Who is the best rhythm gamer you've seen in your rhythm gaming career?

[MinaciousGrace]

i will never understand the massive hardon people around here have for 7k players that have no relevance to 4k (external to this discussion)

anyway this entire discussion is pretty pointless because every point of view is entirely subjective and there is no reliable quantitative method for comparing players within a single game to each other much less to players of a completely different game

even if there was everyone has differing opinions on what "best" actually entails

i would even argue that someone being god tier at multiple different rhythm games is more an indicator of the shallowness of skill within those game's player bases rather than any indicator of the skill of the player themselves (not saying that they aren't skilled just saying that you probably don't have very good competition)

of course we run into another problem which is that in any given activity or sport or whatever a certain amount of skill is required to appreciate an even higher skill and the ability for a person to judge and distinguish the achievements and accomplishments between players who are "god tier" and"semi-god tier" is only reliably gained by people who are just at the cusp of that level of skill.

So even if a rigorous and exact method existed for determining the best rhythm gamer in existence the only person qualified for executing it and delivering final judgement would basically have to be top 5 in every game concurrently aka nobody

but as long as we're throwing out entirely pulled out of our asses opinions that nobody with any authority has any merits for refuting i believe 4k sm is the most "explored" and "conquered" of any game mentioned and the game whose players are closest to any theoretical skill ceiling that exists; in other words if we were to draw a line that indicates the distance in skill between the best and worst player of every game, 4k sm's line would be the longest.

also i do not at all believe in the idea that being "very high level" at a bunch of things qualifies anyone for any status beyond the game in which they are the best at.

basically 4 standard deviations above the average in skill in 1 game >>>>>>>> 3 standard deviations above the average in 100 games

[ca25nada]

Originally Posted by EzExZeRo7497

But that's simply talking about a best "overall" player. There are several players who outmatch him in several skills - namely chordstream speed and LNs. One of the fastest (or the fastest period) BMS players is Monsta - this is his Youtube channel. To fully appreciate how good he is at speed, he has the lowest B+P (boos+poors, essentially combo breakers) for almost every Overjoy 5/6 chart on BMS - the only reason why he doesn't show up all that high on the leaderboards is because of his mediocre accuracy. He also cleared (hard clear or easy clear, either or) multiple maps that ABCD, 0133 or any other Overjoy player can't do. His most well-known clear is NS18 [7Key Amother], a map that has been thought by MULTIPLE Overjoy players that will never be cleared. He also easy cleared FREEDOM DiVE FREQ+2 (1.125 rate) and cleared the Kaiden (the second hardest course in BMS) course on FREQ+4, effectively 1.25 rate.

Speaking of Monsta.... kinda scary he's just 2 songs away from getting a ★★6 easy clear folder lamp.



(the 2 songs)

[Arch0wl]

Originally Posted by MinaciousGrace

anyway this entire discussion is pretty pointless because every point of view is entirely subjective and there is no reliable quantitative method for comparing players within a single game to each other much less to players of a completely different game

you mean "arbitrary", not "subjective." they are similar terms, but the distinction is important. subjective is when something is contingent on your senses, arbitrary is when there is no clear determinant that's better than another, but when you *do* pick a determinant there will be better/worse answers. subjective is your personal enjoyment of a flavor, arbitrary is choosing what criteria you want to use to determine what flavors you're going to put on a menu. (are you emphasizing nutrition? culinary tradition? pure popularity for the most profit? none of these are necessarily 'better' than another, but when you pick one they do have more right or less right answers; if it were purely subjective, there would never be more right or less right answers)

and, yes, it is arbitrary, but there are still interesting ways to parse the question.

for example: which is harder -- bench pressing 400lb, or being a pro DotA player? they're nothing alike, skill-wise, but there are ways you could attempt to answer the question anyway, such as by invoking (a) the competition for pro spots, (b) how many people bench press vs. how many people play moba games, (c) time required to reach pro level vs. time required to bench 400lb, and so on.

despite calling this 'subjective', you did make a good attempt to answer the question when you mentioned that being 3SD above in one thing is greater than being 1SD above in another thing. however, you also have to consider combined hierarchy value. there are somewhat diminishing returns on being 4SD vs. 3SD, but being 3SD above someone else still puts you ahead of a shit ton of people. also, someone who is 99th percentile in X and 99th percentile in Y will probably be much rarer than someone who is simply 99th percentile in X, unless the skills of X and Y completely correlate.

for example, you might be D7 in FFR. let's say D7 is like, professional FFR tier (NBA/NFL) and D6 is semi-professional (college sports). would you prefer being D7 in FFR and abysmal at playing football vs. being D6 in FFR and a D1 college football athlete? I would absolutely prefer the latter, and I don't play football whatsoever. however, I'd rather be D7 at FFR and abysmal at football than be D6 and a mediocre high school football athlete. but, when you do these kinds of tradeoffs, you are unconsciously negotiating combined hierarchy value in your head. you may not realize that's what you're doing, but that's what you're doing -- your brain has already assigned value to these things, you just aren't making it explicit.

so, when comparing multi-game players, we are talking about the rarity of achieving greatness in several games. and, of course, when comparing single-game players, we're negotiating individual achievements on those games. it's not *not* arbitrary, but it's not completely arbitrary either, since these criteria do have relationships.

[TC_Halogen]

Originally Posted by Arch0wl

despite calling this 'subjective', you did make a good attempt to answer the question when you mentioned that being 3SD above in one thing is greater than being 1SD above in another thing. however, you also have to consider combined hierarchy value. there are somewhat diminishing returns on being 4SD vs. 3SD, but being 3SD above someone else still puts you ahead of a shit ton of people. also, someone who is 99th percentile in X and 99th percentile in Y will probably be much rarer than someone who is simply 99th percentile in X, unless the skills of X and Y completely correlate.

100% this, not questionable; based on this logic, I'd have to say this:

- the best rhythm gamer that I've met/seen is almost certainly going to be Little Matt; Aoreo comes in second most likely -- both because they play multiple rhythm games proficiently, WinDEU's still definitely high up there as well

- the best rhythm gamer objectively based off of Arch's logic, which is 100% correct imo, is FEFEMZ, and unquestionably so

[leonid]

Originally Posted by LongGone

•Very high level (?) Drummania player (I don't play Drummania much I have no idea)

Drummania is FEFEMZ's "homeground" game. Used to only play it before starting to explore the other rhythm games

Speaking of the most "explored" and "conquered" ARCADE rhythm games, I think Taiko No Tatsujin is a good candidate.... It's very similar to SM as well

[MinaciousGrace]

Originally Posted by Arch0wl

for example, you might be D7 in FFR. let's say D7 is like, professional FFR tier (NBA/NFL) and D6 is semi-professional (college sports). would you prefer being D7 in FFR and abysmal at playing football vs. being D6 in FFR and a D1 college football athlete?

i understand the sentiment here but if we are restricting this to gaming only just from personal experience i have never met a player in the last 18 years of my gaming 'career' who i thought was exceptionally or even reasonably skilled at one thing and just terrible at anything and everything else (i think they are the extreme outliers and should be treated as such)

in my experience while skillsets for varying games do not necessarily carry over to other ones the capacity to develop those skillsets in a methodical and efficient manner does

basically any player who achieves god tier status in any reasonably competitive game has the capacity to and with minimal effort achieve "pretty good" status in any other game

i mean i could sit here and literally spent all day writing a post on the volume of games ive been "pretty good at" but none of that really means anything in relation to the things i've put the most effort into and been the best at

[Arch0wl]

Originally Posted by MinaciousGrace

basically any player who achieves god tier status in any reasonably competitive game has the capacity to and with minimal effort achieve "pretty good" status in any other game

we're not talking about "pretty good"; we're talking about elite status across multiple games

"pretty good" is not how good fefemz or iamchris4life are at multiple rhythm games

[FoJaR]

Originally Posted by TC_Halogen

100% this, not questionable; based on this logic, I'd have to say this:

- the best rhythm gamer that I've met/seen is almost certainly going to be Little Matt; Aoreo comes in second most likely -- both because they play multiple rhythm games proficiently, WinDEU's still definitely high up there as well

- the best rhythm gamer objectively based off of Arch's logic, which is 100% correct imo, is FEFEMZ, and unquestionably so

did you read arch's post?

[MinaciousGrace]

Originally Posted by Arch0wl

we're not talking about "pretty good"; we're talking about elite status across multiple games

"pretty good" is not how good fefemz or iamchris4life are at multiple rhythm games

well no im talking about my "pretty good" which to me is any status outside of top 3 because to me if you are outside of top 3 you are irrelevant and the qualifiers of "pretty good" and "elite status" and "very good" are all essentially the same

you're talking about your "pretty good" which i assume is slightly above average

ive been top 1% in dozens of competitive pve and pvp games but there are only a couple i would actually consider myself to be skilled to any meaningful level at

[Arch0wl]

Originally Posted by MinaciousGrace

well no im talking about my "pretty good" which to me is any status outside of top 3 because to me if you are outside of top 3 you are irrelevant

so, this is nonsensical, for several reasons

it's absurd understatement and betrays the semantics of 'pretty good', in the reverse way that calling something mildly funny "hilarious" betrays the semantics of 'hilarious'; 'pretty' means 'mildly' or 'mostly', so if you are using it to be top three, then 'good' would presumably be top two, and what would 'excellent' or 'great' or 'superb' or any other superlative be? first? how boneheaded. you've essentially capped your ceiling of superlatives by deliberately assigning the lowest-level positive descriptor you can to an extremely elite fraction of a gaming population.

if you don't want your words to mean what they mean and are using an individual definition particular to you, you might as well call someone who is in the top 3 "bllliknnirrth"; you are communicating about as much by doing so -- in fact, this would be if anything more straightforward, since 'pretty good' is a word most people think they already have mutual understanding of, while at least with bllliknnirrth this would prompt people to ask you what you mean since they are obviously not in mutual understanding with you

I have no idea why you would use an incredibly idiosyncratic personal definition of "pretty good" here, or expect anyone to telepathically divine what you mean by this, but it's dumb, because these words have common meanings outside of your incredibly peculiar/individualized meaning

I don't know what "good" would be in percentile terms -- perhaps the top 10% of people who play the game -- but we gain nothing here by determining that, because we know that iamchris4life and fefemz are a lot more than just 'good'. they have reached the highest level of play in multiple music games, i.e. not just top 1% but top 0.01%

[MinaciousGrace]

oh no its almost like i think this entire discussion is a nonsensical waste of time

shit

u got me

[Dynam0]

In the year 2120, at the 57th Olympic Games held in Zimbabwe, the inaugural running of the Rhythm Game Decathlon will take place and a champion will emerge at which point this thread can finally attain closure.

[Walrusizer]

I am.

[Arch0wl]

Originally Posted by MinaciousGrace

oh no its almost like i think this entire discussion is a nonsensical waste of time

so you've participated in it why, exactly?

regardless, just don't post anymore if you find it a waste of time. the rest of us will.

[MinaciousGrace]

a) heres who i think is arbitarily the best player
b) yes but this is meaningless unless you assign specific values to describe what you are trying to measure
a) but ARBITRARY
b) ok heres my equally idiotic arbitrary system so maybe you can understand why any previous discussion is inherently idiotic through extremes
a) BUT UR NOT BEING SPECIFIC UR BEING ARBITRARY WHY ARE YOU HERE I DONT GET IT I DONT UNDERSTAND
b) k

[Arch0wl]

generally, if you think something is a "waste of time" and don't want to look like an idiot, contradicting yourself and posting again in this thing you think is a waste of time is counterproductive. though, if your goal is to look like an idiot, keep participating in a discussion you've previously declared you're walking away from.

and, so far, you're the only person with a complaint, and part of it stems from definitions only you use.

no one else here has had trouble comparing players across rhythm games. the criteria aren't explicit, but they're easy enough to discern: combined percentile rarity for multi-game analyses and absolute percentile for single-game analyses. for both, difficulty of percentile matters as well -- way more resources are invested in being the top 0.1% at football than in being the top 0.1% at FFR, and this extends to music games, since some games will have less competition for the top spots than others.

[Leo137]

@Mina: 4k⊆7k

[leonid]

7k doesn't have as much history of 300+bpm stream or vibrating patterns as what 4k stepmania charts have been like. 7k insane bms charts for the longest time primarily focused on fast bracketing (which, mind you, is not the easiest thing in the world either).

So as of now directly comparing 4k with 7k skills is not totally fair.

However, 7k bms has been catching up quite a lot through the invention of "delay charts" (split each note into two~three more notes and suddenly make the chart absurd). It would be interesting to see which group would have players with more speed in the near future.

[Staiain]

Jhlee0133

[ggsnipes]

Originally Posted by Staiain

Jhlee0133

^ for accuracy and overall kb department

for speed, Stian for 4k
Monsta for bms, jesus fuck he scares me with his clears.