Rozovian

I work with kids in early school age, mostly 7-9-yearolds. Once a week, we have a game hour, where they can play on their phones, 3DSs, whatever. I've brought my laptop along, and it's been loads of fun. We've had a blast playing Jamestown, and they've displayed the same frustration/love for VVVVVV as I remember from old, die-a-lot games from my childhood. But I don't know what else to bring. So far it seems like it'd have to be something they can play together (Jamestown), something with short levels (Jamestown), something with simple controls (VVVVVV), a forgiving pace (VVVVVV), and/or in the case of longer games something where they can switch players mid-game (VVVVVV). Suggestions, ideas, thoughts, experiences, questions?

Jade from Beyond Good and Evil, saving orphans and a pig uncle Faith from Mirror's Edge, saving her sis and taking down Big Brother Zoey and Rochelle from L4D, surviving in the zombie apocalypse Play more games.

I like how it transitions from 6/8 to 4/4 in a way that first made me think it was just side-chaining messing with the levels before noticing it's a different rhythm. Cool use of both orchestral and electronic elements, tho I would suggest layer them a bit more to give the otherwise often weak pizzicato some meat. The arrangement, however, is as others have already pointed out, too medley-ish for ocremix. If you're gonna submit this to the site, it should be more cohesive and flow better between parts and sources. It's good that it circles back to SoS towards the end, but there's a lot of jarring transitions and other medley things in the middle. You also have some weird clashy stuff around 4:00. Not all good, but a really cool thing regardless.

Good sound. Heard a few note clashes, and source vs. length is definitely an issue if you want it to become an OCReMix. I can make out what could be a melody derived from the source, but imo it's not dominant enough to count.

The problem isn't the distress, it's the damsel. Make him/her an active character rather than an inactive one. Kidnapping princesses isn't the problem, it's that the princess doesn't do anything that is. In the Zelda example, we've had plenty of side characters that we've played as at times, if indirectly. I'm thinking of statues and seagulls and things like that. Much of a typical Zelda game is a puzzle game anyway, so why not play those parts a bit more like the Lost Vikings? In the same vein, why not make Peach _a_ playable character in a Mario game? SMB2 did it. Mario keeps switching hats, why not switch characters just as well? DK64 did it. And nothing's really stopping them from doing a Starfox game centered on Crystal. Why not a spin-off series focused on non-technological stuff. Less flying, more... idunno, crystals and things. Overall, the problem is presenting a motivation for the players. Saving a princess is a simple idea, so is defeating an evil wizard/dragon/whatever. Combining them gets you the formula the vid complains about. We could just as well make the storyabout breaking a curse over a land or another character (the king, perhaps?), leaving the princess (because there must be one) to play a more active role in the story and perhaps the game too. We're still talking about a male fantasy here, whether it's saving the girl, or saving the world with her... so there's still marketability.

Talk to whoever's editing the videos. Even if they're not music ppl, they can tell you about mood and things in a non-music language. Any half-decent video editor will either edit to temp music (giving the vid a good rhythm for you to work with) or otherwise adjust the cut to the music once they have the music. If you know anything about video editing, think like an editor. Or, if the production isn't that coordinated and/or the videos don't need super-synced music, just write stuff that's useful in a variety of scenes. tl;dr: talk to the editor.

Without considering player actions, the other characters will either be active or inactive, story-wise. Town npcs? Pretty much all inactive. Maybe they tell you important stuff if you talk to them, maybe they give you stuff if you talk to them, maybe they provide a service (eg shops) if you talk to them. They're inactive. Cutscene characters that show up to block your path, characters that stop your free roaming for a cutscene to let you know there's a ship in the docks that'll take you to whatever, or give you a mission or something. They're active, at least at that time. So then the damsel in distress, be this male or female, it's an inactive character that has the distress happen to her/him. It's an inactive character. Another character, or story element, is the active element here. The bad guy kidnaps the girl? The bad guy is the active one there. This justifies the player's action - making the player active. What's sexist is the prevalence of female inactive characters in the role of the distressed. The complaint is that it's so often a female character in distress to justify male player characters' actions, and/or that the main female character is an inactive character. Mirror's Edge and Beyond Good and Evil have female protagonists and other characters in distress, so they're not guilty of this. Eg Zelda games where Zelda is an active character and/or has a role in the game mechanics (Spirit Tracks?) aren't either. So maybe it's more a matter of active vs. inactive rather than the distribution of female and male distressed characters. -- Come to think of it, Seiken Densetsu 3 has some pretty interesting motivations for each character.

Also, the ball analogy still applies to so many of these games on a mechanical level. We're not playing because character x loves character y. We're playing because it's fun to play. It's fun to explore the story, or fun to run around in the game world, or fun to dominate the enemies, or whatever. It's for fun. _We_ are not motivated by caring (unless we've grown to care for those characters by the time they're kidnapped/cursed/whatevered). Often, it's not about saving the damsel anyway, it's about beating the bad guy. It's not even about the bad guy either, the bad guy can be the environment, or female, or a machine, or a corporation, or evil itself. As such, it's equally rewarding to beat a game and get the reward smooch as it is to get a comedy ending. We're not playing for a happily ever after, we're playing for any "after". Preferably the most difficult one in the game, in which case we want the game to recognize that we beat it. Anyone ever wanted to play a game because someone stole the protagonist's bananas?

Does this scenario offend on the same level? Kate is obviously the DiD, but now it is her sister who is saving her. How do people feel about this? I personally found Mirror's Edge to be a very refreshing experience on many fronts. A non-combat oriented action game with a powerful, Asian, female protagonist who is not over-sexualized. Bright, clean, colorful design, simple controls, unique soundtrack, great premise. Can you tell that I'm on the edge of my seat for Mirror's Edge 2? Mirrors Edge is pretty kickass, beautiful, and overall a great thing... right up until the stupid server room in the final level, where I spent 20 minutes running around trying to figure out what I was supposed to do and thus breaking the pacing of the game. Doesn't help that the ending cutscene just doesn't work. The editing, the music (timing/intro/something didn't fit the mood of the scene), the action, the apparent disappearance of the PK security there a minute earlier... Kate being in distress isn't communicated particularly well, either. But yeah, she fits the bill. Kate doesn't really do anything, and Faith is motivated by saving her. Faith is an example of a female protagonist done right, so it's not the same as the video's example of two males using her as the ball in a game.

So, _this_ track gets a source breakdown, but obscure DOS games don't. Life isn't fair. Lead sounds a bit too loud. Bell-ish synth gets really bright sometimes. Dubsteppy part feels really weird without an excessive amount of lows. Cool that you're trying something different, and it does transition well into the track afterwards, but you could achieve that with an automated high pass on an initially low-heavy bass just as well. Source undoubtedly there. Feels cohesive and moves well. Too bad there are voice clips, but other than that, I like it. /mr

That's a really loud noise effect. Nice choice of sounds here, but the whole thing sounds ridiculously bright. Do you have any mids? Snare could be a little stronger, it's kind'a weak. More mids. Recognizing the chords of the source so far... Ugh, there's a voice clip. Yeah so, source is there, it's a minimal source, and while I find that those lend themselves well to plenty of variations, I don't mind the repetitive take on it. I do mind some of the transitions, tho. There's a lot of stop-and-go. Leads are too loud. Everything is too bright. Those bells at the very end are piercingly bright and painful to listen to. Dunno what setup you're listening to this with, but it really doesn't sound right on mine. Way too bight, minimalist take on the source, stop-and-go arrangement... Hard to say if it's ocr material, but it's not ready yet. /mr

Starts off clearly sourced. I'm a little concerned it's too much of a cover. There may be a slight difference in genre and sound. Beyond that, it feels too conservative. Production feels pushed a tad too hard. I'm not sure what's in the guitar sounds themselves, and what's a mixdown problem, but it feels too pushed. Maybe you could drop the lead levels slightly. Maybe it's the kick having a bit too much lows. Maybe you should roll off the lows a little higher on things. Maybe there's an unnecessary overdrive somewhere. Maybe the low end is pushing the master compressor too much. Hard to say. The sound gets old, but its a fairly short track, so it's not that big a problem. Overall, it's pretty much about whether it's too conservative or not. I'm apparently a terrible judge of that, so I'm not gonna say either way. Cool track regardless. /mr

I like these sources. Simple, oldsk00l. I'm getting a Lotus vibe from them, which can't be a bad thing. Intro gets loud rather fast, might wanna soften it up slightly. Gets messy once the bass comes in, the low end is just boomy and unfocused. Hihat is a bit loud. There's plenty of retro-y sounds in here, but some of the processing doesn't quite make sense, like the weird tremolo on the choir. There's plenty of cool processing things tho, like the stereo effects. Instrumentation is pretty eclectic, but most of it works well. Some of it could be better mixed into the track, like your overly loud and dry leads. Low end and leads fixed and you should have the track in a much better state. It's quite long, and I got tired of it quickly. While that could be production things getting to me, I don't think this track really needs all five minutes of length. Transitions can be really jarring at times (eg 4:35). Sources are a bit hard to get to, they're both quite long and have plenty of different parts. That coul explain why many of the lead melodies are so hard to place, but those could just as well be original writing. I know the basslines form the main menu are there, and the first melody is clearly source, but the rest is harder to place. Without making this eat up a whole afternoon for me, I'm just gonna ask: would you recognize the melodies in the remix? Fix up your production and figure out your arrangement. You're not quite there yet. /mr

That interface looks a lot easier to navigate than REAPER's.

My advice would be to finish what you're working on. If you find that you've made choices early in the development - eg writing, sound design - that you can't get rid of anymore, just finish the track and move on. Maybe it won't be the masterpiece you expected when you started it, and maybe no amount of pro skill and tools could get it there without pretty much redoing it anyway. I've sat on tracks for years, years. Dragonfood is a good example, although that one's been resurrected and rebuilt a few times in the process. Those old tracks were bad, and some stuff I make today is also bad. It can have plenty of good things (melodies, sound design, mixing things, arrangement, mood, whatever) and still be bad as a whole because something else is dragging it down. TL;DR: If your track is bad, finish your bad track and move on. No use getting hung up on tracks that won't get any better. Make lots of music and you'll learn to avoid badness.

At 100€, your best bet is probably the all-free route. Not sure how easy it is to work with, but REAPER should be able to do the necessary midi edits. As for sounds, you can grab a bunch of free sample packs, such as SSO (the site is "temporarily disabled" atm, tho). Check out KVRAudio for a soundfont player and possibly other instruments and tools. Other sites offer soundfonts and other instruments for free. The hardest part will be to learn how to best humanize your writing. I have some thoughts on it in my remixing guide (in my sig), but it all depends heavily on the samples you have to work with. Also, while it might not be that great for your learning, handing your midi to someone with a bit more skill and better tools is also an option. I don't suppose anyone requires you to play all instruments yourself anyway. I don't know if your school will accept a collaboration like that, tho.

Yeah, arrangement sounds pretty conservative. It's hard to do something in a similar style and keep it from being too conservative, arrangement-wise. Something this close would need to be really personalized and excellent performance-wise to make it onto the site. Way too bassy and/or too loud overall. Not particularly dynamic, you've got drums on full through most of the track. Compression problems noticeable in the highs. SOmewhat muddy and messy in the lows/mids, especially when you have plenty of lead-type sounds, like around 1:00. It does have some nice drum writing and a decent sound design. The break around 1:50 is really cool. This is a pretty good starting point for a new arrangement, but it's too close for ocr atm. /mr

No source link, no source comment. Intro is spectacular. Not that big a fan of the lead sound, nor the type of filtering on the drums (tho I do enjoy filtered drums), but it really builds well. Very low-heavy mixing. The actual leads get better, tho I'm not sure they're that good a fit (whereas that sound used as a lead in the intro has grown on me at this point). You can hear the compressors letting up at the end, which shouldn't be so obvious. It's also a bit anticlimactic with the filtering foreshadowing a change, but I was expecting a new, bigger chorus rather than the end of the track. You can probably adjust the filtering and drop out an instrument or two for a more ending vibe there, if necessary. Arrangement flows quite well, but can't comment on source usage without a source. /mr

Lots of cool reverse effects, and a pretty brutal distorted soundscape. My biggest concern is strictly the mix, and mostly the bass. Yes, it's supposed to be big and dominating, but pushing the compression like this, it really screws up the rest of the sounds, especially when it just comes in. I don't think it'd need that much adjusting, just a dB or two less from the bass. There are also instruments that are bright and clear like they're supposed to be foreground elements, but too soft for that. The 2:28 part has vocals, chippy/bubbly fake guitar things, piano and a slew of things all fighting for attention, some of those could be pushed a bit further back. Arrangement is overall pretty conservative, with a break in the middle. There's some creepy alterations to the melody. Bass writing is pretty cool, good choice of notes there. Hard to say how it'd fare on the panel. I'm too bothered by the messy mixing to really enjoy it, but there's some really cool stuff in there. /mr

Yeah, those prolific on the album. I'd rather not spoil every track and every artist in the preview, or make the preview an hour long. We have a few unusual tracks on it, that I think we should keep secret until the release, or possibly include in the trailer rather than the preview. But as the preview is still in the works, there's time to change things. Anyone on the project disagree/agree/comment? - Said group pic kicks ass. Now you all know.

Realistically != probably. Just get it done as soon as you can. Also, you probably aren't in the preview. It'll be more representative if we focus on remixers more prolific on the album.... unless of course we think your remix well represents a portion of the album. We'll see.

Yeah, ocr really hides the feedback forums. Whether it's remixes or originals, they're really hard to find. Seriously.

That will never happen. Totally never ever.

Indeed. A lot of the music we do we could, for the most part, do in any decent DAW, we just like the features and workflow of the ones we use, or can't afford to buy/learn new ones. I could take Battery, Onnisphere and FM8 to any other DAW and make roughly the same music I do in Logic. These instruments would work in any DAW with plugin support, as would many, may others. So it really just comes down to whether the program works well enough to host some plugins, which is where most of the sound quality comes from. It also, obviously, takes skill, which take time to develop and/or adjust to any new software. When you're just starting out, it doesn't really matter what you're using, since you'll run into some kind of wall eventually, and need to get new sounds/tools. But that's a concern to deal with when you get that far. If it makes sound, you can make music with it.

Didn't watch, but it's a good idea. Tho I wanna see this applied to detuning. How detuned should things be (cents vs key relative) for this to work on two oscillators.