grats Komore !

thx!

thank you for mapping this

Good job, nice map!

nice bookmarks

grats, komore-san ♥

thanks everyone ><

Hi, I saw this in qualified, i think it's a pretty cool map but it can definitely be improved before pushing it towards ranked.

My main issue is the patterning and huge spacing inconsistencies in the kiai.

[queerish dances]

1. 00:50:396 (2,3,1) - The emphasis is wrong here. What justifies this random antijump just when the new measure starts? 00:50:571 (3,1) - If anything, 00:50:745 (1) - should be the most emphasized here, but instead it's a very weird tiny movement. Same goes for 00:51:966 (4,1) - , 00:56:152 (4,1) - and subsequent similar spots (it happens all over the map)
   
2. 00:54:582 (3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) - What's with all these patterns being so completely different from each other even if the vocal (which is what you're mapping to) is always roughly the same in the music? I understand that you want to create variety and that's good, but I think you can refine a lot of your patterns quite a bit. For example, the spacing difference here 00:57:722 (1,2,1,2) - makes very little sense, as you go from antijumps to very big jump to antijumps for no reason. This is very counter-intuitive to play as the music signifies no such change in emphasis.
   
3. The kiai ends after these and all seems well, until we end up in the next kiai...
   
4. 01:50:919 (2,3) - Why is the start of a new vocal now an antijump instead of the reverse as you did before? 00:57:722 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - in this pattern, you emphasized the STARTS of every vocal, whereas here you're emphasizing the second syllable of every vocal, which gives off a completely different effect.
   
5. Not to mention, later on in this pattern you switch around the emphasis AGAIN, emphasizing the start of 01:51:443 (1) - again. Could you pick one type of emphasis and perhaps stick with it for these vocals? Your map will be a lot more cohesive this way.
   
6. 01:57:024 (1,2,3,4) - What's this sudden huge spacing for just instrumental, and then this 01:57:547 (4,1) - antijump here again where the finish would indicate more emphasis instead. Besides, you've never really used this kind of spacing for the background music either way, as your map has been very vocal based up to this point. The same goes for 02:52:838 (1,2,3) -
   
7. 02:29:989 (1,2) - This one is kinda unnecessary since the sounds you mapped these to stop after 02:29:292 (1,2) - already, so this should just be 3 1/2 notes instead.
   
8. 02:52:838 (1,2,3) - Here the patterning gets even more random. Where exactly are you placing these jumps and for what reason? I don't really know why 02:54:233 (3,4) - and 02:54:582 (5,6) - are such big jumps and 02:54:408 (4,5) - is so small
   
9. 03:00:513 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - It pretty much repeats itself, here these patterns are antijumps with every new vocal emphasized again, the pattern itself is fine but why is the rest so incredibly different?
   
10. 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - vs 01:42:373 (1,2) - and 03:20:047 (1,2,3) - hmm... that's quite a huge difference isn't it? These linear patterns are really harsh to play, especially if you don't use the direction change on this vocal 03:14:815 (3) - , and 03:15:164 (1,2,3) - are equally spaced as the notes where the vocals land on (you'd think this would be a lot less intense)
    
11. 03:23:885 (3) - a direction change would benefit this pattern aswell, since this vocal is a lot lower pitched and feels way too harsh to play in such a large spaced linear pattern.

Well, the things I pointed out pretty much repeat themselves throughout the map, so I encourage you to take a look at it, and see what you think.

voli posted dq mod so here comes irre for the DQ :^)

ehh
the things you pointed about "bad emphasis" and "weird patterns" are not issues at all and were done on purpose but oh well, seems like i got something to do for the evening

how dare you make wrong emphasis?!

Voli wrote:

[queerish dances]

1. 00:50:396 (2,3,1) - The emphasis is wrong here. What justifies this random antijump just when the new measure starts? 00:50:571 (3,1) - If anything, 00:50:745 (1) - should be the most emphasized here, but instead it's a very weird tiny movement. Same goes for 00:51:966 (4,1) - , 00:56:152 (4,1) - and subsequent similar spots (it happens all over the map) if an antijump comes after a jump, it's still a form of emphasis due to heavy spacing contrast
   
2. 00:54:582 (3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) - What's with all these patterns being so completely different from each other even if the vocal (which is what you're mapping to) is always roughly the same in the music? I understand that you want to create variety and that's good, but I think you can refine a lot of your patterns quite a bit. For example, the spacing difference here 00:57:722 (1,2,1,2) - makes very little sense, as you go from antijumps to very big jump to antijumps for no reason. This is very counter-intuitive to play as the music signifies no such change in emphasis. its just each vocal set being paired into 2s based on white tick emphasis. as said in the desc, this map is based on 2013style techniques, and back then there wasnt super heavy scrutiny over ever jump being exactly consistent. and talk to the average modder today it'll be apparent this heavy scrutiny hasnt rly made maps better, i dont see much reason to dq over slight changes for variety
   
3. The kiai ends after these and all seems well, until we end up in the next kiai...
   
4. 01:50:919 (2,3) - Why is the start of a new vocal now an antijump instead of the reverse as you did before? 00:57:722 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - in this pattern, you emphasized the STARTS of every vocal, whereas here you're emphasizing the second syllable of every vocal, which gives off a completely different effect. pretty clearly matches up with 00:54:931 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) - spacing concept
   
5. Not to mention, later on in this pattern you switch around the emphasis AGAIN, emphasizing the start of 01:51:443 (1) - again. Could you pick one type of emphasis and perhaps stick with it for these vocals? Your map will be a lot more cohesive this way. same as above, tho slightly changed from a linestyle to a back-forth style
   
6. 01:57:024 (1,2,3,4) - What's this sudden huge spacing for just instrumental, and then this 01:57:547 (4,1) - antijump here again where the finish would indicate more emphasis instead. Besides, you've never really used this kind of spacing for the background music either way, as your map has been very vocal based up to this point. The same goes for 02:52:838 (1,2,3) - somewhat agree the spacing here is a bit large, tho again it's being paired with the antijump for nice contrast to emphasize the downbeat. not enough for dq on its own
   
7. 02:29:989 (1,2) - This one is kinda unnecessary since the sounds you mapped these to stop after 02:29:292 (1,2) - already, so this should just be 3 1/2 notes instead. there's clearly still guitar on that blue tick
   
8. 02:52:838 (1,2,3) - Here the patterning gets even more random. Where exactly are you placing these jumps and for what reason? I don't really know why 02:54:233 (3,4) - and 02:54:582 (5,6) - are such big jumps and 02:54:408 (4,5) - is so small more or less same as before regarding contrast, tho the overall spacing has likely increased due to this being the final kiai for a bigger finish, a common technique
   
9. 03:00:513 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - It pretty much repeats itself, here these patterns are antijumps with every new vocal emphasized again, the pattern itself is fine but why is the rest so incredibly different? same as before
   
10. 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - vs 01:42:373 (1,2) - and 03:20:047 (1,2,3) - hmm... that's quite a huge difference isn't it? These linear patterns are really harsh to play, especially if you don't use the direction change on this vocal 03:14:815 (3) - , and 03:15:164 (1,2,3) - are equally spaced as the notes where the vocals land on (you'd think this would be a lot less intense) introducing the linear patterns at the start of the chorus loop emphasizes how the song is building to a finish while also preparing the player for the crosscreen one at 03:23:536 (1,2,3) - , yes it looks like it awkwardly sticks out but there is some logic to it
    
11. 03:23:885 (3) - a direction change would benefit this pattern aswell, since this vocal is a lot lower pitched and feels way too harsh to play in such a large spaced linear pattern. and as far as what you're saying about the linear motions being too harsh or whatever, this is the most intense point of the song, it makes sense to have its inclusion for emphasis purposes. this map has already had lots of linear motions in it

Well, the things I pointed out pretty much repeat themselves throughout the map, so I encourage you to take a look at it, and see what you think.

Go look at the maps of old commonly considered masterpieces. They certainly don't hold the heavy consistency and uniform emphasis you're seeking. I personally can't think of many masterpieces ranked this year, so there's clearly something wrong with the general modding atmosphere.

Voli wrote:

Hi, I saw this in qualified, i think it's a pretty cool map but it can definitely be improved before pushing it towards ranked.

My main issue is the patterning and huge spacing inconsistencies in the kiai.

[queerish dances]

1. 00:50:396 (2,3,1) - The emphasis is wrong here. What justifies this random antijump just when the new measure starts? 00:50:571 (3,1) - If anything, 00:50:745 (1) - should be the most emphasized here, but instead it's a very weird tiny movement. Same goes for 00:51:966 (4,1) - , 00:56:152 (4,1) - and subsequent similar spots (it happens all over the map) actually this is the way how i sometimes emphasize things. low spacing makes the movement quite uncomfortable, so the slider 00:50:745 (1) - becomes harder to click, which creates some soft of emphasis.
   
2. 00:54:582 (3,4,1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) - What's with all these patterns being so completely different from each other even if the vocal (which is what you're mapping to) is always roughly the same in the music? I understand that you want to create variety and that's good, but I think you can refine a lot of your patterns quite a bit. For example, the spacing difference here 00:57:722 (1,2,1,2) - makes very little sense, as you go from antijumps to very big jump to antijumps for no reason. This is very counter-intuitive to play as the music signifies no such change in emphasis. "variety is cool but please make your patterns look the same" different ways of emphasis at the same places make this map more interesting to play and personally i dont see any problems with that. if the concept is repeated consistently, why is this a problem at all? and a question for you, have you ever played this map before telling me that those patterns are "counter-intuitive to play"? i got, like, a tonn of testplays and nobody was complaining about them.
   
3. The kiai ends after these and all seems well, until we end up in the next kiai...
   
4. 01:50:919 (2,3) - Why is the start of a new vocal now an antijump instead of the reverse as you did before? 00:57:722 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - in this pattern, you emphasized the STARTS of every vocal, whereas here you're emphasizing the second syllable of every vocal, which gives off a completely different effect. variety/read above
   
5. Not to mention, later on in this pattern you switch around the emphasis AGAIN, emphasizing the start of 01:51:443 (1) - again. Could you pick one type of emphasis and perhaps stick with it for these vocals? Your map will be a lot more cohesive this way.
   
6. 01:57:024 (1,2,3,4) - What's this sudden huge spacing for just instrumental, and then this 01:57:547 (4,1) - antijump here again where the finish would indicate more emphasis instead. Besides, you've never really used this kind of spacing for the background music either way, as your map has been very vocal based up to this point. The same goes for 02:52:838 (1,2,3) - its pretty the same as 01:01:210 (1,2,3,4) -.. and well, check my perly above if you are concerned about emphasis
   
7. 02:29:989 (1,2) - This one is kinda unnecessary since the sounds you mapped these to stop after 02:29:292 (1,2) - already, so this should just be 3 1/2 notes instead. no, in my point of view, 02:29:989 (1,2) - this sound is the last one here. also there is a pretty noticeable sound on the blue tick, so i guess two circles wont be the correct decision.
   
8. 02:52:838 (1,2,3) - Here the patterning gets even more random. Where exactly are you placing these jumps and for what reason? I don't really know why 02:54:233 (3,4) - and 02:54:582 (5,6) - are such big jumps and 02:54:408 (4,5) - is so small is it a really a jump lol? i think this spacing is kinda usual for the kiai times.
   
9. 03:00:513 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - It pretty much repeats itself, here these patterns are antijumps with every new vocal emphasized again, the pattern itself is fine but why is the rest so incredibly different? because i want to create variety, as you stated above.. i dont understand, you want me to use only triangles through the whole map??
   
10. 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3) - vs 01:42:373 (1,2) - and 03:20:047 (1,2,3) - hmm... that's quite a huge difference isn't it? These linear patterns are really harsh to play, especially if you don't use the direction change on this vocal 03:14:815 (3) - , and 03:15:164 (1,2,3) - are equally spaced as the notes where the vocals land on (you'd think this would be a lot less intense) 03:14:466 - this part is way denser than the other kiais, so thats why 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) - such pattern exists there. 01:42:373 (1,2) - 03:20:047 (1,2,3) - those are pretty much the same tho, so i dont really see a problem..
    
11. 03:23:885 (3) - a direction change would benefit this pattern aswell, since this vocal is a lot lower pitched and feels way too harsh to play in such a large spaced linear pattern. well, probably, but then it will destroy the concepts i had though the whole map, since all those low pitch vocals are usually mapped in the same pattern as the others. 00:55:629 (1,2,3,4) - here, for example or 01:51:443 (1,2,3,4) - here

Well, the things I pointed out pretty much repeat themselves throughout the map, so I encourage you to take a look at it, and see what you think.

well, sorry, if some of my replies were senseless or something, i just dont understand how am i supposed to write the same things again and again..

tldr low spacing is also an emphasis, and since it wasnt used like once in the middle of the map, i think it should work quite well. completely different patterns are there to create diversity and make the gameplay far more interesting than just playing the triangles over and over again. your complaints about bad playability are senseless and i doubt that you played the map even once.

i guess thats it, thanks for checking..

p.s. also check undeadcapulet's post, he kinda wrote everything i wanted to say tbh.

also thanks undeadcapulet, i really appreciate this!!

wow.. calm down with the lashing out? I just posted my opinion so we could discuss about it (which is what qualified is for), not to force my opinion onto you. I'm glad you responded but comments like ''your opinion is basically senseless'' aren't really needed imo. I also think you kinda missed what i was going for. I'm not saying you should create just ''triangle'' jumps, I only suggested a more cohesive emphasis usage (similar emphasis doesnt meant the patterns have to be the same at all) Anyways, good luck with the map, then!

sorry if it sounded offensive, it wasnt my intention at all =/
i just tried to outline my intentions and thats it...
thanks again for the checking

the "senseless" wordchoice seems more of a language barrier thing. think they just meant the playability concerns weren't based on your actual playing of the map but just on your editor looking

I do want to help clarify voli's stance here a bit. This isn't really about being against variety or forcing people to map the same for the same things. Mapping like that is boring and leads to very stale mapping. What I want to clarify for this map is how intensity works.

Lets take a look at these 2 screenshots, one from the first kiai and one from the second.

1st kiai at 00:54:931 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) -

2nd kiai at 01:50:745 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4) -

Both kiai's follow the rhythm probably and can be justified by the music, so what exactly is wrong here?

Well, the contrast between the 2 intensities varies greatly for it being the same section of music. The mapper sets up an expectation with the first kiai for wide angle jumps and large spacing for this section, however in the 2nd section this doesn't appear. Instead the spacing is incredibility diminished, no wide angle jumps or large spacing to be seen at all.

It doesn't necessarily make sense that one chorus of music should be wildly easier than any earlier sections cause that chorus stayed exactly the same. This doesn't mean that you have the map each section the same, but you should keep the difficulty either the keep same difficulty or make each kiai harder with your jumps.

How you do that is up to you, you can do whatever pattern you want just so long as the intensity matches up with your patterns.

begone thots

someone said something about my qualified map

i have some concerns about this map!
[queerish dances]
basically everything is about the kiais cuz non kiai parts are fine

00:47:257 (1,2,1,2) - so this pattern seemed weird to me, cuz you clearly divide the 4 1/2 beats into 2 parts with the NC and the patterning, but in the song all 4 notes are actually quite equal with 00:47:780 (2) - having a vocal - so removing the nc makes more sense

00:49:350 (1,2,1,2) - randomly tiny spacing like this is weird cuz its still pretty comfortable, the "emphasis" of having an antijump is lost since you're just sort of hovering around the previous note instead of making a concerted effort not to overshoot

00:50:396 (2,3) - and then here your base spacing for when there are vocals is used on a part without vocals ._.

00:55:106 (2,1,2) - same thing here about the small spacing; instead of being noticeable, it's just a comfortable movement so there's 0 emphasis.

01:05:396 (1,2) - unrelated to spacing/emphasis stuff but it would have been cool to highlight the change in the guitar here

01:38:536 (4) - missing nc?
actually it randomly changes from every beat to every 2 beats >.>

01:43:071 (3,4,5,6) - don't see the purpose of a fairly large jump pattern on a part with no melody that is basically filler rhythm, yet it has same spacing as stuff like 01:45:164 (1,2,3,4) - which has a vocal on it

01:48:652 (4,5,6) - the song obviously changes here, the vocals stop... but the pattern is more or less identical? kinda weird imo

01:50:745 (1,2,3,4) - this pattern appears to create a massive distinction between the first beat and the second one that is completely unsupported by the song; the vocals don't change between the parts so having this large of a distinction is really weird to me

01:57:024 (1,2,3,4) - this is gigantic considering how the vocals you've been putting similar sized jumps on aren't here

02:11:850 (2) - wouldnt it make more sense to nc here

02:35:919 (4,5,6,7,8) - having 7 in the same pattern here doesnt make too much sense to me considering that the guitar melody you've been following is notably not on 7

02:44:117 (1,2,1,1,1) - how come you abandoned the pattern you used on the last 2 repeats of this phrase a measure before?

02:55:106 (2,1,2) - i think this pattern places significantly more emphasis on 2 than anything else, but 2 doesn't really stick out in the song in any way...

03:14:466 (1,2,3,4,1) - whoa whoa whoa when did this map turn into xanandra? you never use this type of motion before, what changed so much that you decided to introduce it here?

03:15:164 (1,2,3,4) - it doesn't make sense to make this symmetrical to 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4) - because 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4) - has vocals on it, and 03:15:164 (1,2,3,4) - doesn't have anything, so mapping them the exact same way is not really representing the song too well i think

03:23:536 (1,2,3) - lol

03:25:629 (1,1,1,1) - this isnt even lined up cmon

03:38:885 (1,2) - again something that would be pretty cool to highlight

03:57:809 - why map the song when you can just stick a spinner over it amirite

um actually i understood what voli said lol
i meant that different patterns with the same concept in the same places feel kinda boring (at least for me), so some variation in concepts sounds like a good idea

I never said anything about having the jumps be the same concept tho. You can do different stuff, just make is as intense or harder than previous parts. I'm all for the variation.

Heck that what I was trying to clarify for voli lol

2017 - year of consistency

Naotoshi wrote:

someone said something about my qualified map

i have some concerns about this map!
[queerish dances]
basically everything is about the kiais cuz non kiai parts are fine

00:47:257 (1,2,1,2) - so this pattern seemed weird to me, cuz you clearly divide the 4 1/2 beats into 2 parts with the NC and the patterning, but in the song all 4 notes are actually quite equal with 00:47:780 (2) - having a vocal - so removing the nc makes more sense dont really like the followpoint that will appear if ill delete this nc

00:49:350 (1,2,1,2) - randomly tiny spacing like this is weird cuz its still pretty comfortable, the "emphasis" of having an antijump is lost since you're just sort of hovering around the previous note instead of making a concerted effort not to overshoot well, if you are concerned about emphasis,
read my reply to voli please

00:50:396 (2,3) - and then here your base spacing for when there are vocals is used on a part without vocals ._. 00:50:571 (3) - here you can hear "o" and then here 00:50:745 (1) - the other part of the word, so i guess here are still some vocals lol

00:55:106 (2,1,2) - same thing here about the small spacing; instead of being noticeable, it's just a comfortable movement so there's 0 emphasis. i still believe there is

01:05:396 (1,2) - unrelated to spacing/emphasis stuff but it would have been cool to highlight the change in the guitar here explained before,
in a reply to pentori, this was skipped to emphasize the vocals

01:38:536 (4) - missing nc? does this nc spam really needed?
actually it randomly changes from every beat to every 2 beats >.>

01:43:071 (3,4,5,6) - don't see the purpose of a fairly large jump pattern on a part with no melody that is basically filler rhythm, yet it has same spacing as stuff like 01:45:164 (1,2,3,4) - which has a vocal on it its pretty similar to 01:57:024 (1,2,3,4) - or 00:47:257 (1,2,1,2) -

01:48:652 (4,5,6) - the song obviously changes here, the vocals stop... but the pattern is more or less identical? kinda weird imo but thats the usual patterning concept i use through the whole map, why should i suddenly stick to something different?

01:50:745 (1,2,3,4) - this pattern appears to create a massive distinction between the first beat and the second one that is completely unsupported by the song; the vocals don't change between the parts so having this large of a distinction is really weird to me concept with spacing is pretty similar to 00:54:931 (1,2,1,2) -, only the visual part is different..

01:57:024 (1,2,3,4) - this is gigantic considering how the vocals you've been putting similar sized jumps on aren't here again its pretty similar to 01:43:071 (3,4,5,6) -

02:11:850 (2) - wouldnt it make more sense to nc here i dont think so

02:35:919 (4,5,6,7,8) - having 7 in the same pattern here doesnt make too much sense to me considering that the guitar melody you've been following is notably not on 7 well yeah, but the difference wont be really big.. also 02:36:617 (8) - here that guitar appears again, so i guess it should be pretty fine

02:44:117 (1,2,1,1,1) - how come you abandoned the pattern you used on the last 2 repeats of this phrase a measure before? didnt get this one tbh

02:55:106 (2,1,2) - i think this pattern places significantly more emphasis on 2 than anything else, but 2 doesn't really stick out in the song in any way... wait what? its the same vocals here, and the same pattern i udes here 00:54:931 (1,2,1,2) -, for example

03:14:466 (1,2,3,4,1) - whoa whoa whoa when did this map turn into xanandra? you never use this type of motion before, what changed so much that you decided to introduce it here? intensity of the song increased, so i decided to show it somehow

03:15:164 (1,2,3,4) - it doesn't make sense to make this symmetrical to 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4) - because 03:14:466 (1,2,3,4) - has vocals on it, and 03:15:164 (1,2,3,4) - doesn't have anything, so mapping them the exact same way is not really representing the song too well i think but the instruments are kinda same? also this is not the first time i mapped vocals and instuments in the same way, 02:55:629 (1,2,1,2) - here, for example

03:23:536 (1,2,3) - lol pls enjoy game

03:25:629 (1,1,1,1) - this isnt even lined up cmon y so nazi...

03:38:885 (1,2) - again something that would be pretty cool to highlight same thing as before

03:57:809 - why map the song when you can just stick a spinner over it amirite glad you liked it

thanks for the check, hope my explanations are fine for you..

Alright let me clarify again: I wasn't saying every pattern should be the SAME, hell, you could, for example, even switch to different kinds of emphasis every kiai, but switching them so frequently every measure is just strange because it's not clear what you're trying to emphasize in the music. If you introduce 00:55:106 (2,1) - these as anti-jumps here, and you switch them around again 2 seconds after, it just comes off as very non-cohesive, especially because the rest of your map doesn't do this. That is what I was saying in my mod, not ''oh make every pattern a triangle jump because it should all be the same''.

i understood your opinion, but i cant really agree with you/dont see a problem here
yes, the changes in emphasizing happen kinda quickly, but the patterns still do the work they are supposed to do, even though concepts between them are completely different
at least i think so

I read some of the mods, there are a number of points where i disagree as they look at spacing overall and dont take into consideration flow, variety and structure etc. but some places do seem to have particularly poor flow; for example 03:23:885 (3,4,5,1) and 00:50:571 (3,1)

I also think the triangle triplets like 02:32:082 (2,3,4) are a bit..forced, but meh that's kinda subjective i guess

the way emphasis changes, even on similar parts, is kinda random tbh.

For example you don't take in consideration the nature of the objects at all when making your jumps, as these timestamps show:
00:02:431 (3,4,5) - vs 00:08:013 (3,4,5) - (sliders alter the emphasis on their head based on the flow, and the second one is way weaker than first one for no apparent reason to me).
It's not really a matter of which is more correct here, since we might start the subjectivity war, but more about why is one <this way> and the other pattern <that way>. The intro is repetitive as hell and that's what should be doing the map imo. It's about feedback: songs does something but the map does something else.

Rhythm choices can also be a bit questionable:
00:28:768 (2,3,4,5) - by seeing this you sort of tell the player that circles match some fast vocals in the song, but then...
00:30:513 (3,4,5,6) - first two circles are on empty audio. Apart from that soft keyboard in the background, nothing really plays such a 1/2 rhythm, so the object choice is ambiguous here imo
---------
01:03:652 (1,2,3,4) - becomes 01:59:117 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - which is a bit meh imo since the interpretation changed radically (rhythm- and flow-wise), not just aesthetically

A different sort of emphasis issue related to variation in spacing:
00:50:396 (2,3,1) - vs 00:53:187 (5,6,1) - first one working quite well, but then you decided that was too boring to keep same spacing for two patterns and totally switched it the other way around. Not sure this is intended or just something you do without noticing, but I believe it is the reason why kiai times above all feel so inconsistent with each other.
You arbitrarily change spacing (supposedly because you don't like boring things) without noticing you greatly affect your emphasis across different patterns.
--------
02:49:001 (1,2) - here you have a cool way to interpret the finish sound, nothing to say on it, but...
01:05:919 (3,1) - why is this the opposite once again? As in, the jump should be bigger after the unusual finish, not before.
I assumed having a reverse emphasis was what you wanted to do, seeing stuff like 00:40:629 (5,6,1,2,3) - or 00:54:757 (4,1,2,1,2,1,2) - , which I can't particularly agree with, but it seems like it's your style so...
The alternation between so opposite styles is kinda strange to me tho. If I were to see one style only throughout the map I wouldn't mind it, whether I like it or not personally, but the current fusion is not that great: by having contrasting interpretation you make your patterns less meaningful and more diluted, because you try to associate different rhythms to similar patterns and viceversa

I believe it was pointed out before, but unusual stuff and variation doesn't really bring much quality, even more when we have seldom triangles like this as triplets 02:32:082 (2,3,4) - . There are just 2 or 3 instances of this pattern in the whole map and after checking it many times I can't seem to agree with how this works, nor can find a possible reason why it is here to begin with.


Anyway, I believe your core concept for the style is "emphasis through sudden small spacings", but the execution is lagging with that idea since you sometimes end up doing emphasis the "normal" way (aka, big spacings = more emphasis)
I would like to go over pattern arrangements too (structure), but I already know I would be arguing for nothing... (and it's not considered that important too apparently)

i want to die

MrSergio wrote:

the way emphasis changes, even on similar parts, is kinda random tbh. read the discussion above if you are concerned about emphasis

For example you don't take in consideration the nature of the objects at all when making your jumps, as these timestamps show:
00:02:431 (3,4,5) - vs 00:08:013 (3,4,5) - (sliders alter the emphasis on their head based on the flow, and the second one is way weaker than first one for no apparent reason to me). i cant agree that you can judge the emphasis by the flow.. well, at least here.. this is the usual patterning i use through the whole map, and you cant just say that the emphasis is different because some things are rotated in another way
It's not really a matter of which is more correct here, since we might start the subjectivity war, but more about why is one <this way> and the other pattern <that way>. The intro is repetitive as hell and that's what should be doing the map imo. It's about feedback: songs does something but the map does something else. map your own version then, my point of view is way different

Rhythm choices can also be a bit questionable:
00:28:768 (2,3,4,5) - by seeing this you sort of tell the player that circles match some fast vocals in the song, but then...
00:30:513 (3,4,5,6) - first two circles are on empty audio. Apart from that soft keyboard in the background, nothing really plays such a 1/2 rhythm, so the object choice is ambiguous here imo what? the first circle is on a pretty noticeable drum and the second one is on the vocals.
---------
01:03:652 (1,2,3,4) - becomes 01:59:117 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - which is a bit meh imo since the interpretation changed radically (rhythm- and flow-wise), not just aesthetically probably true, its kinda rhythmically inconsistent, but imo both ways work quite well, so not sure if i really want to change this.

A different sort of emphasis issue related to variation in spacing:
00:50:396 (2,3,1) - vs 00:53:187 (5,6,1) - first one working quite well, but then you decided that was too boring to keep same spacing for two patterns and totally switched it the other way around. Not sure this is intended or just something you do without noticing, but I believe it is the reason why kiai times above all feel so inconsistent with each other. check my thoughts on the previous two pages. maybe for you its inconsistent and not right, but i think its pretty fine
You arbitrarily change spacing (supposedly because you don't like boring things) without noticing you greatly affect your emphasis across different patterns.
--------
02:49:001 (1,2) - here you have a cool way to interpret the finish sound, nothing to say on it, but...
01:05:919 (3,1) - why is this the opposite once again? As in, the jump should be bigger after the unusual finish, not before. 01:05:919 (3,1,2,3) - here i focus more on the vocals, not on the instruments, thats why the spacing isnt that large. (no changes in the vocals -> no huge jumps)
I assumed having a reverse emphasis was what you wanted to do, seeing stuff like 00:40:629 (5,6,1,2,3) - or 00:54:757 (4,1,2,1,2,1,2) - , which I can't particularly agree with, but it seems like it's your style so... i can again stick to that its related to vocals. yes, i know, stuff like 00:53:362 (6,1) - contradicts with this, since "why ffs he decides to change the emphasis its inconsistent!!!113123" but i still believe its fine to use different ideas in the same places
The alternation between so opposite styles is kinda strange to me tho. If I were to see one style only throughout the map I wouldn't mind it, whether I like it or not personally, but the current fusion is not that great: by having contrasting interpretation you make your patterns less meaningful and more diluted, because you try to associate different rhythms to similar patterns and viceversa well, i guess we just have different views on the mapping

I believe it was pointed out before, but unusual stuff and variation doesn't really bring much quality, even more when we have seldom triangles like this as triplets 02:32:082 (2,3,4) - . There are just 2 or 3 instances of this pattern in the whole map and after checking it many times I can't seem to agree with how this works, nor can find a possible reason why it is here to begin with. you can find this unusual stuff only in the solo guitar part, since the part itself is different from the whole song and deserves some interesting patterns imo


Anyway, I believe your core concept for the style is "emphasis through sudden small spacings", but the execution is lagging with that idea since you sometimes end up doing emphasis the "normal" way (aka, big spacings = more emphasis)
I would like to go over pattern arrangements too (structure), but I already know I would be arguing for nothing... (and it's not considered that important too apparently)

thanks for check as well, hope youll be fine with the explanations

I cleaned the last page. Next time I see other meme-y or nonsensical comments I won't warn for sure.


@komore
When you tell me that even you notice awkward stuff in your own map but still go with the "I think it's fine" idea I guess there isn't much we can talk, right?
I hope you at least won't repeat this stuff in the future maps...

Btw, I was expressing my opinion about your emphasis since I read the stuff that happened on the thread. I was stating that emphasis is random, not that "I think" it is.

yea, will take that in mind when ill attempt to rank some other stuff
thanks again

Respecting emphasis can also make patterns feel boring because of how predictable they are. 01:53:536 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Are fun to play imo, but part of that is because they don't respect white-tick emphasis. 02:47:257 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,1) - Same idea here . These are good precisely because emphasis isn't respected imo.

It's not good to say "a map that isn't following proper emphasis is not mapping the song correctly". There is no correct way to map the song to begin with. You can advise a mapper to emphasize certain sounds, but a mapper can also tell you their objective was not emphasis control .

Have fun mapping~

Hey Komore. Been playing a lot of your map since it's been qualified and I'm really digging it. One of the more appealing things about your map is the small spacings at 00:49:350 (1,2,1,2) - , etc. They control the pacing to represent some of the changes in the song well and allow for different and interesting gameplay than you wouldn't see in most other maps. Effectively using small jumps to improve gameplay is actually an amazing skill to have as a mapper, and not many use it as well as you have.

I came into this thread really only to give a small reaction to the map. When playing 02:51:268 (2) - , I felt like the map had become too slow and calm. It made me wish that the lyric at 02:51:617 - was more prominent.

But now that I'm here, I'll poke another small point I had. For the pattern at 00:54:931 (1,2,1,2,1,2,3,4) - , you start with a big spacing in the first combo. This raised my expectation. In the next combo you go small, which was a really nice contrast to the previous combo. But then after a small section, I expected that you would fulfill that original expectation of high spacing, and I feel it would work especially nice since the singer stops using falsetto at 00:55:629 (1) - , which makes the music feel different enough that a stronger level of contrast could represent that. So a higher spacing into 00:55:629 (1) - would provide that energy that was foreshadowed at 00:54:931 (1,2) - , and you would have to give yourself some room to do it by moving 00:54:582 (3,4,1,2,1,2) - to the left somehow.

Anyway, great map, one of the more fun maps I've played all year. Stick to your guns, your mapping decisions are creative, engaging, and a pleasure to play.

02:51:268 (2) - but its kinda the same as 01:46:559 (1,2,3) -, dont you think? imo making this clickable isnt really needed, since the vocals are not that strong..

as for 00:55:454 (2,1) - i agree with you, but i think its better to keep the spacing low since this is the one whole part of the vocals and should be mapped with the same concept imo

thanks for taking a look

Humans,we are all cultured people and let's just stop ''beating around the bush'' behind the words consitency and emphasis.I found the map really fun to play with no problems at all with this type of style that this map is following.It's completely creative and im absolutely amazed.Just stop disputing every map with your ''vision'' only to find some nonsense ''''''issues'''''' behind of some specific terms and discourage the mapper.Accept the freaking differentness of a map.

~I wish you the best to rank it,good luck!

Monstrata wrote:

Respecting emphasis can also make patterns feel boring because of how predictable they are. 01:53:536 (1,2,1,2,1,2,1,2) - Are fun to play imo, but part of that is because they don't respect white-tick emphasis. 02:47:257 (1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,3,4,1,2,1) - Same idea here . These are good precisely because emphasis isn't respected imo.

It's not good to say "a map that isn't following proper emphasis is not mapping the song correctly". There is no correct way to map the song to begin with. You can advise a mapper to emphasize certain sounds, but a mapper can also tell you their objective was not emphasis control .

Have fun mapping~

i'd just like to add that this kind of attitude towards emphasis ("it's not mapping correctly if you're not putting proper spacing emphasis") is causing a lot of unnecessary DQs lately. for the BNs/modders who are doing this kind of thing, i'd strongly advise to check whether these suggestions aren't actually going against the own principles of the mapping style you're attempting to mod (and also, as Monstrata says, the map feels much more fun for the player exactly because the spacing emphasis is different than usual).

Why are Mods deleting perfectly legitimate posts from this thread such as sahuang's?

Hi,

the issues mentioned are worth discussing further, present and actually adressable - the content of the complaints exceeds things that "ppl dont like" so i'm taking this down to remove the time pressure for discussing the issues properly

unnecessary but whatever
i'll edit this with a mod when im back at my computer, hopefully help find a middleground


edit: mm rly dont think you need to give up on this, there can be some minor changes that'll lead to people being happier while still keeping your ideals. if you change your mind let me know

actually there is nothing to discuss, the only solution here to satisfy all the "concerned" people above is to remap all the kiais in a boring way and tbh thats not something i am really planning to do
so i guess its going for grave, sorry to everyone who contributed/supported me..
going to change mp3 tho

edit updated with a new mp3 from Hadis

sad ;w;