Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums

Flash Flash Revolution: Community Forums (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/index.php)
-   Critical Thinking (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/forumdisplay.php?f=33)
-   -   The Simfile Quality Debate (http://www.flashflashrevolution.com/vbz/showthread.php?t=119669)

Arch0wl 07-15-2011 07:46 PM

The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Any medium in which preference is involved tends to have undercurrents of the subjective/objective debate. Most people tend to avoid addressing it directly, but it pervades discussion. In food, in music, in movies -- people like something. They know that someone else likes something they really don't like. They have two options: if their liking is specific to themselves, then they have to tolerate the existence of the thing they really don't like. But if they assume universality and promote their preference to a truth status independent of themselves, they have grounds to dismiss anyone and everyone who likes that thing they really dislike.

I will elaborate on my view here later. But first, I need to establish the Rules of the Debate.

Yes, there are rules. In discussing this issue you will be making arguments. Arguments are bound by formal and informal logical rules. If you want to be Right, you need to religiously avoid the fallacies extremely common to this sort of discussion:

1. You cannot ad hominem; this means you cannot argue by attacking someone's character/intelligence/sense, nor can you attack their motive for making the argument. In other words, you cannot attempt to invalidate someone's argument by discrediting the person making it or the reasons they may be making it. The rightness or wrongness of an argument is completely independent of the person making it. If you discredit the person, you haven't actually proven them wrong. To give an obvious example, if a person who makes a mathematical proof also turns out to be a Viagra spammer, the truth of his math proof is unaffected by the horrendous annoyingness of his hobby. I've noticed that the more subjective the medium, the more arguments tend to be appeals to authority -- food critics being the worst. In any case, if you want to be right, you cannot argue this way.

2. You cannot argue through analogy. You can support your argument through analogy just as you can support your argument with examples, but the terms of your argument must stand by themselves without any equivocation.

3. Your argument cannot be simply rhetorical. Linking me to something you think is really bad and asking me a rhetorical question beginning with "do you really think..." does nothing to prove your point. What if I do really think that? Your course of action is then to ad hominem me, which violates the #1 rule of the game here.

By calling these "rules" I am being somewhat misleading. They are "rules" with respect to being right/wrong, in that you can't be right and violate #1 or #2. You can ad hominem or equivocate all you want, you'll just be wrong.

With that said, I'm going to let everyone else state their case first. The assumption of universality (read: quality) is, in fact, an assumption that needs to be proven before you can even begin to talk about "quality" anything in art.

stargroup100 07-15-2011 10:31 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Subjectivity and objectivity need to be separated and are distinct from each other. You can like something that is of poor quality, and you can also dislike something of good quality. Quality does not correlate directly with subjectivity. Preference does not correlate with objectivity. You can't say that music is subjective because everyone likes different songs, because this assumes there is no difference in quality between a really good song and a really terrible one. You can't say that food is objective and the food is either good or bad. People have different preferences, and if the food doesn't fit their tastes, they have trouble eating it.

However, there is a universality in all kinds of mediums. The most important concept is the idea of "strong" features. Excluding some very special exceptions, universal appeal applies to anything that is of good quality but does not have any strong features.

For example, take food for instance. Excluding some outliers and people who are allergic, almost everyone enjoys (or at least does not mind) food such as eggs, rice, potato, etc. because these foods do not have strong flavors. Foods like tomatoes, cinnamon, coconut, these have very strong distinctive flavors by themselves, which is why there is a polarization between people who like it and dislike it. Now at this point some of you might be saying "Wait, tomatoes? Cinnamon? Coconut? These aren't strong flavors, I love these foods!" You're missing the point. Someone who has never had a tomato in his or her entire life will probably not enjoy eating a tomato for the first time, because the flavor is so distinct. Most people probably like tomatoes, but that's because they've been eating them since they were young. Some people are more open to new flavors because they tried a lot of them when they were younger, and so are used to the wide range, but the same theory applies. That doesn't mean that tomatoes are bad in quality, it just means that preference towards it is a bit more varied.

Likewise, the same can be said about music. Pop music is popular because there is nothing weird about the sounds, no particularly strong sounds. In this case, the "strong" features or sounds could be atonal melodies, dissonance, glitchy effects, etc. Not everyone enjoys these elements, so music that do contain them won't be as popular as pop songs. That doesn't mean that music with any of these elements is bad, but not everyone will enjoy it.

Charts are the same deal. Some people like dumps and some people like QED's work. That doesn't mean they're good, it just means that some people like them. Again, charts that are more universal don't have anything weird about them, no strong patterns or recurring themes. For example, Drove Through Ghosts to Get Here from DCP is very polarized in terms of people who like the chart and people who don't. It's a chaotic piece and chart with lots of quads in the climax for intensity and miniholds all over the place. Normally, people will immediately dismiss the chart and song upon hearing this description, but upon closer inspection, people who do like it probably understand how the layering and themes fit with the style and intensity of the song. ==Planet KARMA== is almost universally liked because it doesn't contain strong features that the community is unfamiliar with. I say "unfamiliar" because there are some strong themes, but these are ignored by the community because they have seen a lot of it already, and people who don't understand the game can't tell what's actually going on, but they do know it looks pretty. This is also why a lot of people are opposed to the new "art file" movement from post-DCP. The style of these charts encompass lots of features such as color notes and some complex layering techniques that only people who have been playing the game for a while can pick up on and appreciate. To people who can't figure out what's going on, it just looks like a mess of colored notes just to look pretty.

There are rules for each medium to achieve the type of universality I've described, but going past this is a little bit more complicated and there are some gray lines, but in most cases, the distinction between objectivity and subjectivity is pretty clear, and should be treated as two different concepts.

icontrolyourworld 07-16-2011 01:22 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
There will never be such thing as a perfect simfile that everybody likes in everyway and should be the roll model for future simfiles to be made. Quality is almost entirely subjective most of the time but in the case of simfiles it is subjective so there really isn't anything to debate.

kaiten123 07-16-2011 01:32 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Icy, I'm going to challenge your assertion that there is nothing to debate.
the fact that i'm challenging this assertion gives something to debate (the accuracy of your assertion).
therefore there is something to debate and your assertion is wrong.

any attempt to rebut my claims will merely be debating and prove me more right.

though i'm sure that there are other (more interesting) things to debate as well since subjective =/= undebateable.

while i can't imagine the existance of any ultimate file everyone likes in every way, saying that its not possible seems like nothing more than an argument from ignorance. as far as i am aware there is no fundamental law of the universe preventing everyone from liking a single file.



Stargroup, one problem with what you're saying is that i CAN say music (and simfiles, etc.) are subjective. you talk about people being able to like things of "bad quality" or dislike things of "good quality". but your measure of what is good or bad quality is merely your own subjective opinion (or the opinion of someone else, or a group, etc.) to begin with.

unless you have a purely objective way to measure quality in such things a lot of your arguments become little more than your own subjective opinions. (though there may be some useful observations in there, particularly on what things commonly gain mass apeal)

if anyone has a suggestion for an objective measure of quality for simfiles, i would love to hear it lolol.

stargroup100 07-16-2011 11:56 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3504447)
Stargroup, one problem with what you're saying is that i CAN say music (and simfiles, etc.) are subjective. you talk about people being able to like things of "bad quality" or dislike things of "good quality". but your measure of what is good or bad quality is merely your own subjective opinion (or the opinion of someone else, or a group, etc.) to begin with.

And this is what I mean by people mixing up subjectivity with objectivity. The problem with defining objective quality is tricky because each medium has its own set of standards. However, in general, quality can be described as a degree of excellence, where the piece of work in question shows considerable traits. There are plenty of songs that I personally don't like but I understand why it would be considered to be good, and I do have "guilty pleasures," songs I like that are actually really bad in terms of quality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3504447)
unless you have a purely objective way to measure quality in such things a lot of your arguments become little more than your own subjective opinions. (though there may be some useful observations in there, particularly on what things commonly gain mass apeal)

if anyone has a suggestion for an objective measure of quality for simfiles, i would love to hear it lolol.

Objectivity is not measured in units, because we're not talking about a quantity. We're talking about comparing apples to oranges, not feet to meters. Every chart has its pros and cons, and a different group of audiences that enjoy the chart. Sometimes, the distinction is very clear, like comparing an apple to a rotten orange, but most times it's not, and shouldn't be treated as such.


Anyone that thinks music is purely subjective, I always give them the same argument. Compare the following two songs:
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/419392
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/71906

Not a single person can tell me the second song is NOT better than the first one by a mile. If you argue that music is subjective and both songs have their merits, then I'm sorry, you're either deaf or you lack common sense.

If you really want to dissect, the first contains no merits, the vocals are simply an improvised track of random syllables with no thought and the background accompaniment consists of nothing but a bassline which is of poor instrument choice, poor production, and no construction of identifiable theme or concept. The second song, while not musically brilliant, at least does not contain any particularly strong sounds (at least to our generation). The chord structure is boring but solid, and there was a lot of effort put into the production (which is a whole another category of stuff altogether), and the instrument selection had a wide variety of frequencies and tones for balance. Recurring themes are prevalent and there is a traditional song structure, giving the piece a more complete feeling.

Charts are no different. They follow the same line of thinking, same qualities, same ideas, same concepts.

Reincarnate 07-16-2011 12:01 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
There's no such thing as a universally-bad simfile unless it completely misses everyone's mark. There are just different types of simfiles for different types of people. Some types will be more popular than others and you might find that there are, perhaps 3-5 distinct megaclusters in terms of simfile preferences.

The quality of the simfiles therefore measure how well they live up to the expectations of those clusters. Talking about "objective" judge metrics doesn't make sense when we're talking about preferences. It'll make sense if we're talking about, say, how synced the steps are (a mathematical argument), but that won't necessarily have sway when it comes to perception of quality (at least past a certain point).

I think simfile quality is different from music quality because we judge them differently. Some songs can be horrible to listen to but are hella fun to dance/grind to, whatever. We can recognize that certain charts may be "better-stepped" for whatever reason, but are they as fun?

Simfiles boil down into different perceived metrics of "quality," so I don't think it necessarily makes sense to talk about objective quality unless we're discussing something similar to g-factor in IQ (something that explains the most variance in a factor analysis, in which case we could show statistically which elements constitute the highest degree of "objective quality" where "objective" is really just another form of "strongly-weighted subjective assessments").

stargroup100 07-16-2011 12:23 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Reincarnate (Post 3504607)
The quality of the simfiles therefore measure how well they live up to the expectations of those clusters. Talking about "objective" judge metrics doesn't make sense when we're talking about preferences. It'll make sense if we're talking about, say, how synced the steps are (a mathematical argument), but that won't necessarily have sway when it comes to perception of quality (at least past a certain point).

Agree with this much, but my point was that preferences are subjective, and should be separated from the concept of quality, which is more objective. Even though the community might have its own perception of what quality should be due to the history of the game (which is still perception), I personally believe there are standards for notecharts just as every other medium.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reincarnate (Post 3504607)
I think simfile quality is different from music quality because we judge them differently. Some songs can be horrible to listen to but are hella fun to dance/grind to, whatever. We can recognize that certain charts may be "better-stepped" for whatever reason, but are they as fun?

We can also recognize a lot of songs that are "better-written" but not as fun to listen to.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n5Yx-ztwrpw

Of course, the educated listener might enjoy this, but a majority of people would find this kind of music boring. Similarly, the educated rhythm game player would find "art files" fun, while a majority of players won't.

Unless you mean "better-stepped" a different sense, such as a chart that manages to layer every instrument but not necessarily be playable. This is not a standard for quality, so it would be an irrelevant (and incorrectly described) case.

Yesssss 07-16-2011 01:53 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
saying that quality is subjective therefore one should not try to apply objective metrics is a pretty stupid proposition IMO

I'll make an analogy to difficulty. Difficulty is fairly subjective. Some people are better at some files than others. I'm pretty sure everyone will agree that therefore we should not apply difficulty metrics is stupid.
So what objective metrics do we use for difficulty? NPS? It works okay but we should be able to agree that it's not perfect (jacks vs rolls, etc). Even if we are to refine an objective method it still isn't going to fit with everyone, especially when difficulty is somewhat subjective.
Even if you take the same song and speed it up, there are edge cases where it actually makes the song easier to play. I remember a time where I actually had a hard time FCing slow songs because it was so hard to concentrate when the NPS is low enough. Another issue is the area between wristjacks and vibrajacks. I remember when hitting jacks at 140bpm 16ths was harder than 160bpm 16ths. Back when I played one handed, I remember there being parts of songs with holds that were easier to hold when the song was sped up.

Likewise for the quality of a file can be judged by judges (who knew?) by simply having them give a rating to the file. There is your objective metric on the quality of a file. It certainly isn't completely accurate, but it definitely is not completely inaccurate, which is what makes objective metrics on the quality of a file useful

Arch0wl 07-16-2011 02:46 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
I'll reply to more of this later (girlfriend has made this Harry Potter Day :p) but Yesssss's reply touches on something key to this debate:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesssss (Post 3504657)
saying that quality is subjective therefore one should not try to apply objective metrics is a pretty stupid proposition IMO

It's not that subjectivity makes metrics meaningless, it's that preference for one metric over another is going to be completely down to someone's whim. There's no way to make nonarbitrary metric selection with respect to something like quality, because even your choice of metric is going to be preferential.

In Psychology, you can usually measure the social usefulness of an otherwise arbitrary metric, which is how psychometricists have been able to defend the concept of g (read: IQ) from attacks. In other words, even if it's totally not what everyone thinks is intelligence, it still measures something useful.

But with stepfiles there's nothing you can correlate it with. What could you possibly correlate it with? Popular opinion? If that were the case, you'd open yourself up to a Pandora's Box of scenarios that would take a huge dump on the very idea of quality you're trying to protect. And if you tried to get out of it by correlating it with the existing simfile "elite", you'd end up with a circular correlation: "high quality simfiles are high quality because they correlate with people who think they are high quality."

So when I say "simfiles are subjective" I'm not saying you can't find a way to measure it, I'm saying that any attempt to measure objectivity will just be a means of systemizing your preferences -- you can't transcend arbitrariness because you're still using preferences as a base.

kommisar 07-16-2011 05:18 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Different styles of files will always cater to different crowds. This is why there are separate communities developing their own style of simfiles. Though there has always been one globally accepted pattern: structure.

Any file that has a decent structure and has consistency is usually more appealing to the player. Regardless of if musical relevancy or anything of the sort is followed, as long as the file has a specific pattern and follows a set structure for the song, its fun value is already increased tenfold.

Arch0wl 07-16-2011 05:55 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
But what do you mean by structure? In the PIU and O2Jam communities for example, the structure preferred by the playerbase is extremely loose.

customstuff 07-16-2011 06:05 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
I think that most people tend to cater to the "elitism" files because they are considered the most accurate. Although there is no rules saying this arrow must go here etc., it feels to some as if it would be playted like this is the computer keyboard were actually the instrument (pitch relevancy...).

I know for a fact that almost every song put out today could be made more fun to play. It could flow better, for example. The problem people have with it is that with many of these patterns it opposes what would be pitch relevant or it could miss a note or two. What I think has happened is that we began with the idea of making it "accurately" represent the song and people enjoyed the idea. However, we quickly made this style into a habit. The reason the people like the files that certain way is because those files feed their habit. It may not have the most fun patterns possible and it could be filled with one-handed trills, but it sounds as if the song would be played in that way. Now it would seem especially strange to skip notes somewhere or play a roll from right to left when the notes go from lower to higher. Just my thoughts on it.

Yesssss 07-16-2011 07:05 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arch0wl (Post 3504685)
It's not that subjectivity makes metrics meaningless, it's that preference for one metric over another is going to be completely down to someone's whim.

It is exactly that whim where objective quality is found. The most common elements among people's whim are the metrics.

kaiten123 07-16-2011 07:34 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3504603)
Anyone that thinks music is purely subjective, I always give them the same argument. Compare the following two songs:
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/419392
http://www.newgrounds.com/audio/listen/71906

Not a single person can tell me the second song is NOT better than the first one by a mile.

even though i did enjoy the second one more (not by much since the first was funny for a bit), that's still my opinion. even if the vast majority of people like it more its still just their opinions. large groups of people agreeing on something do not make it objectively true. jk, it does, the earth was flat for a long time (when that was the general concensus) and then magically became round later

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3504603)
If you argue that music is subjective and both songs have their merits, then I'm sorry, you're either deaf or you lack common sense.

cool ad hominem bro.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3504603)
If you really want to dissect, the first contains no merits, the vocals are simply an improvised track of random syllables with no thought and the background accompaniment consists of nothing but a bassline which is of poor instrument choice, poor production, etc etc.

all of those "merits" are just your opinion of what makes a song "good". please don't wave your opinions around like they're objective facts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reincarnate (Post 3504607)
Talking about "objective" judge metrics doesn't make sense when we're talking about preferences. It'll make sense if we're talking about, say, how synced the steps are (a mathematical argument), but that won't necessarily have sway when it comes to perception of quality (at least past a certain point).

+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesssss (Post 3504815)
It is exactly that whim where objective quality is found. The most common elements among people's whim are the metrics.

care to explain how people whims are objective metrics? people whims fit the definition of subjective so perfectly. i suggest you look up the words "whim" and "subjective" in a dictionary.

edit: whim: http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...src=ref&ch=dic
subjective: http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...src=ref&ch=dic

TC_Halogen 07-16-2011 07:48 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kommisar (Post 3504766)
Different styles of files will always cater to different crowds. This is why there are separate communities developing their own style of simfiles. Though there has always been one globally accepted pattern: structure.

Any file that has a decent structure and has consistency is usually more appealing to the player. Regardless of if musical relevancy or anything of the sort is followed, as long as the file has a specific pattern and follows a set structure for the song, its fun value is already increased tenfold.

I was going to make a post similar to Kommi's in this thread, but Kommisar hit it right on the nose BIG time.

Here's where I'll step in -- a lot of simfiles offer a unique AND "stable" pattern structure. If you step away from trying to be as accurate as possible in the transcription of the chart, you're able to control a LOT more. PIU takes -huge- advantage of this, which is why I'll use it to make the example.

- a specific chart difficulty - compare the start point to the choir that comes in, which adds a menacing difficulty spike in accordance to the "drama" or -theme- that the song conveys at this point of the song

- a controllable structure - compare the verse and the chorus; here, the chorus has less musical value, but in an effort to keep difficulty constant, the chorus is overstepped with a clean and consistent structure.

However, there are other factors that make a file replayable.

- speed driven sections - this speaks for itself; the patterns aren't relevant to the song, but they are incredibly diverse and give a player something to not only remember, but strive to be good at.

- gimmicks - while most players try to be great at songs that are clear and straightforward, others go for the challenge of memorizing a song -- some even go as far as using songs like this to immobilize certain players in tournaments.

While pad play has boundaries for what is doable and what isn't, files that are objectively structured properly (and yes, there is an objective property in pad structure because the threshold for what is and isn't doable is considerably different than keyboard) have limitless choices for what can and can't be done. Imagine what can be done when lifting a good majority of those limitations when playing keyboard -- and imagine what can come of 6/7/8 keys if people were just drawn into it properly.

Yesssss 07-16-2011 08:12 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3504840)
care to explain how people whims are objective metrics? people whims fit the definition of subjective so perfectly. i suggest you look up the words "whim" and "subjective" in a dictionary.

edit: whim: http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...src=ref&ch=dic
subjective: http://dictionary.reference.com/brow...src=ref&ch=dic

oh... I thought that similarities within the biological responses of the human population constitutes as objectiveness whereas the differences were the subjective elements.

Apparently they're both subjective? Is there no word for "similarities within the biological responses of the human population?"

kaiten123 07-16-2011 08:25 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesssss (Post 3504854)
Is there no word for "similarities within the biological responses of the human population?"

the closest thing i can think of would be something like "popular opinion" or "consensus" but one is a 2 word phase and neither is really the same thing.

kommisar 07-16-2011 09:07 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
debit has it. the pump example goes well actually. they use video/lyric relevancy to accentuate parts of the song.

First thing that comes to mind is i'll give you all my love cz/nm, the end stream goes on while she's running, kinda to simulate the video etc.

since there are no keynotes in stepmania, it's nice to have the feeling you're actually playing the songs with different accentuations.

Reincarnate 07-16-2011 10:13 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
I'm going to first just outright summarize my view: I don't think you can make an "objective metric." An objective metric is something that is a true indicator of something, independent of preferences. I don't think this applies here.

How can we possibly say "this file is objectively better than this file"? No matter what metric you choose to compare across two files, that metric will boil down to a user-preference which is inherently subjective. Even "structure" is pretty subjective.

I don't think we can treat opinion and quality as completely independent concepts. We usually define a high-quality apple as high-quality because it's healthy, tastes better, looks better, and doesn't make us sick. These all tie into things that give us utility.

The question then becomes "Could we recognize a stepfile as being high quality even if we hate it?" Even if I find Gone With The Wind to be utterly boring, can I still admit it's a quality movie?

I think that's what we're really looking for here -- something that we can acknowledge as being a widely-accepted metric of utility regardless of our own particular preferences. But whatever that answer is, it's not going to be objective. It's going to be "subjective but widely agreed upon."

stargroup100 07-16-2011 11:00 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3504840)
even though i did enjoy the second one more (not by much since the first was funny for a bit), that's still my opinion. even if the vast majority of people like it more its still just their opinions. large groups of people agreeing on something do not make it objectively true. jk, it does, the earth was flat for a long time (when that was the general concensus) and then magically became round later

I provided an extreme example. There is absolutely no way in which that first song is better than the second. I don't care what anyone's opinion is. It's not about large groups of people agreeing on it, it's about objective standards that define what makes certain sounds pleasing to the ears.

The simple fact is that the earth is round no matter what. The fact of the matter is that second song is more pleasing to the ear than the first song. No general consensus or opinion changes that idea.

aka you're wrong

Kraezymann 07-16-2011 11:37 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
So I am confused, please help me out.

Pertaining to the songs stargroup and kaiten123 are talking about; I haven't listened to either song, so no one can say that one song is better than another, right?. Because there is no proof that its true?

Its the same when I see posts about files. Until I play a certain file, no one is right, correct? Because at that point all I am reading are opinions about it. And so, the file becomes completely subjective (unless there is something mathematically wrong with it, like offset or the song is of poor audio quality), right?

I think that having something that doesn't have anything special about it (sg provided Planet Karma as an example) still wouldn't appeal to everyone, because of the fact that it doesn't have anything special about it:
Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup
==Planet KARMA== is almost universally liked because it doesn't contain strong features that the community is unfamiliar with

Wouldn't someone find that boring? Unoriginal?

Since it is impossible to please everyone at any given time, there can be no basis for something to be factually better than something else.

Or did I completely miss the point? Remember, I don't quite understand everything within the debate, so I probably screwed up somewhere.

kaiten123 07-17-2011 12:43 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3504942)
There is absolutely no way in which that first song is better than the second.

its funnier and more original, but of course that is my subjective opinion. in your subjective opinion that may not be the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3504942)
it's about objective standards that define what makes certain sounds pleasing to the ears.

different people ears find different sounds pleasing. actually its not even your ears that decide what sounds are pleasing, its your brain and:

Quote:

Originally Posted by dictionary
sub·jec·tive:
existing in the mind; belonging to the thinking subject rather than to the object of thought.

Quote:

Originally Posted by different dictionary
Resulting from or pertaining to personal mindsets or experience

so yea, by definition, whether a sound is "pleasing" is subjective. it takes place entirely in your mind. someone who's mind is different enough will find different sounds pleasing and you have no objective claim of your pleasing sounds being better than his.

any criteria for quality you make based on something being "pleasing" will inevitably be subjective since pleasure is a subjective experience.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Kraezymann (Post 3504958)
I think that having something that doesn't have anything special about it (sg provided Planet Karma as an example) still wouldn't appeal to everyone, because of the fact that it doesn't have anything special about it: Wouldn't someone find that boring? Unoriginal?

i actually quit out of planet karma both the times i tried to play it since it wasn't interesting

Arch0wl 07-17-2011 01:09 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesssss (Post 3504854)
oh... I thought that similarities within the biological responses of the human population constitutes as objectiveness whereas the differences were the subjective elements.

Apparently they're both subjective? Is there no word for "similarities within the biological responses of the human population?"

There is no reason to believe that a particular style of stepping is more biologically appealing than another style of stepping. If anything, people are conditioned to favor the charts they've become accustomed to playing most frequently.

Yesssss 07-17-2011 12:02 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Arch0wl (Post 3505018)
There is no reason to believe that a particular style of stepping is more biologically appealing than another style of stepping. If anything, people are conditioned to favor the charts they've become accustomed to playing most frequently.

Uh... actually having the bpm right is a "style" of stepping that is universally more appealing...

stargroup100 07-17-2011 02:51 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
In the case of Planet Karma, I did say that there wasn't any strong features, but there were some aspects that made it a little bit different from other charts. For starters, rather than being one really long song, it's more like 5 smaller completely different movements, which is easier to keep the player engaged. In addition, there are small details that add significant appeal, such as changing backgrounds and panning effects. In this sense, the chart is a little bit more than just "a boring chart with nothing special about it."

My point however, is that if there were strong features, there would be no way it could be a popular chart. Pop songs are the same way. It could be an unoriginal song with nothing special about it, but the fact that it doesn't have strong features is what makes it popular.


Let's take another comparison. A chart can be "objectively wrong" if it's off-sync, as in the BPM and rhythms are wrong. Now the question is, why is this considered objectively wrong? It's not because it's impossible to enjoy. It's because it's a standard that we have set. Why is this a standard? We understand that lining up notes with the amplitude peaks makes a chart inherently more fun. Likewise, finding other patterns can also make a chart inherently more fun. Positioning the notes on the columns in relation to specific frequencies (pitch relevance) is an example. Does that mean a chart that does not follow pitch relevance isn't fun? No. However, doing so does help make your chart inherently more fun. In this way, "objective" qualities of a chart are really no different from "subjective" qualities. Art is subjective in many ways, but without objective rules and standards, you just have a chaotic subject of absolutely nothing that can be taken seriously and studied.


Another reason why a lot people think a lot of things art-related are more subjective than they actually are, is because of the psychological inclination to be more open-minded and liberal. People think that by saying everything is subjective and there are positive qualities to everything, they will become more open-minded and seem more intelligent. A bad song could have a positive quality to it, but it doesn't make the whole song overall any good. However, this inclination to subjectivity is flawed because it lacks common sense. The ability to logically and emotionally interpret a piece of work is obstructed by the need to appear open-minded. You can verbally express that you dislike a song and still recognize its positive qualities, but it doesn't change the fact that you hate the song. But the fact that you can recognize this means you already can tell the difference between quality and preference. In such a way, the distinction does exist.

Arch0wl 07-17-2011 03:23 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Since bufang and Yesssss made the same point re: bpm, I'll just save time and address Yesssss's:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yesssss (Post 3505190)
actually having the bpm right is a "style" of stepping that is universally more appealing

Even BPM isn't totally consistent across games, since some people like doubled/halved BPMs depending on the way the song "sounds" -- MAX300, for example -- and fancy BPM effects a la O2Jam. Still, most people wouldn't consider sufficient syncing a stepping style because that comes before any notes are placed. And even if they did, the variation in preference after you have sufficient syncing is enormous.

Also, this brings up an interesting point:

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3505259)
Let's take another comparison. A chart can be "objectively wrong" if it's off-sync, as in the BPM and rhythms are wrong.

While I can't think of anyone who likes a 150 BPM song stepped at 145 BPM, there are countless examples across music games where people have liked charts with "wrong" rhythms.

ScylaX 07-17-2011 03:59 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
It tends to be objective when you get to be used to the technical parameters involved in the game, such as the rythmic tropes in the music. Anybody that plays DDR on pad for instance will not naturally be concerned about that because the chart is directly focused in the vibes and not on "musical details". The difference with KB chart is the fact that, with the time, it became more and more centralized over the "actual" sounds of the music stepped and thus, founding a "technical" aspect of the game.

So yeah it's really just a matter of experience but the community tends to have a few opinions (such as the technical accuracy of stepfiles) that became canonical for whatever reason. When I get back to playing some files I used to love when I began to play the game, I just feel like they're not of my taste anymore since I conditioned myself to play "correct/modern packs" for a while.

Arch0wl 07-17-2011 05:09 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Even communities go through preference changes when the charting authority changes and they're expected to get used to a different style. The methodology for determining what was a "good" 8-foot chart in the Tournamix era of DDR is now very, very different. Back then you were expected to be inventive with rhythms, and going to the song's main melody (what they called "karaoke") was frowned upon. They would even welcome double steps, which are something of a sin to some stepping styles now. Largely due to ITG and the influence of charters like Chris Foy/DukAmok/Omid, the DDR community's ideal 8-footer now would be, at best, a 3/5 in the Tournamix view due to being too "karaoke" among other things.

It's attractive to always imagine that our current state of doing something is an improvement on some previously worse state, but you have to establish that there's actually some form of progress happening. The food world can be an enormous victim to this false-progress mentality; the fashion world is at least honest about it.

Patashu 07-17-2011 09:31 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
sorry but the only objective measure of simfile quality is how many people play it

by my Objective (tm) measure:

Legend of Zelda Remix is the best ffr file
A Kidney Stone is the best ts song (but An Exaggerated Simulation of Plasma Particle Trajectories hard is the best chart)
星の器~STAR OF ANDROMEDA (ANOTHER) is the best bms
Bad Apple!! is the best osu beatmap
MAX 300 is the best stepmania online file

FFR4EVA_00 07-17-2011 09:55 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
it is impossible to make a file that everyone will love
it is only possible to make a file that everyone will hate because there are in fact very, very basic standards to be met in making a file
there is no place for objectivity in creative processes and continuing to make discussions such as this will only promote the idea that there is via reverse psychology or some similar means

kaiten123 07-17-2011 10:07 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
stargroup, fun-ness isn't an inherent property of the chart and the fact that different people experience different amounts of fun from the chart is sufficient to prove that. by definition this makes in not objective.

objective does not simply mean following some set standard. for something to be objective it must be an inherent property of the object it's self completely distinct from how the object is experienced.

and arguing from "common sense" is silly since that is subjective too.

kommisar 07-18-2011 12:24 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
why does everyone play uber rave even though it sucks

Reincarnate 07-18-2011 09:28 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Everything associated with simfile quality is subjective -- that's pretty much all there is to it.

kommisar 07-18-2011 10:11 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
that could be said about anything in life

stargroup100 07-18-2011 07:50 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3505472)
stargroup, fun-ness isn't an inherent property of the chart and the fact that different people experience different amounts of fun from the chart is sufficient to prove that. by definition this makes in not objective.

Never said fun factor was an inherent property of a chart. The feeling of fun is the result of effective applications of techniques that are by nature inherently more fun than other approaches.

I could walk a mile and say that it felt really short, and another person could walk that same mile and say that it felt long. That doesn't change the length of the mile, it doesn't mean that our opinions are wrong, it just means that the length is one mile but might feel like something different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3505472)
objective does not simply mean following some set standard. for something to be objective it must be an inherent property of the object it's self completely distinct from how the object is experienced.

The reason these standards are set this way is because that's "just the way it is." The fact is that putting notes on amplitude peaks is more fun than not doing so, so a chart is objectively better when it follow this technique (tl;dr charts are more fun when synced properly).

Math is similar. People consider math an objective field, but that doesn't mean that everything in math is proven to be perfect. For example, the very definition of an axiom of mathematics is a mathematical proposition that is not proven but simply taken for granted because it is self-evident.

Scientific theory works in a similar way too. It's an observation you assume to be true based on evidence, but does not need to be proven rigorously (that would be a scientific law iirc).

Just because maths and sciences are more pure than social sciences doesn't mean that there aren't objective conclusions drawn and applied from the social sciences. The concept of what makes a chart inherently more fun than another falls in the area of social sciences. Art is simply an organized approach to using what we know about we inherently like and then applying it to a piece of work. Without these objective criterion, you wouldn't have art.

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaiten123 (Post 3505472)
and arguing from "common sense" is silly since that is subjective too.

In what universe does the notion of common sense fall into a subjectivity?

Subjectivity means that different people have different views on the subject, but the definition of common sense is a set a propositions and beliefs that most people agree is of sound judgment. How is this subjective?


I mean, by your reasoning, everything in the world is subjective because everything we feel and sense is simply a set a electrical signals wired to our brains through our nervous system. For all we know, everything we know to exist and to be true could just be an illusion created by the neurons and the signals they send. Therefore, since nothing is objective, we might as well not even use the concept of objective and subjective.

The problem is, you still don't have a good idea of where to draw the line between subjective and objective. Heck, why bother calling things "natural" and "technology." Human beings are part of nature, so why isn't technology, which is made by humans which were made as a result of nature, part of nature? Let's just throw out the idea of nature and technology because everything is natural. The reason we have this distinction is because of the standards that we have set. Stop trying to over-reason things.

justin_ator 07-18-2011 07:58 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
I don't really understand why there is so much of a debate over this topic. I mean, honestly every bit of this game is opinion. If someone decides they aren't going to play FFR that's most likely because in their opinion it isn't worth the time.

ps, I liked Planet Karma. It was an engaging file, and had, as stargroup said, several segments to it that keep things from getting repetitive and boring. Not a big fan of long songs though.

I like short songs.
I like files that are on sync.
I like files that have more than one pattern in them.
I don't like awkward patterns like the bursts in Hardkore Atomic.
I like jumpstream that doesn't get repetitive.
etc, etc.

It's all opinion...

edit: I fight with my girlfriend about music in general like this all the time. She's like, 'this band sucks' and I just look at her now because she knows my response to that is, 'no, you just don't like it.'

I don't like country, but that doesn't mean it is bad music.
Very similarly with stepfiles, just because I don't like the jacks in Einstein Rosen doesn't mean that the file is bad.

stargroup100 07-18-2011 08:04 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
There is this much debate because we're trying to determine what objectives makes a chart fun. If we can figure out the answer to this question, we could make more quality charts more often.

But the argument is more focused on the distinction between the two rather than the application of the concepts.

Reincarnate 07-18-2011 08:24 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
It's because you keep trying to call it an "objective standard." That's throwing off this entire thread.

If you want to define "objective standard" as "a standard that can apply to a large cluster arising from segmentation" then fine, but it's not really "objective."

It's like asking "What makes for a quality winter wardrobe?" The answer will depend on who you ask and what year you're asking it. Standards change all the time, so you're going to waste time in this discussion by trying to call things "objective" when so much changes from one iteration to the next across various groups.

You may touch on a few things that remain ever-present even among all iterations, and that's fine -- but calling it "objective" is going to be incorrect.

stargroup100 07-18-2011 08:34 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
But that's just what it is. I can't think of a different way to describe it.

Why do pop songs use standard chord progressions? Because it sounds good. Why does it sound good? The intervals are considered to be consonant. Why are those intervals more consonant than others? They just are. No other reason. They just are.

"Objective standard" are the only words that come to mind to describe this. If you can think of a better way to describe it be my guest. But that's just how it is.

Reincarnate 07-18-2011 08:37 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Okay but I am telling you right now, you're misusing the word "objective."

"Objective" means something that is NOT influenced by feelings, bias, prejudice, or personal interpretations. It's true for me, true for you, and true for everyone. If you're making a statement that is based on opinions and not facts, it can't be objective.

A better phrase to use might be "core standards" or something. "Core" implies something central, important, and widely-present, but not necessarily universal and hard-set in its truths.


Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3506013)
Why do pop songs use standard chord progressions? Because it sounds good. Why does it sound good? The intervals are considered to be consonant. Why are those intervals more consonant than others? They just are. No other reason. They just are.

Standard chord progressions sound good to many people, but they don't sound good to ALL people. That's why you're going to derail the thread by calling it an "objective standard" because you're trying to imply that there is something that EVERYONE likes no matter what.

And we actually do understand why certain progressions sound better than others to different people -- and why we enjoy music to begin with. It ties into the nature of harmonics and the mathematics of language and how it weaves into various biological processes that are associated with utility-increasing metrics. Since these metrics will largely differ from person to person on a biological level, that's why we have different tastes in music. </gross oversimplication but the central point here is what matters>

stargroup100 07-18-2011 08:54 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
But it doesn't change the fact that an octave is going to be inherently more consonant than a minor second. This is fact and it is objective. You can build guidelines on top of that that get more and more subjective as they get more and more advanced and specific, which deals with a issue of preference, but it doesn't change the basic principles. In this case, the example of an octave being more consonant than a minor second.

Reincarnate 07-18-2011 08:58 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
An octave may have all sorts of nuances and differences when compared to a minor second, but that has no bearing on an objective quality standard with respect to human perception. That's like trying to argue something like "This type of apple X will have more sugar than apple Y and therefore, based on this objective fact, I can extrapolate to an objective standard saying that everyone will like apple X." That's just a fallacy in itself.

Reincarnate 07-18-2011 09:03 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
I mean, okay, using your own example:

Consider a comparison between Jaws (minor second) and Somewhere Over the Rainbow (perfect octave). Using your logic, EVERYONE will prefer Somewhere Over the Rainbow to Jaws. Correct?

You'll probably go "No, because there are all sorts of subjective overlays on top that change one's perception of the songs!"

My response to this is "that's the point." Even if one particular combination of sounds has a particular appeal over another in a vacuum, that doesn't mean they are objectively better. Trying to change, for instance, Jaws into a song that exemplifies the perfect octave over the minor second would result in a totally different song that lacks the same appeal.

kaiten123 07-19-2011 02:38 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3505976)
Never said fun factor was an inherent property of a chart.

yea, but the fact that it isnt means its not objective

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3505976)
I could walk a mile and say that it felt really short, and another person could walk that same mile and say that it felt long. That doesn't change the length of the mile, it doesn't mean that our opinions are wrong, it just means that the length is one mile but might feel like something different.

this is exactly my point. all of your arguments about music/simfile quality involve how it is perceived (fun, etc.).

whether the mile is "long" or "short" is subjective because it is based on one's perception or experience, the fact that it is "one mile in length" is an objective fact as it is an inherent quality of the path walked.

in the same way, whether music/simfiles are "good", "bad", "fun", etc. is subjective since its base on one's perception or experience, though we can say objectively that "this simfle has its notes placed closer to amplitude peaks in the song" or any number of similar statements as they are inherent properties of the chart.


Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3505976)
In what universe does the notion of common sense fall into a subjectivity?

Subjectivity means that different people have different views on the subject, but the definition of common sense is a set a propositions and beliefs that most people agree is of sound judgment. How is this subjective?

common sense is subjective because different cultures and different time periods have different "common sense" and none have any objective claim over all the others to being "the 1 true common sense".

also, i was talking about trying to argue that something is true because it is common sense which is silly because common sense is based on nothing more than the views of a large number of people. there was a time when it was "common sense" that the earth was flat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3505976)
The problem is, you still don't have a good idea of where to draw the line between subjective and objective.

if you had bothered to read any of my posts you'd know that objectivity is based on whether it is a property of the object being observed or the subject observing it.

example:
saying "file A has a BPM closer to that of the song than file B" is objectively true/false since it is about a property of the files/songs.
saying "file A is more enjoyable than file B" is subjectively true/false since it is dependent on the person playing.

Reincarnate 07-19-2011 07:45 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
At any rate, my overall point here is that the best you can do is figure out the "clusters." What are the 4-5 different types of files that people like to play? Based on that, we judge quality based on the standards of each cluster.

In other words, it's like asking "What makes a quality song?" The answer will depend. A person who listens to only techno music will have a very answer from someone who likes classical and will have even yet a different answer from someone who likes rock or pop or death metal.

Across all clusters, though, I'd say the steps need to make sense. If you're throwing out weird patterns to a song as if you hadn't even used the music as a guide, I think it's safe to say most people wouldn't like it. In other words, I agree that structure is pretty important, but to me it's almost a self-evident tautology. The whole point of a simfile is that it's a bundle of both a song and stepchart. The two obviously need to coincide with each other in at least having the steps FIT to something from the music. It's like asking what makes a good sandwich by saying "Well, I think whatever is between the two pieces of bread should be edible and go with the bread." Similarly, the file that goes with the music needs to be playable/sensible.

Past that base level of having a playable file with steps that are fit to the music in some way, it all depends on which cluster you're making your file for.

MarioNintendo 07-19-2011 08:21 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Wow. I think you guys are trying to dive deeper than the subject can let you go! I've tried to follow the conversation, but lost track around page 2.

You seem to be looking for the constraints that would make a universally good chart. To me, that's like asking yourself what you need to implement in a song in order to make it succesful. How can anyone know the answer to those questions if it's all based on subjectivity rather than pure reason?

Reincarnate 07-19-2011 08:35 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by MarioNintendo (Post 3506304)
Wow. I think you guys are trying to dive deeper than the subject can let you go! I've tried to follow the conversation, but lost track around page 2.

You seem to be looking for the constraints that would make a universally good chart. To me, that's like asking yourself what you need to implement in a song in order to make it succesful. How can anyone know the answer to those questions if it's all based on subjectivity rather than pure reason?

Because there are typically a finite number of clustered groups when it comes to segmentation analysis. That makes it much easier to cater to their tastes.

The question can't really proceed until we identify those clusters, because then it's all speculation. Unless of course, we wish to speculate. I think the main clusters would be split between pad and keyboard files, but the subclusters would be harder to define.



Please watch this video so you get a rough idea where I am coming from, because this is how the food industry was transformed and this same logic applies here. I know it's 18 minutes long, but there are a lot of interesting insights in here (mainly in the second half, as the first half is pretty obvious to most of us).

stargroup100 07-19-2011 11:42 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Subclusters are not difficult to define among keyboard charts. If I wanted to take the time I could do a very heavy breakdown. But I won't because I don't see a need for it.

Another misconception is that people keep thinking that we're looking for a universally fun chart. No such chart will probably ever exist, but that doesn't mean you can't come close. The points that I have mentioned simply describe what makes certain works in different mediums popular. The concept of subjectivity and objectivity are simply used to help describe this. In no way am I saying that you can use objective facts about making charts to make the perfect chart that everyone likes.

SKG_Scintill 07-19-2011 12:00 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
I love how the commercial at the end is completely against what had just been said

Reincarnate 07-19-2011 12:10 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3506388)
Subclusters are not difficult to define among keyboard charts. If I wanted to take the time I could do a very heavy breakdown. But I won't because I don't see a need for it.

Another misconception is that people keep thinking that we're looking for a universally fun chart. No such chart will probably ever exist, but that doesn't mean you can't come close. The points that I have mentioned simply describe what makes certain works in different mediums popular. The concept of subjectivity and objectivity are simply used to help describe this. In no way am I saying that you can use objective facts about making charts to make the perfect chart that everyone likes.

The point though is that you probably won't be able to "come close." Preference variance is simply too wide. You can try to please the most amount of people with one chart, but it won't be nearly as optimal as what you could do by making a few charts that cater to completely different tastes.

To this extent, subcluster breakdowns are vital and there is most definitely a need for it. Again, please watch the video if you still disagree.

stargroup100 07-19-2011 03:03 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
-___-

I'm not trying to get close to the perfect chart. My point was the quality and subjectivity both exist in chart making, it's not 100% subjective.

Reincarnate 07-19-2011 03:06 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by stargroup100 (Post 3506388)
No such chart will probably ever exist, but that doesn't mean you can't come close.

I was responding to this. But more broadly, I'm arguing that you *do* need to identify your clusters if you want a better shot at creating the best set of simfiles.

Arch0wl 07-21-2011 06:30 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
You watched that TED Talk too? I've seen Gladwell's talk like, four times. I even bugged my girlfriend into watching it. It's ****ing great.

Reincarnate 07-21-2011 08:49 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Yeah, TED talks are pretty sweet.

Completely random aside about Gladwell irrelevant to this discussion:

I don't know if you've ever read Outliers (cool book by Gladwell, even if broad in generalizations and not very rigorous/academic), but at one point he discusses the effects of luck + hard work etc, and mentions the "Smartest Man In America" -- a man with an IQ over 200 who was held back because of lack of support.

If that alone doesn't ring warning bells, I should add the finishing touch, here: I've actually *debated* him before. He's a religious nutcase who's very ignorant of science, abusive of mathematics, untrained in jargon, unnecessarily verbose, and downright condescending.

~kitty~ 07-21-2011 09:08 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Well if the simfile is on sync, then I think it's mostly based on opinion and a person's playing style. I've recently tried changing to spread, and I enjoy different simfiles now due to that change. I don't have a lot to say because I barely even understand the subject at hand, I just wanted to toss in my opinion.

stargroup100 07-21-2011 10:12 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by ~kitty~ (Post 3507716)
Well if the simfile is on sync, then I think it's mostly based on opinion and a person's playing style. I've recently tried changing to spread, and I enjoy different simfiles now due to that change. I don't have a lot to say because I barely even understand the subject at hand, I just wanted to toss in my opinion.

Good point. This is a completely different issue though. When you change your playing style, you are essentially playing a different game. A pattern feels different between two playstyles, whether it's something minor like switching from index to spread or something major like DDR to Guitar Hero. In the case of different playstyles, it's less of an issue of personal taste and more about how the two playstyles themselves differ from each other.

Reincarnate 07-21-2011 11:12 AM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
Some files are easier to play with certain playstyles over others (FOTBB is loads easier on index, for example, whereas I have no idea how you'd play, say, Pants on index very effectively). I agree that if a file is very biased towards one playstyle, then someone who plays with a different style is going to view your file very differently.

Kilroy_x 07-29-2011 10:35 PM

Re: The Simfile Quality Debate
 
At this point I am addicted to most anything which has a high level of dissonance while still having an internal logic.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:13 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright FlashFlashRevolution