PIKOTARO - Pen-Pineapple-Apple-Pen [Osu|Taiko]

posted
Total Posts
168
show more
Topic Starter
-TakoYaki-
Hi I am back

Mun wrote:

Cut the first 5 seconds off of the audio track, it's needlessly taking up space and wasting time, since it's just silence. This isn't a rankability issue, it's just... ugh. ugh.


00:16:082 (1) - This held sound ends at 00:16:523, why does the slider keep going to 00:16:744? somehow we all think that it's ok lolol but welp may consider
00:33:067 (1) - Maybe move this so the sliderend is blanketed with 00:32:185 (4) - because it looks weird as it is. Players' eyes focus on note 5 here, shouldn't be a bit problem in-game, but will consider
00:26:008 (1,4) - I would advocate moving these 2 notes over so that 00:26:008 (1,2,3,4) - becomes a triangle with at least close to 2 equal distances. As it stands, it looks like a bit of a mess. Agree
00:31:964 (3) - There is 0 sound here. If 00:31:743 (2) - was a 2/4 slider, it would make sense to have the end here, but the note is a clear unnecessary overmap. the strong beats are long here, which is fine imo
00:41:891 (1) - Maybe make this into a 180 degree rotation of 00:41:449 (5) - ? Agree, it also makes the flow better
00:45:424 (1) - I had to turn my audio up to normally ear-destroying levels to hear the sound behind this spinner after 00:48:953. Ending it on the big white tick seems more accurate to me.Wa you fine? lol
00:26:670 (3,4) - My slidey senses are tingling, I think this blanket is off just a bit. Are you referring to 1,3 or 3,4 here? For 3,4, it doesn't look off here. But for 1,3, the slider 3 appears after the player clicked slider 1, at this moment the players' eyes should be focusing on note 2. Therefore I focused on 3,4 blanket rather than 1,3 here
00:27:773 (1,2,3,4) - Spacing emphasis in this pattern is REALLY bad. The highest spaced circle is on the least emphasized part of the 'song' behind this pattern. I get your point, actually, slider 4 shouldn't be included in this set here(bass-hihat-snare-hihat). The set 1,2,3 has a triangular shape here, which looks well imo
00:33:949 (3) - Maybe this should be a 180 degree rotation of 00:33:067 (1) - for the sake of visual consistency. both 1 and 3 pointing inwards, emphasizing note 2 and slider 4
00:43:214 (5) - This, perhaps one of the strongest sounds in the whole 'song,' has not only no hitsound, but is actually an extremely quiet soft tick? Why?! This one was originally a slider, but some of the modders pointed out that it didn't work well so I decided to change it to a note
Metadata:
Tags:
piko taro ppap pen pineapple japanese jump funny lol short takoyaki gidz -gidz- dailycare skylish nanako nnk starrstyx
"piko" and "taro" should not be in the tags, as they are duplicates of the artist.
"jump" "funny" "lol" "short" are all irrelevant tags.
Remove "gidz" from the tags, as searching "gidz" will include search results with the tag "-gidz-" in them.
Change "takoyaki" to "-takoyaki-"
Why is "nnk" a tag?
True




There are way too many flaws in this, despite being such a short map. How did it make it to qualified?

Nothing is perfect imo :O

Kuo Kyoka wrote:

You may want to add
Source: jubeat Qubell

Since it's now official in a KONAMI ARCADE game


Unsure, because the song released before the song got officially in this game so ... but since it's already, why not?
Anymore, tags:
ペンパイナッポーアッポーペン Single
KONAMI BEMANI

That's all I guess so. Information: https://www.remywiki.com/Pen-Pineapple-Apple-Pen
I don't think this is necessary tho
Topic Starter
-TakoYaki-
soz for double post

Thanks for spending your precious time on this mapset guys, DQ incoming I think

I will also consider taking suggestions from other mods as well.

I am truly sorry that we might have to delay a bit since I am currently in exam period right now.

Hope you all have a nice day ;)
IamKwaN
As your request.
StarrStyx
Im planning to do a partial remap of my diff so please hold off modding it until I finish my fixes, thanks!

However I'll edit this post with replies to some of the mods once I get off school. check my other post lol
KittyAdventure
Topic Starter
-TakoYaki-

KittyAdventure wrote:

I agree with Kuo Kyoka!

Source: jubeat Qubell

https://twitter.com/jubeat_staff
http://p.eagate.573.jp/game/jubeat/qube ... REDIRECT=2





still a bit curious tho, since あそべるようになりました simply means it is available on jubeat, if somehow it is also available in other music games like taiko no tatsujin, reflecbeat etc, how do I determine which one is the real source. :thinking: but anyway I think I'll add it then. I will just add it as a tag instead, since jubeat didn't participate in the creation of PPAP
Shiranai
Why this one still on qualified listing Kwan http://puu.sh/s4YXg/cdf4da0990.jpg?
Good luck on requalification btw :)
Topic Starter
-TakoYaki-

Mako Sakata wrote:

Why this one still on qualified listing Kwan http://puu.sh/s4YXg/cdf4da0990.jpg?
Good luck on requalification btw :)
Thanks!
Shmiklak
hey guys pay attention on my version pls ;w;
StarrStyx
Opening another post since there are quite a few other replies.
We don't need jubeat as the source, because the song was added into the game later and its not a song that was composed for the game. However I'd agree with putting jubeat into the tags for easier natvigation.

Mun wrote:

Cut the first 5 seconds off of the audio track, it's needlessly taking up space and wasting time, since it's just silence. This isn't a rankability issue, it's just... ugh. Theres no need to cut it lol.

00:06:596 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - These notes aren't just weirdly spread, but it just plays quite badly.
I don't really think it plays badly considering I ask quite a few ppl to testplay this map, but I'm gonna change this anyway
00:14:979 (2,3) - Maybe stack sliderend with this note? There's a lot of that sort of stacking going on in the map, and it doesn't make sense to have that little inconsistency there. I might be changing this part later
00:38:361 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - This is a really skewed octagon. It feels rather strange playing it, since all of the followpoints do not share any single point. Don't really think its skewed lol
00:39:464 (2,4) - Again, stacking? Again, I might be changing this part later
00:45:039 (2) - Maybe move this note over just a bit, so that the sharply turning slider at 00:44:578 (1) - directly leads into the followpoint.
will change to something else to be consistent with the previous vocal only part


There are way too many flaws in this, despite being such a short map. How did it make it to qualified?

Sonnyc wrote:

Star's Insane.
00:06:596 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - What is this? This just feels like a randomly scattered objects in the screen without forming an actual pattern.
Although it might seem a bit random, I wouldn't say its not an actualy pattern: in fact I placed it in the usual perpendicular cross, just like i usually do in my other maps. However I will be changing this part later so yea
00:10:126 (1,2,3) - It seems (3) is having a stronger sound in the song. Why is (1,2) having a bigger spacing than (2,3)?
It would seem to me the spacing is quite similar lol, but I'll change this part when I get to it
00:11:008 (1,2,3,1) - Similar as above, why is (2,3) having a bigger spacing than (1,2)? Did you wanted to express the upbeats stronger? ok, could work. Then why is 00:11:891 (1,2,3,4) all having the same emphasis even if you decided to place an emphasis on the upbeat previously? Such inconsistent emphasis usage felt highly inappropriate in beatmap structures.
Same as above
00:13:655 (1,2,3) - According to the music, this has a high similarity with 00:10:126 (1,2,3). What kind of consistency did you managed to express? The rhythms I see. The flows... not quite. Slider shapes, nope. Spacings, nope.
Same as above
00:31:302 (1,2,3) - What is the placement logic of these objects? At least (1,2) feels like a mirrored sliders, but there are tons of questions. Why is (3) formed that way? Why is (2) placed there? Why is (3) placed there? What kind of a visual pattern is the placement of (2,3) forming? This kind of doubt presents all over the map and you'll want to figure it out if you can give a proper answer besides 'it is fun to play' or 'it's placed randomly to create my expected flow'. Unless, that's why this map should get considered as a low quality.
I'd agree that the sliders can be placed better, will be revamping this part later
00:36:596 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - The melody lines are off here and just expressing the same as other large spaced parts weren't reflecting the song properly. Having a vocal-only part is a great difference in the music, but like there is 0 difference with previous sections in the map.
Yes, there might be 0 difference, but its still a vocal only part and you said it; I wish to offer a different pattern as opposed to other parts of the song solely because of this reason.
00:43:655 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - ^ I might change this to keep consistency with the above pattern as mentioned

Didn't pointed out all issues since I doubt if it this map could work in the current design.
It's honestly painful to see this in qualified. The map only contains flow and nothing else than that. Although I do pay attention to aesthetics myself sometimes, since when is flow not the most important aspect in mapping? I'd sacrifice aesthetics over flow just to make it play better.
Thanks for the mods. These are just some replies, but in fact I'll be rebuilding some of the parts from scratch, so please wait until I've finished the fixes, otherwise your mod will be ignored since it doesn't really apply anyway :?
Doyak

StarrStyx wrote:

Didn't pointed out all issues since I doubt if it this map could work in the current design.
It's honestly painful to see this in qualified. The map only contains flow and nothing else than that. Although I do pay attention to aesthetics myself sometimes, since when is flow not the most important aspect in mapping? I'd sacrifice aesthetics over flow just to make it play better.
Well I'd say, flow is like 20% of the map. It doesn't mean it's not important; 20% is already really big aspect. However that doesn't mean you can sacrifice every other little 10%, 5% elements for that one 20%. I honestly can't see much of any other logic behind your map.

00:06:596 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - The flow is kind of perpendicular, but still it's not even close to be a proper 'perpendicular pattern', because the angle differs for every jumps and visually, nothing is perpendicular. You can't call angles that differs from 70~110 degree a perpendicular pattern. They're just randomly placed jumps that provides 'similar' movement.

00:36:596 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3) - Seems you misunderstood what Sonnyc said. What Sonnyc said is that your map has no difference than the previous parts because you used the same kind of spacing/jumps, while the music has drastically changed. You may have thought stacking 00:36:596 (1,2) - 00:37:057 (1,2) - made this part very unique than others, but that''s not what Sonnyc felt.
StarrStyx
ah thanks for the clarification.

In fact for 00:06:596 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - I assumed it was perpendicular but w/e
like I said, Im gonna do some big changes anyway so I'll get some more opinions when I finish fixing them.

Thanks for the concern!
snowball112
Heya, just some stuff for the taiko diffs:
General
  1. You should try using lower volume before 00:10:126. This parts sounds really loud imo, and the main instruments start at 00:10:126.
  2. Using hitobjects from 00:43:655 until 00:45:039 doesn't look good imo, hitsounds stay the same even though it's vocal and you've been going with instruments the whole time so it sounds really loud. Also, similar part at 00:36:596 is left blank, I don't think this looks neat for overall structure. I suggest you just leave both parts empty to not conflict with the what you mapped before.
Skylish's Muzukashii
  1. I think you can remove 00:10:346 and 00:13:876. Even though this song is repetetive, you can still have a bit of variety in spacing, the diff is fairly similar to oni as well otherwise.
  2. Slider on 00:16:082 just sounds weird because there is no drumroll but rather a hold sound, I think a single note on 00:16:082 would sound much better and be better for consistent structure like at 00:12:552.
  3. I don't think the spacing of 00:17:185 (1,2,3,4,5,6) works very well, mainly because you have a note on 00:17:405 even though the background instruments are stronger at 00:18:288. I suggest you remove 00:17:405 and move 00:17:846 to 00:18:288 and try a structure like this, cursor on 00:18:949. Even if you justify this with mapping to the vocal, in that case 00:17:846 should be a k and there would have had to be a note at 00:19:832 as well by the same logic. Also, the note 00:18:950 (7) is off by 1ms, should be on 00:18:949.
  4. You can remove 00:21:817 and change 00:21:596 to D. I don't think K sounds good for vocal because up until now the only thing you've used k on is the high instrument sound, and suddenly you use it for vocal, I don' think this looks good.
  5. Remove 00:27:663 and use similar spacing to the previous suggestion for this part as well, there is nothing that would support a 1/4 here, the only sounds which would support this imo are from 00:26:670 to 00:26:891 for example where you can emphasize the long sound in the music, but you can save that for the oni diff.
  6. Remove 00:38:581 and 00:42:662 and 00:42:111 as well, looks a lot better for spacing imo.
Skylish's Oni
  1. You could replace the stream at 00:08:361 with a spinner, would sound much better. It would also be better for spread if you just make more differences later where the diffs are more alike currently instead of forcing a huge difference right at the start in my opinion.
  2. I think you can remove 00:10:788 for a better spread and to avoid such a long note chain here. Similar with 00:14:317.
  3. Remove 00:13:545. This note emphasizes nothing.
  4. 00:16:082 - replace with a d like in muzu, a drumroll seems unfitting here.
  5. You can remove 00:17:405 and change 00:17:847 to k for emphasis of the vocal here and a bit of variety.
  6. You can remove 00:18:949 as well for better emphasis, it doesn't make much sense to have a note here and leave 00:19:832 blank even though there is much more going on in the music. You should add notes on 00:19:721 and 00:19:832 and remove both 00:20:494 and 00:20:604. The sounds at 00:19:611 would support a 1/4 pattern, but there is no 1/4 at 00:20:494.
  7. Emphasis of the "uhh" in the music is really poor if you just map continuos 1/2 around it, I feel like you should use larger spacing to emphasize this more. I suggest you remove both 00:21:376 and 00:21:817 and change 00:21:596 to D.
  8. You could move 00:22:258 to 00:23:361 and 00:24:133 to 00:23:251 because the long sound in the music would justify the use of 1/4 more than at 00:24:023. Then you could remove 00:24:464 as well.
  9. After applying the above, you should make the second loop consistent with this, eg. 00:24:906 k, 00:25:898 and 00:26:009 remove, 1/4 from 00:26:670 to 00:26:891 instead of at 00:27:552 etc. Similar with 00:29:317 the 1/4 should not be here, but at 00:30:199.
  10. Remove 00:32:405 and 00:34:170 since there is no sound here.
  11. I think you should try to make the part from 00:38:361 consistent to the part at 00:10:126. i don't think it makes sense to have the difficulty spike at the end with so much 1/4 when the most intense part of the song is somewhere in the middle.

Overall, structure is not that great in my opinion because you've mapped 1/2 note chains for the most part and used 1/4 that seem a bit random instead of where the music would support them, eg. at 00:20:494 instead of 00:19:611. And the last part needs to be less intense especially in the oni since this does not correspond to what the song provides.

Good luck
Ayame-
that song xDDDDD
Joe Castle

KittyAdventure wrote:

I agree with Kuo Kyoka!

Source: jubeat Qubell

https://twitter.com/jubeat_staff
http://p.eagate.573.jp/game/jubeat/qube ... REDIRECT=2





i dont think is really "necessary" to put "jubear qubell" as source, because this song wasnt part of the game when it got released :v
Joe Castle
on other news...

https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6477250

WHY YOU GUYS DQ THIS MAP ;n; TOOK ME 1 HOUR TO FC THE HARD DIFF WITH ALL MODS : IT WAS MY SECOND #1 ;n;
Topic Starter
-TakoYaki-

Joe Castle wrote:

on other news...

https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/6477250

WHY YOU GUYS DQ THIS MAP ;n; TOOK ME 1 HOUR TO FC THE HARD DIFF WITH ALL MODS : IT WAS MY SECOND #1 ;n;
;w; I am sorry for the inconvenience, but many people think that we should improve our diffs. It would take some time for us to get it back on track :<
StarrStyx
I tried my best to make the map look nicer, and at the same time keeping the rhythms consistent.
Putting this here in case someone wants to look at it before TakoYaki uploads.

Thanks for the suggestions guys! Feel free to give opinions on this partially remapped diff! http://starrstyx.s-ul.eu/MK4se7dv
Topic Starter
-TakoYaki-

StarrStyx wrote:

I tried my best to make the map look nicer, and at the same time keeping the rhythms consistent.
Putting this here in case someone wants to look at it before TakoYaki uploads.

Thanks for the suggestions guys! Feel free to give opinions on this partially remapped diff! http://starrstyx.s-ul.eu/MK4se7dv
Thanks! both of my diffs and StarR's diff are all updated. Thanks for everyone's suggestions!
Ashton

StarrStyx wrote:

I tried my best to make the map look nicer, and at the same time keeping the rhythms consistent.
Putting this here in case someone wants to look at it before TakoYaki uploads.

Thanks for the suggestions guys! Feel free to give opinions on this partially remapped diff! http://starrstyx.s-ul.eu/MK4se7dv
it's okay, but i'd like to ask why was CS raised? (correct me if i'm wrong)

I'm still kind of worried about hte rhythm choice you made near the end (the 1/2 spam, when it could have been sliders in there like the beginning)

But who am I too judge, good luck.
show more
Please sign in to reply.

New reply