- titan wrote:
nm from my queue! hallo!easy SPOILERsv ahh this is really fast c:
00:12:367 - why is there a break here? sounds almost identical to the part before it that you mapped. if you do keep it though at least make it start at 00:13:598 since there wouldn't be anything mapped inbetween for easy, that'd basically mean just having a lone circle one bar later, which imo is kinda weird, and would be rather forced.
00:39:444 (3) - this slider looks ehhh. the one at 00:25:905 (2) looks better. did a copypaste transplant
00:40:674 (1,2,3) - i'd suggest rotating this triangle a bit more clockwise :/ ehh..? that'd not make as much sense in the context of the pattern. horizontally balanced bird slider -> 1 and 2 are straight right under it > 3 goes under the middle of the bird.
00:55:444 (1,2,1) - pretty subjective but i don't like how any of these sliders look. maybe its the curvy part looking shorter than the straight part? idk. I suppose that's personal preference but I'll keep it in mind.
01:34:828 (1,2) - position (2) more evenly between the slider head and tail I couldn't even tell oops >o<, fixedsnormal SPOILERsame thing about breaks on all diffs the break is tosame thing about the break ):
00:39:444 (3,2) - make this blanket fixed the pattern a bit instead so it doesn't look like an off blanket
00:46:213 (3,1) - this doesn't blanket (but imo it looks better without blanketing so i guess don't change it) what what the heck this looks terrible how did i not notice. Fixed to at least be evenly spaced from the circle on both ends even if it's not an ultra snuggly blanket
00:55:444 (1,1) - these slider aren't ugly, but they don't really look good imo I think they're fantastic for representing the unique instrument present here c:
01:06:213 (1,2) - fix the blanket fixeddd
01:37:905 (1,2,3) - looks kinda bad with the light overlap stuff no change to the pattern, but I noticed the stack was a few pixels off, fixed that.
01:49:598 (1,2,3) - this is the same thing basically, but it doesn't look bad here.no change
- Match the game the video is from
- perfectly display the title in the video
- give the player a chance to enjoy songo
- so that the start and end can mirror eachother
nice set gl thank you c:!
ayyri's mod from the grave so i can click timestamps
Ayyri wrote:
Muzukashii
-------------
- 00:13:598 - Finisher. There's a pretty clear cymbal here. changed
- 00:23:444 - ^ changed
- 00:27:136 - to 00:28:059 - There's really no definition to any of these notes. There are different sounds going on here, yet you chose to keep it monocoloured. Consider something like having 00:26:828 - to 00:28:367 - be something like, k d k k d K. So you get the emphasis of the vocal at 00:27:136 - and 00:28:059 - , while keeping the k's for the metallic sounds at 00:27:444 - and 00:27:752 - . (Also adding a finisher for, well, the cymbal there.) changed this some, though not exactly as suggested.
- 00:33:290 - Finisher. Already stated my reasoning for this. changed
- 00:35:752 - to 00:36:675 - Consider changing it to be k d k d. So there's more of a back and forth pattern when it comes to your movements, which would greater emphasis the vocals going on here. While also giving 00:36:675 - and 00:36:982 - the same colours, to add emphasis to the kk after it. changed as suggestion! that makes a lotta sense, thankya ^^
- 00:38:213 - Finisher. Previously stated reason. changed
- 00:39:136 - and 00:39:752 - Ctrl+G. Follows the vocals a bit better, and added emphasis to the vocal/finisher at 00:40:059 - . I'm not sure about this one because I would prefer to have the current ddk ddk pattern which is following the vocals ;
- 00:44:675 - and 00:44:982 - Ctrl+G. Having a k at 00:44:675 - , would better emphasis the change from the intense vocals/finishers, into the regular rhythm and would also follow the kick at that point. see below
- 00:45:290 - Change to d. Instead of having the same colour as 00:45:598 - , which is a higher sound, and adds more emphasis to it. taking these suggestions into account, 00:44:674 - starting here, changed these six notes to kkdkkd. so that it 1.)emphasizes the change from the finishers, 2.) emphasizes the following high note, 3.) goes k k d , k k d, following the vocals.
- 00:48:059 - It's odd that you start this with a finisher, yet you ignore this same rhythm at 00:49:290 - . Just something to think about. this is because the section already contains regular 1/3 doubles, fitting for the kiai, and I feel adding in regular finishes on top of that would just be.. brutal. Between the finishes or the 1/3 in the chorus for these points, I'd prefer to have the 1/3.
- 00:50:521 - Same as the above. ^
- 00:52:674 - There's no cymbal sound here indicating that there should be a finisher. Using one here to emphasis the drums, also takes away from the crash at 00:52:982 - . changed it to k so that it is still emphasized after the prior pattern without taking away from the impact of the finish.
- 00:57:905 - Nothing very powerful occurs here, other than this being the last verse of this phrase. But using finishers for it, is rather.. odd. Because it feels like they're being randomly placed here to try and emphasis that, but fail to do so. mm, I disagree. I think they accomplish emphasizing the very very VERY strong 1/1s, which is what they set out to do. In this, it is also very similar to 00:08:674 - this section here, albeit more dense.
- 01:00:367 - Finisher. Previously explained reason. changed
- 01:03:444 - to 01:05:290 - Like I stated for 00:27:136 - , having the same colour for different sounds, especially in a calm part, makes it rather boring and doesn't bring out the fact that there's more going on. For example, consider making 01:04:059 - a d, to emphasis the higher vocal, and the ending of the verse here. changed to a d as suggested, I hadn't considered using a d for a higher vocal, that seemed beyond me. that makes sense tho.. when put that way.. yess
- 01:05:290 - Finisher. Already explained this. changed
- 01:08:059 - and 01:08:367 - Ctrl+G. Emphasises the vocal better, in a building up manner. i'm not sure if i already changed this cause the way i have it right now emphasizes it better than the suggestion so now i'm confused
- 01:08:982 - Change to k. Emphasises the end of the vocal here, and provides more power to the oncoming notes. kk
- 01:09:290 - and 01:09:598 - Change to d. I can see why you made these finishers, but having 01:09:290 - to 01:09:905 - all as finishers, kind of takes away from the intensity that 01:09:905 - has on it's own. So it would be better to have only 01:09:905 - as the finisher, to better show the "thud" sound that's happening here. In the below point, (I didn't apply this in order oops) the change to K ended up helping to emphasize it already. Otherwise, I find it fitting to have all three as finishers, as they are all part of one heavy progression of sound, and made no change to those.
- 01:10:213 - Finisher. Here especially, it feels really lacking in play when you have a D at 01:09:905 - , and absolutely no finisher at 01:10:213 - , when there's a very audible cymbal there. If you did add one, preferrably make it a K, so it doesn't blend in with the D at 01:09:905 - . changed this to a finisher, made 01:09:905 - a K so that what its following is still ultra EMPHASIZED