removed this change from the pr until discussion is more settled
could i get a summary of what still needs to be cleared up?
could i get a summary of what still needs to be cleared up?
No, metadata is permanent and if you already know that it's going to be an unnecessary rule at some point, it means that it's just a bandaid fix and not an ideal solution. It's quite ironic that you support this temporary fix when last time we were discussing spaces in tags (which is a much less problematic issue and it turned out that what I had proposed was actually intended but accidentally worded in a wrong way) you were completely against the idea of having a temporary solution instead of fixing stuff in the client or on the website.clayton wrote:
the thing u mention in #8 is coming, just not very soon. that's why we're looking to specify this info in titles. they can be edited out &replaced when a better feature is in place.
Yes, tags are meant for searching but could still be somewhat helpful I guess, though I'm indifferent to it. I feel like you're missing my point about the description, I'm saying that the length information is much more important than the information whether it's an unofficial cut or not as proven by the players who complained. Therefore it wouldn't be a problem to put it into the description, if people want more information about a map they have to click on it anyways, it's obviously impossible for the beatmap listing to include all the details of a map without looking cluttered. By adding the length in osu!direct/beatmap listings you are already giving players what they need to know if they are concerned about length.clayton wrote:
for the "why not in tags/description" part--- tags are not meant for viewing, only searching. and beatmap descriptions are an equally poor place to mark important info like this because they are volatile and not displayed alongside beatmap downloads (except for beatmapset pages)
1) It's not efficient at all, using a temporary fix just means that we'll have to change the rule again at some point and we'll end up with another huge metadata inconsistency and we honestly have enough of those already.clayton wrote:
my responses to ur other 7 things, I didn't read the whole thread so I'm probably just repeating people
- for a temporary fix I think this is okay & it's the most effective solution we have of letting people know that the song is shorter, be it an official cut or not (i'd argue the officiality doesn't really matter here)
- or both rules could change!
- two cuts can be different but they're both certainly not the original song. I think that's the only info it's meant to get across
- maybe "edit" is a better word than "cut" then? just semantics
- still missing part of the song; I don't see a problem with adding the "cut" label to this example
- they should be checking metadata & no amount of rules will help if BNs don't follow them. of course we should try to make them less confusing if possible though. in that very rare example case you'd probably act on consensus from other modders and BNs? i dont think it needs to be written in stone
- it's a dumb hack of what "titles" are supposed to be, but we don't yet have a standard way to mark cuts, and titles are our best option currently
I don't agree that they are fundamentally different pieces. The song is still the same, just a different version (in terms of length). I'll use official cuts such as TV Size and Short Ver. as an example. Many of those official releases have the same exact title in the metadata source as the full version, the artists themselves often don't differentiate between them, therefore you cannot say that it's misleading or unfair to the original piece because the difference between an official and an unofficial cut is usually trivial.Lefafel wrote:
I don't think just displaying map length on o!direct would be sufficient to solve this issue. In my opinion cuts cannot have identical core metadata to the original songs, because they're fundamentally different pieces. Having the two on equal terms is misleading and even unfair to the original piece. I think both the tag in the title and the length display are welcome additions, and neither solve the entire problem on their own.
That's not a bad idea actually, of course the implementation always takes time but stillLefafel wrote:
The long-term solution for cluttered titles could be a flair tagging system (similar to what reddit, for example, does), separating these alteration markers from the actual title. But for now, something needs to be done ASAP and this proposal seems to have gotten all the vital issues covered and has a lot of support behind it.
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
Many official releases have the same exact title in the metadata source as the full version, the artists themselves often don't differentiate between them, therefore you cannot say that it's misleading or unfair to the original piece because the difference between an official and an unofficial cut is usually trivial.
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
Many official releases have the same exact title in the metadata source as the full version, the artists themselves often don't differentiate between them, therefore you cannot say that it's misleading or unfair to the original piece because the difference between an official and an unofficial cut is usually trivial.
There is still no sense in this argument because you claim that any cut should not be equal to the original full version regarding the metadata, yet even the artists don't differentiate between them, therefore they are the same song. Following your logic, we also don't have the right to add (TV Size) to anime openings yet we do and you most likely support that idea. But technically by doing that you're also not using the metadata as provided by the artist.Lefafel wrote:
Official releases are made by the copyright owners (or with their permission), they get to decide how they should be called. You don't get that same privilege, because you aren't the owner/creator of the piece you're cutting. Equating your cut with their official piece is not okay. The current proposal already addressess insignificant cuts, so if yours is only trivially different from an existing official piece, you're exempt from this tag anyway.
I didn't even ask to choose between the two, I only asked which aspect the issue is and you mentioned the length and not the fact that it's an unofficial cut. The same goes for other people in those reddit threads etc., the length difference was bothering them, not the fact that it's a cut. Sotarks' RIOT - Overkill map is again a good example for that, if it had (Cut Ver.), would that change anything? Would you refuse to download/play the map because of it? Is the information that it was cut somehow useful for your playing experience? Not really, the map's still the same and not significantly shorter than the original. However, if the map were cut to 1:30 length, it would probably make you less interested in it if we go by the assumption that some players dislike such cuts. This just proves that basically only the length is relevant and obviously the quality of the cut, but that can't be measured without listening to it.Lefafel wrote:
"last time" you asked to choose between length and the officiality of a cut as the more important factor, to which I answered with my choice being the length. You're once again misrepresenting what I've said. You're really not helping your case here.
For everything else, just scroll up and read again because all these things have been explained to you over and over again in this thread.
From a logical point of view, yes the (Full Ver.) or (Long Ver.) marker should be removed, however that is unrankable under the current rules so you'd have to make an amendment for that as well. I also have no idea where you're coming from regarding "butcheries", it's a very different topic.dong wrote:
The "(Full ver.) (Cut ver.)" problem is a moot point. If you cut a full version of a song then it is literally no longer the full version of the song and therefore only requires "(Cut ver.)". The fact that there are already ranked maps labelled "(Full ver.)" that have been cut is pretty hilarious though and proves that metadata transparency has a long way to go in this game. There are a million different ways to edit an MP3, though. It could be the case where you slap so many butcheries, speed ups, slow downs, loops onto a song that it just becomes a god damn "edit", and that's ok. Once you reach that point the song becomes almost unrecognizable anyway even if you didn't actually add anything new to the song from a technicality standpoint.
I'm not saying that we shouldn't add any markers at all, I only made an analogy to explain why the usage of (Cut Ver.) is unjustified. For many artists, the full version and the official cut version is the same. They often don't have different titles. So by adding (TV Size) you are also doing a "disservice" to the artist by changing their song title, if that's what you're concerned about. Artists not treating cut version differently is also the reason why the existence of (Cut Ver.) is unnecessary in the first place, because it's the same song.dong wrote:
It's also not a case of being interested in the song enough to go and look it up, this is a problem with every song whether i like it or not - I'm going to mention again that there are songs in this game which i had no idea were not the original or full versions of the song. Whether or not I enjoyed the song enough to go and look it up is irrelevant because it's a disservice to the artist none-the-less.
You argue that by saying this is a disservice to the artist that we shouldn't add any markers (such as TV Size, because there are many cases where it is not a part of the official metadata), but what gives you the right the cut the song and not label it as such in the first place? If a cut version of a song was uploaded to YouTube with no label in the title and it hit the algorithm getting more popular than the full version of the song, the same problem would arise of people not even knowing that the original version exists, clicking like and moving on.
I think you misunderstood, I'm saying that with the current rules it's not allowed to remove the (Full Ver.) marker, so you have to make an amendment for such cases.dong wrote:
ok, i get what you're saying:
An artist makes a song, the original version is, say, 3 minutes long. Then, the artist makes a new version and calls it "Full ver." which is, say, 5 minutes long. A mapper could take the "Full ver." and cut it to 4 minutes long, which would make it a "(Full ver.) (Cut ver.)", right?
i'm not looking to have a bajillion different tags for every possible edit a mapper can potentially make to an mp3, but i also don't have a solution to what this would be called
like, you're suggesting that if I wanted to map xi - Halcyon full ver. cut ver. with the chorus looped, two verses removed and a double solo that the correct metadata for this would be... "xi - Halcyon"?
Probably yes, but tying to find that out would take a long time. In any case, it is very possible to happen so it should be taken into consideration.dong wrote:
is this something that has EVER happened in the game's history?
No they can't because there are no rules about (Speed Up Ver.)dong wrote:
edit: cases like (Short ver.) (Sped up ver.) can already exist under current rules if "(Short ver.)" is already in the official metadata
Yes of course because if you speed up a specific version of the song (like TV Size) it's not that version anymore so there's no need to keep the TV Size markerdong wrote:
But sped up ver. is clearly editing how the song sounds just like "(GoldenWolf edit)". I can see your proposal for getting "Sped up ver." standardised - do you think that if someone speeds up a song that has (Short ver.) or (TV Size) already in the metadata that either of them should be removed?
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
dong wrote:
But sped up ver. is clearly editing how the song sounds just like "(GoldenWolf edit)". I can see your proposal for getting "Sped up ver." standardised - do you think that if someone speeds up a song that has (Short ver.) or (TV Size) already in the metadata that either of them should be removed?
Yes of course because if you speed up a specific version of the song (like TV Size) it's not that version anymore so there's no need to keep the TV Size marker
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
Yes of course because if you speed up a specific version of the song (like TV Size) it's not that version anymore so there's no need to keep the TV Size marker
I don't think speeding up a song can be compared to cutting it, also the difference is that there is usually no label for full versions, but there is for official shorter ones, I don't think this is really related to the double marker thingdong wrote:
And so if you cut the full version of the song it is no longer the full version of the song
I feel like it's irrelevant whether it's a speed up of the full or short version but in any case it's super rare so no big deal. Cuts however are much more common so the double markers are kinda problematicdong wrote:
i don't agree with you that speeding up a specific version of a song somehow means that any given official metadata marker for that version should be removed, by the way. you can speed up multiple different versions of a song. in which case, multiple markers is appropriate.
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
I feel like it's irrelevant whether it's a speed up of the full or short version but in any case it's super rare so no big deal. Cuts however are much more common so the double markers are kinda problematic
It's not completely illogical, it does happen, here are some examples I could think of:dong wrote:
cuts are much more common, but you couldn't find me an example of a cut down full version that isn't an existing official version? i mean, the reason you couldn't find one is of course because it would be completely illogical to cut a "full version" of a song when an official shorter version already exists... Of course it could happen but i think mappers should be discouraged from doing that (i put a post in this thread addressing this). In any case, if you cut a song in such a way, then it just becomes (Cut ver.), but I seriously think you are misrepresenting how common such a case would be, like I can't see this happening unless a mapper was being a total clown on purpose, or if the two official cuts that you make your own cut between are like 15 minutes apart.Serizawa Haruki wrote:
I feel like it's irrelevant whether it's a speed up of the full or short version but in any case it's super rare so no big deal. Cuts however are much more common so the double markers are kinda problematic
Serizawa Haruki wrote:
It's not completely illogical, it does happen, here are some examples I could think of:
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/785518
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/583943
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/745312
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/813969
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/780952
https://osu.ppy.sh/s/475538
Bibbity Bill wrote:
i'll just chime in with a quick opinion here in case it hasn't been said since i couldn't keep up with how long this thread is. so if trying to differentiate cuts is basically impossible wouldn't adding a (Extended Ver.) or (Full Ver.) marker to full versions or something along that line be best in that case and just have no markers on cuts? or would that not solve the problem at all? because either way you would be adding an unofficial marker and if this is the easier case to define the edge cases for wouldn't it be better to have that instead?
like if there's an existing marker officially your unofficial marker would replace it, as was proven here artists do use (long ver.) (extended ver) ect all in their titles so it wouldn't be too out of place
like i figure it would solve stuff like (Sped Up Ver.) (Cut Ver.) shenanigans and also extensions/cuts i figure would be easy to spot with just a youtube search on the song or something and any edge like those are already discouraged with the 'The audio file of a song should not be artificially extended in order to meet a time limitation in the beatmapset section of this criteria.' guideline, and the cases where people extend songs that are already 5 minute drain times are so obscure that they should be handled on case by case basis as i've never seen anyone do that (if there has been cases like that i would love to know)
i mean it would give distinction that it's different from cut vers, it would be easily enforceable in the rc already, it wouldn't cause any ugly double markers, only downside to having a marker like this would be that it would look weird with songs that wouldn't normally be cut and for the whole 'it would look less official' argument but i mean you could say that with any additional markers added to songs in the first place like with adding (TV Size) on songs that don't have it officially (think western cartoon shows and non anime stuff in general that usually end with theme in the title that most people would already recognize as a theme song but needing to add it due to it being from a tv show like https://osu.ppy.sh/s/933621 for example) and editing metadata for standardization since it would be different than what you would search for on official places.dong wrote:
I don't think we should be adding markers to any official release of a song. If a song has no markers at all then it should be assumed that it is the first and original version of the song (with the exception of TV sizes). In the many cases that artists create longer/shorter versions of their own songs we should use whatever metadata the song artist provides and come up with a way to differentiate unofficial cuts made by the mapper - hence why we changed the proposal from "Short ver." to "Cut ver." for unofficial cuts, as many artists already use the "short" wording for official cuts vs. almost no one calling their own songs "Cut ver."
The official version of the song should be treated as the "default" version of the song.
Bibbity Bill wrote:
i mean it would give distinction that it's different from cut vers, it would be easily enforceable in the rc already, it wouldn't cause any ugly double markers, only downside to having a marker like this would be that it would look weird with songs that wouldn't normally be cut and for the whole 'it would look less official' argument but i mean you could say that with any additional markers added to songs in the first place like with adding (TV Size) on songs that don't have it officially (think western cartoon shows and non anime stuff in general that usually end with theme in the title that most people would already recognize as a theme song but needing to add it due to it being from a tv show like https://osu.ppy.sh/s/933621 for example) and editing metadata for standardization since it would be different than what you would search for on official places.
Nevo wrote:
HOWEVER HOW DO WE DISTINGUISH DIFFERENT CUTS HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM and what if the artist has cut versions and tv size versions
KittyAdventure wrote:
also, how about keep use old tv size metadata like -TV SIZE VERSION- and TV EDIT like official website say? it's because not every tv size is shorter from full version.
baz wrote:
Just to test the waters, what are peoples opinions be if we change the marker to something like (Unofficial Cut.) or words to a similar meaning for unofficial cuts and leaving official cuts with the official metadata?
KittyAdventure wrote:
I don't think (Cut Ver.) its good to use because its cut like TV Size or fade out like that?