Bracket 1 - Discussion

[will-i-am]

If it makes you feel any better, I have no objections on Trial Machine PhoeniX WrighT's Heavy. I thought it was Perfect! No, Marvelous!!

#Infinity, how does the song sounds thin? What does that even mean? The song is the busiest of all entries in the entire bracket, far too busy to even make out all the noises! What did you suppose k//eternal did, then? Make a 6 foot chart for a Trip Machine remix? That'd be a first. It sounds like you're looking for an excuse to dock points. Believe me, I understand that the mash-up sucks other than for the concept, but I think you're being a bit unfair by not really stating what you found wrong with the patterns in the chart themselves and are relying heavily on the whole "the song didn't warrant this difficulty" argument.

Also, jammitch! has faulty reviews. He gave Good Time a 4 in presentation and SPARKS FLY a 2 because Good Time has two full sets of charts and SPARKS FLY only has one extra chart. What about the graphics? Appropriate song cut? Aspects that were actually required?

Remember this?

Who's docking points for excluding bonus material? Imma get'em!

You're giving an unfair advantage to others who included extras by basically replacing the "presentation" field with "graphics and extras", rating graphics alone out of a possible 3 points instead of 5 and then adding points for files with unnecessary material that you probably didn't look into any further than noting its existence after seeing it listed on the song wheel. Essentially, every song should start with a 5 in presentation and then be docked for poor or flawed graphics. Songs can regain lost points with extras, but they're seemingly expected in your reviews in order to get full presentation points. What if a song doesn't have a music video made for it? That seems to be the only thing holding back Space Truckin' from a full 5 points. I find it hard to make sense how you expect people to turn in their personal renditions of the Mona Lisa along with added features, like eyebrows, to a simfile competition when you yourself slipped up on graphics this contest. The situation of extras was a real problem years ago with OSC BoNG, so please don't contribute to a repeat in the much evolved system we have now.

Just so ya'll know in advance, BLueSS is letting me tally up the votes. That means I have final say in who and what counts for the first round when I compile the point totals in Excel. I'm not saying I'm going to exclude your vote because I don't like your opinion, but when you disregard the guidelines that are clearly stated and have been discussed, I can't tolerate misinformation, especially when one review can make the difference between a file moving on and getting cut.

[y3v0n]

i hardly feel robbed tbh but that's just me, i rather enjoyed the fact jam at least saw the fun side of sparks fly and didn't get bogged down in the fact it's karaoke heavy

[hellrazor]

Just so ya'll know in advance, BLueSS is letting me tally up the votes. That means I have final say in who and what counts for the first round when I compile the point totals in Excel. I'm not saying I'm going to exclude your vote because I don't like your opinion, but when you disregard the guidelines that are clearly stated and have been discussed, I can't tolerate misinformation, especially when one review can make the difference between a file moving on and getting cut.

BlueSS also said that PRESENTATION cannot be docked due to 'Song Choice' yet Infinity did just that.

The point I took off in presentation, on the other hand, is simply based on the fact that the song itself is inexcusably messy and melodically incoherent, and I felt that that affected how "presentable" the simfile was.

jammitch and Infinity need to adjust their scores just like I had to.

[hajtos]

Disclaimer: I hate drama. When I have to deal with drama, I used to try to make everyone happy.
Not anymore; this is the last tournament so I'm making a ruling. If you're happy with it; great. If not, you better not whine about it; because this is the last tournament and it's going to be fun, even if I have to ban people to make it that way. :)

Let's not make BLueSS force the fun into the tournament.
I also didn't agree with some opinions about my simfiles(mostly Lisek's, whose I thought was highly biased) but you know what? I don't care.
There is no real reward in this tournament so why argue about it?
For me, if there is at least one person that honestly liked my file and will step it from time to time, then that already makes me happy and no further reward is needed.

[jammitch!]

Also, jammitch! has faulty reviews. He gave Good Time a 4 in presentation and SPARKS FLY a 2 because Good Time has two full sets of charts and SPARKS FLY only has one extra chart. What about the graphics? Appropriate song cut? Aspects that were actually required?

First off, if extras don't reflect effort, then I don't know what does.

Second off, in an attempt to use the entire scale, I start from a lower baseline. Meeting the requirements is a 2. It goes up from there. It's exponential - a little more work (e.g. full singles, lyrics, or excellent graphics) gets you a 3, a lot (e.g. full doubles too) gets you a 4, and I reserve 5 for something above and beyond.

I did consider graphics. Except Good Time, almost all the graphics in this tournament are sufficiently competent to not dock points for - but nothing really jumps out as "above and beyond" either. Effort is hard to judge, because I can't tell "grabbed something from DA" vs. "rendered it myself". I'm not going to dock people on the graphics for thematic reasons, because that's such an individual choice. And I know there's been backlash in the past for going too hard on people who aren't good at Photoshop.

Cut basically got factored into the step rating, since that's when I notice it. I don't really want to double-dip. Again, except Good Time, just about all these files are technically well cut. (Whether I agree with the types of cuts made is another, irrelevant matter).

I'm not an audiophile, so I'm not a stickler for sound quality unless it's really bad (see Totalimmortal). Ditto for videos. I wanted to check samples, but my computer seems to run them long if the file is an MP3, so I gave up on that.

(Note that I'm actually against videos - they thrash my Myth box - but again, it shows effort.)

Even under these guidelines, Good Time probably should have been a 3.

If it ends up just being graphics quality and cut, I'm going to award almost straight 5s, which to me defeats the point of even having the category. If you can't count extras, there's just not a lot of areas in the base file to warrant having 5 points when most files are pretty competent at them nowadays.

Third, I just use tilt to put files where I want them to go anyway.

Fourth (and relatedly), these reviews were super rushed, as I'm under huge deadline pressure at work. I have absolutely no time between now and Friday, so I am going to do this the stupidest way possible. I'm just going to give every file that was competent in graphics and cut a 5 in presentation. Then I'll give a +1 tilt to everything that was a 4 or higher, and a -1 tilt to everything that was 2 or lower. Just about nothing will have changed about the relative order, but hopefully people will be happier with it.

EDIT: And done. Again, almost nothing changed, except now everyone has two more points. Good Time probably got the worst of it in the end.

EDIT 2: Less passive aggression.

[Yuke]

I agree with what Hajtos said. It is kinda sad, that if one person gives your work like 6/25 because of something, you have absolutely no chance to go to the next 'round'. The tourney is just for fun, so I guess this is not a big problem, but I also disagree with the fact, that a pretty standard simfile (everything on sync, good graphics, steps that have a good flow) is judged that harsh and basically excluded form the tourney.

(I am glad I'm in Lisek's bracket, so I do not have to worry about that happening to me, though :D)

[Lisek]

I also didn't agree with some opinions about my simfiles(mostly Lisek's, whose I thought was highly biased)

You can agree or not. That's why a lot of people is judging. If everyone would agree with others then there would be only need for one judge. I assure you, my vote wasn't biased. You weren't even the one who got least points from me. Please check my other reviews (not only from BM5 but from ALL of the BEST-Mixes since BEST-mix 1). If you feel that you would like to discuss this with me - please feel free to contact me by my GG number or by PM.

that a pretty standard simfile (everything on sync, good graphics, steps that have a good flow) is judged that harsh and basically excluded form the tourney.

I don't want to argue but let's face it. I wouldn't call them good graphics. Firstly it isn't real effort to take one of the official covers ( http://i46.tinypic.com/eapbp0.jpg ) which is also on white background and just add a font from default windows ones. Secondly, the graphics (the banner) didn't even included artist - which was mandatory in this (and all others BEST-mixes).

Please note that for me 3.5 for presentation is very high note. I only awarded one 5 till this point (Hammerhead, those are example how great ITG graphics should look like) and about 3 or 4 times I gave out 4 points. There is no official guidelines how everyone should judge the presentation value. I'm spliting those points into graphics quality / audio quality / preview / video quality (if there is one) / readme quality (if I want to bump something up).

Please also note how the readme of Hajtos's file looks. It contains least information that it could. It's not of course bad thing. But I would also like to take a note that graphics were made by someone else and were poor.

My next issue with the file were of course steps which were below average. I understand that there were no doublesteps or any other construction that "the polish community" takes as bad steps but I personally didn't like them. The song was highly understepped for ITG BRACKET. If the song would be in DDR BRACKET I would gladly give him around 6 points. I'm not saying of course that being "easy" is what decides whenever song should be in ITG or DDR bracket because there were also easy songs in ITG and hard songs in DDR but I think that even thought this songs perfectly fits with ITG guidelines the steps fall into DDR. The song is material for hard 10 or easy 11.

Going onto next one - the video. He didn't even took his time to fix the ratio, everything is stretched. This would be easily fixed with adding of black strips on top and bottom (which in VirtualDub takes about 15 seconds to add). Video is in pretty low quality and also contains audio track which unnecessary adds into file size (and takes precious space which could be used to boost video quality).

I hope that this took out a lot from your worries. If you need any more information about why have I given him that amount of points please contact me on PM or GG.

Also I would like to note that if you don't agree with my notes - why won't you judge by yourself?

[Yuke]

Hey, hey, chill out. No need to make DRAMA-mix out of this contest, as we are generally trying to have fun here. Nobody said, that your judging is wrong - I just said I personally disagree with the notes, because for me the simfile is pretty okay, at least. The post itself was just my feelings about what I saw - the topic says "Discussion", so why not?

You have right to judge as you please, and I can understand that some people might like different things than the others. I was just thinking about the fact, that (looking closely) one bad review like that may be more important than the rest of really positive ones (in terms of getting to the 'next round'). I know that now nothing can be done about this, but I think the most fair option with judging is that, which is used on the Olympics, or so - not including the best, and the worst note in the general score. Of course I know, that it would be really hard to judge like that here in Best-mix (the amount of reviews is mostly low), but hey, it is the Final one, so it won't happen either way.

About me judging - I enjoyed most of the files and I have some thoughts about them, but I am pretty busy these days. I will try to post some Approval Votes at least. :)

[Ronin]

I don't want to argue but let's face it. I wouldn't call them good graphics. Firstly it isn't real effort to take one of the official covers ( http://i46.tinypic.com/eapbp0.jpg ) which is also on white background and just add a font from default windows ones.

Yeah, thats rly disgraceful... I wonder who did those:
http://i.imgur.com/LGIdb.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/iicGg.png

Please note that for me 3.5 for presentation is very high note. I only awarded one 5 till this point (Hammerhead, those are example how great ITG graphics should look like) and about 3 or 4 times I gave out 4 points. There is no official guidelines how everyone should judge the presentation value.

Lets be honest, most of ITG players don't give a single shit about graphics. But sure, there is no "official guidelines" and thats why we can be dicks and shit on someone because of irl drama. Yay internet.

And about chart scoring... 2/10... ok, I understand "highly understepped" argument, its quite legit. But 2/10? It looks more like "I would made other chart so fuck you".
Even my abomination from last BM "Watashi wa Watashi no Michi wo Iku" got higher score from you, and that file was not only 100% retarded but also rushed.

Well, drama-mix is drama.

[Lisek]

Yeah, thats rly disgraceful... I wonder who did those:

And who said, that those were good? I think they are shit, like most of my older graphics. Wouldn't rate them much higher than Hajtos's (still if I would be rating them, I would give them at least one point more because they stick to the "artist on banner" guideline).

But sure, there is no "official guidelines" and thats why we can be dicks and shit on someone because of irl drama.

I'm not judging people - I'm judging simfiles. If file is shit - I will say that. Just like in all other reviews I have done. I would be much happier with anonymous files like in BEST-mix #1, no one would call me biased because I wouldn't know which files are yours. Also like I said in previous lenghty post - I'm juding ALL OF THE FILES BY THE SAME GUIDELINES.

Even my abomination from last BM "Watashi wa Watashi no Michi wo Iku" got higher score from you, and that file was not only 100% retarded but also rushed.

I liked that file, problem? Like I said, I'm not judging people - I'm judging simfiles. I don't really care if the simfile has been made by you, Hajtos, aurae, hellrazor or k//eternal. If file is good - I will rate it nicely. If file is shit - I won't.

Also I would gladly ask you to stop bashing me. I got it - you all hate me but I hold no grudge against your bunch. After all I'm doing here only what I have been doing for about five years.

[Ronin]

I don't hate you. I hardly care about all this drama nonsense.
This scoring is simply confusing for me. At the end of the day this is just friendly contest to provide some files for community with no money prizes or something like that.

[Yuke]

I don't hate you.

Nor do I. Or anyone else here. We are just simply arguing on your strict scoring, nothing more.
Hajtos himself said, he didn't care, so I do not see the reason to continue this drama anymore.


Ronin, let's just go troll League of Legends people instead~ :D

[Hainaut]

Since I can't review my own bracket, I'm going to give some brief comments about the entries in DDR B1-2:

Fireflies: Really good job with the graphics! Almost looks like something an nDDRo member would design. The steps are also a lot of fun. They have lots of variety, plus a few creative ideas, like the 16th double-taps during the chorus. Easily one of the better entries in the pack so far for me!

Good Time: Steps for this are pretty okay, but not exciting. Once again, horrendous presentation just destroys this for me. Besides the weak graphics and your usual habit of cutting off the song out of nowhere without a fadeout, the sync is extremely early.

Hyadain no Kakakata: Anime songs are mostly really unexciting to step because they don't have very interesting cues to follow and mostly force you to take a karaoke approach. That's pretty much just what brings this file down the most for me, but you still did a great job with what you were given. Lots of excellent placement throughout, and like your ITG entry, this has a nice break around the middle. I don't absolutely love it, but I can easily call it a great simfile.

Max 150: I really like this one, too! These steps have a lot of great momentum and flow quite smoothly. It's the type of chart that keeps you focused the whole way through. The breaks are a nice way to prevent this from being too repetitive, although I think they're a little overdone on most occasions; it's often just a non-jump quarter ever other beat, even though the music isn't any less energetic than the areas you step more holistically. Also, the sync is a bit early.

Sparks Fly: Putting aside the fact that this has some amazing graphics, this simfile has little to offer for me. I have to agree with Zounder and k//eternal that this goes way overboard with karaoke, and for me at least, it causes this simfile to feel completely one-dimensional. Although there are a few little notes in-between the vocals, it's not enough to save the steps. This kind of approach does not fit the thickly-produced song at all, which begs for at least a few instances of non-karaoke algorithms to break things up a bit. The karaoke streams in the very beginning of this stepchart are especially ineffective. Sorry y3v0n, you have lots of other quality files, but this file is just really predictable and dull for me.

[will-i-am]

Thanks for editing the reviews, jammitch! I kinda feel sorry now that you've replaced everything with 5's, but the presentation score isn't based on effort. It's based on quality. Plain and simple. You can still add or subtract a bonus point for effort in the Tilt field if you wish.

[Juub005]

Just downloading now. Speed: 11.8 KB/sec. :(

Edit2: Never mind, going rather quickly now.