Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Move fixed scroll speed change out of classic mod for taiko #22325

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 25, 2023

Conversation

sw1tchbl4d3r
Copy link
Contributor

@sw1tchbl4d3r sw1tchbl4d3r commented Jan 21, 2023

Followup to #21883
The assertions made here (i.e. looking identical to classic mod and stable) weren't quite true yet, for that the constant sv scaling must be moved out of the classic mod as well, this was sadly missed on my part.

This PR makes taiko notes scroll at a constant speed, no matter the size of the playfield.
The comment which mentions more notes being visible on a longer playfield shouldn't be of concern because longer playfields currently get clamped anyway.

This is opposite of what master currently does, it scales scroll speed with aspect ratio, so notes become slower on lower aspect ratios to keep the same amount of notes on the screen, which is undesirable, and not the behaviour of stable (which is what the first pr aimed to achieve in the first place.)

To compare:
What we want - #17225 the videos attached here in regards to 4:3, identical scroll speed to 16:9
What we don't want - https://sw1tchbl4d3.com/static/files/what.mp4

For approach: I'm not sure how important order is here, so instead of putting it into UpdateAfterChildren() I opted to just use the Update() method as the mod previously did, since this value has to be recalculated on every update, and does affect child positioning.

@peppy
Copy link
Sponsor Member

peppy commented Jan 23, 2023

So to confirm, the expectation from the taiko community (and how it works on stable) is that if you have a 4:3 or 5:4 aspect ratio, you're actually going to see less of the playfield? Basically making the window adjustment a cheap and incorrect alternative to a "fade in" mod akin to osu!mania's?

@sw1tchbl4d3r
Copy link
Contributor Author

Correct.

@peppy
Copy link
Sponsor Member

peppy commented Jan 23, 2023

I wonder how receptive the community would be to adding this as a FadeIn mod instead of this direction.

@peppy peppy requested a review from a team January 23, 2023 05:39
@sw1tchbl4d3r
Copy link
Contributor Author

sw1tchbl4d3r commented Jan 23, 2023

Probably not well, the point of this was to remove the mod dependency, not move it around.
Important to note is that people don't play 4:3 for the "extra challenge", it's just a question of comfort, and their default way to play, which would make locking it behind a mod unwanted.

Copy link
Collaborator

@bdach bdach left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think I will ever understand doing this and intentionally creating an uneven playing field as the standard taiko game experience, but if it's what the people want ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

@zachmanthethird
Copy link

Important to note is that people don't play 4:3 for the "extra challenge", it's just a question of comfort, and their default way to play, which would make locking it behind a mod unwanted.

I agree. Locking expected functionality behind a mod would likely come with criticism. That said, I don't think taiko players would be adverse to a "Fade In" mod in addition to this if it added even a slight multiplier advantage. osu!mania's Fade-In, Hidden, Flashlight combo generally seems well-liked and could apply to osu!taiko as well. I'll poll a small portion of the taiko tournament community and open a separate discussion if necessary. Unfortunately, I think this is unlikely to gain traction until #17265 is resolved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants