ok so this thread is mostly just a reroute thread from eph's thread: https://osu.ppy.sh/forum/t/915906

basically the idea is that some people have been making mindbogglingly terrible mp3 cuts of songs as a joke and then ranking them and a lot people think it shouldnt be a thing anymore. there were 2 main proposals on how to make these cuts not a thing anymore:

thing 1: make a rule that restricts how much of the song can be cut out if the final mp3 ends up under a certain length (proposed by noffy)

noffy proposal wrote:

A cut can not be over 50% of the full song if the resulting length is less than 1:30. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.

thing 2: make a collection of guidelines to target those cuts more specifically cuz the first proposal could cause not-terrible cuts to be unrankable as well (proposed by nao)

nao's implementation was too long so here's my shitty first draft instead wrote:

1. Cuts should not be shorter than 1:30. These often cause unsatisfying play experiences and are generally seen as disrespectful to the artists. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.
2. Cuts should be edited in a way that still flow as an individual song. This includes avoiding odd key changes, avoiding starting/ending on transitional phrases, and avoiding other moments that do not flow naturally and are obviously cut without needing to listen to the original song.
3. Cuts should maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song. Cuts that make significant changes to the overall listening experience of the song are very misleading and often cause unsatisfying play experiences. This does not apply to official cuts or recreations of official cuts.

second option after some iteration is probably better(?) but it's also guidelines which means people can still be very very very stupid, and doesnt provide a good example of what's acceptable which is bad practice for guideline writing, so idk what's better

oh and both of these would need "cut" to be added to the glossary lol
so uh

glossygloss wrote:

Cut: A song file that has had a portion of audio removed to shorten the beatmapset's play time.

lookin for lots of feedback and iteration on this one cuz this is p hard to get right

I literally gave examples bro

I agree 1:30 is better for my rule idea based off feedback and multiple people telling me really specifically that so if it could be updated in OP thanks

looking it over the biggest difference is whether you want a simple to apply rule (which can be hard because apparently the wording is somewhat confusing?) or a more ambiguous set of guidelines.

the 1st and 3rd nao-idea guidelines seem ok, the 2nd one sounds really confusing as there is no definition what on earth traditional song structure is supposed to be, and I feel like a lot of what it WOULD accomplish is already covered in the 3rd point.

ok updated op to 1:30

and ye as soon as i wrote that i knew it was shit but i needed others' help for it to be not shit
basically the idea was "dont break up hypermeasures" more or less ^^' that sort of thing. keep hypermeasures together, dont start/end on a transitional phrase cuz that sounds like ass, dont have weird unfitting keychanges, etc.

"Cuts should be edited in a way that still flow as an individual song. This includes avoiding creating odd key changes not present in the original, and avoiding starting/ending on transitional phrases, or the cut creating other moments that do not flow naturally and are obviously cut without needing to listen to the original song"

wording obviously still needs work but this is my attempt to tackle what is intended by guideline 2 in a way that makes more sense just reading it
hopefully

Agree with this since stupid people cut in wrong way

2nd proposal is good, probs needs stricter enforcement on such guideline tho - even then we can't check every single song that's being cut lo

Almost agree, but I personally found that 1:30 is still somewhat harsh.

I always cut the anime character song to make the player enjoy it as a TV Size thing, but here is the result. (Length indicated by game client)

https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/821545#taiko/1857180 (Length 1:29)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/980582#taiko/2052174 (Length 1:28)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/933864#taiko/1949540 (Lenght 1:26)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/834374#taiko/1747899 (Length 1:29 / Ranked)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/878807#osu/1854512 (Length 1:26 / Ranked)

(btw, the full length of these songs is over 3:30. Therefore, over 50%)

Even though these cuts don't mean to cut as a joke as you may see that the cut version stil maintain the general impression and intensity of the full song and not oppose traditional song structure. I'm afraid that this proposal may also prohibited the cut such as the map above too.

Speaking frankly, some of original anime opening/ending TV Size also failed to reach 1:30 length. Such as,
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/680251#osu/1438380 (Lenght 1:26 / Ranked)
https://osu.ppy.sh/beatmapsets/342894#osu/761383 (Length 1:25 / Ranked)
etc...

As a (self-claimed) anime song cutter, I found that sometimes it would be impossible to cut some song to have length more than 1:30

Perhaps 1:20 ~ 1:25 may work better? I think that this worth a discussion.

I'm in general support to Nao's proposal because it is a guideline and provides some flexibility. With the guideline, BNs can stop bad cuts from ever reaching rank by an upheld veto for guideline breaking, while allowing comparatively good cuts through to the ranking section. I've changed my support to the Nao proposal because after the rewording by UC, I can see the proposal actually being used because it is simple enough to interpret and make use of.



Lastly, I would like to ask how would the 1:30 be calculated. Would it be drain time, play time, or length of the mp3. This may be important further on because the length is not well defined in the OP.

well the intention w/ setting 1:30 as a guideline is that there's wiggle room to that number for cases like "made a shorter than 1:30 cut bc the song's structure matches that better than sticking to hard 1:30 minimum", and stuff a couple seconds below 1:30 matches that so no need to worry there.

and i dont think that specific allowance is needed to be included at all bc it's rly easy to cut out that kind of audio and still obey the 3 current guidelines.

i'll try to implement noffy's wording into the op soon

Welp, I find it kinda funny that people who opose cutting mp3 doesn't understand idea behind this at all.

The thing is players don't like to be forced to play one song, just to play other. That's why most of maps for uta-like song skips their intro and the reason why there's no this much compilations containing full songs like the "unforgiving". Taking Uta as example, once you check any mapsets of this song, that actually mapped intro, you find out that many people write that this part is boring etc. and people while playing often just screams in their minds how they just want to skip that part and start playing what they came here for.

but uta is really soft example in that matter. If we look at other icdd songs, like "Sangeki no Chi ni Kagayaku Somatta Ai to Zetsubou..." this problem is even higher. Intro of this song doesn't actualy have anything to do with the rest of the song (be it mood, way of handling build-ups, etc. litteraly everything). Following rule you propose players would be forced to play two completely different songs just cause they were released as one, and that doesn't make sense.

Of course that wouldn't happen 'cause in reallity nobody cares about time put in making intros and mapsets for such songs would end up skipping them anyway. That's where your "respect for artists" ends.

They are many peoples who may like different aspects of someone's music, but supporting one of them, while shitting on others just because they dont follow your elitist taste in music, never was and never will be right

This is a great proposal, I fully support the idea! However, how about you make the song structure and intensity guidelines rules? People are going to justify instances of breaking them if they're guidelines, and there will be absolutely nothing we can do to enforce it.

@ChurritsuTV What? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying intros deserve their own mapsets because they're a separate song?

Of course the mood/handling of crescendos in the intro is going to contrast with the intense portion of the song, that's the entire purpose of it. The artists of the song would have not composed an INTRO if it was meant to be a completely different song. They would've released it as another track on an official album or as a unique single. This is why a majority of people skip mapping introductions and prefer to map the "second song", as you've defined it.

Addressing your final point, I believe most (not all) mappers are not being elitist when they state their disliking for particular genres. People are allowed to have opinions, and as long as they monitor themselves and engage in civil discussions, there's no issue with it.

@frenz guidelines (or at least the ones we write nowadays) are for all intents and purposes enforced as rules. cant put these as rules bc we literally have to judge everything case-by-case, and rules should basically never be case-by-case. so unless we set a hard limit on play time like proposal 1, they have to be guidelines. these are still enforceable (see the compilation guidelines), just requires bn's to pop/dq for it instead of just "hey this is unrankable lol"

in other news i added a slightly altered ver of noffy's thing to op

and i added this glossary term cuz its needed:

glossygloss wrote:

Cut: A song file that has had a portion of audio removed to shorten the beatmapset's play time.

i think this guarantees unmappable intros/outros can be cut without being accidentally unrankable, but it might cause weird exceptions im missing? thoughts on this would be nice

FrenZ396 wrote:

but are you saying intros deserve their own mapsets because they're a separate song?

No, the point isn't that it deserve it. The point is that it should be allowed. I don't forbid anyone from skipping to the part they like, and i expect the same thing from them. If i want to map an intro that from the musical standpoint is just another song, I want to do it and not be stopped by some hypocrites in whose "the respect to artist" turn on only when it's broken in a way they don't like

Hi, as representative for the PP Mappers Union, I cannot in good faith support this proposal without addressing the shocking and deleterious effect this proposal has on the pp mapping scene. Shorter mp3 edits (between 0:45-1:30) are great for creating mapsets that grant a high amount of pp. Due to the brevity of the mp3 edit, players are able to complete the map sooner, and also will not have to hold combo for nearly as long. Players have a much lower chance of breaking combo on shorter songs in general, and some of the most-played beatmaps are of short songs, which make them integral to player engagement in this game. After all, without pp maps we wouldn't have so many amazing plays made by pro players.

After careful deliberation, I recommend the bar be lowered to 1:00 for mp3 edits. Anything below, the PP Mappers Union has collectively agreed to be within reason to be considered "too short". Though we would prefer 0:45, we are willing to settle at 1:00.

We would be happy to follow up whatever concerns you may have. Please do not hesitate to contact us at: ppmappers.union@gmail.com

I'm unsure if a fixed measurement of how much you can cut from a song in percentage will work on long term. The idea cuts cannot be shorter than 1:30 sounds very good imo and as a good hard limit. I also agree with the second point, especially by not having literally only the refrain of the song once.

idk if I have oversee something, as long shorter versions that exist by the producers will still be rankable I wholeheartly support this.

I'm posting to try to revive interest in this idea as discussion seems to have stopped for a while. I am generally for the idea of limiting cuts from music to respect the whole piece of music and to provide a good gameplay experience to all players, Having said that, I will now attempt to provide counterpoints to ChuuritsuTV's and Monstrata's points.








TLDR - "intro-vers" which feature a short, very silent portion of a song should be banned since they make for a poor gameplay experience, disrespect general style and intensity of song, and nobody likes them anyway. (well maybe one or two mappers like them i dunno)

"pp-cuts", which usually feature the chorus or the refrain only, are also misrepresentative of the whole song. However, they have their supporters among mappers and players so a poll might be required to gather more opinions from the playerbase as a whole.

dennischan wrote:

For example, Uta from ICDD should not be cut because it is clear that after the end of the intro that there is still music afterwards.

That doesn't match with what you're saying later. As you said A.L.I.E.N could be cut. But if it were cut, it also would be clear that there was music before/after part that didn't got removed. (no longer 'cause you remove this part from your statement) The sole excistence of transition between songs cannot be treated as argument for not separating them as it doesn't even take into account what those songs are. By this logic any of songs from SakiZ's "Osu!Memories" can't be treated as separate song 'cause the drums making transition between songs smooth were added.

inb4
>but "Osu!Memories" is unofficial mix that came after songs were released
and let's be honest, even if all of them wouldn't be released before and that wouldn't be an unofficial mix, but official song, still nobody would call it this way. The point is to look at the song the way it actually is and not how someone calls it to be.

dennischan wrote:

"Ranking is a privilege not a right" A ranked map is supposed to be official content that has the approval of the community at large. If so-called "intro-versions" are not welcome by the community, of course it would be barred from rank.

And this is the most basic problem with it, but I'm not gonna again repeat why ranking process is shit 'cause that's obvious.
The reason why I won't ever agree with this argument is simple. This game is for all people, who might have different music/gameplay/etc. preferences. Just 'cause majority of players can't enjoy slow songs/easy maps/actually hard maps/certain music genres/etc. doesn't mean those shouldn't be ranked. Every person while entering the community should have the possibility of playing ranked maps of what they like and shouldn't be forced to or like what everyone likes or leave. It's the game that is for people, not the opposite

dennischan wrote:

Thirdly, allowing skipping the intro but not the main body is justified because the intro is less important to the work objectively than the main body, simply by comparing the length and elements used (chords, instruments, vocals, phrases of music and so on).

Using "objectivity" as argument just shows you don't know what this word actually mean.
>According to mancrafted concept of being less intense/slow/etc., does this song objectively follows those criteria
The answer is yes. It objectively does 'cause those are actual treats of matter you can measure and compare. If you were to be learned the idea of slow and fast the opposite (meaning you call being slow, being fast) you still would call it corecttly. Just naming changed, the state of thing and reason why you're assuming it's in this state stayed the same.
and the problem with judging if something is objectively more important is that anything named "important" doesn't exist in the first place. It's not a treat, you can't measure it nor compare. If you were to be learned that it's slow parts that are more important you would tell the song is good from completely different reason. It's not objective and never will be 'cause it fully depends on world view you have.

dennischan wrote:

bad cuts, especially intro-ver cuts, make for a general poor gameplay experience.

If by "poor" you mean "simple", "not-variable" (or actually anything else), that might shock you, but if I do play slow song I don't expect it to be super speed tech-song. If I play an easy diff, I play it BECAUSE I want to experience what EASY diff provides, not INSANE. Same with playing SLOW song, not FAST. REPETITIVE, not VARIABLE and anything else you could possibly came up with.

dennischan wrote:

For example, intro-vers are usually EE sets or EN sets

That doesn't even depend on the song, but on how player will interpret it. It can't be an argument for judging a song if it doesn't depend on it.

i'm in favor of doing nao's implementation, minus the second bullet point. maps cut in ways that don't have ~proper song structure~ don't successfully reach ranked anyway (or do they and im missing them?)