in comparison. It's is mapped slightly more intensely, to make it stand out more
02:21:693 (1,2,3) - What about this one? This is THE biggest jump in the entire map. Is this note so strong that it deserves this gigantic jump? Is it THE strongest note? You are correct that it is the biggest jump in the map, however since it's only one big jump and a few small ones, it's not the most difficult jump in the map. It was, as before, made to stand out
03:07:763 (6,7) - Second largest spacing. same question as point 2. Additionally, this is one of the very few place you used 1/4 sliders on. What makes this and other 1/4 (such as 03:58:920 (5)) so different that you used a technique you didn't use in the entire map? It is the ending of one section, just before the song changes quite dramatically. I often use larger spacing at the ending of these sections, to kinda finish them off with a bang. The sliders are because the notes stands out to me, while being quite staccato, which I emphasized this way.
03:26:312 (1,2,3,4,5) - The last note's spacing is 3 times as large as the other note. Is it that special? the previous notes follow the drums, while that note follows the flute, so naturally I separated them a bit. Also, I think this gives a feeling of forward momentum or action, similar to what I did here 01:22:343 (2,3,4) -
03:40:908 (1,2,3) - Why is this completely different from 03:42:502 (1,2,3,4)? I wanted to emphasize the drums the second time around, because it was the end of the section

Like Manysi said, I can probably point out stuff in your map all day and still not be done.

Yes, many mappers can interpret songs differently. That's where styles comes from. But majority of your spacing is an error, not creativity. It's plain impossible to "interpret" the notes the same way you claim to have interpreted with your mapping technique.
You should probably stop referring to things you subjectively disagree with as "errors", it kinda makes you look like an asshole...

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.

relevant song is relevant...
Last edited by jawns , edited 1 time in total.
Manysi
336 posts
Joined July 2014
Manysi
By decreasing, this is what i meant
SPOILER
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.
Natsu
8,076 posts
Joined September 2012
Natsu
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.
Deva
2,343 posts
Joined December 2014
Deva
I tried both maps you linked and id say they are anything but fun.
CXu
osu! Alumni
3,558 posts
Joined March 2009
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.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
Topic Starter
jawns

Manysi wrote:

By decreasing, this is what i meant
SPOILER
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...
Okoayu
Nomination Assessment Team / Elite Nominator
4,957 posts
Joined May 2012
Okoayu
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
osu! Alumni
3,558 posts
Joined March 2009
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
336 posts
Joined July 2014
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
5,282 posts
Joined June 2010
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)
Last edited by Endaris , edited 1 time in total.
Kenan
10 posts
Joined May 2015
Kenan
This is clearly going nowhere, just lock the topic and be done with this.
Manysi
336 posts
Joined July 2014
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
5,938 posts
Joined August 2010
Flanster
jawns, can you please not make another post to reply to each person, just put it all in one.
jawns
109 posts
Joined October 2013
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

0
1 / 46