community forum

toby fox - Undertale (Chime Remix)

posted
Total Posts
38
show more
[ Drop ]
just wondering
How do you think about this map ?
Kuki

-[ Snowflake ]- wrote:

Wtf? It's a background, not a hitcircle. You could literally use an anime girl for the bg and it'd still be rankable. Background images have nothing to do with song emphasis.
actually, you couldn't (unless it's related somehow). backgrounds should represent the song as nicely as possible, why would i have a song like this fitted to a bg like this? certain parameters must be followed, unless you're in a circumstance where there is nothing you can directly trace back to the song that can be reliably used or at least incorporated.

-[ Snowflake ]- wrote:

That aside, how dare you say the quality of the background is bad? This is some high quality shit. No pixels, round edges, strong detail in the setting (i.e. mountains, trees, clouds, etc.), a very good depiction of The Underground, good shading, a lot of different colours used to keep fine detail, and a lot of god damn hard work and dedication. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the quality of the background. It is beautiful, not fuzzy, not blurry, and not pixelated. I am insulted! >:(
your background is 1193x670, contrary to the highest quality allowed (1366x768). stretched out onto a 1920x1080 screen, and coupled with the watermark, it looks bad. the "fine detail" of this piece is lost in the resolution.

i don't know why you would be insulted regardless.
_handholding
idk, the bg looks more than fine to me. Both in editor and whilst playing
Kuki

Kisses wrote:

idk, the bg looks more than fine to me. Both in editor and whilst playing
i assure you it's not as good as it could be regardless.
_handholding

Kuki wrote:

Kisses wrote:

idk, the bg looks more than fine to me. Both in editor and whilst playing
i assure you it's not as good as it could be regardless.
I feel like its good the way that it is as any more pixels would have too much detail and create a distracting bg
-Faded-
While I agree that the way he responded was inappropriate, you shouldn't force your suggestions onto the mapper unless it's something unrankable. Personally I like the BG and the fuzziness adds a warm, retro feel to the beatmap. This is subjective, and at the end of the day it is down to the mapper as to whether he/she wants to change it or not.
Kuki

Kisses wrote:

I feel like its good the way that it is as any more pixels would have too much detail and create a distracting bg
you just said that worse quality is important to have in a bg so it's less distracting? this is possibly one of the most ridiculous statements i've ever heard. if you played the map in 1024x768 it would be perfect quality, but i don't see how it could possibly be distracting in any sense of the word.

-Faded- wrote:

While I agree that the way he responded was inappropriate, you shouldn't force your suggestions onto the mapper unless it's something unrankable. Personally I like the BG and the fuzziness adds a warm, retro feel to the beatmap. This is subjective, and at the end of the day it is down to the mapper as to whether he/she wants to change it or not.
i wasn't forcing my suggestions.

you're saying that worse quality adds a retro feel? there are thousands of ways to edit an image to get a nicer looking image, with a nicer looking "retro" quality to it.

Kuki wrote:

i don't think the quality of your current bg is good

Kuki wrote:

i still strongly suggest you try and find another one
-Faded-

Kuki wrote:

i wasn't forcing my suggestions.
It definitely seems that way when you make three forum posts about it when the mapper had clearly stated that they don't want to change the bg.
Shizuku-
Why is this almost 6 stars? It's like every mod, it gets way harder.
Seijiro
I don't get it all.
This argument went on for already few days. Instead of keeping drama going on why not providing a better BG quality?

Also, unless the BG is really out of context, it's not even a problem for the ranking process.
Let's stop being stubborn for tiny matters, please.


rip my mod's reply :'(
_handholding

Kuki wrote:

Kisses wrote:

I feel like its good the way that it is as any more pixels would have too much detail and create a distracting bg
you just said that worse quality is important to have in a bg so it's less distracting? this is possibly one of the most ridiculous statements i've ever heard. if you played the map in 1024x768 it would be perfect quality, but i don't see how it could possibly be distracting in any sense of the word.
Im pretty sure that wasnt what I said at all you're just twisting my words to make yourself look big and right.
Kuki

Kisses wrote:

Im pretty sure that wasnt what I said at all you're just twisting my words to make yourself look big and right.
you said leaving it as it is (with a lower resolution) would be better, because if it was higher, it would be too distracting.

Kuki wrote:

you just said that worse quality is important to have in a bg so it's less distracting
like i said also, it's my opinion, there's no real right or wrong here, just lower or higher quality.

mrsergio, i searched for a higher quality bg, and there isn't one. i offered a high quality bg i found that i thought suited in it's place.

-faded-, i'm trying to explain myself further as so far it seems there isn't an understanding.

-[ snowflake ]-, if you don't want to use the bg i suggested i think you should try waifu2x or something to up the resolution.
Osuology
ok here we go

So, first of all, you said that massively inconsistent difficulty throughout the song is being looked into, and not to comment on it. And I'm not saying you shouldn't do this, but I want to make sure that you know the best option here (or at least, what I think is best). So, first of all, you have the option to change the slower easier parts to harder, or the harder parts to easier. The first option, I believe, would get the result you want, and be the easiest option, however it will lower the quality of your overall mapping. If you make the hard parts easier, the quality would go up because the difficulty is the same, but. The difficulty will suffer, and it will take quite a long time. Anyways, on to the mod.

00:28:373 (4,5) - The distance between these two represents a change in where the 5 exists right? It's not merely 1 blue tick apart, it's two. But when you get the same rhythm here: 00:30:088 (4,5,6) - You change to antijumps which doesn't represent the rhythm as it did before. Now, neither of these are bad, because they are consistent with themselves, but I would recommend sticking with one or the other, unless the rhythm sounds different enough to justify doing this.

00:41:659 (1,2,3) - This is awesome, I love technical maps, and it really calls for something different than just a triple conformed to DS. But the problem comes when you start to conform them to DS for a second, and then go back to this pattern. Again, stick with your patterns and don't leave them if the rhythm is the same.

00:50:230 (1,2,3) - DS between the 2 and the 3 is 2.34x, and has one follow point. But then here 00:52:052 (2,3) - they are 2.64 apart and have two follow points. This is quite ugly then, so remain consistent.

00:58:373 (1) - Would recommend curving this more such that the blanket looks better.

01:00:088 (1,1) - Try to avoid small overlaps like this, small overlaps are terrible. But, overlaps can be good. If you want to intentionally overlap something, try bisecting another slider, it looks quite good.

01:05:230 (1,2) - Once again with this blankets. They aren't so great, try to curve the 1 more and blanket the 2 better then.

01:06:945 (3,4,5,6) - Make the distance between this close to 1.21, it will look better and more consistent.

01:34:588 () - This should exist, I mean, just listen, it exists, and you map the exact same note multiple times over.

01:35:230 (1,2) - This works, but you can't just place it anywhere. If you want these to exist, structure needs to exist. 01:34:373 (1,2) - These two would have to have the same jump.

01:44:230 (3) - Why not blanket this?

01:41:445 (3,4,5,1) - I hope you realize these are like, 1/4 jumps at 280 bpm. I mean, if you remain consistent it's ok, but you aren't consistent with the WHOLE map. If it calls for it, it does. If it doesn't, it doesn't. I'm not sure exactly what I would say for this, but I would probably nerf the DS to... 1.41, versus the 1.88 you have now.

01:44:445 (4,5) - If you did decide to blanket the previous blanket suggestion, this jump needs nerfing.

01:55:588 (2) - Make this pattern a equilateral triangle, it fits better considering the time between notes.

02:05:230 (1) - Why is this NC? That doesn't make any sense to do.

02:08:659 (1) - At least you were consistent with it, but it still doesn't make sense considering in the previous section like this you didn't make a NC in these spots.

02:14:659 (5) - try this http://puu.sh/p8d8P/8884eb13d4.jpg

02:20:018 (3) - Unsnapped on start and finish.

02:20:659 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I don't think this fits the noises here. Either go with your original triplet or repeating.


02:39:516 (3,4,5) - Why is the distance between the 3 and 4 four follow points, but between the 4 and 5 they are three? Be more consistent.

02:42:945 (3,4,5) - Since you copy and pasted it, ^

02:49:159 (1,2,3) - Distance isn't proper. two follow points.

02:58:480 (9) - Unsnapped green line around here.


02:59:230 () - Don't see why the break should start here really.

03:28:373 (3) - http://puu.sh/p8do1/e8ad7888cf.jpg (sorry puush sucks at selecting areas)

03:33:088 (2,3,4) - Distance between all these should be the same.

03:34:373 (4,1,2) - Why are these so close? Surely the 1 calls for a little bit of a jump.

03:34:802 (2,3) - Distance has 3 follow points, but 03:36:088 (1,2,3,4,5) - these only have two.

03:51:516 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1) - You copy pasted this stream from before so if you made changes to the previous one, make them to this one too.

Skipping fourth chorus...


04:24:088 (1,2) - pls. Just make it a proper blanket.

04:37:694 (8,1) - This calls for a stream jump.

04:39:409 (8,1) - ^

04:41:123 (8,1) - ^

04:57:945 (7) - Slightly offscreen, unrankable.

You did pretty good! You are progressing like a million times faster than I did! :)

<3
BanchoBot
This modding thread has been migrated to the new "modding discussions" system. Please make sure to re-post any existing (and unresolved) efforts to the new system as required.
Please sign in to reply.

New reply