Park / Warner Bros Movie World - France
-
27-September 10
- Views 7,744
- Downloads 1,371
- Fans 0
- Comments 13
-
-
51.92%(required: 50%) Bronze
Louis! 70% robbie92 70% chapelz 60% nin 60% turbin3 60% CedarPoint6 55% Kumba 55% BelgianGuy 50% K0NG 50% Sey 50% Liampie 45% SSSammy 45% Casimir 40% Nokia 35% RCTNW 35% 51.92% -
No fans of this park
-
Full-Size Map
-
Download Park
1,371
-
Objects
450
-
Tags
It was clearly the kind of park someone wanted to build and enjoyed making all the way through with little thought given to whether or not anyone else would ever feel the same way. And it's incredibly endearing. And as someone who was around in the summer of 2003 when RCT2 first came out, a park like this really takes me back. For about a year in that era this would've gotten all kinds of love. The ideas border on maniac creativity, the way objects are used are often completely off the wall to create architectural elements that were impossible at the time. The Water Coaster is a perfect example of this sort of look and feel. The entrance gates too, are very classy. The 'Golden Gate Bridge' also looked pretty spectacular in it's own modestly scaled way. The coaster were decent, but nothing terribly groundbreaking or exciting. I liked Loveless the best of them I think... The woodie in Luna was too much on the slow side, the other one was a bit short (length-wise)... I could go on but there's no reason to rip on the rides. Except Stunt Fall, which comically, can't run without crashing beautifully (I tried it and then had to watch a second time for the LOLz).
But overall it's a pretty nice park. It feels reasonably alive and, had it been peepible, I'm sure I would've absolutely fallen in love with it. Sadly it's not, and in spite of all the joy it shows it's age just a little to much to really dazzle or draw me in. I'm glad NE had an accolade to give it though (I can't imagine this even making runner up by mid 2004, which would've been a shame), because the spirit is there and if the parkmaker is willing it'd be great to see what he's capable of today.
Ride6
first, i should say that this park was started in 2003 when rct2 first came out - you can tell by the custom scenery used. after releasing the five six flags parks in ll earlier this summer, i realized that this park was more than 75% complete when i stopped playing rct2 in 2004, so I decided to finish it.
second, all my parks that have been released here were built for me. none of them were built with the exclusive intention of being publicly released. therefore, there was no coordination or peer review (which i can now see the value of). along with that, this park is not peepible for the same reason - it was built just for me. i would like to try a peep-friendly park in the future though. this is also the reason that stuntfall is not fully functional, since i am more interested in the park's aesthetics than its' functionability.
third, i have a few more parks that i've started working on and intend to complete. the next park will be more of a hybrid of my retro rct style and the more detailed ne style.
1 - The park APPEARS to be unfinished. Although the park was dated, it did have it's bright spots however any park that submitted for consideration should at least appear to be a finished product. Even if it was just treed in, at least it would appear finished.
2 - The little details were missing. I'm not referring to custom vending carts or elaborate theming. Things like path elements (benches, lamps and litter bins) add that minimum touch of detail that can be easily placed and were left out in the final product
3 - The park looked dead. Aside from the park not having peeps which is understandable however having all the rides closed just gave off a dead feel to it.
4 - No staff. Although not a big deal, having a staff in place shows to me that the parkmaker was interested in how the park looked and functioned. Naming your staff is also a big deal to me.
In short, Imo, this APPEARS to be a park that was on it's way but was abandoned and submitted to garner an accolade. In my eyes, anyone can start a park and make it look good. It takes much more effort to actually finish a park properly and since this felt like only the first half was completed, I only offered half the point value I would have given had the park been minimally finished.
All that said, I do hope you have other projects in the works as I would love to see what you can do when you go the full distance.
James
RCTNW - Thanks for explaining your vote, but reread my posting that explains how/why I designed the park - I think it responds to most of your faults. I didn't want trees just to fill the back of the park. I guess if I was more tech saavy I would have deleted the empty tiles altogether. I didn't hastily submit this park for an accolade either....I rebuilt some sections of the park several times before submitting it and the main reason i submitted the park was that I'd advertised it with pictures back in 2004, I thought it would be nice to share it and show that some parks from long ago can be FINISHED!
As for building this park for yourself, I can respect that however if you are going to submit this for accolade consideration, then I would hope you'd want the highest accolade you can achieve and with just an hour or less worth of work, (benches, lamps, staff, open rides, naming etc) it would have achieved a bit more and perhaps garnering a Silver.
Anyway, I do appreciate the effort put into this and for sharing this with the community.
James
tdub96 Offline