1. osu! forums
  2. osu!
  3. Feature Requests
This is a feature request. Feature requests can be voted up by supporters.
Current Priority: +2
posted
I would like to see more features in the Multiplayer mode, showing you how many times you lost and won (% thing) who is the best on certain maps and who comes 2nd and 3d etc. It would also be cool to score by points by winning alot and then unlocking (or buying) certain items like avatars, skins, wallpapers etc?

It would make the multiplayer alot more fun and rewarding.
posted
It doesn't sound good since you never play with the same people, I don't get how this would work.
posted
I think he's saying that he wants a separate scoreboard for multiplayer mode. I don't see how that would work well either.
posted

Wishy22 wrote:

It doesn't sound good since you never play with the same people, I don't get how this would work.
Exactly. Stats like these are a false representation of one's actual play skill (even though they would only be temporary for a single multi room I would imagine), but might be a nice touch for longer multi games where the same group of players/friends are competing.

As for a multiplayer store? I really don't see anything like that ever happening.
posted

twistedice wrote:

I think he's saying that he wants a separate scoreboard for multiplayer mode. I don't see how that would work well either.
Yea a seperate ranking board for multiplayer, why wouldn't it work? Too hard to calculate everything?
posted

Derekku wrote:

Wishy22 wrote:

It doesn't sound good since you never play with the same people, I don't get how this would work.
Exactly. Stats like these are a false representation of one's actual play skill (even though they would only be temporary for a single multi room I would imagine), but might be a nice touch for longer multi games where the same group of players/friends are competing.

As for a multiplayer store? I really don't see anything like that ever happening.
About the false representation thing, wouldn't see it as false since it would also have a ranking board for each difficulty (easy, normal, hard, insane) And certain players are just better then others so why would it be false?
posted
Play with a bunch of newbs who are worse than you, then you'll have a high win ratio, when actually you aren't that good.


By the way, don't double post. if you need to quote two different posts, press "Quote", copy the message given then go back and Edit your first message.
posted

JInxyjem wrote:

Play with a bunch of newbs who are worse than you, then you'll have a high win ratio, when actually you aren't that good.


By the way, don't double post. if you need to quote two different posts, press "Quote", copy the message given then go back and Edit your first message.
True but that's why you have different ranks for each difficulty, noobs don't play on insane or hard or sometimes even normal, it's like that in every multiplayer game.

Sorry i didn't know how to put 2 quotes into 1 message.
posted
Ranking in low diffs is stupid, many friends I have used to rank on easy/medium maps (they were newbies) and played easy maps like 80 times to get a top 40, while me or any other somewhat skilled player got top 10+ on the first try, and as you can see, it's pretty normal that on easy/medium/even hard maps the first scores use pretty much every mod they can. On multiplayer the same would happen, if you want to compete with other players, you can just try to get higher scores than them on specific maps playing on single player.

Plus, for example, I see a noobs room playing an easy/medium map, it'd be pretty easy to raise my win ratio there, since I'd get easily an S with 99% acc if not an SS (as any player than can easily pass lunatic maps would do), while the rest of the players would be playing maps they maybe consider hard for them, therefore they will never win and it wouldn't be fair.

This would be a good idea if applied to, let's say, organized games (like tournaments) or special rooms that require the players to over rank over, let's say, 2k, or something to avoid any kind of abuse. Sadly, this wouldn't work on "rank lower than X", since I already see people using multis to get free multiplayer score or whatever we should call it. Sadly, again, applying something like this to low ranks/low skilled played is pretty much impossible, since the same will happen as what happens on easy maps, high skilled players will easily take the first places and you can do nothing to stop them.
posted

NoW_Dream wrote:

True but that's why you have different ranks for each difficulty, noobs don't play on insane or hard or sometimes even normal, it's like that in every multiplayer game.
Nope. They do sometimes. Besides, having so many different rankings is too much.
posted
Hmm what about this then: No rankings for easy, just normal, hard and lunatic, also each difficulty has their own room (thats why you need the points) the way wishy said, also if somebody is hard ranked (let's just call it that way) an normal ranked cannot play with the hard ranked player unless they accept your challenge. A rank system like this would probably work, alot of games use it. People who cheat will probably get noticed and of course banned in someway. This way the win ratio would work alot better, also if you would rank up from normal to hard, it resets again so it stays fair.
posted
The mode people play the most is head-to-head, which is just single player with a social aspect. And guess what... single player already has rankings! Wonderful how that works out.

As for the other modes, anybody who knows a way to implement a consistent ranking system is lying. There are just too many factors to make things uneven, most of which have already been mentioned. For difficulty tiers, how do you suggest maps be filtered into the appropriate tier? You are aware of how inconsistent difficulty names and star ratings are, yes?

Besides, if you're asking about all this, you like multiplayer mode, right? Isn't simply playing and having a good time its own reward?
posted

Soaprman wrote:

The mode people play the most is head-to-head, which is just single player with a social aspect. And guess what... single player already has rankings! Wonderful how that works out.

As for the other modes, anybody who knows a way to implement a consistent ranking system is lying. There are just too many factors to make things uneven, most of which have already been mentioned. For difficulty tiers, how do you suggest maps be filtered into the appropriate tier? You are aware of how inconsistent difficulty names and star ratings are, yes?

Besides, if you're asking about all this, you like multiplayer mode, right? Isn't simply playing and having a good time its own reward?
Just requesting stuff to make the game better, i know peppy & staff would have to change certain things, but why not if it makes the game even better?
posted

NoW_Dream wrote:

Just requesting stuff to make the game better, i know peppy & staff would have to change certain things, but why not if it makes the game even better?
Well, it is nice to now that you want to make the game better, but the current problem is that most people in this thread do not see how this feature will make this game better (myself included). Your goal is to convince the other users that this feature is worth implementing by showing that is indeed useful and easy to implement.
posted
The OP's idea now could work, but it'll be really REALLY hard to "rank" each map in a certain tier, since it depends absolutely on each player, for example, I'm somewhat good at jumps but SUCK at streams, while I got friends who are awesome at streams but not to good at reacting for fast jumps, therefore we have a different concept of a "very hard map".

I'm sorry for the OP but this idea won't work in this game, at least I think so.
posted

Wishy22 wrote:

The OP's idea now could work, but it'll be really REALLY hard to "rank" each map in a certain tier, since it depends absolutely on each player, for example, I'm somewhat good at jumps but SUCK at streams, while I got friends who are awesome at streams but not to good at reacting for fast jumps, therefore we have a different concept of a "very hard map".

I'm sorry for the OP but this idea won't work in this game, at least I think so.
Each map is in the tier of the selected difficulty, like a normal mode map in the normal tier.

This would mean that everyones map difficulty's names need to be the same (normal, hard, lunatic/insane w/e) but i don't see that as a huge problem.

Also for the ppl that say this is just like single player...it's not, in multiplayer you are alot more nervous(atleast i am) mainly of the switching of the players all the time, and now because you actually have another reason to do multiplayer, getting points to rank up(and maybe a win ratio thing if that would work). Chatbox before/after the match adds some fun aswell.
posted

NoW_Dream wrote:

This would mean that everyones map difficulty's names need to be the same (normal, hard, lunatic/insane w/e) but i don't see that as a huge problem
lolyeahitis
posted

RandomJibberish wrote:

NoW_Dream wrote:

This would mean that everyones map difficulty's names need to be the same (normal, hard, lunatic/insane w/e) but i don't see that as a huge problem
lolyeahitis
How?
posted

NoW_Dream wrote:

Wishy22 wrote:

The OP's idea now could work, but it'll be really REALLY hard to "rank" each map in a certain tier, since it depends absolutely on each player, for example, I'm somewhat good at jumps but SUCK at streams, while I got friends who are awesome at streams but not to good at reacting for fast jumps, therefore we have a different concept of a "very hard map".

I'm sorry for the OP but this idea won't work in this game, at least I think so.
Each map is in the tier of the selected difficulty, like a normal mode map in the normal tier.

This would mean that everyones map difficulty's names need to be the same (normal, hard, lunatic/insane w/e) but i don't see that as a huge problem.

Also for the ppl that say this is just like single player...it's not, in multiplayer you are alot more nervous(atleast i am) mainly of the switching of the players all the time, and now because you actually have another reason to do multiplayer, getting points to rank up(and maybe a win ratio thing if that would work). Chatbox before/after the match adds some fun aswell.
You don't get the idea, some Lunatic maps are harder than others, and with that I mean there are Lunatic maps I can't pass, while there are others that are easy enough to get an FC on the first try. Plus, you got what's called Collabs, guest diffs, etc. Plus as I said, some maps can look insane to you and dumb for me, since we may me good at different stuff. However, the main point is that some hard maps could be called normal, and maybe some hard maps could be insane, and the same happens to pretty much every map depending from the point of view you choose.
posted

NoW_Dream wrote:

RandomJibberish wrote:

lolyeahitis
How?
People are always going to have different opinions on what makes each difficulty what it is. What's most important is how the names fit within the map: Although both this and this are named Easy Normal Hard, the respective difficulties are very different despite the names fitting perfectly within the map itself.

Also, many don't want to be limited to the default difficulty names.
show more
Please sign in to reply.