Park / North of the Border

32 Comments

  • posix%s's Photo
    I'm pretty sure it is Butter. The email registered for his old and this account both contain the same surname. Just the latter is his uni account he now has. Good eye, robbie.
  • Wanted%s's Photo
    @Jag-The high detail of todays parks does not mean they are better in any way than the old parks. Old spotlights are still beautiful and deserve spotlights even by todays standards. Old spotlights = todays spotlights imo so stfu.

    As for the park. It definetely looks like Butterfinger architecture. The trees kinda overtake this so I definetely like his older parks better.
  • Jaguar%s's Photo

    @Jag-The high detail of todays parks does not mean they are better in any way than the old parks. Old spotlights are still beautiful and deserve spotlights even by todays standards.


    I never said that, I just explained that most old spotlights cannot compete with newer ones. They are beautiful, but outdated. I never said they were worse, and I said that most spotlights from the past would get lower scores not that they were worse.

    Old spotlights = todays spotlights imo so stfu.


    Please don't assume. I was not saying anything about that, and for you to post that rude comment. I am not going to get into an arguement because someone was to ignorant and misinterpreted what I have said, so don't tell me what to do or not to do.
  • Wanted%s's Photo
    Old spotlights cannot compete with newer parks is like saying they are worse...recieving a lower score means "not as good"... Sooo either the system is flawed or you are wrong.
  • Jaguar%s's Photo

    Old spotlights cannot compete with newer parks is like saying they are worse...recieving a lower score means "not as good"... Sooo either the system is flawed or you are wrong.


    You are wrong. Every system has its flaws, because people are human, and progress advances over time. Basically the older spotlights are "antiques" in a way.
  • posix%s's Photo
    I agree Wanted that your comment had some unnecessary rudeness in it.

    I also agree however with your point that saying "they cannot compete" equals saying "they are worse", which is why I would ask you, Jag, in what regard, subjectively for you, they cannot compete?

    Again, this irritating unspoken assumption that more detail equals better parkmaking quality emerges for me here.

    What I have observed over the past year is that the level of detail has been increased to produce ever finer building fronts or foliage design. Yet I don't feel higher park quality goes hand in hand with this. In fact, I believe it often enough reduces park quality, as focus on flowing path layout, ride alignment or harmony of colour is compensated or lost completely.
  • Wanted%s's Photo
    Trying to work on that whole "rude" thing around here when arguing :p

    But I am glad you see what I mean.
  • Austin55%s's Photo
    Crazy how you can win a bronze accolade and not even be in the top 25 on the current rankings.
  • bdawgtk1982%s's Photo
    I personally don't like storm. I do however LOVE the wooden roller coaster. I like the park layout... maybe a little too many trees but other than that I like the landscape.
  • posix%s's Photo
    Butterfinger's identity has been confirmed and updated.
  • J K%s's Photo
    Sounds good! Is this just one stop or are you back?
  • tdub96%s's Photo
    I was just viewing Butterfinger/PP's page and realized he isnt ranked in the current standings since the account update. He should have around 145 pts in the current standings, as 154-deprication of days=currents points. Am i right? Just thought id point this out.
  • Louis!%s's Photo
    huzzah! the community rejoices! welcome back :)