New Songs: July 29th, 2011

[leonid]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

12 bar bloops was pretty awesome, don't see why people hate it so much

Because they can't AAA it sightread and they ABSOLUTELY MUST AAA EVERY SINGLE CHART ON FFR

[Plan_Bsk81127]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

Dont see why its such a big deal that a good amount of people just dont like the song and/or chart.

[One Winged Angel]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

It's a great chart, the difficulty spikes are just massive

[aperson]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

There are a few sections of the chart that I think are fine, but there's a few wtf parts. ala: The 32nds the hands in the first half the song ect. Subjective on the hands I guess but those 32nds I would venture were thrown in for lulz.

No we're just more vocal on when things seem wrong now.

What 32nds?

Do you realize that the hands go to the same thing every time in the first half?

[stavie33]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

question, I thought the file was by bmah, now it says it's by aperson, who actually stepped 12 bar bloops? And I just noticed that Little God Channel is no longer stepped by Classic Rocker, now it's kinx, confused much?

[bmah]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

It's by aperson, never was mixed up by anyone else other than igotrhythm. Did it actually say it was by me? Nope.

And Classic Rocker is Kinx, the latter being the active account.

[TC_Halogen]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

question, I thought the file was by bmah, now it says it's by aperson, who actually stepped 12 bar bloops? And I just noticed that Little God Channel is no longer stepped by Classic Rocker, now it's kinx, confused much?

CR = kinx
aperson is the simfile artist for 12 Bar Bloops

...and a lot of people are complaining because they want easy FCs/AAAs but this song simply doesn't hand it to you. The only part worth giving even a slight complaint about is the handjacks - I thought the pattern setup of that particular section could have been slightly better (like 134 into 234, instead of 123 to 234). File is well structured, otherwise.

EDIT: oop - good ninja bmah

[qqwref]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

I only complain about charts because of how strict the judging process is - after so much judging and such high point requirements, I expect a lot. So whenever the one really difficult file in a week is stepped poorly, I'm very disappointed. What's the point of all the judging and rejecting when some of the discarded files would be enjoyed more than some of the accepted ones? I'd mind bad charts a lot less if getting files into the game was easier.

While I'm on this issue, why don't we force things such as very bad patterns to be fixed before a song goes into the game? It's usually pretty clear when a scoring issue is going to cause a lot of complaints and unhappiness, and they're often mentioned by judges, so it seems almost malevolent that the people in charge decide they shouldn't be fixed. It's not that I hate charts I can't score on (some of my favorite FFR files are ones I can't FC), but that you can't really casually enjoy playing a file when you always get nervous that the One Hard Part is coming up.

[XxMidigamixX]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

Because they can't AAA it sightread and they ABSOLUTELY MUST AAA EVERY SINGLE CHART ON FFR

Actually, I suck at FFR. I just didn't find the chart to be enjoyable. The same goes for System Failure, there was just simply a few things that ruined the file from becoming an enjoyable one. I admit, I love playing ap's files but I just think that the difficulty spikes in the file makes it harder than Mathsma imo. If the spikes weren't there, it might've been a VC. But overall, I just thought that those two files were just simply unenjoyable.

[bmah]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

While I'm on this issue, why don't we force things such as very bad patterns to be fixed before a song goes into the game? It's usually pretty clear when a scoring issue is going to cause a lot of complaints and unhappiness, and they're often mentioned by judges, so it seems almost malevolent that the people in charge decide they shouldn't be fixed.

This used to be the case in the Tass era, where Tass would ultimately decide which files needed to be fixed by the stepper. These files would be "conditionally queued", but today, jx decided that conditionally queued files only applies to ones where gap is out of place, or some other minor technical issue.

I think the reason for the looseness is to accept/embrace various opinions, so if a file is good enough to be accepted, it is up to the stepper to decide what to fix, if anything. Therefore, judges should use [+.] and [+?] more meaningfully.

[qqwref]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

The thing is, though, I see a lot of files that are actually quite good except for one small portion that completely ruins them. Chik Habit and 12 Bar are great examples of this. But I don't want to be too cruel, so I will generally give a mediocre rating ([+.] or [+?]) and explain why. But the current judge system only has "great as is" and "no chance of being in the game", which is IMO completely useless. If a file does get in, and the judges noted serious pattern issues, stepauthors should definitely fix them or provide a reason why they think it should remain as is. When I play a file with huge difficulty spikes like this, I see the stepartist as just a troll trying to get a bad file ingame so they can laugh at the reactions, not as a serious creative person. This means I lose a lot of respect for someone when they do this.

Also, once a file has been accepted, there's really no oversight on changes. 12 Bar is quite different from the SM file, and the hardest part (the handjack thing) is actually even more difficult than it originally was. This is also a problem with the current system.

[bmah]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

Yeah, I feel your concern. As of now, the only thing I do is to word my notes carefully. If I've accepted a file with a [+.] or even [+] and urge the stepper to re-evaluate a few sections, I'll word it in a way that sounds like more than a "suggestion". But other than that, can't do anything.

Also, huge difficulty spikes gives me different reactions. You might see it as a "stepartist troller" but I often see difficulty spikes as potentially big accomplishments for those who overcome them. Yeah, it'll frustrate some people, but it makes the file more memorable (for better or worse) and I guess adds flavor to the FFR world.

Finally, in regards to oversights on changes, jx is supposed to handle these changes to see whether they're acceptable or not, but I'm guessing it's pretty loose in this department. I can check fixes that are sent by the gmail address, but in this case, I never saw the 12 Bar Bloops fix - ap must've sent it privately.

[TC_Halogen]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

<hit enter on accident, post is in progress>

Some songs call for difficulty, and some people craft patterns within a song differently from other people, and saying that a person is trying to "troll" the userbase with bad patterns or serious pattern issues is just downright ridiculous. Just because a pattern pushes an extreme in comparison to the rest of the song doesn't mean that it is meant to be bad. Not all files should be linear in comparison to the songs. 12 Bar Bloops was made to be a difficult and very technical file, and just because the patterns don't work out well to certain players doesn't make it bad. That's where subjectivity applies.

aperson did a LOT better than most of the simfile authors here; he left a huge impression on a lot of players who played the song, and the tough structure of the chart adds a huge amount of playability. The response isn't very favorable, but he still triggered a huge response, which is more than most simfiles do.

[DossarLX ODI]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

I'm with qqwref on this one - I had no reason to keep my old Jamais Deux file (which got accepted first submission a long time ago lol) the way it was when I noticed minor layering issues and lolrage difficulty spike at the end. So I fixed it before it got ingame.

Metro was a good example of "no chance of being in the game" when it was getting 5's and then a 1 to completely throw it off - even without "serious pattern issues" because there wasn't any legit reason for it to get that rating. If those issues are addressed and the author doesn't fix them, that person better give a good reason.

Also bmah, there's a difference between a memorable difficulty spike and an obnoxious difficulty spike that could've used an alternative (like Halogen mentioned).

[bmah]

Re: New Songs: July 29th, 2011

*shrugs*

I'm just defending the usage of difficulty spikes in general. There's a general adversity against them. "Good" difficulty spikes amongst the general public is something that doesn't hold in many people's eyes. What's obnoxious and what's a "good difficulty spike" is completely within the realm of opinions. It's nothing more than that.