[ddr_f4n]

Reviews! (this post will be solely dedicated to submission reviews)

Ai Dee - Rejected

- I'd have the chart start at m7 instead of immediately.

- Stream at m11 to m18 doesn't make sense. I'd get rid of it and chart is some other way (follow the vocals more and probably step some more notable sounds like the guitar at some points).

- Probably best to step the drum roll at b79 here.

- So for all choruses such as the one starting at m31 you just made them streams. I think it's because you thought the 16th beep sounds continue throughout the entire chorus but it's not really the case here. They only on for 1 measure each time (ie. the first instance starts at b120 and ends at b124) so I'd say restep the chorus streams to be more accurate with that in mind instead.

- I like the use of bracket stomps for the "uno dos tres quatre" part.

- I also like the use of bpm/stop gimmicks in this chart. It actually works here.

- Not a fan of the use of mini holds starting at b257 to accent Luka's vocals. Either extend the holds to be at least an 8th note long or get rid of them entirely.

- Kinda on the edge of the use of streams at the very end when the song itself is toning down. Dunno how to feel about it atm.


From your three submissions, this was your best one because the BPM gimmicks actually work here. This is the chart that's most likely to be approved with those fixes I mentioned.


Glide - Rejected

- So none of the bpm gimmicks are used well here. I think this chart should just be straightforward with just a constant BPM.

- b25.5 and b27.5 starts off with an ambiguous step.

- I don't think the holds for b32 and onwards should extend all the way to the next note. I thought they were brackets at first but then you started using other patterns would definitely suggest otherwise.

- b46 should be triplets to be consistent with the keyboard

- Now I REALLY don't like the use of mini holds to accent the main vocals. Just make them regular steps for all holds that are shorter than an 8th note long. Chorus holds are fine though.

- I really don't get the usage of the rolls used during all the choruses. Was it to accent part of the melodies more? If so, I don't agree with it and should've just made them regular holds to be consistent.

- I also don't agree with the mind pillars for b175 and onwards for the choruses. They don't go to anything.

- b203 would've been a good place to maybe used a BPM gimmick here (slow to fast).

Basically the main issue with this chart are the unnecessary BPM gimmicks for a song that didn't need any except for maybe one I mentioned. Chartwise it was decent but could still be fixed up.


PartyxParty - Rejected

- the drum parts at the beginning like b18 to b20 you should've stepped as well.

- BPM gimmicks here are also all over the place. But for this one I can understand a bit more as to what you're going for but it feels really overkill. I think this chart should be consistent for entire chart as well except for parts I'll mention in later points.

- rolls for sections like b137 and b166 to accent different vocaloids I don't agree. Just make them regular steps.

- B279 slowdown is fine though. Keep that.

- 12th stream actually starts at b427 there.

- Stop at b452 is fine too. Keep that as well.

These are the more glaring issues of the chart. There are some minor ones as well but I think we can tweak those a bit ourselves if you fix the other issues.


Yuru Fuwa Jukai Girl - Rejected


Okay, first off this isn't even using vocaloids. You submitted a re-arrange of the song that used an utaite/human singer instead, which is against the rules as the pack clearly states that the song must have vocaloids as the main vocals or as harmonies at the very least.

Regardless of that, this is a full version which can easily be cut down to our preferred standards. the chart also is full of streams that...makes it feel like this chart was meant for a stream pack like VocaJawnz instead. I mean I can see why they were put in but I feel like they would've been fit more as an Edit chart instead.

Regardless, this is just a straight up rejection mostly for the first reason, so I feel there's no reason to go more in-depth with the review because of that.