FFR Suggestions

[arcnmx]

Re: FFR Suggestions

I already posted about this in the R^3 thread weeks ago but yeah, completely for this. Not allowing them does nothing more than discourage people from playing, while allowing them makes the game more enjoyable for players.

Okay I just dicked around a bit in R3 and you're right...I'm confused as to how this affects judgment though (the game can't possibly be running in 30fps at this point anymore even if I select that as my framerate option, so I don't know exactly where the perfect window starts and ends...arc?)

Anyways I just isolated the Skeletor wall at 1.1/1.2 and a few other rolly things (DeVouR etc.) I thought should theoretically be much easier to bs through given the higher roll speed, and yeah, I'm finding it much easier to AAA.

Obviously this problem doesn't exist for the vast majority of songs, but it's still there.

Rates force the game into fps mode, so it uses the fps timing windows. You might want to compare 1.1 and 1.2 at 30fps with 1.0 at 31fps to force fps mode on. It certainly can make slow rolls easier to jumptrill since it compresses them.

[YoshL]

Re: FFR Suggestions

If, for example, mirror scores were to record to the same scoreboard as nonmirror, I'm saying that now, after testing this, there will be players that can AAA something like Lolo on mirror but will be unable to do the same on nonmirror. Why should these scores be reflected in the same scoreboard for this file as nonmirror scores if the player is unable to achieve the same score without mirror?

If some of you guys don't see the potential problem there, then I don't know what else to say lol

i dunno, maybe i'm really overthinking this, but I really don't see your argument as valid (i'm seriously really sorry if like, idk. I just...irdfk)

[mi40]

Re: FFR Suggestions

well mirror's a diff issue because people are right or left hand dominant so mirror/nonmirror counting makes sense lol

[One Winged Angel]

Re: FFR Suggestions

If I'm in the minority thinking that what I'm posting about is actually a problem, then that's fine. I understand that most players want rates and I'm not against that. I'd prefer that most players see the issue I'm addressing and don't view it as a big deal as opposed to glossing over it only because this is a potential speedbump to getting rates added.

Also yes this would certainly make Synth Legacy crap easier to AAA, like TSR mentioned. Not just FGO level crap.

And yeah I don't see rates and mirror being comparable at all, I'd prefer to see more players weigh in on the issue and see what they have to say.

[HalfStep]

Re: FFR Suggestions

Honestly, as long as it doesn't harm the integrity of high level play and leaderboards, it should be allowed. If it allows most players to have more fun with the game, and also brings more players in, I don't really see why you would be against it.

(It's like if Smash Melee was released without items and someone was like, hey we have this cool new idea that makes it way more fun for all the casuals, and you can turn it off for competitive play. Most people would be like yeah that's fine.)

[mi40]

Re: FFR Suggestions

i actually think it's even better that older songs that are otherwise NEVER touched because of their terrible file quality will be easier to AAA

because well, ffr isn't ffr when you're only playing a selection of 200 songs fit to your skill level

incentive to play easier songs on higher rates (even if they are easier to AAA because of rates) will give ffr more replayability





honestly when's the last time you played secret zombie room or dj kankaoh stuff for fun

[arcnmx]

Re: FFR Suggestions

If I'm in the minority thinking that what I'm posting about is actually a problem, then that's fine. I understand that most players want rates and I'm not against that. I'd prefer that most players see the issue I'm addressing and don't view it as a big deal as opposed to glossing over it only because this is a potential speedbump to getting rates added.

Also yes this would certainly make Synth Legacy crap easier to AAA, like TSR mentioned. Not just FGO level crap.

And yeah I don't see rates and mirror being comparable at all, I'd prefer to see more players weigh in on the issue and see what they have to say.

Not sure about others but this is pretty much how I feel. The pros outweigh the cons and if someone can AAA these songs on higher rates, more power to them, go take that #1 spot in the leaderboards - they deserve it. It's also an even playing field, if there is a song on 1.1 that's actually easier than on 1.0 then everyone can just go play it on 1.1.

And yes, it's probably a good thing if it lets people blow through the pathetic legacy stuff. It's all about making the game more fun.

[One Winged Angel]

Re: FFR Suggestions

The pros certainly outweigh the cons, I just didn't like this one con (imo) very much lol

Will definitely need some staff discussion from the other game managers and some admins (half are like dead or something though so idk), but I'm fine with the addition. Although I can't really see why anyone would say no at this point, I don't think there are other issues as long as it's coded well and people don't take advantage of some obscure way to get songs to record on lower rates lol. Curious to see how rates will be reflected in the replay imager, though.

And yeah, in retrospect, blazing past the legacy songs....might be a good thing lol

[HalfStep]

Re: FFR Suggestions

Rates work fine in the replay imager, there's a few in the thread.

[arcnmx]

Re: FFR Suggestions

The pros certainly outweigh the cons, I just didn't like this one con (imo) very much lol

Will definitely need some staff discussion from the other game managers and some admins (half are like dead or something though so idk), but I'm fine with the addition. Although I can't really see why anyone would say no at this point, I don't think there are other issues as long as it's coded well and people don't take advantage of some obscure way to get songs to record on lower rates lol. Curious to see how rates will be reflected in the replay imager, though.

And yeah, in retrospect, blazing past the legacy songs....might be a good thing lol

Yeah, I do like the idea of limiting it to multiples of 0.1 just in case. I wouldn't actually mind if completely arbitrary rates were allowed, framers will be framers however you manipulate them, but it seems like only allowing 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, etc. would work out well. The interface needs to become a slider anyway. As for the imager, I already have an updated version that supports rates because people were asking for them.

[mi40]

Re: FFR Suggestions

i didnt even know you could do random numbers like 1.0592 lol

but idk anybody here who would actually take the time to figure out stuff like that just to get a better score on a song..

[YoshL]

Re: FFR Suggestions

for a tournament, you'd be surprised

[mi40]

Re: FFR Suggestions

i would assume tournament songs would be pressured to undergo framer-fixing anyways but i guess it makes sense

admins pls talk w/ each other and make this happen tho, maybe increments on 0.1 or 0.05 (1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.35 etc)

[qqwref]

Re: FFR Suggestions

I think I'm against having ratemods record. It'll save time for people playing the easy files, but is that really a good thing? Many older users such as myself actually had to play through all those files to AAA them, and being able to play on a higher rate would make that work pointless. Same argument for not recoloring / removing backgrounds from the old legacy files. It does also hurt the integrity of the high score boards, since they're not really judging the same chart anymore - it's much of a bigger change than mirror.

But if we do allow ratemods to record, I would strongly argue we need...
- to only allow rates that are a multiple of some increment, as people have suggested
- to have a minimum rate of 1.2 or so (so the rate must be either 1.0, or at least the minimum)
- to use frame based timing, NOT millisecond timing (in fact, it shouldn't even be allowed on 1.0 IMO)

[TC_Halogen]

Re: FFR Suggestions

Millisecond timing in charts still doesn't exist on R^3 yet -- it does exist in offsetting for the purpose of machines that occasionally have issues with offsets that "fall in between frames", but the placement of frames themselves do not scale appropriately to proper frames (for example: a 0-framer that happens for a note that is > ~16.6 ms doesn't change in spacing at 60 FPS, despite having enough precision for something like that).

I am in agreement with having rate mods not record, for precisely the same reasons you have (and OWA had); I said pretty much the same things in this thread a bit earlier. It does make the game easier for those who lack the patience and control on very slow files (I mean, come on -- who wouldn't want to rate mod easy files if it guarantees half of the time spent?). However, there comes a point where it might be worthwhile to put aside the personal dislikes about being forced to do something a certain way when it's beneficial for the game as a whole (referring to recoloring of Legacy files). I, along with a lot of the forum community that is well ranked, has dealt with the Legacy files for a long time. I personally do not feel like newer users should have to deal with that as well. Besides, with that current reasoning, frame fixes would technically be something that some players might not benefit from (and there is an active movement to get that to happen as well).

It sucks, but I think that 10 year old charts that are far below the standard of acceptable quality now really should be re-colored (or discarded altogether).