orzezek wrote:
check aimod and fix tags conflict pls oops, doublespace, reuploaded
01:36:703 (2,3,4,5) - what a nazi pattern on the highest diff btw it follows lyrics
forum
Fall Out Boy - I Don't Care
posted
Total Posts
108
Topic Starter
you didn't get the joke
good work !
Let's go!
Qualified! 
Vass_Bass wrote:
we care!
Vass_Bass wrote:
we care!
Many congratulations Aleks (:
Great map!
поздравляю!
Nice map and all but these diffnames are completely unrankable. There is no clear progression of difficulty or indication to the player about what kind of mapping to expect...
nao silly
UndeadCapulet wrote:
nao silly
You guys missed your chance at le epic reply "I don't care" lel
I don't careKisses wrote:
You guys missed your chance at le epic reply "I don't care" lel
thanks for the second chance
здравствуйте,привет вам РАНК (:
I have to agree there, there is no real progression of difficulty naming. It's just from one point to another (A -> B), doesn't imply harder in any way.
Please try to find more appropriate difficulty names that clearly indicate difficulty progression
(also taking it down because mapper hasn't responded to the report)
Please try to find more appropriate difficulty names that clearly indicate difficulty progression
(also taking it down because mapper hasn't responded to the report)
Thats same story how with Xanandra's map,its really big problem to make DQ? If this map was ranked 3-4 years ago no one BAT or QAT nothing would have said. why now such a tight control? answer me please. ;____;
Because standards change, and you have to adapt to them. This is not 2014.
I agree with Raiden about diffnames. They don't properly indicate the true difficulty level.
uh.. they do indicate progression!
It's from a positive state to a negative state; you see, when you care about something or someone, you are positive and caring towards that, and when you don't, you can be negative and harsh. So it does make sense with "I Care!", "I don't Care!", and "I kinda Care" (as the state between caring and not caring at all). Come on, this isn't even advanced English, people.
Also, was the mapper somehow notified that there was a report on his map? I don't see any post on the thread about the map getting a report, and I don't know if he received a pm about it, so this is just a question.
I see no problem here, there's an inverse correlation between how much the mapper says he cares and how high in the spread the diff is. It's consistent, even if consistently negative, and works with the song title.
Make the hardest diff "I don't care" and it makes sense progressively
Right now the meaning is kinda "implied" so the syntax sounds different.
Right now the meaning is kinda "implied" so the syntax sounds different.
I posted on the thread about it, and reported it. Which he ignored 
Anyway, I suggest something like "I normally care > I hardly care > I don't care" which both shows the desired progression and also includes the difficulty of the map in the name. This solves both issues.
Anyway, I suggest something like "I normally care > I hardly care > I don't care" which both shows the desired progression and also includes the difficulty of the map in the name. This solves both issues.
OBJECTION!ezek wrote:
uh.. they do indicate progression!
It's from a positive state to a negative state; you see, when you care about something or someone, you are positive and caring towards that, and when you don't, you can be negative and harsh. So it does make sense with "I Care!", "I don't Care!", and "I kinda Care" (as the state between caring and not caring at all). Come on, this isn't even advanced English, people.
Also, was the mapper somehow notified that there was a report on his map? I don't see any post on the thread about the map getting a report, and I don't know if he received a pm about it, so this is just a question.
Pay more attention to why it's being disqualified; it's not being disqualified because it doesn't show progression, it's being disqualified because it doesn't properly indicate the difficulty level. How does "I Care!" -> "I don't Care!" properly display the intended difficulty levels?
Nao posted 4 days ago on this thread and didn't receive a reply, so the mapper has had plenty of time to properly address the issue, and they didn't.
Yes, I saw your post, but in that post you didn't say you reported the map so the mapper could care enough and take action, that's why I asked if he was notified by pm. You see, Aleks doesn't get online everyday so he needs a good reason to show up, I suppose. Imagine if you see a comment about one of your qualified maps and you think is no big deal, but then your map gets reported and the person never said it got reported, so you know until your map gets dq'd without a chance to at least attempt to defend yourself. If you did notify him directly, then that was nice and Aleks wasn't for not replying, but if you didn't, well, just be more clear when you do such thing next time.Naotoshi wrote:
I posted on the thread about it, and reported it. Which he ignored
Anyway, I suggest something like "I normally care > I hardly care > I don't care" which both shows the desired progression and also includes the difficulty of the map in the name. This solves both issues.
Well moving on to the important thing here, I think Monstrata's and Nao's way of dealing with this is fine, so it should be up to Aleks on what to do. For some reason my brain saw the last diff as "I don't care" instead of "I really don't" all the time haha. Still is something that works imo, but since the map is already dq'd we should expect an improvement.
edit: Dooormat, my explanation shows how it is related to difficulty as well
Admittedly I should not have made the assumption that he is a no-life like the rest of us and looks at the game every day. I'll make sure to forum PM people when I report their maps - which is a fairly rare occasion for me. Sorry for causing trouble. Regardless, I do believe I was in the right and that my solution is an good one. And also, don't forget to add exclamation mark to the end of the last difficulty name to keep it consistent with the rest of them.
@ezek you didn't know explain why it's related to the difficulties at all. Doormat was asking how "I care" and "I kinda care" relate to normal and hard respectively. Also just because the diff names aren't advanced English doesn't mean it's ok. There are many osu players that don't understand English all to well, some not at all which is why it's preferred to not use diff names such as these. Names like Normal, Hard etc are fine because they are the staple names of their difficulty but you can't expect everyone from a multi linguistic community to be able to interpret what each diff means if every set was names like this.
They might not represent what kind of difficulty it will be, but you will be sure that the first difficulty, which in this case was "I Care!", would be the easiest difficulty of them all, because the mapper decided to follow the general theme of the song. Starting at this, I do not see where the issue is with the current difficulty names as they show a progression from "I care" to "I really don't".
Following this aspect, I agree with Monstrata as the last difficulty should be named "I don't care" instead of "I really don't", because it would first, follow the song's title and the theme of the song and second, show an actual progression, like Aleks intended to do.
Following this aspect, I agree with Monstrata as the last difficulty should be named "I don't care" instead of "I really don't", because it would first, follow the song's title and the theme of the song and second, show an actual progression, like Aleks intended to do.
@Kisses I meant difficulty based on the progression. My bad for not being clear there. Explicitly stating which kind of difficulty is not necessary as long as it shows a clear progression from easiest to hardest, thing that Gabe already explained above~ And again, the names are simple and most people should understand (I can tell since English is not my native language). Anyway, I already expressed my opinion on the subject, so I'm not going to reply on this anymore xp let's see what Aleks has to say~
Unless I'm interpreting the Ranking Criteria wrong, that's not what the Ranking Criteria says at all, which is why Naotoshi (and myself) find it to be an issue that wasn't really addressed.ezek wrote:
Explicitly stating which kind of difficulty is not necessary as long as it shows a clear progression from easiest to hardest, thing that Gabe already explained above~
The problem with "I Care!" -> "I really don't" etc. is that they don't really indicate their level of difficulty. Yes, they show a progression, but it's not explicitly stating their level of difficulty. It is implied, but I feel that that's not good enough. Standards change, and what was acceptable in 2013/14 isn't necessarily acceptable now.Ranking Criteria wrote:
A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in a set. The mapset's hardest difficulty may use an appropriate custom difficulty name, unrelated to a username. Mapsets may also use a complete set of custom difficulty names that clearly indicate their level of difficulty to the player.
I think I'm going to give my opinions here.
Some things mentioned here makes not definitely sense to me if you ask me. First of all I want to say I do agree with difficulties names.
If you're using custom sets, it's because they makes sense with the music/band/some lyrics/etc.
As an example I've mapped some "Panic! at the Disco" songs (and some other mappers did the same a few time ago such as Bakari), and I used something like "Calm!/Nervous!/Panic!" but I'm wondering.. How can you notice the level of those difficulties? Yeah, I personally think that "Calm!" is the only one that you can notice as an Easy but "Nervous" as Normal? Why? You generally put nervous when you play something that it can be a bit "Hard" but not in this level (you can say to me, "there are players that can be nervous in Normal difficulties" but there are new players that don't feel really calm playing Easy difficulties becuase they've recently joined this game, so this doesn't count to me as a justification).
Are you telling me that I can't use these difficulties names because they don't represent properly its level? That's not fair at all, and it sounds pretty bad to me.
I'd like to use this phrase because is what I think too. I don't need to add anything else.
I'll repeat this phrase as a conclusion, if you want to indicate the level of all difficulties with its name, then we must only use "Easy/Normal/Hard/Insane/Extra" and similar ones such as "Beginner/Advanced/etc." because other thing won't meet this "rule" and I don't want to see that, I think all users here have common sense to notice that by themself. If difficulties names are progressive, the rest should be subjective.
Some things mentioned here makes not definitely sense to me if you ask me. First of all I want to say I do agree with difficulties names.
Yeah.. that's true, standard changes, but it's impossible to indicate the level of difficulties when you use custom names. Following that textually, the only difficulties names that we are available to use are "Easy/Normal/Hard/Insane or similar ones, you can't innovate at all in anything.Doormat wrote:
The problem with "I Care!" -> "I really don't" etc. is that they don't really indicate their level of difficulty. Yes, they show a progression, but it's not explicitly stating their level of difficulty. It is implied, but I feel that that's not good enough. Standards change, and what was acceptable in 2013/14 isn't necessarily acceptable now.Ranking Criteria wrote:
A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in a set. The mapset's hardest difficulty may use an appropriate custom difficulty name, unrelated to a username. Mapsets may also use a complete set of custom difficulty names that clearly indicate their level of difficulty to the player.
If you're using custom sets, it's because they makes sense with the music/band/some lyrics/etc.
As an example I've mapped some "Panic! at the Disco" songs (and some other mappers did the same a few time ago such as Bakari), and I used something like "Calm!/Nervous!/Panic!" but I'm wondering.. How can you notice the level of those difficulties? Yeah, I personally think that "Calm!" is the only one that you can notice as an Easy but "Nervous" as Normal? Why? You generally put nervous when you play something that it can be a bit "Hard" but not in this level (you can say to me, "there are players that can be nervous in Normal difficulties" but there are new players that don't feel really calm playing Easy difficulties becuase they've recently joined this game, so this doesn't count to me as a justification).
Are you telling me that I can't use these difficulties names because they don't represent properly its level? That's not fair at all, and it sounds pretty bad to me.
I'd like to use this phrase because is what I think too. I don't need to add anything else.
This can be a point that we can discuss a lot of days but nobody will be happy with others opinions. But well, I'd say this is a subjective issue because 50% of the community do agree with those difficulties names and the other 50% do not agree with them.ezek wrote:
uh.. they do indicate progression!
It's from a positive state to a negative state; you see, when you care about something or someone, you are positive and caring towards that, and when you don't, you can be negative and harsh. So it does make sense with "I Care!", "I don't Care!", and "I kinda Care" (as the state between caring and not caring at all).
I'll repeat this phrase as a conclusion, if you want to indicate the level of all difficulties with its name, then we must only use "Easy/Normal/Hard/Insane/Extra" and similar ones such as "Beginner/Advanced/etc." because other thing won't meet this "rule" and I don't want to see that, I think all users here have common sense to notice that by themself. If difficulties names are progressive, the rest should be subjective.
Oh well, here I am again~Doormat wrote:
Unless I'm interpreting the Ranking Criteria wrong, that's not what the Ranking Criteria says at all, which is why Naotoshi (and myself) find it to be an issue that wasn't really addressed.ezek wrote:
Explicitly stating which kind of difficulty is not necessary as long as it shows a clear progression from easiest to hardest, thing that Gabe already explained above~The problem with "I Care!" -> "I really don't" etc. is that they don't really indicate their level of difficulty. Yes, they show a progression, but it's not explicitly stating their level of difficulty. It is implied, but I feel that that's not good enough. Standards change, and what was acceptable in 2013/14 isn't necessarily acceptable now.Ranking Criteria wrote:
A difficulty's name must indicate its level of difficulty, with the exception of the hardest level of difficulty in a set. The mapset's hardest difficulty may use an appropriate custom difficulty name, unrelated to a username. Mapsets may also use a complete set of custom difficulty names that clearly indicate their level of difficulty to the player.
While it is true that they're implied, they're simple. The most important thing is that we can understand which is the easiest, hardest, and average difficulty, so it shouldn't be a big deal. Now that you pulled out that from the rc, I understand why Nao suggested the diffs in that explicit way lol. Too much regulations ruin the fun xp I think Nao's suggestion is the safest way to go, but I don't think the current ones (except for the highest diff) are bad.
Anyway, I'm not saying the current names must be kept the way they are, I was just expressing my point of view on the matter by explaining why I believe they're okay in their current state; as I already said, improvement should be expected since the map is already disqualified. In short, I'm not against a change~
seems mancuso wrote something while I was typing this, so idk if I repeated something that he already said (I'm a very distracted person so my mind goes to places and I stop writing xD)
I can't believe we're having a long discussion just for some diffames lol, well, I'm gonna keep myself out of this since I gave all the input I could xp
Topic Starter
First of all, i would like to greet all drama queens in this awsum thread but actually i don't care.
Post of nominator in the thread is just the opinion. Should i reply every opinion? It makes no sense. Words of ONE nominator were previously beaten by TWO nominators who had qualified map earlier. Do you get it? Unbeliveable behaviour from your side, really.
Opinions of bns after dq can't be counted, it's like feeding wingulls, sorry guys,no offences. it always was like that, most of you support qats just because. I will continue to talk only with qats. Topic will be locked. QATs, pm me for next conversation after reading my objections.
About progression. Answer me personally, who cares about diff's difficulty?
Right, newbies. Tought guys don't care anout it at all, they can play everything. And "Kinda" shows that person knows basics, but still care about difficulty, something between previos names. Pretty clear for me. Plus star indicator on preview for dummies. I gave you clear indication, what can you reply?
Liar. There were no report or pm. It was simple dq w/o notifying. You were the one who had broken the rules.Raiden wrote:
I have to agree there, there is no real progression of difficulty naming. It's just from one point to another (A -> B), doesn't imply harder in any way.
Please try to find more appropriate difficulty names that clearly indicate difficulty progression
(also taking it down because mapper hasn't responded to the report)
Post of nominator in the thread is just the opinion. Should i reply every opinion? It makes no sense. Words of ONE nominator were previously beaten by TWO nominators who had qualified map earlier. Do you get it? Unbeliveable behaviour from your side, really.
Opinions of bns after dq can't be counted, it's like feeding wingulls, sorry guys,no offences. it always was like that, most of you support qats just because. I will continue to talk only with qats. Topic will be locked. QATs, pm me for next conversation after reading my objections.
About progression. Answer me personally, who cares about diff's difficulty?
Right, newbies. Tought guys don't care anout it at all, they can play everything. And "Kinda" shows that person knows basics, but still care about difficulty, something between previos names. Pretty clear for me. Plus star indicator on preview for dummies. I gave you clear indication, what can you reply?
The map was reported here - p/6340110 - Yes, perhaps Naotoshi could have notified you via PM, but this is a standard method of operation for the current Qualified section and nobody has broken any rules.
The post of anyone in the thread is an opinion and yes, you should reply to every one. The Qualified section exists for this explicit purpose - to allow the wider community to give feedback on maps. If a mapper doesn't respond to that feedback explaining why the map is fine in its' current state, we disqualify the map to allow that discussion to take place.
Opinions of everyone are counted, regardless of whether they are a Beatmap Nominator or not. The task of checking Qualified maps is now the community's responsibility, with the QAT acting on those reports. If you refuse to interact with the community, this map won't be able to progress.
Believe it or not, players care about difficulty when choosing a map to play and the naming system plays an important part in making that decision. Star Rating alone will never be a 100% accurate portrayal of a map's level of difficulty. Plenty of suggestions have been provided which might help remedy the situation and find a point of compromise everyone can agree on, so I ask you to please consider them once you decide to unlock this thread.
The post of anyone in the thread is an opinion and yes, you should reply to every one. The Qualified section exists for this explicit purpose - to allow the wider community to give feedback on maps. If a mapper doesn't respond to that feedback explaining why the map is fine in its' current state, we disqualify the map to allow that discussion to take place.
Opinions of everyone are counted, regardless of whether they are a Beatmap Nominator or not. The task of checking Qualified maps is now the community's responsibility, with the QAT acting on those reports. If you refuse to interact with the community, this map won't be able to progress.
Believe it or not, players care about difficulty when choosing a map to play and the naming system plays an important part in making that decision. Star Rating alone will never be a 100% accurate portrayal of a map's level of difficulty. Plenty of suggestions have been provided which might help remedy the situation and find a point of compromise everyone can agree on, so I ask you to please consider them once you decide to unlock this thread.
And what happens with the opinion of those who agrees with the diff names?JBHyperion wrote:
The map was reported here - p/6340110 - Yes, perhaps Naotoshi could have notified you via PM, but this is a standard method of operation for the current Qualified section and nobody has broken any rules.
The post of anyone in the thread is an opinion and yes, you should reply to every one. The Qualified section exists for this explicit purpose - to allow the wider community to give feedback on maps. If a mapper doesn't respond to that feedback explaining why the map is fine in its' current state, we disqualify the map to allow that discussion to take place.
Opinions of everyone are counted, regardless of whether they are a Beatmap Nominator or not. The task of checking Qualified maps is now the community's responsibility, with the QAT acting on those reports. If you refuse to interact with the community, this map won't be able to progress.
Believe it or not, players care about difficulty when choosing a map to play and the naming system plays an important part in making that decision. Star Rating alone will never be a 100% accurate portrayal of a map's level of difficulty. Plenty of suggestions have been provided which might help remedy the situation and find a point of compromise everyone can agree on, so I ask you to please consider them once you decide to unlock this thread.