Park / Land of Wonders
-
20-April 09
- Views 33,009
- Downloads 921
- Fans 1
- Comments 147
-
63.00%(required: 60%) Silver
Cocoa 70% Scoop 70% Xtreme97 70% chorkiel 65% Liampie 65% robbie92 65% Camcorder22 60% CoasterCreator9 60% nin 60% posix 60% geewhzz 55% saxman1089 55% 63.00% -
1 fan Fans of this park
-
Full-Size Map
-
Download Park
921
-
Objects
382
-
Tags
i can see what people liked so much about vampyre, yet i think the stuff of it that was there was just WAY too little. so little that i could not really take the park serious. on the other hand, land of wonders was "almost" finished, if you don't look into that one corner, and was very elaborated overall. in my opinion easily the winner of this round.
1. It WAS finished by the deadline but a hardware malfunction caused FG to lose this version (as stated in the read me file). I just can't see even the most brilliant, expeditious RCT player completing half of that park, retaining the same level of quality, in less than 6 hours. Although, that's exactly what the included read me said was, in fact, the case:
"Just to explain why this park is unfinished. Builder #1 sent the park to Builder #2 to finish and send in.
After finishing the park Builder #2 suffered a hard drive failure meaning that he couldn't send the park in.
So the only version of the park we have is this unfinished version. Unfortunately there wasnt anything we
could do, so all we can do is hope that the fact it's unfinished wont stop you from enjoying our park".
2. It could have been finished in time.
Could have, would have...should have.
Now, the read me clearly states that the park was indeed finished by "Builder#2". Yet, in his post, Magnus contradicts that by saying that [insert player name] had no chance to work on the park due to technical problems.
Which one is it? Was it finished or not? It's pretty obvious that it wasn't.
So, this leads me to believe that someone wrote up a quick little misleading statement (lie) to include with an unfinished park in order to possibly convince some voters that they had, in fact, completed their entry and an unfortunate turn of events had catastrophically destroyed all of the hard work that had been put in by the team.
Now, it's obvious that a certain amount of hard work WAS put into this park which, I will admit, probably would have won this round had it been finished.
But, it wasn't. And this, IMO, sets a terrible standard for future rounds if teams realize that starting a park, taking the time to create a nice entry and getting halfway finished by the deadline can not only garner votes but, can possibly win a matchup. The deadlines are there for a fucking reason.
I see people saying that, by what's there, they can imagine what it would have turned out to be. Voting for the potential of an unfinished entry. Let's also imagine what the final product might have been had FG's frantically had to finish the remaining half of this park in less than 6 hours.......filling in with rushed foliage, archy and the like...let alone testing to see how peeps flowed through the park without jamming up and creating mass cluster fucks of lost and angry visitors. I sincerely doubt that the quality of the park would have remained at what people seem to imagine the finished product would have been.
I know that our team also had it's share of technical difficulties with LoW.....including a comp that had mouse and keyboard driver failures that disallowed one of them to participate in quite a bit of the building...while another member was out of town.....and we still busted ass to get a finished park sent in by the deadline.
No excuses, no false explanations....just manned up and did the job.
And this:
I never realized that making excuses and falsifying facts implied good sportsmanship. The kind that is displayed by only 10% of our team voting for a FG forfeit so that there would be a matchup here.
And, if I hear one more person that's losing a matchup proclaim their indifference for the outcome of their respective match, I'm gonna throw up in my mouth (actually, I just did....a little bit).
This is a fucking competition. Playing RCT for the pure enjoyment of it and being "about parks and having fun building them..." is all fine and dandy when you haven't signed up for a competition. After that, winning isn't the main thing...it's the only thing. Ironically, I've yet to read that from anyone who's team is winning their respective matchup (although, I'm sure it'll happen now that it's been mentioned.
Bottom line is that everyone on every team wants to win. And apparently, will say just about anything to procure victory for their team. Until they start to fall behind.....when winning and losing suddenly just isn't important any more.
Now, I'm done.
Edited by K0NG, 21 April 2009 - 02:39 PM.
they couldnt get the park finshed on time and thats it.
you don't need to have an 8 page discussion on why they didn't get it done.
vampyre's invert is a great layout, it falls just short of stellar. The curves in the first half certainly work very well, but i would have preferred to see another inversion to maintain the element-to-element flow. the buildings are solid -they remind me of beauty and the Beast - and there's a fantastic use of detail throughout: the ruined walls and wall gates use those tiny building 16th/tile blocks to great effect, and they aren't needlessly scattered about the rest of the park- its all very tasteful. As far as I'm concerned it is a decent start to a park that could be fantastic when finished. On the downsides, it was obviously unfinished. i watched the coaster go a few times and then scanned the rest of the park- I really liked some of the houses, but the similarity between them all left me feeling like I had seen them all after just one. I would have liked to see the foliage demonstrated near the entrance spread over the whole area.
Land of wonders kept me personally occupied for a much longer time than Vampyre. It might be a matter of a small attention span, but the fact that there was stylistic variation in the architecture kept me interested and forced me to inspect each new building, and i was rarely disappointed when I did. The rocket on top of the ride building was awesome, and i loved the Schwarzkopf layout. The peep-friendliness was very convincing for me, and the park as a whole was a believable experience. the tiny mushrooms were used to great effect on the bare hillside and waterfront. Thor and the woodie were slightly awkward, but their interaction was well done and I felt they certainly didn't detract anything from the park. I loved the dodgems under the rockets, the log flume worked quite well imo, and the carousel roofing was wonderful. thor's station area was alsoa high point for me, as was the backstage detail on the woodie brakerun/transfer and the little s&s tower bit on the roof.
@zburns- based on your comment about "things not going the way you thought they would" I totally understand where you're coming from. That's the sole reason I was upset over the outcome over our match, it was unexpected and I felt blindsided by the general feelings of the community. Don't worry though, you'll bounce back once the third match is posted and will be more motivated than before
and for what it's worth, vampyre was cool and all but I just couldn't bring myself to vote for something so unfinished
People, please try and use these topics to comment as objective as possible on the parks (I know it's all opinions anyway) and not bashing the other team's park to try and gain more votes.. It's pretty sad and quite ridiculous to be honest..
I hope posix will reconsider not letting team members act this way..
SF
You're drawing some conclusions which you can't draw with the information you have. You don't know a fuck about how it went, so stop making my whole team look bad.
Also, if I could vote I would vote for the Whzz Kids. Their park was a bit uninspired, but it's a lot more fun to look at. You're winning and that is really deserved. I'm glad people like our park too, or at least what's there of the park...
i must, strongly dissagree.
im sure at least many of the people in this contest are playing because they enjoy the game, and that they get to play and create with people they wouldnt usualy get to,
if i was drafted, it would be to create good parks, with the off cance of winning being a side effect. *is struck off the "if the worst comes to the worst" lists *
i love the amount of effort put into H2H parks, maybe for the win, but more likely because they love the game and enjoy seeing parks created in a short space of time, succinct, high quiality, fun.
im not entirely sure ive got what i want across.
Okay, that's like saying people work because they have fun working, and they don't work because they need the money. When in reality, people work because they need money to survive in our society. Having fun could be a product of working, but in the end, you have it backwards.
It is obvious "to me" that the finished park deserves the win, and that is what I voted. However, I did not like the park that well. It was just OK for me. I thought the park was messy and didn't appear well planned out plus the fact that coasters were running into each other....
I'd really like to see the other park finished if those parkmakers decide to do that because what was there was very nice indeed.
SF
Milo, I have to disagree with this. You're assuming that fantasy will have an inherent disadvantage over realism... a distinction which is a very grey area anyway.
In my opinion the parks from the other match up weren't of the same quality, it's not that I voted for the Hurricanes because theirs was realistic. I voted for them because theirs was better.
When we see a fantasy park of the same quality and execution as a realistic park, and they go up against each other, then I guess we'll see what happens then. All I know is that of all the great H2H parks I can think of in the past, most have been fantasy oriented. Just a few off the top of my head - Ghost Cell Crisis, Below Bermuda, Kitabasaki Dragonland, Slime Meridian, Mars Colony Eurolai, The Faraway Tree, Calatravas... All examples of when fantasy parks have been pulled off well, and immortalised. You are not at a disadvantage building fantasy. You are only a disadvantage if you lack the skill to pull it off.
That was then, this is now. You may be right, but look at the comments on our match. It wasn't a rare occurance that people liked AoW but on whatever level just couldn't justify voting for it because it wasn't a "park". Tbh I think the community has shifted quite a lot in the past few years and some examples you didn't mention can prove that. Like Kayate Ridge (or whatever) beating Internet City. Nobody can deny the quality of those two parks and in the end IC lost in a tight battle. I realise you feel differently but I thought our match would have been a lot closer based on the overall quality of both parks (which had some pretty heavy strong parts and some major drawbacks). I mean, an unfinished park is getting votes faster than ours did
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying skill isn't important any more or that people are just sheep to their styles but I think in a pretty even matchup a realistic park has an advantage these days. Tbh people saying that you don't have to build fantasy or that if you've got the skill and ideas you can get a win no matter the style are correct, but it's the same argument as in previous seasons about LL. I would stick with LL if it were still at the disadvantage it was before (and that was a clear disadvantage) and I'm sticking with my style for better or for worse. Am I sure I'll lose? No. but I now realise I'll have to make something that much more awesome to impress people. I refuse to cater to people's tastes (or rather, the taste of the majority) just to accomplish getting votes in a RCT contest though. That's just not my way. On the flip side, it's some fantastic motivation and I'm having a blast with RCT right now. It makes me glad I signed up for H2H no matter what happens, win or lose.
Hopfully K0NG didn't puke all over his keyboard
Magnus wasnt proclaiming anything about the fact that we were losing. We fully knew when we came into the match up that we were going to lose. Hell I wasnt even expecting any votes, I know that I wouldnt vote for an unfinished park, I just didnt want the season start off craply by having a forfeit.
What Magnus was saying was that people were complaining that we were getting votes when it doesnt matter as you are clearly winning anyway.
Edited by Louis!, 21 April 2009 - 05:19 PM.
-Land of Wonders was nice, but I found myself not liking the architecture. However, the entrance and coasters were cool and I am going to go out on a limb and say- Egg_Head? Plus, I really like this team as a whole. It didn't quite seem like lands, although there was a hodgepodge of architecture.
-Vampyre was really cool and this almost got my vote. The architecture was much more appealing and the layout was cool, despite not having a vertical loop. The castle was looking awesome, and what this could have been made it hard for me to pick one. I also sympathize for the hard drive crash.
In the end, I picked Whzz Kids. It edged over the Flying Germans, mostly because it was finished and it didn't seem quite fair to pick Vampyre over Lands of Wonder, when both were almost equally matched.
Edited by Cocoa, 21 April 2009 - 05:24 PM.
If there was no Readme file, or no mention of this 'hard-drive' crash there would be a shit-storm like in last H2H threads about how ya'll didn't finish your park, and in round-1 to boot. (has there ever been any unfinished round1 parks ever?) and it's not happening here because of the phony excuse.