BEST-mix.net - DDR Simfile Tournament

Have at it, kids.

I've never reviewed stepfiles before so I have no idea if my reviews are fine, or too subjective or something.

You've done a great job from what I can tell. You're also receptive to feedback, which is very important too.

DJ Potatoe SUCKS! Oh wait...

Krazy wrote:I've never reviewed stepfiles before so I have no idea if my reviews are fine, or too subjective or something.

Well, you did a very nice job. It was really thorough and you judged all 3 charts, so it seemed like you put quite a bit of thought into your review, which is always a good thing.

CoreyBlaze wrote:DJ Potatoe SUCKS! Oh wait...

probably still does

What do you consider to be a good way to grade the non-chart point areas?

I haven't judged a simfile since TournaMix (3? 4?), so I'm a bit out of practice. Any pointers?

Personally, I think you did a very nice job on your B1 reviews, Kamek.

For my part, these are (generally) what I find most important in a stepchart:

-Are the steps intuitive?
-Will it look like the person is stepping that way on purpose?
-Are they enjoyable to play?
-Are they entertaining to watch?
-Are the steps appropriately rated?
-Did the same thought get put into all difficulty levels?
-Do they make sense within the context of the song?
-Are the steps creative without being gimmicky and/or alienating people expected to play on that skill level?
-Do the steps follow SOMETHING in the music?

To me, as long as they're not a distraction, graphics mean precisely dick. Frankly, I'm a more than a little appalled at how seriously some people take mere aesthetics, up-voting a garbage chart for looking pretty and/or down-voting a very well-done chart because they're not museum-quality. To me, I feel that those people don't have their priorities straight. If I gave one word of caution, it would be not to fall into this trap.

Having said that, a good-looking BG/Banner can be an indicator of the thought put into a work. If you're using that as a measure, however, you obviously aren't familiar enough with the chart itself, and should study that instead.

0rion wrote:To me, as long as they're not a distraction, graphics mean precisely dick. Frankly, I'm a more than a little appalled at how seriously some people take mere aesthetics, up-voting a garbage chart for looking pretty and/or down-voting a very well-done chart because they're not museum-quality. To me, I feel that those people don't have their priorities straight. If I gave one word of caution, it would be not to fall into this trap.

Having said that, a good-looking BG/Banner can be an indicator of the thought put into a work. If you're using that as a measure, however, you obviously aren't familiar enough with the chart itself, and should study that instead.

I completely disagree, the banner is the first thing a person sees and leaves a lasting first impression. The art doesn't have to be amazing, but if it's ugly it makes the file feel really unprofessional.

Same can be said about song volume, sample start, song wheel, etc. It all has to do with professionalism. Best example I can come up with is Xaiyou. It's charts are excellent, but I would have never played it if I didn't have to review it because the banner is ugly and it's so loud that it hurts my ears compared to everything else. Shit, it's not even spelled right on the song wheel. A song with all these things wrong with it absolutely does not deserve to win, even if its steps are perfect.

This is why BlueSS specifically said presentation is NOT just art, it's how the file is presented as a whole.

I wouldn't include video in presentation, because it's an optional extra, not something that's required. You can't take away points for not having something that doesn't need to be there. Personally I think that readmes were required so they should have something to do with presentation but this is kind of a weird issue that I don't feel like talking about.

However, I think docking someone for a misrating is somewhat meaningless. It's just an estimation, not an absolute. Really, it's an arbitrary measure based on barely founded rules from DDR that, as you admit in the other thread, aren't exactly perfect. There are 9's harder than 10's, 8's harder than 9's, probably some 7's harder than 9's, etc. It's just kind of a general guide.

I don't mean to be a hardass but that's a problem I have with your reviews. Just because something is rated slightly off doesn't make it a bad chart, the chart is still exactly the same whether someone typed the number "7" or "9" into Stepmania. It seems like for a lot of things you took off points just because the rating was off.

Kamek wrote:I haven't judged a simfile since TournaMix (3? 4?), so I'm a bit out of practice. Any pointers?

Haha, I think it was TM4 because I remember you being one of the only judges that liked my file.

I concur somewhat on not docking for misrating, and for sure when it comes to song wheel. I think that if you can't properly title the song and author, it shows a lack of care for the simfile you just made. As for graphics, I believe it means a good deal less. That is in certain cases of course, mainly because a good stepfiler isn't always a good artist. To be honest, there were about 8 or 9 files I would have entered if I felt I wouldn't be harshly graded on graphics because I know the chart is top-notch and the graphics are not. That said, an ugly banner i.e. one with no thought whatsoever is fully subject to a low grade.

As for extra things like videos, charts and whatnot, I've been including comments about them sometimes, but not docking or crediting points for them. I think if you have an opinion, go ahead and leave it, but don't let it reflect the score in presentation.

Krazy wrote:I completely disagree, the banner is the first thing a person sees and leaves a lasting first impression. The art doesn't have to be amazing, but if it's ugly it makes the file feel really unprofessional.

Quick. WITHOUT LOOKING, describe Monkey Punk's banner to me. How about Love This Feeling? Did the background from Superstar (Non-Stop Megamix) give you ANY indication of what the steps would be like? It was just a recoloration, so obviously very little work was put into it. Does that mean the chart was automatically bad?

Krazy wrote:Same can be said about song volume, sample start, song wheel, etc. It all has to do with professionalism.

Yes, but they're all DETAILS. Little bonuses here or there that when you get down to it have nothing to do with the most key aspect of the gameplay itself. At BEST, it can indicate the thought put into a file. But again, if someone can't tell that by playing, they're probably not a very good judge of that anyway.

Krazy wrote:Best example I can come up with is Xaiyou. It's charts are excellent, but I would have never played it if I didn't have to review it because the banner is ugly and it's so loud that it hurts my ears compared to everything else.

See, and that's the problem. When you do something like that, you're acting like some spoiled little 6-year-old kid that won't try a new type of food because it "looks gross." It's closed-minded and foolish, with respect.

Krazy wrote:Shit, it's not even spelled right on the song wheel. A song with all these things wrong with it absolutely does not deserve to win, even if its steps are perfect.

Frankly, I didn't even notice the misspelling, and I could think of a couple of worse BGs in that same bracket. As far as misspelling goes, that can be attributed to an honest mistake. Tinkle Whatever-it-is was given a pass on a mistake in B2, so it's a double-standard not to do so in this case.

You also JUST ADMITTED that no matter how good the chart is, you wouldn't let it win if the visuals were sub-par. It bespeaks a lapse in priorities.

Krazy wrote:I wouldn't include video in presentation, because it's an optional extra, not something that's required. You can't take away points for not having something that doesn't need to be there. Personally I think that readmes were required so they should have something to do with presentation but this is kind of a weird issue that I don't feel like talking about.

And it also makes you look like a hypocrite. You automatically lose credibility if you tell someone not to count one non-required element, while saying another should in the same breath.

No one got full marks on tilt (the highest bonus being +2). Had I added the extra .5 to tilt instead of presentation, it would have come to the same.

Krazy wrote:However, I think docking someone for a misrating is somewhat meaningless.

NO. NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO NO, NO!

If I'm a person that's just starting this game and I see a file rated a 1 that has step-jumps, corner jumps, and crossovers in it, it's going to automatically turn me off when it comes to the chart and possibly the game in particular. Likewise, if I see something rated a 7 or an 8 with candle runs at ridiculously high speeds, I'm going to wonder just what the hell the author was thinking.

Take Disconnected Disco's Expert Doubles chart on In the Groove. Some bonehead gave this chart a 10 rating when it has some of the most outrageous and ridiculous handplants and BS combinations in the game. Not only did this ACTUALLY bespeak the quality of the work (or rather the lack of forethought put into the step positioning), but it also meant that anyone that beat a song of that level was only good enough to beat a 10.

By that same token, a chart rated harder than it is can mean disillusionment. Sakura would be my exhibit A on that one.

Krazy wrote:There are 9's harder than 10's, 8's harder than 9's, probably some 7's harder than 9's, etc. It's just kind of a general guide.

There's a difference between someone lowering/raising a borderline difficulty based on their personal thoughts regarding the file and seemingly pulling a number out of thin air.

Likewise, if a chart has something in it that simply isn't appropriate for a player of that skill level, while the rest of the chart would be playable for them (the candle 16ths on What it Feels Like are a perfect example), that part sticks out like a sore thumb.

Krazy wrote:I don't mean to be a hardass but that's a problem I have with your reviews. Just because something is rated slightly off doesn't make it a bad chart, the chart is still exactly the same whether someone typed the number "7" or "9" into Stepmania. It seems like for a lot of things you took off points just because the rating was off.

So, let me get this straight. You would ENSURE (by your own words) that a song with sub-par visuals would be buried, but don't like it when I dock points based on something that actually has something to do with the chart itself?

With respect, I think you should stop and think about this a little bit more.

AmazingKenchan wrote:As for graphics, I believe it means a good deal less. That is in certain cases of course, mainly because a good stepfiler isn't always a good artist. To be honest, there were about 8 or 9 files I would have entered if I felt I wouldn't be harshly graded on graphics because I know the chart is top-notch and the graphics are not. That said, an ugly banner i.e. one with no thought whatsoever is fully subject to a low grade.

I agree, and I think you did a better job of pointing this out than I did, really.

AmazingKenchan wrote:As for extra things like videos, charts and whatnot, I've been including comments about them sometimes, but not docking or crediting points for them. I think if you have an opinion, go ahead and leave it, but don't let it reflect the score in presentation.

I gave an extra .5 to a video, because it was above and beyond and in most cases added something that wasn't there before. From now on, I'll add it to the tilt, but it would still come to the same score.

I don't time to make a huge response right now but I hope someone can back me up because I don't think I'm wrong about most of the things I said.


I think what it comes down to is, I consider simfiles an art and look at the entire package, the theme if you will, whereas you are only focusing on the gameplay and what is actually there. Basically, artist vs. realist.

Krazy wrote:I don't time to make a huge response right now but I hope someone can back me up because I don't think I'm wrong about most of the things I said.

Please don't go appealing to other people to back up your statements. Not only does it not add any credibility to what you say, it's also irrelevant.

I'm doing you the courtesy of addressing your points frankly and directly. While you don't need to go into the same amount of detail as I did, I would appreciate the same courtesy in return.

The fact that you didn't have an immediate response says to me that you don't dislike what I said because it's "wrong," but because it's a different, new idea. I'd beg you to give this some more consideration rather than simply looking for a way to write it off.

Krazy wrote:I think what it comes down to is, I consider simfiles an art and look at the entire package, the theme if you will, whereas you are only focusing on the gameplay and what is actually there. Basically, artist vs. realist.

This could be considered true. However, every medium of entertainment can be looked upon as an "art form." At what part does artistic expression come at the expense of entertainment value?

Ok, whoa, easy there. I think the both of you make fairly valid points though. In fact, I believe the right answers lie in the average between the things the both of you suggested...compromises if you will.

Alright, graphics. They shouldn't be the death of an otherwise good song, but they are also not completely meaningless. Gameplay and the chart itself is first and foremost, however, Krazy and AmazingKenchan had good points. A truly ugly chart is off-putting. It does have a first-impression effect, and if the banner/bg are horrific, it does seriously make you think less about who put it together. And I'm not talking like... I disagree with the color scheme or the text etc...I mean like they tossed in some image they just 'found' for the background and wrote the title sloppily on it with a Photoshop paintbrush, lol. So again, bad graphics shouldn't entirely kill a song, but they do set the tone before even playing the song, so they should be at least considered.

And quick note to Orion...

Quick. WITHOUT LOOKING, describe Monkey Punk's banner to me. How about Love This Feeling? Did the background from Superstar (Non-Stop Megamix) give you ANY indication of what the steps would be like? It was just a recoloration, so obviously very little work was put into it. Does that mean the chart was automatically bad?

While I barely ever played Monkey Punk, I do remember off the top of my head that Love This Feelin' had a pink/red/orange schemed bg and banner with a skeleton in the background I believe? Also, about the recoloration for Superstar? It's a remix, it makes sense. There was work put into the graphics for the original mix, so recoloring for the remix is irrelevant. Point is, the graphics for the remix still didn't look BAD.

Now, difficulty ratings. I think Orion had the best conclusion on this one... If you have a chart rated Standard 5 on a 160BPM song for example, and you have bursts of sixteenths? You're a nutbag. There are so many songs out there that are really hard to tell if they should've been bumped up or knocked down in their rating. Witch Doctor maybe should've been a 9... Celebrate maybe should've been a 7, etc etc. I think the rating is relevant when, and only when, the marking in difficulty is blatantly erroneous. We can't nitpick people too much, deciding that "Well I thought that song was pretty easy, so it should've been rated one less." But if someone creates a song on Heavy that's crazier than Xenon's Heavy chart and they insist on calling it a 7? Then that's about the time you probably should call them on it. If you think you're good at making stepcharts, I would think you -should- have at least some general idea of where ratings should fall. The ratings may not be based on any strict rules, but we use them based on songs/ratings we've experienced in the past, so it gives you a good idea of a song's difficulty level overall. That's what ratings are pretty much...comparisons. So use them and help the players out! haha.