ŻuŻ;; second clarification since i'm not sure if certain people are understanding my posts. i'm not really expecting people to get AAAAs on songs. i know it's extremely difficult and *partially* why i suggested this as an idea~ so that there'd be a sensible way to measure skills amongst AAAs without having the leaderboards look so stilted all the time. intended implementation would be a thing in so far as this sorting function specifically (as per tc_halogen's post).
(in any case if getting amazings is down to some luck i'm almost certain its less so than how AAA rankings are on the current implementation of the leaderboard so i can't really see much of a counterargument in even that. being even more pedantic im sure dossar & owa got all the exact milliseconds calculated to stall & hurry their fingers for each 1/30th snapped note in a given song anyway, lol)
that's... fine! you're not missing out on anything even if u have 0% amazings, as nobody checks out the ranking order for AAAs on leaderboards as they are right now and you wouldn't lose yr rank 1 or whatevs it is. it is primarily intended as a cool way to use space that would otherwise go unappreciated and as (as far as it can be given the current system) a nice way to encourage ppl's continued accuracy development (as far as they are able given the current system)
There's some luck in the sense that you need a machine that has the potential to run flash smoothly. I have both a desktop and laptop at home that I've played FFR on. The desktop runs Flash 9 extremely well and I've gotten some really good accuracy scores because of it (Yoshi's Cookie AAAA, Weapon DDP, VBB teens). On my laptop however, without feeling any less accurate when I'm playing, I'd be lucky to SDP Yoshi's Cookie, just because Flash runs like absolute trash in comparison.
There's also an issue prevalent with my laptop that doesn't affect my desktop where the longer into an FFR session I am, the worse the game runs (and a few others I've spoken to regarding this have experienced something similar). These are two runs both on my laptop that I can say felt equally as accurate, the former being the second play into a session, and the latter being 40 minutes into one.
Massive accuracy discrepancy despite me feeling like I wasn't really doing anything that different between both plays.
And of course, songs that don't have one of those magic bpms where frames are all equidistantly spaced from one another (150bpm = 3 frame 16th gaps, for example) become a lot more difficult to quad through on FFR solely due to running in 30fps. That isn't to say all other bpms are luck-based to hit accurately (I've quadded great deals of 180bpm files, which alternate between 2 and 3 frame gaps for 16th notes), but it's certainly much more arbitrarily difficult than it needs to be.
Regardless, I still think it'd be an interesting feature to incorporate.
thank you! (hehe, a small part of me kind of really likes the idea of people having to feel out accuracy discrepances just from the bpm. seems like it'd be a really "next level" sense if u get me)
Comment