1. osu! forums
  2. Beatmaps
  3. Ranked/Approved Beatmaps
show more
posted

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

Lian- wrote:

M4M

The source song is: '' The Mindsweep '', which is the fourth album from the group, Enter Shikari not sure about this one, ill put it in source if will be mentioned
Albums aren't put as sources of songs. Just to make it clear lol.




Anyway, M4M!
[Still Alive]uhh. i modded this (and insane) before the update you did. there may be things i pointed out that got fixed or changed so idk :(

  1. 00:20:627 (4,5) - imo, aesthetic aspect here could be improved by making 00:20:627 (4) - look like the vertical opposite of (5).
  2. 00:29:541 (8,1,2) - Would be nice if 00:29:713 (1) - were to be put in where the vocal starts (00:29:541 (8) - position). The vocals in 00:29:541 - to 00:29:713 - seems to be more connected and more fitting to be a slider than 00:29:713 - and 00:29:884 - . (01:35:121 (7,8,1) - )
  3. 00:32:798 (10) - I suggest putting this at (440,312). Mostly because of aesthetics (and a bit of emphasis on 00:32:970 (1) - ). Also doing so may lessen the probability of a player to be surprised with the sudden SV drop, due to the low DS.
  4. 00:48:563 (3,4) - Parallel?
  5. 01:29:806 (1,2) - How this entire part is mapped is similar to the first one. And in terms of "structure", 01:29:806 (1) - seems to be the only one different... I think. Reference being 00:24:227 (1,2) - .
  6. 02:46:184 (7) - NC this one to make the change in the part more apparent. Maybe this one too, 02:49:270 (8) - .
  7. 02:53:556 (2,2) - Actual vocals hit in these two objects. I think these should serve as the turning points in the stream instead.


[Insane]
  1. 00:19:941 (1,2,3) - These three could use a bit more space imo.
  2. 00:29:541 (5,1) - 01:35:121 (5,1) - The same thing as the one I said in the previous difficulty.
  3. 00:43:817 (1) - Put this one a bit more to the right for it to be seen more.
  4. 01:29:806 (1,2) - Really minor thing. A blanket seems nice for aesthetics.
    Can't see any glaring issues in this difficulty.


[Hard]
  1. 00:20:284 (2,3) - I feel like these two work better as a stack than 00:20:456 (3,4) - . Reasoning here being kinda the same as my connected-sounds thingy from the first difficulty.

Nothing much here (=w=;
That's all. Hope it helped ;w;

Good luck!
posted

-Harpuia- wrote:

Albums aren't put as sources of songs. Just to make it clear lol. Thanks for clarifying!

Anyway, M4M!
[Still Alive]uhh. i modded this (and insane) before the update you did. there may be things i pointed out that got fixed or changed so idk :(

  1. 00:20:627 (4,5) - imo, aesthetic aspect here could be improved by making 00:20:627 (4) - look like the vertical opposite of (5). i use this shapes quite often
  2. 00:29:541 (8,1,2) - Would be nice if 00:29:713 (1) - were to be put in where the vocal starts (00:29:541 (8) - position). The vocals in 00:29:541 - to 00:29:713 - seems to be more connected and more fitting to be a slider than 00:29:713 - and 00:29:884 - . (01:35:121 (7,8,1) - ) im following drums tho..
  3. 00:32:798 (10) - I suggest putting this at (440,312). Mostly because of aesthetics (and a bit of emphasis on 00:32:970 (1) - ). Also doing so may lessen the probability of a player to be surprised with the sudden SV drop, due to the low DS. made better aesthetics, but differently
  4. 00:48:563 (3,4) - Parallel? no, parallel is too basic
  5. 01:29:806 (1,2) - How this entire part is mapped is similar to the first one. And in terms of "structure", 01:29:806 (1) - seems to be the only one different... I think. Reference being 00:24:227 (1,2) - .oh, this is pretty odd observation, i think their similarity is not critical at all
  6. 02:46:184 (7) - NC this one to make the change in the part more apparent. Maybe this one too, 02:49:270 (8) - .i think it would really confusing in terms of readability
  7. 02:53:556 (2,2) - Actual vocals hit in these two objects. I think these should serve as the turning points in the stream instead. i made turning points for drum sounds tho


[Insane]
  1. 00:19:941 (1,2,3) - These three could use a bit more space imo. i think they are ok atm
  2. 00:29:541 (5,1) - 01:35:121 (5,1) - The same thing as the one I said in the previous difficulty. same response
    this helped with hitsounds tho :)
  3. 00:43:817 (1) - Put this one a bit more to the right for it to be seen more. im pretty sure its readable ingame..
  4. 01:29:806 (1,2) - Really minor thing. A blanket seems nice for aesthetics. i follow another idea there
    Can't see any glaring issues in this difficulty.


[Hard]
  1. 00:20:284 (2,3) - I feel like these two work better as a stack than 00:20:456 (3,4) - . Reasoning here being kinda the same as my connected-sounds thingy from the first difficulty. but druuums dude

Nothing much here (=w=;
That's all. Hope it helped ;w; Thank you!

Good luck! You too~
posted

M4M



General (Metadata, Timing, etc.)


_________________________________________________________



  1. Why are the kiai in "Insane" and "Still Alive" separatedand the ones in "Normal" & "Hard" aren't?

Normal



  1. 00:27:484 (1) - Why not place this 1/2 back like you did with 00:24:570 (1)?
  2. 00:41:105 (1) - CTRL+G this slider, it'll play better flipped.
  3. 01:25:521 (2,3) - Suggestion.
  4. 02:22:184 (x) - Perhaps a note can be added here?

Hard



  1. 00:53:308 (1) - Remove NC.
  2. 00:56:378 (4) - Align this with 00:55:864 (2).
  3. 01:01:864 (4) - Same as above.
  4. 01:25:178 (4,5,1) - Suggestion

Insane



  1. 00:16:513 (1) - Maybe move this to x:408 y:120.
  2. 00:32:970 (1) - This hit sound here is a bit loud, jarring and distracting than the other drum hitsounds you've used.
  3. 00:43:312 (1) - This slider is kind of obscuring the slider maybe this would solve it?
  4. 03:24:590 (4) - Slightly obscured by a slidertail.

The map just needs a rechecking of patterns and hitsounds, especially on the Insane difficulty, sorry for the wait.

posted

Crimmi wrote:

M4M



General (Metadata, Timing, etc.)


_________________________________________________________



  1. Why are the kiai in "Insane" and "Still Alive" separatedand the ones in "Normal" & "Hard" aren't? i thought too many visual effects would confuse beginners

Normal



  1. 00:27:484 (1) - Why not place this 1/2 back like you did with 00:24:570 (1)? i think it represents music better as it is now
  2. 00:41:105 (1) - CTRL+G this slider, it'll play better flipped. i think it doesn't make much difference, some patterns would be ruined tho
  3. 01:25:521 (2,3) - Suggestion. was suggested before, applied now
  4. 02:22:184 (x) - Perhaps a note can be added here? i don't think its needed

Hard



  1. 00:53:308 (1) - Remove NC. reworked nc for this section, should be better now
  2. 00:56:378 (4) - Align this with 00:55:864 (2). yup
  3. 01:01:864 (4) - Same as above. did something better
  4. 01:25:178 (4,5,1) - Suggestion i think it works quite well atm

Insane



  1. 00:16:513 (1) - Maybe move this to x:408 y:120. um, does it really matters?
  2. 00:32:970 (1) - This hit sound here is a bit loud, jarring and distracting than the other drum hitsounds you've used. i guess ill have to make it quieter..
  3. 00:43:312 (1) - This slider is kind of obscuring the slider maybe this would solve it? i still think its easily readable
  4. 03:24:590 (4) - Slightly obscured by a slidertail. yeah, i use this kind of overlap quite a lot

The map just needs a rechecking of patterns and hitsounds, especially on the Insane difficulty, sorry for the wait. you are right, found a few issues with hitsounds. Thanks for modding!

posted
I am extremely happy to see some Enter Shikari being mapped! I just have a couple of things I would like to see changed before I can give this a bubble:

[General]
  1. Kiai: The kiai sections you used are not exactly considtent throughout your mapset. Why doesn't normal have the kiai fountains you put in the other difficulties? :'(
    Try being consistent!


[Still Alive]
  1. 00:54:664 - The green line and the red line must have the same volume set.
  2. 02:00:242 - ^
  3. 02:49:613 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I personally don't like the spacing graduation here. Even if it makes sense, it's not really fun to play, I would even say it is frustrating because the player has to repeat the exact same movement 8 times, the only difference is that the spacing slightly increases each time. Would you mind considering making a different pattern here?


Awesome map, keep up the good work!
posted

Kurai wrote:

I am extremely happy to see some Enter Shikari being mapped! I just have a couple of things I would like to see changed before I can give this a bubble:

[General]
  1. Kiai: The kiai sections you used are not exactly considtent throughout your mapset. Why doesn't normal have the kiai fountains you put in the other difficulties? :'(
    Try being consistent! i thought flashing lights would distract beginners D: made same kiai sections as in final diff for all diffs


[Still Alive]
  1. 00:54:664 - The green line and the red line must have the same volume set.
  2. 02:00:242 - ^ fixed
  3. 02:49:613 (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) - I personally don't like the spacing graduation here. Even if it makes sense, it's not really fun to play, I would even say it is frustrating because the player has to repeat the exact same movement 8 times, the only difference is that the spacing slightly increases each time. Would you mind considering making a different pattern here? hm, i kinda agree with this but.. not quite. i had troubles with this kind of pattern too, BUT once i learned how to play it properly, it became really satysfying to go through (its not difficult in terms of far cursor movement, only reading those is hard)

also fixed some hitsound volume inconsistencies and 1 broken slider in Hard diff

Awesome map, keep up the good work! Thanks a million.
posted
m4m

n o o b m o d i n g s k i l l s

[general]
  1. my eyes are hurting me (i dont know if its good colours)
  2. tags are all good?
  3. also medata?
  4. fix ur preview point
  5. fix bookmark its not balance


[still alive]
  • not really a big fan doing 2.10 + Slider Velocity, its too long = small jumps
  1. 00:13:084 (1,2,3) - really poor aesthetics
  2. 00:13:598 - vocal starts here; 00:13:770 (3) - should be jump because of the flow
  3. 00:15:484 (7,8,1) - ctrl+g for better flow
  4. 00:20:627 (4,5) - hehehe weird pattern
  5. 01:01:864 (6,7) - not shaped
  6. 01:18:664 (1) - no kickslider here tbh
  7. 02:00:074 (4,1) - too close ds
  8. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - bad flow since the beat are the really the same
  9. 02:52:356 - actually make better this better imo
  10. 02:53:813 (1) - no clircle here; 02:54:413 (2,3,4) - rhythm is bad, reduce it since the beat are the SAME
  11. 03:14:082 - idk why you change sv and color, its still the same
  12. 03:16:793 - sv is too long; color aren't the same as red
    [-]03:40:522 - add 5% time section

i really dont want to say any of the patterns you made, the flow is low and the aesthetics is not good enough though
idk or im just lazy

[insane]
  • sv is fine, maybe doing on 1.7-9 on highest difficulty
  1. 00:17:198 - do some patterns here
  2. 00:25:427 (1,2) - not flow and structure
  3. 00:55:864 (3,4) - too far since u made a low sv section
  4. 01:17:292 - uh yea ds is fine, but how about 01:18:664 (1,2) - this part
  5. 02:49:613 - overkill ds
  6. 02:53:642 (3,1) - just stack this trust me
  7. 03:16:793 - uh i think 53% fine pattern to me, sv is high tbh
  8. 03:40:522 - 5% time section



overall, need to learn more about the patterns. and yes i still need to learn more about mapping ALSO modding too.
its just not really ready for rank.
posted
Played the map again this morning, did have any trouble FCing it this time. I guess it's good to go now! Enjoy your bubble!

Metadata source:
  1. http://hopelessrecords.merchnow.com/products/v2/187143/the-mindsweep-cd (Enter Shikari's record label's website, click on "tracks")
  2. https://www.discogs.com/fr/Enter-Shikari-The-Mindsweep/master/785318
  3. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eH4vmNvb7Ik


EDIT: SOMEONE POSTED A MOD WHEN I WAS ABOUT TO BUBBLE LMAO, REMOVING THE BUBBLE FOR NOW
posted

Zallies wrote:

m4m

n o o b m o d i n g s k i l l s

[general]
  1. my eyes are hurting me (i dont know if its good colours) show your eyes whos boss
  2. tags are all good?
  3. also medata?
  4. fix ur preview point its perfect
  5. fix bookmark its not balance fixed, but i don't know if it matters..


[still alive]
  • not really a big fan doing 2.10 + Slider Velocity, its too long = small jumps
  1. 00:13:084 (1,2,3) - really poor aesthetics so.. you are fan of the double ctrl+> thingy?..
  2. 00:13:598 - vocal starts here; but stressed syllable doesn't00:13:770 (3) - should be jump because of the flow im following drums mostly
  3. 00:15:484 (7,8,1) - ctrl+g for better flow flow is great as it is now
  4. 00:20:627 (4,5) - hehehe weird pattern the whole diff is based around this..
  5. 01:01:864 (6,7) - not shaped yes, made it better
  6. 01:18:664 (1) - no kickslider here tbh it fits perfectly here and follows vocal
  7. 02:00:074 (4,1) - too close ds i can't see how is it too close ds..
  8. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - bad flow since the beat are the really the same i think up-down-up fits there quite well and its even more interesting than just up-up-up
  9. 02:52:356 - actually make better this better imo i think its pretty well made, ds change is smooth enough and direction changes follow drum volume and stressed lyrics
  10. 02:53:813 (1) - no clircle here; you should listen more carefully, just compare actual empty space here 02:54:156 - and at beat which you pointed 02:54:413 (2,3,4) - rhythm is bad, reduce it since the beat are the SAME why would even mod this if you don't feel the song at all?
  11. 03:14:082 - idk why you change sv and color, its still the same try to listen closely
  12. 03:16:793 - sv is too long; color aren't the same as red what does this even mean.. sv is fine tho
  13. 03:40:522 - add 5% time section i don't think its needed

i really dont want to say any of the patterns you made, the flow is low and the aesthetics is not good enough though
idk or im just lazy the fact that these aesthetics vary from what you are used to see in common beatmap doesn't make it bad, its consistent, it plays good, it has idea.

[insane]
  • sv is fine, maybe doing on 1.7-9 on highest difficulty
  1. 00:17:198 - do some patterns here there is already a pattern, im pretty sure..
  2. 00:25:427 (1,2) - not flow and structure ok, i think this picture will give you some idea on whats going on
  3. 00:55:864 (3,4) - too far since u made a low sv section have you spend even a few secons figuring out what im emphasizing?
  4. 01:17:292 - uh yea ds is fine, but how about 01:18:664 (1,2) - this part This part is ok, plays well
  5. 02:49:613 - overkill ds theres a clear reason behind it and its not even hard
  6. 02:53:642 (3,1) - just stack this trust me it would ruin the idea
  7. 03:16:793 - uh i think 53% fine pattern to me, sv is high tbh ?
  8. 03:40:522 - 5% time section



overall, need to learn more about the patterns. and yes i still need to learn more about mapping ALSO modding too.
its just not really ready for rank. one of those mods i guess.. edit: wait a second.. I didn't get it. Anyway, thanks for modding!
posted
got nothing on normal

  • - There are a few structure that is questionable for me
  1. Structure that deserves questioning
  2. 00:21:998 (1,2,3,4,5,6) -

    As we can see, none of the patterns actually hit up by an aesthetically pleasing pattern. All I see in the editor is just some random circle placement that only supports flow, and that's it. Quality-wise something like this should not be allowed to pass by
  3. 00:49:241 (1,2,3) -

    Having a straight slider and curved slider makes the map aesthetically bad. It's like having one square and suddenly one sphere. It does not connect with each other at all.
  4. 01:33:749 (3,4,5,6) -
    Nothing is good on this section. Even flow itself is in tatters. Even when testing on the gameplay itself I didn't enjoy that section due to the fact it played kind of bad for me
  5. tldr I guess the map itself looked REALLY untidy and you need tons of work on this diff before it can be pushed for rank. Ask any experienced nominator as well as QAT, if they take this mapset seriously then you'll notice tons of work needs to be done before it can be deemed as ready
    -Moving onto modding the diff itself
  6. 00:15:827 (4) - Why is the spacing here increased? There's no strong sound that justifies the increased spacing.
  7. 00:29:198 (5,6) - The flow here looks really untidy. For no apparent reason 00:29:713 (6) - body is pointed towards 00:30:227 (1) - which I think it's not clean at all
  8. 00:32:970 (1) - Starting here, I noticed you are reducing the spacing here. Modding on the objective side, this will be surely be pointed out (I once did that on my bubbled mapset and it got popped since I reduced spacing for no apparent reason
  9. 00:54:664 (1) - Why is this slider shaped differently?
  10. 01:28:264 (4,5) - Why is the flow here changed direction out of the sudden? Put an NC if there is a change of cursor movement that you are planning to put
  11. 01:34:264 (4,5) - ^
  12. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - I think you can make much more better pattern than this (https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8671238)


actually this is just one diff. Was planning to add more at later date so call me back and we can discuss more about this beatmap

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays)
posted

Winter Story wrote:

got nothing on normal

  • - There are a few structure that is questionable for me okok, just hold your font size, ok? :)
  1. Structure that deserves questioning
  2. 00:21:998 (1,2,3,4,5,6) - As we can see, none of the patterns actually hit up by an aesthetically pleasing pattern. All I see in the editor is just some random circle placement that only supports flow, and that's it. Quality-wise something like this should not be allowed to pass by ummm, for what purpose did you boost ar on the screenshot? concepts explanatons: 1), 2) (shapes of sliders correspond with each other)
  3. 00:49:241 (1,2,3) - Having a straight slider and curved slider makes the map aesthetically bad. It's like having one square and suddenly one sphere. It does not connect with each other at all. perfect shapes correspond with each other well. your opinion is extremely subjective and has nothing to do with objective sense
  4. 01:33:749 (3,4,5,6) - Nothing is good on this section. Even flow itself is in tatters. Even when testing on the gameplay itself I didn't enjoy that section due to the fact it played kind of bad for me im too lazy to make pictures again since these follow the same idea as in your first statement
  5. tldr I guess the map itself looked REALLY untidy and you need tons of work on this diff before it can be pushed for rank. Ask any experienced nominator as well as QAT, if they take this mapset seriously then you'll notice tons of work needs to be done before it can be deemed as ready
    -Moving onto modding the diff itself ok, i want to clear something up. when i made mod for your map, i read previous mods, and i noticed huge one with pointing out all instances of overmaps (placing object to no sound related). i pointed out overmap too in my mod, but not every single one, since i didn't see any reason to it. You answered "your mod is very subjective with overmaps" to that guy which is.. basically false on every aspect. Also you wrote "try to understand mappers intention" to the guy. As I can see, you don't do what you expect from others. I could see only one intension in your map - pp. Whose mod is subjective - so is yours
  6. 00:15:827 (4) - Why is the spacing here increased? There's no strong sound that justifies the increased spacing. snare on the end of the slider
  7. 00:29:198 (5,6) - The flow here looks really untidy. For no apparent reason 00:29:713 (6) - body is pointed towards 00:30:227 (1) - which I think it's not clean at all well, its your opinion, i think it fits well with the whole diff idea and plays well too
  8. 00:32:970 (1) - Starting here, I noticed you are reducing the spacing here. Modding on the objective woah, im glad that you know this word side, this will be surely be pointed out (I once did that on my bubbled mapset and it got popped since I reduced spacing for no apparent reason apparent reason - drastic change in intensity
  9. 00:54:664 (1) - Why is this slider shaped differently? i think it emphasizes change in intensity quite well (also i do this in next future instance
  10. 01:28:264 (4,5) - Why is the flow here changed direction out of the sudden? Put an NC if there is a change of cursor movement that you are planning to put
  11. 01:34:264 (4,5) - ^ these sounds are quite heavy and i think this kind of movement supports it well
  12. 02:20:642 (1,2,1,2,1,2) - I think you can make much more better pattern than this (https://osu.ppy.sh/ss/8671238) i think its not worse than your suggestion


actually this is just one diff. Was planning to add more at later date so call me back and we can discuss more about this beatmap nah, not interested in this tbh. you are acting passively-aggressively for some unknown to me reason and your sense of self-importance is a bit too high
if you think that i got something I don't deserve, try to keep in mind that i started mapping ~13 months ago, and for this mapset i spent ~8 hours per day for 2 weeks

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays) mapping is basically a subjective thing, nowadays ranking section is filled with a huge amount of maps of different variety, from ones concerned about pp to the ones which are unique and don't have any other of their own kind. I still think and hope that this one deserves place there
posted

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

Winter Story wrote:

got nothing on normal


-Moving onto modding the diff itself ok, i want to clear something up. when i made mod for your map, i read previous mods, and i noticed huge one with pointing out all instances of overmaps (placing object to no sound related). i pointed out overmap too in my mod, but not every single one, since i didn't see any reason to it. You answered "your mod is very subjective with overmaps" to that guy which is.. basically false on every aspect. Also you wrote "try to understand mappers intention" to the guy. As I can see, you don't do what you expect from others. I could see only one intension in your map - pp. Whose mod is subjective - so is yours If that is what on your mind then you are wrong on a few things.. The fact that you are calling my intention in maps as 'pp' and nothing elsec felt wrong in some case. The intention of me mapping a certain mp3 is to reflect a song properly through a clean exhibition of patterns whilst trying to provide a good gameplay experience, albeit a repetitive, seemingly pp farming gameplay (at which you are correct, but deducing my reasoning my rejection of overmapping felt wrong as there are shit ton of maps that is overmapped but still got through the ranking process. If they are being tolerated then why would I still be discriminated with the overmapping bs?)[/color]
)
actually this is just one diff. Was planning to add more at later date so call me back and we can discuss more about this beatmap nah, not interested in this tbh. you are acting passively-aggressively for some unknown to me reason and your sense of self-importance is a bit too high I am doing this in contrary to assist you in ranking this. If I were to call someone who likes to shit on maps then I would gladly call on one. But the reason I am trying to make reasoning is to avoid your seemingly hardwork go to waste, forcing your work to square one again even when a nominator seemed like giving it a chance. And I am doing this because I once had experienced where I thought a map of this quality can get into a ranked section, but a nominator proved me wrong in many level. To the point even other BNs can agree. I reflect on that and strived on improvement. What I am saying is that something like this can be pushed forward (bubble) but expect it to be popped by another BN or QAT.
if you think that i got something I don't deserve, try to keep in mind that i started mapping ~13 months ago, and for this mapset i spent ~8 hours per day for 2 weeks A mapper's quality, or even a map's quality itself, is not calculated based on how long have you mapped. It's how you interpret a quality map. In my case, reviewing positive feedback maps and a handful of ranked section maps help determine my map's quality and, when I compare it to yours, this has a long way to go before nominator nowadays can deem this as ready

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays) mapping is basically a subjective thing, nowadays ranking section is filled with a huge amount of maps of different variety, from ones concerned about pp to the ones which are unique and don't have any other of their own kind. I still think and hope that this one deserves place there
]You did your part of work, but for me hoping enough would not be enough. Taking more action to improve your mapping would be the optimal solutionp
posted
There is no point in saying that something is of low quality and not adding anything to back up your own words. If you thing something should not be bubbled, go ahead and explain your reasons. This will help us understand you as well as improve the quality, so, in the end all of us would only benefit from well-explained concerns.

We did look through things and polishied things up. h4d0uk3n1 basically did pretty much everything all by themselves, but still

So yeah, except for certain things that are sort of unpolished it's all cool in my eyes.
posted
Changelog (mostly minor visual fixes):

still alive
00:41:444 (2,3,4) -
00:52:970 (4) -
01:03:749 (3,4) -
01:39:226 (2,3,4,5) -
01:54:142 (3) -

insane
00:26:456 (4,5,1) -

hard
00:32:284 (4,5) -
01:33:406 (2) -
01:38:206 (5) -

normal
00:43:139 (3,1,2) -

Chatlog saved
posted

Winter Story wrote:

also Kurai, I'd appreciate it if you can reconsider the bubble on this map since quality is not on an acceptable level (If, by chance this map is not going to get popped, should it be bubbled, I'm going to have conflicted feelings on the mapping standard nowadays)
If you fail to provide me a proper reasoning as to why the quality of this map should be a hindrance to its nomination, then I am not going to take your opinion into account (i.e. I don't care about your feelings, I want facts). This map is probably one of the best I have modded since I joined the BNG 3 weeks ago as it is extremely well structured: patterns all follow a certain logic that is consistent throughout the music while still providing pattern variety, jumps illustrate intensity variations in the music perfectly, SV changes make sense, etc.
I believe you only have a problem with the aesthetics of this map as it does look pretty old school (somehow this map reminds me of this one which is definitely a good one), and I don't see why this would be an issue.

I'm bubbling this set, if you have anything to add, feel free to do so, h4d0uk3n1 will decide whether or not he wants to listen to your suggestions or not.
posted
I'd rather compare it with something made by Natteke in terms of the feel of certain patterns, but I have to agree with Kurai, it's most definitely well made and deserves a chance to be ranked.

Too bad I can't place a lovely heart on it!
posted

Kurai wrote:

If you fail to provide me a proper reasoning as to why the quality of this map should be a hindrance to its nomination, then I am not going to take your opinion into account (i.e. I don't care about your feelings, I want facts). This map is probably one of the best I have modded since I joined the BNG 3 weeks ago as it is extremely well structured: patterns all follow a certain logic that is consistent throughout the music while still providing pattern variety, jumps illustrate intensity variations in the music perfectly, SV changes make sense, etc.
I believe you only have a problem with the aesthetics of this map as it does look pretty old school (somehow this map reminds me of this one which is definitely a good one), and I don't see why this would be an issue.

I'm bubbling this set, if you have anything to add, feel free to do so, h4d0uk3n1 will decide whether or not he wants to listen to your suggestions or not.
subjectively speaking, the map still needs polishing on a few perspective, and yes. Mainly on aesthetic (but we all know it's not a must to add aesthetic). But I guess I can't do much if the nominators itself are set on ranking this when there are much more better set that can be exhibited (can't really show a few but surely there are a few that deserves a spot in the ranked section).

In addition to that, quality of the map is still lacking from my point of view so I do hope a veto could be set up from a deeming nominator as someone told me not to complain too much and let the nominator do their job (by quality, i do not mean from my point of view. I am comparing 2016-2017 maps that have much higher quality and comparing them to this map, this needs a lot of work before it can be deem as 'ready for rank').

I do hope I can reach an understanding here, instead of just following the ranking criteria alone. Should I solely following the ranking criteria, then I could have file a complaint as to why my set is popped even when there is nothing in hindrance to make it unrankable (link : t/518872/start=90 )
posted

Winter Story wrote:

Kurai wrote:

If you fail to provide me a proper reasoning as to why the quality of this map should be a hindrance to its nomination, then I am not going to take your opinion into account (i.e. I don't care about your feelings, I want facts). This map is probably one of the best I have modded since I joined the BNG 3 weeks ago as it is extremely well structured: patterns all follow a certain logic that is consistent throughout the music while still providing pattern variety, jumps illustrate intensity variations in the music perfectly, SV changes make sense, etc.
I believe you only have a problem with the aesthetics of this map as it does look pretty old school (somehow this map reminds me of this one which is definitely a good one), and I don't see why this would be an issue.

I'm bubbling this set, if you have anything to add, feel free to do so, h4d0uk3n1 will decide whether or not he wants to listen to your suggestions or not.
subjectively speaking, the map still needs polishing on a few perspective, and yes. Mainly on aesthetic (but we all know it's not a must to add aesthetic). But I guess I can't do much if the nominators itself are set on ranking this when there are much more better set that can be exhibited (can't really show a few but surely there are a few that deserves a spot in the ranked section).

In addition to that, quality of the map is still lacking from my point of view so I do hope a veto could be set up from a deeming nominator as someone told me not to complain too much and let the nominator do their job (by quality, i do not mean from my point of view. I am comparing 2016-2017 maps that have much higher quality and comparing them to this map, this needs a lot of work before it can be deem as 'ready for rank').

I do hope I can reach an understanding here, instead of just following the ranking criteria alone. Should I solely following the ranking criteria, then I could have file a complaint as to why my set is popped even when there is nothing in hindrance to make it unrankable (link : t/518872/start=90 )
tl;dr, mapping is not about how map fits in current meta, its about how things in map show music, about making logical sense and about fun
posted

h4d0uk3n1 wrote:

tl;dr, mapping is not about how map fits in current meta, its about how things in map show music, about making logical sense and about fun
if that's your perspective then you are mistaken. What do you mean by 'logical sense'? How do 'things in map show music' actually interpret in the map? Now I am not that subjective to the fact I am blind to see that you did your part to reflect the song well. But doing so without consistency and actually getting noticed by nominators saddens me when there are much better maps that can be bubbled and ranked. But instead something like this is deemed as 'ready for rank'.

I'm going to stop here and not cause drama because if nominators deem this set as ready then I won't interfere. It's just, subjectively speaking, the map is not yet ready and I am warning you in advance.
posted

Winter Story wrote:

subjectively speaking, the map still needs polishing on a few perspective, and yes. Mainly on aesthetic (but we all know it's not a must to add aesthetic). But I guess I can't do much if the nominators itself are set on ranking this when there are much more better set that can be exhibited (can't really show a few but surely there are a few that deserves a spot in the ranked section).

In addition to that, quality of the map is still lacking from my point of view so I do hope a veto could be set up from a deeming nominator as someone told me not to complain too much and let the nominator do their job (by quality, i do not mean from my point of view. I am comparing 2016-2017 maps that have much higher quality and comparing them to this map, this needs a lot of work before it can be deem as 'ready for rank').

I do hope I can reach an understanding here, instead of just following the ranking criteria alone. Should I solely following the ranking criteria, then I could have file a complaint as to why my set is popped even when there is nothing in hindrance to make it unrankable (link : t/518872/start=90 )
If you think a change is needed, come and make that change happen. Be specific and point out exact timestamps as well as reasonable explanations on why you think certain aspects should be changed. Please, refer to this map and this map only and explain your concerns. Remember, that none of us have to go ahead and explain anything, unless you specifically address issues and stop overgeneralizing.

Otherwise, there is no point and we might just as well assume that your goal in this case is to personally attack the mapper or nominating BN by purposely and with no reason holding up the set.

Oh, and I'm sure we all could appreciate if -Kazuto could practice their sense of humor somewhere else, unless they have some relevant input concerning the map itself.
show more
Please sign in to reply.