forum

[Proposal]Clarify non-4:3 aspect ratio offscreen rankability

posted
Total Posts
5
Topic Starter
jeanbernard8865
4:3 resolutions have traditionally been the go-to method when checking for offscreen objects. However, even perfectly rankable maps in that regard will most likely have offscreen objects on other aspect ratios. Let me demonstrate that with the example of this borderline offscreen slider in my living colour map.

example

Slider on a 1024x768 resolution, which is a 4:3 aspect ratio. As you can see, this slider is entirely on screen and thus perfectly acceptable.


Same slider on a 1280x1024 resolution ( thus a 5:4 aspect ratio ) : notice how significantly offscreen it goes.

This needs to be addressed as 4:3 has always been considered a " base resolution " despite actually allowing for too much edge cases like the one cited above. However, as forbidding offscreen objects on any and all supported resolutions would currently be too complex to both set up and enforce ( due to implying having to check on every possible aspect ratio ), the best that can currently be done is to expressly make offscreen objects on non-4:3 aspect ratios rankable, so as to avoid any possible confusion.

I thus propose that this rule :

Ranking Criteria wrote:

Hit objects must never be off-screen in 4:3 aspect ratios. Hit objects that are even partially off-screen can create reading difficulties. Test play your map to confirm this.
be reworded as such :

Hit objects must never be off-screen in 4:3 aspect ratios. Hit objects that are even partially off-screen can create reading difficulties. Test play your map to confirm this. Off-screen objects in other aspect ratios such as 5:4 are rankable due to technical limitations making them impossible to avoid.
discuss here
UndeadCapulet
if something isn't expressly declared unrankable then it isn't unrankable. the rc specifies 4:3 ratio so obviously 5:4 isn't considered at all.

there's no point adding this "exception" because it isn't an exception. is it onscreen in 4:3? then it's rankable, end of story.
Topic Starter
jeanbernard8865

UndeadCapulet wrote:

if something isn't expressly declared unrankable then it isn't unrankable. the rc specifies 4:3 ratio so obviously 5:4 isn't considered at all.

there's no point adding this "exception" because it isn't an exception. is it onscreen in 4:3? then it's rankable, end of story.
That's beyond the point... What i'm saying is that the rule should also consider ratios that are not 4:3 or 16:9 to avoid any possible confusion. Currently, it contradicts itself : if even partially offscreen objects can cause reading difficulties, then why would they not on 5:4 ? At the very least, there should be clarification that they are not considered because they are not properly supported by the game. So we would end up with something like :

Hit objects must never be off-screen in 4:3 aspect ratios. Hit objects that are even partially off-screen can create reading difficulties. Test play your map to confirm this. Other aspect ratios such as 5:4 are not taken in consideration because they are not properly supported by the game.
Kibbleru
If its not unrankable its rankable. why would we need to add this?

no need to put more unecessary words into the already confusing af RC


besides, it has never really caused a problem before, so i don't see why this needs to be there
pishifat
from what i saw in the bn discord, people explained to ayanokorin why clarifying 5:4 isn't necessary, so thread will be archived
Please sign in to reply.

New reply