Presentation components have a max of 30, but the total you can get is 20. There are three primary areas: Songwheel impression: the thoughts I get from passing over your song on the wheel. This includes banner and sample loop. Basically, this amounts to whether this would attract me to waste 25 cents on your song or not if BEST-mix were an arcade game. Yes, I am judging this somewhat on what it sounds like, so hopefully you made it gripping. In-game impression: thoughts I have playing your song independent of the chart I'm playing. This includes the BG, video and song itself (its suitedness, not its genre). This is whether I feel like I'm getting my 25 cents' worth. Extras: anything above and beyond requirements that merits extra points. Note that just doing something isn't worth points if it doesn't add to (or if it subtracts from) the file. For steps: Light: If you do decently, and it feels like an appropriate light chart for the song, you get 5. There's a low threshold of creativity here, necessarily. Standard: You need to show a smidge of creativity to get the full points; a solid but otherwise unremarkable file will get between 8 and 9 out of 10 (6.5 to 7 out of 8). Heavy and challenge: A solid but uninteresting file here will get 10.5 out of 15 (7 out of 10); a good file will hit 12 (8). Great files hit 13.5 to 14 (9). The elusive last point is reserved for a file that truly floors me, to differentiate great files the seven wonders of the world. To be honest, I'm not sure I've ever awarded it. Let's see this year. For challenge, sub the numbers 6, 6.5 and 7, respectively. Amatsu Boss: 17/50 Presentation: 9/20 Songwheel impression: 4/10 The banner is really slapdash and doesn't line up with the song (Amatsu in kana =/= Amatsu Boss). Keep it consistent. Also, sample doesn't line up with anything or loop. In-song impression: 6/10 The second "chorus" adds nothing and should be cut. BG is too busy, and barely shoehorns in the title to fit the rules, without removing other extraneous text. Extras: -1/10 * Beginner... with 170 steps and blue notes? I'll let freezes go but that's inexcusable. -1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 8/30 Basic: 2/5 * Measure 29 doesn't really follow the music. * In general, the 8th note patterns on a Light chart are ill-advised. * Freezes too short to miss in 47-50 - get rid of them. * No light player's going to get measure 51. * Too many 8ths to be a 4. * Sixteenths in measures 71 and 72 are a big no-no. Eighths are a challenge on light; sixteenths are too much unless the song's like 80 BPM. Also, measure 73 DOESN'T GO TO ANYTHING! * A lot of your steps don't really go to anything; you're trying really hard to smooth over the offbeats, but it doesn't work very well at all. Standard: 1/7 Measure 23 equals no. Measure 31 equals very no. Sevens do not have sixteenth sets, much less CROSSOVER sixteenth sets. It just gets worse from there, with short freezes, massive jackhammers, and a general lack of position awareness or care for where the steps go. I don't see any thought put into patterning here at all, and even some of the rhythms (in the 70s, for example) don't make sense. Also, you copied this back to Light and trimmed some steps (or vice versa). Expert: 3/10 Oh, I see, you copied Heavy back and removed some steps to make Standard, or vice versa, and then did it again. SHOW SOME EFFORT AND MAKE THREE ACTUAL CHARTS! All the same problems - complete unawareness of position, aribtrary rhythms and sporadic stupid difficulty, often all at once. I'm trying to be constructive, but the best I can say is that you need to seriously rethink everything about your simfile process. Challenge: 2/8 Still largely a copy of the previous difficulty. Still awkward, unplanned and unfun. Caravan of Love: 44/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 6/10 Banner is competent, if weird. Sample is done well, but I don't get the impression that this is going to lend itself to a good notechart. In an arcade, I'd just keep moving past it. (Generally, I fear for any song without a hard beat.) In-song impression: 8/10 Art, while random, is fine. Song drags on a bit. No beat, which makes it hard to get excited for. Extras: 6/10 * Canon beginner +1 * Three doubles charts +4 Hard is only half done, so nothing there, but the other two are fine. * Philosophical readme +1 Steps: 24/30 Basic: 5/5 Dreadfully boring - just the way a 2 should be. Standard: 8/10 Awfully repetitive. Yeah, I could see you trying to mix it up, but you had no choice. It's technically fine, so it's hard to dock much for it, but I have to do something that says a 95 BPM a capella song will never be anything more than "competent", because there's just no room for it. Expert: 11/15 You made up your own rhythms. Hey, that's fine, this isn't IIDX, but it is an admission of how little you had to work with. The singular yellow note felt off to me, as did the staggered freezes. While this is "different," I don't think it's particularly "creative" or "interesting," and again cannot rise beyond "competent." DARLING: 46.5/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Banner is bland but competent. Sample loops okay. Doesn't grip me, but I wouldn't turn my nose up if my neighbor picked it. In-song impression: 9/10 BG is a video shot. Video is decent and non-distracting. Length is fine. Extras: 6/10 * Decent premade video +2 * Canon beginner +1 * Lyrics +1 * CDTitle +1 * Decent readme +1 Steps: 26.5/30 Basic: 4.5/5 I think the step-jump-step-jump is out of place in the chart; the rest is easily a 3, but those are harder than the rest. Aside from that, no problems. Standard: 8/10 Measure 27 was a bit weird the first time, as are all the subsequent places where the sounds went 0xxx0 and you went 00xx0 instead. The rest of the chart was pretty good. Expert: 14/15 Excellent chart, very well done. I might have filled out some of the runs at the end, but that's neither here nor there. Dashboard: 38/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Banner is decent, if a bit off-center (skews up and right). Sample transition is a bit harsh. The vocals of the song are a bit off-putting, but I can hear potential in the song. In-song impression: 9/10 BG is random but fine. Video is non-obtrusive. End of cut is a bit abrupt, but not too bad. Cut is short; I like short. Extras: ./10 * Decent premade video +2 * Canon beginner +1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 18/30 Basic: 3/5 Definitely a 4 with the middle jumps. Beginning needs some variety besides all those double-taps. End steps don't go with the obvious sound the beginners will pick up on - the drum; instead, they go to the quarter note with nothing on it. Standard: 5/10 Measure 2 is an awkward place to start, especially when it's not a measure start (since you're off by a quarter beat in your chart - not a scoring point, just a note). Measures 7-8 and 11-12 feel quite awkward, and don't quite line up with the music. The two jacks are bad enough, the three are too much and the six is an order of magnitude harder than anything else in the chart. Also, the eighth sets don't flow together all too often, and the end is too early. Actually, most of the song seems to line up better if I add an extra beat at the beginning, but then the latter half of the song is off, until the end, which lines up again. Odd. Expert: 10/15 Beginning (and some of the middle) has a dire lack of turning, and those sixteenths with the jumps are just unnecessary. Gets better, until the freeze jacks; still ends early. Down 4 My Niggaz: 33/50 Presentation: 15/20 Songwheel impression: 5/10 Banner is quick and dirty (and skews down and left; you should get together with the last guy!). Sample seems chosen for the swearing - then again, that might be par for the course in this song. Historically, rap files have worked very poorly - this is because you either have a barebones musical track with some quarter notes to go to, or the rap itself, which is rather complex and usually doesn't translate well to stomping (nor does it feel natural). Thanks to this, I'm not sure I have high hopes from the sample. Since I can't judge on song choice, I have to give somewhat the benefit of the doubt here. In-song impression: 7/10 You missed one. Static BG is in context of video; video isn't funny, but it's not annoying either. Song is all boom boom chick, boom chick, which leaves you about zero anything to work with. This will be reflected in the grades below, not here. Should be one measure shorter. Extras: 15/10 * At least you did something to the video even if it wasn't funny +2 * CDtitle +1 * Offensive barebones readme +0 Steps: 18/30 Basic: 3/5 These steps had exactly one modicum of thought put into them. Repetitive, just like the song. Eighth note taps are technically acceptable at this BPM but I still wouldn't recommend them, and they make it a 3, at least. Standard: 7/10 Desperately trying to not be repetitive, but it doesn't really succeed. Patterns are competent, but weird in some places and ultimately uninteresting. Expert: 8/15 Don't hear the early rhythms; don't like sixteenth jacks; DEFINITELY don't like sixteenth jump jack marathons; end of song is even more repetitive than the rest. Frontal Impact: 45/50 Presentation: 19/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Shiny banner (nDDRo shiny, even). Sample is a smidge short. Doesn't strike me one way or the other. In-song impression: 8/10 Again, shiny artwork. It should end end with a bang at measure 58, not with a whimper at measure 66. Extras: 3/10 * Canon beginner +1 * CDTitle +1 * Decent readme +1 Steps: 27/30 Basic: 5/5 I'd be careful around measures 55 and 56; it might put a light player into a situation where they need to cross over and push them a bit too far. Otherwise, fine. Standard: 9/10 Last eight measures really start to drag here. Other than that, chart is fine, no complaints or particular praise. Expert: 13/15 I didn't think the back-to-back gallops in the eurobeat synths fit very well. The rest of the song was fun; I liked the jumps and the sporadic use of crossovers. Full-Consciousness Green: 38.5/50 Presentation: 17/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Banner fonts are jaggy. (No, it's not "stylized".) Sample is a smidge long. I can hear how this could work. In-song impression: 9/10 BG is much better than banner, jaggy or not. Length is fine, but song's a bit repetitive. Extras: 1/10 * Canon beginner +1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 21.5/30 Basic: 3.5/5 Transition to speedup is awkward. I think there's a few too many things here that suggest crossovers, but at this speed I can't dock for it. I worry about the tap-freezes being readable to a beginner. Also, that's a lot of notes for a 3. Standard: 7/10 A large reliance on taps for a 6, especially at this speed. Easily a 7, which is somewhat appropriate, although the song itself is kind of subdued. Flow is good, but it's definitely on the harder side of what's appropriate, and what you called it. Expert: 11/15 I don't like the serial jumps at 180, nor the step-jump sections. The early sixteenths are awkward and I didn't really hear any of them. The gallops are fine, but the later drumrolls feel like they'd be better served as eighths at this level. They just feel like they come out of nowhere, even with a musical cue. My favorite part was definitely the long eighth runs. Hold the Line: 38/50 Presentation: 17/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Total k-rap. (Sorry!) Actually, more hip-hop, which lends itself better. Banner is similar to the Snoop Dogg one in motif, but it's executed better here, with better color consistency and it stands off the background more. Loop is a bit early at the beginning and end. Sounds like it could work. In-song impression: 9/10 Background is fine. The end of the cut is a bit abrupt. Extras: 0/10 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 21/30 Basic: 3.5/5 Ends like at least a 5 - even at these BPMs, that's where blue note runs come in. I'm even wary of the triple taps at this difficulty (the doubles are passable, but not by much). Standard: 7.5/10 Heavy reliance on jackhammers and jack-jumps for a standard; even at these speeds I think that's enough to call this a 7. Also, you seem intent on following the chorus, but it starts on the blue before the measure line, which makes the steps feel weird. Expert: 10/15 It was going well for a while. The complex crossovers were still slow enough to double step, so it warranted an 8, and while I didn't like the serial jumps, I could live with it. Then you spring the IIDX-style ending on me and make this at least a 9 (if DDR had a passmark, it'd be a 10), and throw some useless freezes into the mix just to make it even worse. Don't Bloodrush the ending. I've Got A Jar Of Dirt (remix): 27.5/50 Presentation: 12.5/20 Songwheel impression: 5/10 Sample loop starts early. Banner is three seconds in Paint. Song, while loltastic, also sounds like three seconds in Paint. I'm not sure how this is going to work, but it might actually be funny. In-song impression: 7/10 Funny... for about 15 seconds. Everything after that is just unnecessary. BG is cheap, but technically okay. Song has low production values, I'll say that much. Quite repetitive. Extras: .5/10 * Beginner steps - canon, but a 2, especially with the pause +0.5 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 15/30 Basic: 2/5 No four consecutive twelfths in Light. Ever. I don't care if it's the only way to save the world from imminent nuclear disaster. Beyond that, why are there carefully laid out crossovers (even on quarters) in a light chart? The freeze-steps are too much for light players too. Standard: 5/10 Gallops and twisty freeze don't really belong on Standard, and those parts are more of a 6 or 7. So is the end. The rest of the song is a boring 4 at best. Nothing remotely interesting here. Expert: 8/15 Gallops can be a viable gimmick for a part of a song, but not the WHOLE DARN THING. FOR EIGHTY SECONDS. Dreadfully repetitive. The bursts at the end were just desperate. Oh, and the bursts make it a 9. Kimi no Machi Made: 44/50 Presentation: 18/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Sample is a bit short. Banner is basic, if passable. I'd probably whip right by this one on a real game because it sounds a bit sparse besides the vocals; let's see. In-song impression: 8/10 Art is fine, if generic. Middle of cut is less compelling than the beginning and end. Speaking of the end, that's weird; it almost sounds to me like you should have cut the BPM by 3/4 and made the steps triplets rather than eighths. Extras: 3/10 * Canon beginner +1 * Decent readme +1 * Romanized lyrics +1 Steps: 26/30 Basic: 5/5 Best light chart I've played this session. Ending is weird but whatchagonnado? Standard: 7/7 Very nice. Flows well, rather fun. Expert: 7.5/10 Measure 74.2 is clearly an error; put some lag time between the end of the freeze and the jump. I'm also not too fond of the jump-step-jump early on, and there's one place where you break otherwise impeccable flow, so it stands out like a sore thumb. Otherwise, good, but not to the standards (heh) of the Standard chart. Challenge: 6.5/8 Definitely a 9 with all the Be Lovin step-jumps. Incidentally, get rid of those and we'd be talking a 7.5 here, for an otherwise very good chart. With those, and the rating off, it's a bit lower. Kokoro Odoru: 42/50 Presentation: 18/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Banner is stylized, and pretty good. Sample is a tiny bit short. Song sounds like it has much potential, and it grips me; it does sound like the BPM should be double from the sample. In-song impression: 8/10 I dunno... I still feel like some parts (but not all) should be in the 220's. End drags on a bit. Art is good. Extras: 2/10 * Non-canon beginner (has a freeze) +1 * Barebones readme +0 * Romanized lyrics +1 Steps: 24/30 Basic: 4/5 Ugh, I really don't want to see those yellows in a light chart, because syncopated rhythms are advanced. I know there's precedent, but still... Last four measures are really bland... right right left left right left right left. Rest is good, although I'm wary of triple taps. Standard: 5.5/7 I worry about the step-jumps. It's at least marked as a 6, but I'm still not sure they're appropriate. Sixteenth notes are fine for appropriateness. Yellow freezes are something I'm wary of in a Standard too, since it's hard to read. Expert: 7.5/10 I was hoping for more reliance on sixteenths than step-jumps. The down-(leftright) parts were fun, the jack-jumps, eh, not so much. End feels weird with the offbeats - I hear it, but barely. Challenge: 7/8 By and large, better than the heavy. Some of the rhythms during the chorus I just don't hear, and there's still some parts that are too Be Lovin for my taste, but not too bad. Lady*Chopper: 43.5/50 Presentation: 17/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Banner looks really cool, until you see how badly it loops. Sample is so boring and repetitive; let's hope the whole song isn't like that. In-song impression: 9/10 BG is bland, but okay; looking at your file, I expect a video, but nothing. Song is a lot more interesting than the sample makes me think it would be. Nice cut. Extras: 1/10 * CDTitle +1 * Decent readme +0 Steps: 27.5/30 Basic: 5/5 Solid. Standard: 10/10 Ludicrously nice. I worry about taps for Standard players, but they fit really well. Expert: 12.5/15 Not as clean as the standard; a hair awkward in places. I also don't like the extended jacks, but everything else is pretty good. Let's Get Rockin': 31/50 Presentation: 15/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Sample is a bit late and long. Artist text and banner BG are artifacty; title is okay. Whole banner is somewhat bland. Another repetitive sample, although at least it's got a strong beat and you can dance to it. In-song impression: 8/10 Background is pretty ugly with plain text. Cut is fine. Extras: 0/10 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 16/30 Basic: 2/5 Um, no. A 6, minimum. Too many blue note sets (especially followed by jumps) and the yellows shouldn't be here at all - not on the offbeats, not on the freezes (which don't even line up with anything). If you rated it a 6, I'd call it a 4 for "not very light, not very interesting but s'okay" but off by two foot ratings = off by two points. Standard: 3/7 The first yellows shouldn't be in standard, but then again, they shouldn't be there at all because they aren't there. Patterns change, but in no real progression. Second set of yellows could be done without too; the third is okay because there's less of them. Also, 15-note-long runs of eighths at 177 BPM is not a 6; it's an 8; 400 steps is almost enough to call it a 9. Two foot ratings off = more lossage. Expert: 7/10 This may have been easier than the standard. It had more steps, but they were more straightforward (why you used fewer sixteenths here than the standard, I can't fathom). The step count is high enough that I'd call it a 9 for stamina reasons. The early patterns didn't really fit, but it got better as it went on. Challenge: 4/8 Holy unnecessary, awkward, unnecessarily awkward gallops at the start. After the gallops, I don't hear anything the steps go to at all until at least measure 33. It gets better (although still trying way too hard), and then craps out again at measure 49. You've clearly got a good grip on patterning, but if you have to try this hard to cram notes into HARDCORE, you're doing something wrong. Love In Your Arms: 41/50 Presentation: 16/20 Songwheel impression: 6/10 Another shiny banner. Sample is completely neglected - half a chorus, half a verse - but the song is still somewhat grippy, if totally emo rock. In-song impression: 9/10 I was wrong - it's emo *Jesus* rock. Fair enough. Background is good, song is somewhat catchy. Cut is a tad abrupt. End feels like a different song. Extras: 1/10 * CDTitle +1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 25/30 Basic: 5/5 Some of the steps feel like quarter notes trying to go to eighths, but there's nothing wrong. Standard: 8.5/10 Solid steps, albeit a bit crossovery for standard. Okay in moderation, but be careful. Expert: 11.5/15 Much more awkward than the Standard. The freeze triple-jack comes to mind, and the beginning is laden with nice runs that aren't connected, which causes some ugly double-stepping in the jacks. It gets better, and there's some nice crosoover work in the middle, so there's potential, but it needs some polish. My Selene: 45/50 Presentation: 19/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Banner is decent, but needs a bit more polish. Little teeny "GARYsurvivor" in the corner... hrm.... Sample runs a little long. I can hear this working. In-song impression: 9/10 Art is okay. Cut could be a *smidge* shorter, as it drags out just a bit. Extras: 3/10 * Canon beginner +1 * Heavy doubles +2 A bit dense, but a good grasp of doubles. * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 26/30 Basic: 5/5 Some of the quarters feel weird mingling with the offbeats, but there's nothing wrong here. Standard: 8/10 Measure 25 doesn't feel right to me. In fact, a lot of the eighth note pseudogallops feel forced to put more notes into it. It's got a lot of notes, so I might call this a 6. I also worry about double-taps, but they end early. Not too shabby though; kinda laidback and breezy for the song. Expert: 13/15 The burst of sixteenths at the end of 4 (and similar) seems a bit arbitrary to start halfway through the drumroll. The end step-jumps I don't like, nor the layout of the last bursts (although the rhythm is fine). They might bump it to a 9 though. Freeze crosses and taps are very well executed. NB RANGERS Returns: 26/50 Presentation: 16/20 Songwheel impression: 6/10 Sample needs a small amount of tweaking. Art looks grabbed from something with an artist slapped on. I think this one could go either way. Why does this have a random BPM? You're not that special, trust me. In-song impression: 7/10 Those gimmicks are annoying; I can't see a reason for this to go to 290. Pauses are okay, if disorienting. Beginning can go; it's not worth stepping. Art is kind of slapdash. Extras: 3/10 * Edit +2 It's still dumb, but at least it's actually for keyboard now, where I can four-finger it. * Decent readme +1 Steps: 10/30 Basic: 3/5 As I said, the beginning can go. The first run at 145 BPM doesn't turn for like 8 measures; after that it's very double-steppy (although I won't dock you for that at this speed on a Light chart, because a light player doesn't flow anyway). Runs and step-jumps in the fast part are too much. Standard: 1/7 Beginning is ridiculously awkward and has sixteenths and a 32nd that leads into a step-jump. Even at half BPM, that's like a sixteenth step-jump - insanely obnoxious on heavy, utterly intolerable on standard. There's double-steps everywhere because there's no thought to continuation between runs; there's fast bursts in between gimmicks that no one at this difficulty will ever pick up on (the eighths at double speed are as bad as that 32nd), and then there's the rest of the song, which is so easy. Half a 5 and half a 9 doesn't make a 7; it makes a bad 9. That's what this is - a bad 9. Expert: 4/10 The 32nd isn't here. Hmm. There is still a total lack of cohesiveness to this chart - it's schizophrenic in difficulty and completely lacking in patterning and foresight. But since it's at least difficulty appropriate, it's better than Standard. Challenge: 2/8 The beginning is still an orgy of double-stepping, but now there's sixteenth-note step jumps - YAY! Only now it continues for the whole song. Maybe if I had four legs you could get a passing score, but not here. Ne~e?: 39.5 - 6 = 33.5/50 Presentation: 18.5 - 6 = 12.5/20 Songwheel impression: 7 - 2 = 5/10 I'll hope the banner is a video reference - it's artifacted a bit like a cap. Sample is good, and sounds like it will work, if it's a bit saccharine. Minus 2 because I heard you cribbed the artwork from Xythar. BLueSS can overrule this if he chooses. In-song impression: 8 - 4 = 4/10 Background is okay. Video doesn't synch right. Cut is fine. Again, saccharine. I can still taste it. Minus 4 for cribbing the artwork and cut from Xythar. BLueSS can overrule this if he chooses. Extras: 3.5/10 * Decent premade video +2 * Canon beginner, should be a 2 at this speed +0.5 * Solo beginner? There's no chart so I assume you're just using this to force the song to run a certain length +0 * CDTitle +1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 21/30 Basic: 3/5 With all the blues, this is probably a 5. I don't like so much syncopated rhythm in a Light chart. I especially worry about the one place with (x--x-x--). Patterning is fine, but this feels more like a Standard than a Light. Standard: 7/10 There are three or four places in the song with awkward setups for the next run - 52 comes to mind. Triple jack and step-jump at the end concern me. Decent, but needs polish. Expert: 11/15 Again, the transitions between runs are awkward, even if the runs are fine - see measure 52. The end jack is also annoying. It's still a 7, but a few more of those things and it might be pushing it. Onna ni Sachi Are: 45/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 The banner is cool in concept, but it detracts from the identification of the song, which is the primary purpose of the banner. Synchs up with the sample fine (the main work in such a banner), and the sample is fine too. Sounds fine. (Aside: when are we going to run out of Morning Musume songs to do, anyway? It's getting old). In-song impression: 9/10 Is she supposed to be saying something at the beginning? Seems like something's misaligned. Rest is fine. Extras: 6/10 * Decent premade video +2 * Two sets of lyrics +2 * Rambly readme +1 * CDTitle +1 Steps: 25/30 Basic: 5/5 No complaints. Standard: 9/10 Also no complaints. Nothing to wow me up to the 10 range, though. Pretty standard karaoke. One crossover, which is okay. Expert: 11/15 I liked the first crossover. I don't like the pattern right at 57, where you have to either shuffle or cross over to hit the jump after that eighth. Overall, this is solid and builds on the fundamental principles of stepcharting, but doesn't do anything interesting or surprising either. Poodle: 38.5/50 Presentation: 17/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Exclamation point on banner needs to go; I know for a fact that's not in the title (and it's not in your SM file either). Art is bland and partially cribbed from the video, but that's fine. Sample is a bit short (I'd have finished the chorus), but representative of the chorus. Also saccharine, but it'll work fine. In-song impression: 9/10 Cut a bit too aggressively, leaving out quite a bit of the good stuff >_< Art is fine. Extras: 0/10 * Barebones readme +0 (oh, and it's from Happy Sky; whether it's on GOLD is incidental) Steps: 21.5/30 Basic: 2/5 Ugh. I know you rated it a five, but I still don't like those eighth-note double taps in Light, especially when the rest of the chart is HALF notes - yes, every other quarter. Half a 3 and half a 5 doesn't make a fun chart for anybody. The blues in isolation are okay, because the sound there is very prominent, and you don't carry it on for sixteen measures in a row. Standard: 8.5/10 Measures 43 and 44 seem to be a very contrived crossover, but any standard player is going to double step them and end up in trouble right at 45. The jack at 15 doesn't really fit to me either. Beyond that, it's a pretty good chart, with good sporadic use of 16ths. Expert: 11/15 I don't feel that the jackhammers and jack-jumps are the best pattern for this song. A few of the ones during the chorus are good, but others aren't, and the ones during the intro/outro don't really feel like the best move either. Patterning is okay, but there's a bit too little turning, especially at the end. Certainly competent, but it needs a bit of polish. ROCKET (Dancing in the Moonlight): 35/50 Presentation: 16/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Instrumentals are gripping, but the sample is too short. Banner is okay, but doesn't differentiate the title and subtitle very well. Your SM file should also probably put the subtitle on the subtitle line. In-song impression: 8/10 Can we stop dragging the song on after all the music's gone? There's nothing left to step to; find something in the middle to repeat to lengthen it. Art is subtly good. Extras: 1/10 * Decent readme +1 Steps: 19/30 Basic: 3.5/5 Measure 24 and 25 set up for a crossover; I don't like that on light, nor the triple taps. Measure 28 is another one, indisputably. And it started out so promising, too. At least you had the decency to call it a 4. Standard: 6.5/10 I don't like the introductory freeze crossovers/eighth note moving one foot around. It's a bit advanced to lead a Standard song with. Measures 11 and 12 are inappropriate as well. The other crossovers are bearable, but barely; the freeze spin is over the top and is going to freak out true standard players (or they'll just melt it and fake the whole thing). Most of the song is so easy, and then you have those jump-step-jumps and the spins; you need to pick a feel and go with it. Expert: 9/15 This song has enough going on that you don't have to cram in jumps every other beat just to up the difficulty. Sometimes they go to stuff; sometimes they don't; every time, they're just annoying and don't fit a synth driven song - the synth steps fit a lot better. Well, except for the sixteenth jack and the sixteenth step jump, which are just bad. This feels like a 9 written by someone who's never played a 9 and is just guessing what they might be like. (I was there, way back when; I'm quite a bit ashamed of some of those files, which is why they aren't released.) satellite020712 from 'CODED ARMS': 44/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Banner is on the edge of too busy, but not quite. Sample is repetitive, but that's the song for you. In fact, I would worry about this song, having played it on IIDX. Let's see how it goes. In-song impression: 9/10 I was prepared to slam you for trying to give me epilepsy, but the video script got better, and I see (and hear) what you did there. Art is fine, song is uncut from IIDX, a smidge repetitive, but okay. Gimmick is fine; I half expected a few more pauses at places. Extras: 10/10 * Clever, if annoying, generic video script +2 * Beginner +1 * Four doubles charts +5 Challenge is a bit above my level to test - it feels awkward, but I might just be getting lost. There's definitely some awkwardness / cross-pad double stepping in Standard and Heavy. The Light is a bit tricky too, but fine for doubles. * Rambly readme +1 * CDTitle +1 Steps: 24/30 Basic: 5/5 I worry about those double taps, but all in all this is masterful, nice work. Standard: 5/7 I don't like those initial taps - not for the taps but because I don't feel them in the song. Same with the offbeat stabs. The spin/twist/whatever freeze section is also not the best idea in a Standard - a player should not be expected to melt. Offbeats to the drums are fine. End patterning is a bit lacking in turning. Most of the chart is fine, but somewhat lackluster. Expert: 7.5/10 A lot of the changes feel forced to try to recover from the repetitiveness of the song; it works, to an extent, but when the music doesn't change to match it doesn't come off perfectly. Most of the song flows well, but there's a few places where it doesn't that stand out because of this. Overall, pretty decent. Challenge: 6.5/8 See above. Measure 44 is a very poor leave. Spring 1st Movement: 41/50 Presentation: 17/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Banner is obvious, but at least it's legible, which is more than some of them. Sample starts abruptly and isn't very interesting. Mixed feelings about this based on the sample. In-song impression: 9/10 Song is very repetitive. Cut is okay. Art is okay, but nothing special. Extras: 1/10 * Canon beginner (2 for BPM, but may be 1 for content) +1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 24/30 Basic: 4.5/5 I worry about holding those freezes past the pauses on Light; that's a tactic normally reserved for Heavy (see: MaxX Unlimited). I also wish you hadn't changed it up on the third freeze, which will confuse a light player. Other than that, boring but fine. Standard: 6.5/10 I appreciate the slow "crossovers" early, rather than eighth note ones on Standard. Measures 23 and 24 (and subsequent) are very bad ways to lead the player into the next pattern, especially at this level. Measure 65 may be tricky too, although there is precedent. End runs are boring. Seems like it could be a 6 if you removed the awkward parts. Expert: 13/15 Nothing new or original here; it's just eighth runs, although that certainly has its own perverse charm. The step-jumps should be curtailed a little bit, or at least checked to make sure they flow. Other than that, this is so much better than Standard. Seriously. Symbolic (Cryptex Mix): 42/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 6/10 Banner is too busy, and the text doesn't offset enough from the background for it to work. Sample is a bit short. I've stepped this song in the past, so I know what to expect: it could be interesting or repetitive, depending. In-song impression: 8/10 Art is passable; cut is decent. Extras: 6/10 * Non-canon beginner (with freezes) +1 * Three doubles charts +4 Pad transitions are too ugly on standard and heavy to award the full points, but it's not totally incompetent either, so one point each, and 2 for light. * Decent readme +1 Steps: 22/30 Basic: 4/5 Too many steps to be a 3. Nothing interesting here, but nothing overtly wrong. Standard: 5.5/7 A six with the step-jumps, at least. I didn't like the jacks in the middle; at least you only chose to use them once, but why even that, and why the first set? You tried to vary things up to get around the repetitive nature of the song, and while at least your steps built, the song really didn't. All in all, decent, but it can't really overcome its own repetitiveness. Expert: 7/10 Quite a few of your runs don't lead into each other well. Since it's random and not structured, it feels like laziness/unawareness and not intentional. I did like the rhythms before the freeze (but not the patterning). The drop-off in difficulty after the freeze is somewhat disappointing. There's nothing glaringly wrong here, but it needs some touching up. Challenge: 5.5/8 The beginning needs more turning. Right after the first freeze is an example of a bad leave that makes things harder than they need to be. Your use of step-jumps and gallops is randomly inconsistent - that is, not building or changing on song phases, but changing randomly. Some of the gallops lead with the same foot, some with the other foot, and some of the jumps are jacks while some aren't. It feels like no care was put into that part of it. The quiet part is just desperate; the lead-up to it is very awkward. Without polish, it's pushing a 9 too. Needs some definite polish and tweaking. The Game of Love: 44/50 Presentation: 18/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 That is too many fonts. Other than that, banner is okay. Sample loops well. Will probably work, but it's the easy way out. In-song impression: 8/10 A Jenny Rom song without the BPM juiced? I think it's worse off for it, myself. The outro is unnecessary, and is actually cut poorly at the end. Nix it. Art is a bit better on a larger scale, but still too many fonts. Extras: 3/10 * Generic video script +1 * Canon beginner (1 for BPM, but 2 for content) +1 * CDTitle +1 * Lyrics +1 * Holy RTF escapes, Batman! -1 Steps: 26/30 Basic: 5/5 No complaints. Standard: 9/10 Gallops are barely okay in a 6. Rest of the chart is fine, if pretty humdrum. Expert: 12/15 I don't think the triple jacks in the middle fit; I'm somewhat grateful that you didn't take the obvious quad jack early in the song, but it would have been fine there. I like the gallop gimmick. The rest of the chart is solid but so incredibly predictable. Okay, the blues caught me off guard, but I'm still not sure that was the best thing to do there. Oh well. TKO: 41.5/50 Presentation: 17/20 Songwheel impression: 8/10 Banner is a little hard to read, but somewhat stylish. Sample is too short. Another one I'm torn on between gripping and repetitive. In-song impression: 8/10 I still can't decide what I think of the song. A little on the short side. Art is okay, but a bit busy. Extras: 1/10 * Half a heavy doubles chart +0 Good, except for the last bit, which doesn't even look possible. * CDTitle +1 * Barebones readme +0 Steps: 24.5/30 Basic: 5/5 Predictable to a T - actual *over*use of symmetry. Hard to dock much of anything for a stupid nitpick like that though. Standard: 8.5/10 46 and 47 are a really advanced crossover series for standard. No 6 player would pick up on that; I didn't understand that until 8s. The rest of the chart is fine, although nothing else stands out. Expert: 11/15 I don't hear any of those gallops at all. It feels like you threw them in there to force it up to an 8 so you could play with a few more crossovers while you were at it. The long runs were old-skool fun. Why did you go away ~GIRL'S SIGHT~: 37/50 Presentation: 20/20 Songwheel impression: 7/10 Again, too many fonts, and they aren't set off from the background very well. Banner skews a little low. Sample is a bit short. Can't think why this song should ever drop to 80 BPM; prove me wrong. In-song impression: 9/10 Song is uncut. Art is okay, if plain. Nothing to note here one way or another, really. Extras: 6/10 * Three doubles charts +6 (check) Incidentally, much better than the singles. * Barebones readme +0 * Clean up your .OLD files before submitting +0 Steps: 17/30 Basic: 4 - 2 = 2/5 More of a 3 than a 2. On the other hand, this chart is four beats too late. Since the heavy chart is correct, this isn't a gap issue, this is a quality control issue. You really should check all your charts before submitting. I'm docking 2 points on Basic and 4 on Standard for this. Standard: 9 - 4 = 5/10 Chart is off by four beats; see above. That felt more like a 4, except for the one burst at the end. Admittedly, a lot of notes, so it's fine. Patterning was really awkward - at this speed, it's fine, but it makes me worry for the next chart up. Expert: 10/15 Awkward transitions between runs at random (25 is a prime example, although there are others before it). Be consistent, or at least have some cue for it. Rhythms are fine throughout, but the file shows mere competence, or just shy of it with the previous part.