ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

[Patashu]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

ok, I'm not going to b (FUCK YOU DDREAM STUDIO)ed until I've finished this file

[04im]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

suck my d

[SKG_Scintill]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

I think a 6 14 should be a 7 9 to the 3 3 3 while 8 goes 2 in order to notify the differences between 5 and 0

[04im]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

is it bad taht i never even look @ the numbers for difficulty
i thought everybody didnt look at it

[EzExZeRo7497]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

I'm fine with the 10+ scale yeah since it's more catered to people with more experience (which in turn would be people from the ODI era and such, so they'd be used to seeing high difficulties to begin with). Even then I'm pretty sure with the NPS+FF scale applied most if not ALL the files would be at 10+ so the "gay machine score" issue is irrelevant haha.

[Dynam0]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

Probably the biggest reason why I prefer the 10+ scale is the fact that I peek at my score lots during sightreads to judge how far into the song I am tbh. After I know the file well, I could care less if it's rated under a 10, although what Glove says about lower difficulties being unattractive is true (for experienced stepmaniers anyways so w/e). It would make intuitive sense to rate from 1-10 within a pack but what about files outside of the pack that are easier than 1s? You run into the problem people seem to have when buying clothes since size X at one store is not necessarily size X in another (which is why an objective scale would be so nice).

The disadvantage of 10+ for experienced stepmaniers is that difficulties at that stage are almost pointless to check (I barely ever look at difficulty ratings for files anymore).

For the sake of this pack (since it is predominantly not for beginners) I would side with the 10+ scale. If you're going to make packs that cater to new players though I definitely think 1-10 is more appropriate.

[Gundam-Dude]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

I don't think nps+ff was adopted until... until... umm it wasn't until at least after xoon 5 I remember.

xoon 5 still used the chancellor scale

the first 4key implementation of nps+ff was in fact LCP3 and the FFR Season packs that followed afterwards, although my system isn't all that accurate because I heavily fudged stuff up/down to make up for the column space and density compared to 6key

[dascookieman]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

i thought the rule was

1) play hardest difficulty available
2) if you cant do the hardest difficulty, move to lower one until you can play it adequately
3) if beginner exists take a quick look at it for fun on autoplay
4) gawk at people who AAA the hardest difficulty

well the pack is not for beginners so i would think most of everyone will be able to play all the files in the pack. you can still find what number of feet is your own personal comfort zone if you don't like to play too hard files, no matter what system is being used.

I don't think dark chancellors pack was nps+ff, wasn't it the 1-10 dark chancellors scale? (where 1 was a typical kil file and 10 was epileptic crisis) and I don't think nps+ff was adopted until... until... umm it wasn't until at least after xoon 5 I remember.

oh oops sorry. i think many don't keep up with what's going on with the different foot ratings systems and 10+ being keyboard files is something everyone recognizes. i was wrong about when nps+ff was first adopted, but this pack is still more consistent with the older packs and i would still like to use 10+ to represent that

also, a 6 nps file is less dense than max 300 (a 7 nps), if you're good enough to AAA a max 300 equivalent then yes, a 3 nps file WOULD be too boring for you.

well let's say you bump my argument up to comparing an 9-footer with a 6-footer then. the 6-footer could be a superunique and awesome simfile while the 9-footer that was AAA'd had easy 16th jumpstream and made the 6-footer file overlooked.

but, as long as the difficulty rating system you use is meaningful (as in someone or collectively a group has tried to make 11s harder than 10s easier than 12s etc) I don't mind what is in use.

yes i agree, that's what i ended up thinking as well when considering the different options. so i thought i might as well use 10+ because of machine score, recognizably and consistency with the previous odipacks.


ps patashu finish a file fast!!!!

[Patashu]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

i thought the rule was

1) play hardest difficulty available
2) if you cant do the hardest difficulty, move to lower one until you can play it adequately
3) if beginner exists take a quick look at it for fun on autoplay
4) gawk at people who AAA the hardest difficulty

this is what all year-+-of-experience-keyboard-players do, what about those with less than a year experience?

[04im]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

i thought the rule was

1) play hardest difficulty available
2) if you cant do the hardest difficulty, move to lower one until you can play it adequately
3) if beginner exists take a quick look at it for fun on autoplay
4) gawk at people who AAA the hardest difficulty

[Patashu]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (Release when graphics are done)

I don't think dark chancellors pack was nps+ff, wasn't it the 1-10 dark chancellors scale? (where 1 was a typical kil file and 10 was epileptic crisis) and I don't think nps+ff was adopted until... until... umm it wasn't until at least after xoon 5 I remember.

also, a 6 nps file is less dense than max 300 (a 7 nps), if you're good enough to AAA a max 300 equivalent then yes, a 3 nps file WOULD be too boring for you.

but, as long as the difficulty rating system you use is meaningful (as in someone or collectively a group has tried to make 11s harder than 10s easier than 12s etc) I don't mind what is in use.

[dascookieman]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (May 18th deadline!)

You're not using the old grading system, are you?

i am using the old 10+ system since they both end up being completely subjective in the end

nps+ff has a bigger range since it goes from 1feet+, but i don't think that's a good thing since the files with very few feet can easily be overlooked. the difference between a file that has 3 and 6 feet is often times not that big for an advanced keyboard player and if you get a good AAA on the 6-footer sightread you will get the impression that the 3-footer probably would be way too boring to play and never try it. it's much better that these two files would have 10 and 11 feet as their difficulty ratings.

nps+ff also gives you inconvenient machine scores that makes it too gay to care about. i think most people still use machine scores to get a quick indication of how well you've done on a file since you can see your machine scores when scrolling through the files in stepmania, even though machine score has always been broken. it's especially convenient to use when it's a harder file and the score is not about exact number of perfects or a single combo-breaker, which is how much of this pack will score for many.

the first pack that used nps+ff as far as i know was the dark chancellors pack which came right after odipack2, and there is a pretty significant breaking point there in how files generally were made. this pack is in some ways a bit of a throwback (for example no dodgeball mine files) and i would like the old 10+ foot rating system to be used to represent that.

also with nps+ff people who don't hang out on the forums might not know what's going on and think it's pad files, or they might recognize it from previous packs and think that it means that it's another pack with a million mines in almost every file (which is something most of the nps+ff packs have =P). in all other communties as far as i know they still use the 10+ system for rating their keyboard files (they make some packs in korea and china for example)

for further discussion on this, this thread is interesting: (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/...d.php?t=130136). what i can gather from it is that you would need a really advanced formula to be able to have a system that gives you objective foot ratings, if that could even be achieved at all. so i would prefer to use 10+ over nps+ff because of my previously mentioned reasons in this post

[04im]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (May 18th deadline!)

sending final touchups to earth quake

maybe i finish a certain metal file...........

[moches]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (May 18th deadline!)

yeah, I was curious about that as well. is it the old scale or NPS+fudge factor (which was the system I used for FFR Community Pack 4)?

[Arntonach]

Re: ODIPack3 submissions (May 18th deadline!)

You're not using the old grading system, are you?