I said I won't post anything anymore, however as I took another glance here I felt I should post something.

TheVileOne wrote:

Edit I still think there needs to be a limit of how crazy a difficulty can go. I could easily map everything in 2.0 and completely ignore everyone's complaints that its too hard due to the reason that they can't handle it. It would be nice if there was a rule/guideline that restricted the rankable distance snap used for the majority of the beatmap, and other things like you should never have a jump that exceeds 4.5 with the only exception being miscalculations with different slider velocities.

Then again how often does this happen. I'd rather set the limit to 4.0. Anything more than that is kind of ridiculous by jump standards.

I will just leave this map here:
http://osu.ppy.sh/s/18630

By your "standards" this map is beyond unrankable. Please stop thinking about generalization where it's not required, and start thinking on a case per case basis where every variable counts, be it bpm, intensity, overall feeling of the song, etc. This is also another great example why your guideline about spacing is just plain wrong.

The harm about including a modified version of that rule is that you aren't specific enough. Everything needs to be clear.

TheVileOne wrote:

Guidelines by their nature don't need to be specific.

Yes they do, what is the point if they aren't?

In closing, rules aren't here to limit everyone in what they can do, they are here to prevent really stupid stuff from happening, limiting the mappers is just a result of the reason. Not the other way around.

That was only an example and an ill-thought up one..... I'm beyond my thinking clearly mood. When I suggest things, usually the first product is raw material, and I spend the next responses molding that into a sensible idea. I wasn't going to press for that of course. I said then again, it might not be worth the troubles, which meant I wasn't sure about what I said...

I'll reiterate. That part is not worth it, and I do not think what I said is worth it or a good idea; it was only an idea. I don't want to come into this thread to comments saying things, because that was only an example that was unrefined.

You do make a really good closing remarks.

I think I get what you are trying to say. "What if a map is crappy, even if it meets all the Rules/Guidelines thru some weird exploits etc". I think this will come out in the modding. People will say, this map is crappy please fix it. Putting in vague rules/guidelines is only makes the problem worse. The Rules and Guidelines can't spell out every permutation of bad mapping otherwise it would be as long as this thread. Although I would to see something at the bottom of the guidelines like "The BATs have the final word on ranking. If you don't like a BATs decision, feel free to find another. If you can't then you have to come to some understanding with the BAT"

Yea I guess my reasoning is that, all things should be covered in the guidelines, subjective or not. Before, it was criteria for ranking, and now that has been changed to rules and guidelines. A guideline is different in meaning than a criteria. A guideline is a standard; it is the suggested/recommended way to map a song. It is what BATs like to see in maps.

Basically I was hoping people would want to create a more thorough set of standards for a ranked map. So we can show future mappers, these are the elements to make a good beatmap, but it's not the only way it can be done. If we just tell them they should overmap whenever possible, what kind of quality will their beatmaps have?

I don't care if there are good reasons to overmap. It is misleading to not hold a standard of any kind against overmapping or at least make a note of it. If there was recommendations section, it would be even more perfect for this. I mean aren't the guidelines already filled with tips on how to make a basic beatmap? Adding breaks in a map is subjective.... We can't say that all maps must have a break. Why can't we say that Mappers should not overmap a song (by placing notes where there are no sounds) just to increase difficulty and should only do so if it fits. Overmapping is considered an advanced technique and only should be used by experienced beatmappers. (The same as using 1/8th notes for example)

What is wrong with that?

Because there is nothing inherently wrong with overmapping except for your dislike of it.

As such, it should be moderated via modding, rather than the rantings of an individual.

GigaClon wrote:

Your map must be perfectly timed. This means that your BPM and offset are spot-on, sliders end when they should, notes are generally following a recognizable rhythm (such as the lyrics or drums) which is comprehensible by a player, and that there are no unsnapped notes (you can check this by running AIMod (shortcut ctrl+shift+a) in the editor).

Shiirn, you're wrong.


By definition overmapping, means excessive mapping. Excessive under this meaning is referred to as a negative, or else it would just be referred to as just mapping or creating your own beat as some do call it. It should be done in moderation or all maps will just end up being unnecessarily difficult.

Think about more people than just the ones on your skill level. Would everyone want to deal with overmapped beats? Should everyone have to deal with them? Is a map made better because its overmapped?

Hi I play 2008 maps and many are more fun than current "standard" maps. kk.

2008's standards were stricter than they are currently.

Huh, really? Never knew that. I still find them more fun though. I guess it's something about how each map feels different from each other in some way.

Still, I don't really see the point of this. 2008 maps were considered "reasonably playable" at the time they were ranked I suppose, and today, the majority of the osu!community disagrees. Then what about me and every other guy that still think they are "reasonably playable"?

My skill level is pathetic.

Just saying.

Shiirn wrote:

My skill level is pathetic.

Just saying.

It's probably a safe assumption that you can at least make an educated guess as to where the next object should be. I'm a pretty sloppy and unskilled player myself, but I can miss something and think, "this is fucking hard, but it at least fits the music" or, "this mapper's just spouting as much fake difficulty as they can and I feel no connection to the music as a result."

I also feel compelled to reiterate the second definition of overmapping. If every spare rhythm in a song has an object to the point where the entire map becomes a horrible mess, then it is overmapped. I would much prefer to see an undermapped song if it makes the playing experience fun. "Fun" is subjective, because I usually prefer to take it easy when I play, but it's really not a problem if a map doesn't follow every semiquaver and triplet that occurs in the rhythm section.

mm201 wrote:

2008's standards were stricter than they are currently.

mmm' sure?
then explain why some players left osu! because the average level of mapping was low?

When? Then or now?

"average level of mapping was low" could be because standards are too low or too high, so it doesn't say very much.

If anything, we have more people getting sick of mapping now, because of the saturation of maps and the leniency towards what is ranked. Watching awful maps receive a lot of attention is extremely discouraging to those whose decent maps are passed by, ergo they stop wasting their time on fruitless endeavours.

Mapping evolves. Some people will like it, some will not.
I really don't see by what logic a mapper would get sick of mapping now, because someone else did something else. Those two things look completely unrelated me, and I say this as a mapper. Just because I see things which are overmapped to hell and back (which I dislike, but that's just my opinion) that doesn't discourage me to map however I want (within the ranking criteria that is).

Just an offtopic observation:
Did anyone notice a huge influx of guest difficulties? Now, mind you, I don't mind them at all, but I rarely see a mapset which is mostly, if not completely done by a single mapper. Sure a guest diff here and there, or a taiko guest diff, but I see people just mapping 1 diff and getting guest diffs from other people to rank the mapset. In my eyes, this could be direct cause to why are certain maps in a mapset so inconsistent, especially in difficulty spread.

Why did I mention this? Because this means mappers aren't putting much effort into their maps, they just want a "complete" mapset and then rank it asap. This is actually the reason why some maps are considered average or below average today. Atleast that's how I see it.
Oh and no matter how "bad" all these maps are, I still find them very playable, even if they are a bit overmapped. Probably not as enjoyable as I would expect them to be but that's not the point or the issue here.

In any case we should be finalizing this, as we're getting offtopic too much and we don't have anything to discuss. I will let this opened for another day or so and then deny it if no good and/or valid reasons are presented in the meantime.

Extreme difficulty is a fad right now. There's a prevalent feeling that low difficulties don't matter and it's solely the "insane" difficulty which represents the mapset. Furthermore, difficulty has become synonymous with quality to many. Lower difficulties are afterthoughts which the mapper doesn't want to put much effort into, and makes only because there's this nuisance of a rule requiring them. They would be quick to outsource them to guest mappers to save the effort.

The mapping community has gone to the elites, which is alienating newcomers.

The problem that some people have expressed is that they feel that their style of mapping simply has no place here, or that they simply get sick of being pissed around. It happens. It's also an annoyance that a lot of mappers are flat-out lazy, and the fact that this laziness is enabled is what puts off those who pour a lot of time into a mapset. Again, it mustn't be a good feeling for excellent mappers when they try their best, only to be stuck in a queue behind slop. There's only so much of that that people can take.

Guest difficulties are also becoming quite a serious issue and it should be up to the mapper to decide on one or two guests, instead of asking a load of people for guests, mapping one difficulty on their own and calling it a day. It's even worse when there are more than four maps, with superfluous guest difficulties.

As for unenjoyable maps, it's reasonable to refuse to rank something if it has a bad feel, even if it is technically rankable. Thorough modding can suggest ways to make patterns feel more comfortable or to tone down overmapping. Additionally, if patterns outright ignore/plough through important musical elements, then they should also be changed. It may be worth having some emphasis on the map emphasising the music in a logical and consistent way, so that there's a continuous feel throughout.

DEEDIT: I agree about the mapping community catering to experienced players. On several occasions, I've mentioned that, just because we as committed members of the community have been conditioned to certain quirks, it doesn't mean that these quirks should become standards. Players who are just getting used to playing harder mapsets could be turned off completely by some of the habits which mappers have acquired. There's "evolution" and then there's losing sight of what is accessible to as many people as possible. This game is becoming big and osu!stream is on its way to gaining some serious headway in the App Store. Sooner or later, more casual players will be drawn to this and osu! may become less of a cult, so we're going to need to consider them more. Even making easier easy maps would be a start.

D33d wrote:

Even making easier easy maps would be a start.

I think you got this a bit wrong. Sure there are superextreme maps, but unless the map is approved, it's a pretty much a whole mapset with atleast 2-3 different diffs, where atleast one of them is catering for less experienced players. Just because people are used to completely destroying a certain Insane diff with 100% accuracy and then get like 85% C on another one doesn't mean the map is bad. Such a player can fairly enjoy a Hard diff then.
It's not about making easier maps, it's about people not wanting to play easier diffs.
Anyways this has gone way offtopic, I will stop replying until tomorrow.

mm201 wrote:

When? Then or now?

"average level of mapping was low" could be because standards are too low or too high, so it doesn't say very much.

I know people who played Osu! time before I Started playing and ended because in front of DS versions the maps were pitfull.
The quality was low except the usual exceptions because the standard weren't anyway as strict as now.

I can't understand a word you're saying. Either use proper grammar or stop posting here.
How can we argue with you if we can't understand your arguments?

He said that he knew people that played before he did and stopped playing because compared to the DS maps, they were not very good and that the standards are more strict now

Thank you.

If anything, I would call 2008/09's maps much more like those in Ouendan. Ouendan maps follow beat spacing, don't overlap, and don't focus on intense difficulty. These three things are among the reasons I don't like the current generation of maps.

Tastes?
Anyway, older maps didn't follow beat spacing (2008 only though) and overlapped many times, actually, but partially and not fully. The Slider Shapes weren't so good ( I know that the editor was different though ).

I just don't get what you're saying, all maps (except the crazy troll fullscreen 1/8 jumps etc etc) can at least be played by someone who can tell if they had fun or not when playing the map. Fun is subjective, and it also depends on the skill level. If a newbie plays a hard map that has a tricky spot and he keeps missing in that part, he will obviously get angry at the map and -his childish attitude will make- him hate the map, while a more experienced player will not have any problem at that certain part and probably like it. If the more experienced player also has problems on it because it's tricky, then the mapper is doing something wrong for sure.

As a "insane lolololol" mapper, I don't map just "for the sake of Insane difficulties being cool", I map what the song feels like, and sometimes (Big Black or Rainbow Dash Likes Girls) mapping easier difficulties is just pretty much impossible for me. In most cases I'd call a mapper that's better at making easier difficulties, since I can't make them by myself if I think this song feels just too fast/"busy" for a newbie player.

By the way, 2008 maps can be not pretty, but I have much more fun playing some of them than most of nowadays' maps.


And I'm pretty sure val had the same problem with Atama no Taisou, instead of just going "LOL LETS MAKE THIS AN INSANE ONLY MAP!!!"

As much as I fundamentally agree with this guideline, it's so subjective that it wouldn't end up doing anything. Clearly opinions differ on this issue, since otherwise "overmapped" maps wouldn't be made.

Hmm odd enough I would agree as well but it is a done deal for now