Park / Mystique
-
28-January 07
- Views 5,168
- Downloads 2,148
- Fans 0
- Comments 29
-
-
70.63%(required: none) Gold
5dave 75% Cocoa 75% inthemanual 75% MCI 75% trav 75% posix 70% alex 65% Liampie 65% nin 65% csw 60% 70.63% -
No fans of this park
-
Download Park
2,148
-
Tags
Similar Parks
-
Thunder River National Park
-
Let´s Build a ThemePark
-
[H2H6] R2 - Reservoir Dogs - Pixar Animation Studios
![park_2387 [H2H6] R2 - Reservoir Dogs - Pixar Animation Studios](https://www.nedesigns.com/uploads/parks/2387/aerialt2130.png)
-
Rougarou
-
The Will-O-The-Wisp
-
Aquila
Comment on Mystique and/or his NE Parkmaker page below please.
Corkscrewed Offline
And as much as I disagree with the parkmakering at the moment (it's not a rag towards SF, btw, he's a great parkmaker, but not quite NE parkmaker quality in my opinion... my opinion is rather elitist and old-fashioned), congrats on the parkmaker spot.
This basically guarantees that SF will not produce anything else ever again (NE Parkmaker curse).
I'll look at the park a little later, but congratulations on the parkmaker spot Hans, you're one of the most deserving in my opinion, well done.
-JDP
Congrats on this title, I've always been a fan of your works.
The main reasons I found this park somewhat weak were because of the coaster layouts... some of them were horrible; especially the giga and the duelers. The giga went underground too much, had some pointless helixes, and worst of all, it needed a chainlift to get back to the station. There should never be a chainlift to lift the train back to the station, for that just shows clearly poor pacing issuses. There also wasn't a brake run either...
The duelers had a terrible color scheme to begin with, way too bright IMO. I also thought that it just shows pure laziness how it had absolutely no custom supports. I mean, if you're going to "custom support" the rest of the coasters, you should have done so for those coasters. I also thought both of the layouts were weak, especially the ending, where there were too many helixes in which it lost its flow.
The architecture was above-average throughout the park I'd say. Although I really liked the splash boats area; it had some nice colors and the atmospheric drop was great. That being said, the white and blue color scheme was hideous in the giga area; it was just redundant on that kind of a scale.
Overall, I think this park should've gotten Runner-Up, for it was lacking in many areas. Although it did have some nice parts in it, I couldn't get into the style, and I also have to agree with Corkscrewed that this isn't Parkmaker quality at all... congrats nonetheless, though.
James - rctnw
btw - love the logo for you though!
RMM Offline
but yea... the coasters looked weak from the screens. the park seemed to look empty... it lacked a thick atmosphere that a park this high ranked should have. i dont have rct2 installed so im not sure... i may install and take a look later.
Haven't seen the park yet, I'll look at it tonight. Anyway, congrats on the parkmaker page...
When I sent in Mystique I knew it was going to get a lot of critique on various points, mainly the coasters.. While I can see some of your points, I think they're quite enjoyable though, with good pacing on all of them, nice elements and theming (caves, architecture and interaction with the park itself are all examples).. I started this park a long time ago, probably a year or something, and some parts show its age I think..
It was fun to build it though, and when Kumba offered me a PM spot, I was pretty thrilled as it still is the highest title in the community.. I can see your point corkscrewed, but I WILL prove you wrong
Thanks for the comments everyone!
SF
Kumba I'm not gonna bash you or anything but like Turtle said, I know you make spelling mistakes and whatnot, but I mean can you at least have someone look it over, or something? Just like a general higher level of respect should go towards a page specifically for a park that someone spent hours laboring over. Just a thought.
If you want send me a version you checked and I can use that, if not i'll try it myself later.
I could send you a checked copy of it if you want. I try to be good about spelling/grammar whenever possible, so I might be able to help.
Edited by Gwazi, 29 January 2007 - 07:57 PM.
In addition to the so-so coasters, I think this park also suffered from poor ride type distribution. Five coasters in a park this size is fine with me, but only 8 (3 Thrill, 2 Gentle, 2 Water, 1 Transport) other rides total in the whole park isn't. You could have done with several more Gentle rides, and a few more Thrill rides as well. I also didn't like the monorail traveling over the water, I think it would have been better if it was integrated into the more scenic areas of the park. But the archy was awesome, and the landscaping and park layout were also very good. All in all an award winning park either way, and congrats on your new title, SF, you deserve it for your long history of award winning parks in this community.
Edited by ride_exchanger, 30 January 2007 - 01:14 PM.
there were a lot of place that you could have had some killer coaster/path interaction, but instead you opted to just fill it with foliage. i think that was really the one glaring fault to this park.
regardless, congrats on the super runner-up and the parkmaker spot, and good luck with any future endeavors.