artmapping

closing proposal as requested by squirrelpascals in favour of a different approach

my map: unconventional philosophical unique artmapping (good)

your map: conventional unartistic common uninspired mapping (bad)

Idk how this works but to me it's just mapping with advanced thinking and nothing else. since I believe making maps are basically ''art'' due to the ideas and aes we go for. Anything thats purposefully made to reflect means art in a map

i'll be reworking this proposal soon to adress the concerns

calling "some" maps artistic would imply not all maps are artistic, which i disagree. ALL maps are some kind of art imo

good idea on paper but at the end of the day art is in the eye of the beholder, imo it's not a descriptor that we as audience should be putting on maps, but something that mappers themselves should put on their own because who knows better about the intent behind a map than the mapper themself?

Is this descriptor intended for maps like Hawatari Nioku Centi aka maps that are basically too """""artistic"""""" to be properly playable?
/s/1893971

Or would something like this not be unique enough in its approach? Does this map go into a gray zone? Would whether or not this falls into this category be dictated by the skill level of top players?

Would this descriptor be intended for maps like Otomegokoro?
/s/16987

This had unique approaches for mapping for the time, but in the end, was still designed to be playable, more so than most auto maps or quila. This map seems really tame in comparison to other examples, but appears to fit the criteria for its time.

I think @melloe's complaint is valid for both examples. Miss You would've probably gotten this label back in 2014/2015, but with how mapping has evolved, a lot of maps use similar approaches now, and Otomegokoro would probably be considered too tame now.

just using "experimental" as a descriptor would be 10x better even though that's also based on individual perspective but tbh it feels a lot more universal n a clearer concept than just "art mapping"

eh i think ill be voting this a no bcus of various factors i dont rly wanna type out (lazy)

fair moonpoint :p

however, im curious on what people would think about doing this, because at that poitn you may as well used "experimental", which coorelates heavily with artmapping depending on how people might define art in mapping, lol

art has surpassed positive connotations in musical genres, but the more i think about it im not sure if its an appropriate straight forward port to mapping terms?

would probably require a shift in majority opinion for this to be OK, i.e. this could be too early

I think changing the tag to "avante garde" and possibly deleting the second sentence of the description would make the experimental nature of the tag more descriptive, and solve the issue of straight forwardness, since people indeed have different definitions of what "art" is. Works both ways because the way avant garde is used as a term is ajacent to the arts.

What mellow said

i think it's way too timely of a phrase. a map may be considered "artmapping" just because it's weird; and then maybe everyone follows suit, there's twenty more maps like it, until all of a sudden it's become ordinary. "artmapping" isnt actually a qualitative descriptor of the map itself, just of how unconventional it's perceived to be at that certain point in time.

also the line between "art" and "non-art" is so blurred, so many maps could be argued to be either-or

when i typed everything in and changed my vote to hold the page reloaded, so im not typing that again

Im not sure if "conceptual maps" are that rigid. An idea itself can either be limiting or allowing of more by itself. I also dont know if i view mapping as art or if it has a sub-branch thats purely artistic so ill just figure it out for myself for a while...

Definitely a yes from me. Like what squirrelp stated prior, I also believe that "conceptual" can be a bit too structured on a single idea / set of ideas. With the artmapping descriptor, it could maybe even promote maps that are more freeform / niche in general.

i think being very innovative and creative classifies and something like "artmapping" i would use this

probably needs rename to just "art"

not against this in theory. i dont find the "no ranked maps for this" argument too compelling because loved exists. nonetheless if you had some ranked maps in mind when proposing this, then expanding the scope in the description sounds like a good idea. a lot of people are interpreting it in a pretty limiting way

hold too cus milr_ said what i believe aswell, in my opinion there's no "artistic" map that exist at all in the ranked section due to how complicated some can be, only example of a mapper that for me gives those artistics approaches will be quila, where they actually try to interpret the song with either "phantom" layers, slider-art or manipulate the editor in a way that is simply unrankable

too vague, and I think its too tied to peoples subjective opinions about which maps are good. I think at least part of this could be covered by an 'experimental' tag that could cover the 'entirely unique philosophies' idea.

i like it it sounds funni

but also i think there's potential for this descriptor, imo there's enough examples of this kinds of map in ranked that it should be ok

/s/1158280
/s/988651
/s/1628539
/s/1147094
/s/1150829

Here are a few ranked examples that initially came to mind for me

i don't think this could be applied to anything that people could vote for right now and not cause a huge divide on if stuff with this tag is actually so distant from traditionally possible design norms for there to be a whole tag 4 it

pls example bcause i like this 100% in theory but i'm not convinced something like this actually exists in the bin(s) of maps that we can vote for right now stuff like 4n3c are like really obviously removed from traditional modes of representation as the "game design" part of mapping would allow for but this is like very not the case for most of the ranked / loved section right now unless you REALLY stretch the line between accessible design and more performative design

I think the same idea for art vs conceptual can be applied to mapping as to music. Art-Rock and Art-Pop etc. follow more of an avant-garde approach. Conceptual music follows an idea to connect the music/album together.

Also on that note I think the word art works here fine imho. We've been using art as a way to describe music in the same way we'd be describing maps here.

i can understand the definition of art but there's not enough the data of it cuz most of them are almost unranked/graveyard like 4n3c and etc(extremely centipede ig) would vote "yes" if they had gotten ranked/loved status

@monsieursebas I see a conceptual map as being very tightly structured around an idea or gimmick with object placement, whereas artmapping is much more limitless. conceptual mapping lays out strict rules and groundwork to follow, whereas there are no rules to artmapping- the mappers creativity is their only limit

I do not like how the word art is used here.

or do these overlap a fair bit anyway?

when does a map stop being conceptual and start being "art"?

One could argue that "intent" is hard to judge, but this would work well for maps out there that stand out enough design wise to put them in a completely different league of their own. especially with many super experienced mappers out there that set out to create something super experimental. lots of maps are already judged for being "art" already so honestly, why not lol. examples: 4n3c, dreamteamrox