[xXOpkillerXx]

Originally Posted by One Winged Angel

There's a big difference between mashing through a small portion of a chart that may be overwhelming while playing the rest legitimately vs hitting the same inputs for every chart regardless of what's on the screen.

I'm in the camp that finds this statistic pointless to track if the latter is something players will end up doing. That's the extent of what I'm willing to argue about this.

There is a significant difference yes.
I can't argue that bold section; what you find meaningful in a game is purely subjective. Therefore for that same reason, if a non-negligible amount of players consider it a fun metric, the decision to keep it or not is Entirely up to "do you think there are enough players who like that metric to warrant keeping it ?", and not "do you think the metric is meaningful". This is basic game design, and can be seen in countless games where there's some accomplishment/completion stat which has nothing to do with the main path/quest/metric of the game.

Originally Posted by axith

I've always seen the fc as a step towards the aaa. The fc bar should count fc* though. It's never felt good to lose a fc if I got a better raw score that happens to have a miss. It feels like I'm going backwards.

In bold are somewhat contradictory statements. A significant amount of PBs from all the player base are close to AAA but not an FC. Also as others mentionned, FC* does incentivize mashing for that specific metric, therefore if it counted it would most definitely be Less of a step towards AAA than it currently is.