Park / The Ragnarök
-
24-June 06
- Views 27,021
- Downloads 633
- Fans 0
- Comments 138
-
No fans of this park
-
Download Park
633
-
Objects
301
-
Tags
Also tracid you need to stop putting yourself down like that (by the looks of how Cajamarca turned out you were a great complement to Ed stylistically). See what really high expectations of LL do to now very good new LL parkmakers' confidence levels?
It's all just speculation though isn't it? Hmm, I'd say Mont Saint Michel is a perfect example of a "good RCT2 park". Lacking in rides, the idea itself isn't amazing, but there's that fantastic architecture and landscaping work. But how many LL parks would beat it? One of us veterans at the top of our game probably could, but then we'd be expected to win regardless -- that's why we're veterans. I think if any of us really got to know RCT2 and how best to use it's tools as well as we know LL we could really blow people away with what's possible, more so than even the best LL park could.
I feel the same way about my LL parks that you seem to feel about yours. It's good work for what it is, but still not reaching full potential. I can sortof see why you're so confident that a quality LL park can win any matchup though. Certain things do translate fairly equally between both games. A good coaster is a good coaster regardless. There aren't 1/4 tile landscaping tiles in LL, but good landscaping is still about equal between the two. And of course a good idea is still a good idea, regardless. But against Mala and Phatage? Wow. You're more confident than I am.
So what i'm trying to say is that I think expectations for LL h2h parks are definitely higher than those for their rct2 opponents.
I think the 'top' LL players should start to play RCT2, and vice versa.
Maybe an idea for a new competition?
SF
There's no point in that when you want to win in a competition.
SF
Edited by eman, 27 July 2006 - 09:53 AM.
RMM Offline
Its not that RCT2 is easier to build in. Its the FACT that its easier to impress the crowd.
Edited by RMM, 27 July 2006 - 10:02 AM.
I also feel that people stopped trying to find new things in LL because they didn't need to. The "NE Style" was born and that did something really important. Win Spotlights. People just made what everyone wanted to see. This is why the parkmakers I really respect are not the ones with the most Spotlights; they're the ones who worked to push the boundries of the game no matter how limited it seems.
To Six Frags and anyone else who thinks LL is limited; that's bullshit. Just because you don't have 40,000+ objects to choose from does not mean a game is limited. I feel LL lets you to be more creative and is a little harder. This makes it more fun for me. I mean, where is the fun in just picking out objects for your workbench? I'd rather make my own objects and use them for what I need. That said, I wasn't trying to 'one-up' anyone with my black tiles (well, maybe just a little
Edit-I'm not saying I won't give rct2 a chance. I just don't like to play it. And I feel the so-so quality of Grijs was higher than the so-so quality of Ragnarok.
And what new LL players are there that have really played a lot? Not many, so I don't know what that 'cult' thing was all about.
Edited by OLE, 27 July 2006 - 11:51 AM.
If only more LL 'veterans' would try to get used to rct2, like fatha', mala and phatage did, we would get a much clearer view of the (H2H/rct2) parks that are being build nowadays.. Et vice versa, of course.
Oh, and OLE, it's a fact that you have to work with the textures that come with RCT1/CF/LL, you can't import new textures like in rct2. Sure you hack the hell out of the game and use tracks etc. to let it look like new textures, but you know those are not really 'new'.. That's kinda the charm (for me) with LL; To be creative and find new ways to develop originality. That's also why I voted SM; There were a lot of innovative ideas I've not seen done before in LL and thus making it refreshing and original.. Bottomline is there were no new textures, just new ways..
SF
Edited by Six Frags, 27 July 2006 - 11:52 AM.
Edit- Define new for me. If no one has done it before, it's new. No matter what it is or how it's done. At least give me a little fucking credit for what I'm trying to do in LL. And other people.
Edited by OLE, 27 July 2006 - 11:58 AM.
One of the other reasons is because I think simply more attractive things can be created in the game. Of course that's disputable, but for me nothing in RCT2 can rival the Greece area in The Aegean, or the entrance area in Loopy's new solo, or the heaven area in Divine Comedy, to name a few. Something about raised land looks purer and more like a painting to me. I don't know why. Maybe it's because the building-from-the-ground-up nature of RCT2 makes things look like they were placed on the landscape, whereas LL stuff looks like it is just a part of it, inseparable from it.
While I am making a concerted effort to move away from only using raised land, windows, and paths, I don't care if anyone think it's outdated or unimpressive or whatever. When done right, it's fucking gorgeous.
I added tags to new, because I knew people would fell over it.. I mean new as in objectively new--new .dat files that contain new texture content, like rct2 has.
Not new as in a new combination of textures to create a new one that people haven't seen done before in the game.. Miscommunication I presume
SF
Edited by Six Frags, 27 July 2006 - 12:11 PM.
And it didn't really take much skill to find the new things. Mostly just luck.
Edited by OLE, 27 July 2006 - 12:20 PM.
Don't you include any assessment of the skill that went into something when you're deciding how good it is? If something looked horrible but you could see there was a lot of technical skill involved (of course the two are linked, but I think it's possible for something to have lots of skill involved but not look that great) wouldn't you see it as slightly better than when you first looked at it? Maybe not aesthetically, but in terms of appreciation of the work that went into it... Maybe you don't care about that aspect of rct, I don't know.
In the end I think that the level set by Battlefield RCT means that all LL H2H parks are expected to be amazing, whereas expectations are lower for rct2 parks. I just think that's now a fact of H2H and I don't see how that could fail to affect people's votes.
Just to address one of the things you've said in this thread, Ed - you've spoken out about how LL parks should be expected to keep up with the furthest that RCT2 has gone. But I think that's like comparing two different forms of art. You can't criticize a stage production of Hamlet because the visual effects aren't as cool as in the Lord of the Rings movies, nor can you expect them to create a perfect full-size Elsinore Castle on stage just because LotR has Minas Tirith. You know what I mean?
Edited by Panic, 27 July 2006 - 12:51 PM.
Corkscrewed Offline
Hey Stefon. You and Ed vs Me and Blitz. LL vs RCT 2.
Everyone else: