Maridius wrote:
Let this sink in, QAT decided that this map is fundamentally flawed not just like 2 people.
Keeping in mind that everything is "so transparent", I demand that the chat-log to this discussion is publically available. Then we at least truly have a base to discuss on, because I still think that what currently hold the veto is not right.
Might not be "THAT" obvious, considering you can easily influence someone by pming them with your opinion - if that happened, we'll let it be at this point, but please don't talk about it being obvious.
What happened to: BN1 bubbles, BN2 veto, BN1 got blocked, BN3 can "get rid off the veto" if he explains as to why. Now you're telling me that there's something behind the stages where the mapper is being left to some ultimatium?
Nao Tomori wrote:
i dont get why you guys are suddenly complaining about standards being enforced when you were also the ones complaining the most vocally that standards ARENT being enforced...
Aha. Could you explain me then why standards are being pushed now on "aesthetically pleasant" maps but nothing happens on other maps, when there are extreme conceptual flaws combined with non-meta aesthetics (how you call it)? They might play ok, but I just as well have my concerns about them. And this map is just as fine, if you compare it on this level. Nothing happens, but suddenly this is a big deal? I remember that people were calling me out for having double standards, but what exactly is happening now? Hypocrisy as its finest
Towards the "problems" themselves:1)
Spacing concept used leaves little to no room for contrast in spacing and movement to match contrasting elements in the song within many patterns. Contrast in spacing between patterns in certain sections is too minor and disallows differentiation of strong vs. weak beats. Examples can be found within the original veto post, alongside 00:31:164 (1,2,3,1) - mostly mapped to faint bg noise yet huge spacing, 00:36:353 (1,2) - emphasis on red tick with no sound yet is nearly halfway across the screen, 01:05:218 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - which has no emphasis on red ticks yet are 1>2 half-screens.I think you fail to understand what contrast is, I can't put it differently. There were many examples as to how the contrast is given in this map, so please take a look at them and reconsider your statement.
This is definitely a point which should not justify this veto, because this is a "problem" which isn't one.2)
An abundance of overmapping mostly unsupported by the song. A noticeable case is 00:55:650 (3,1,2,3) - where there is no 3/4 in the song, similar to 02:12:191 (2,1,2). 00:57:110 (1,2,3,4) - also an unsupported rhythm as there are no notable sounds on (2), coupled with too high spacing. While I'd like to skip the spacing statement, I do agree on the overmap on the 3/4. You might be well off to reconsider that, ProBox and see what happens after - because they do have a point here.