Park / Chimera

12-June 07

1,093 Comments

This park shares comments with 41 other parks(View Parks)

Panic Offline

Gir: Daemonen at Tivoli.
posted 17 years ago
- #641
- Back to top
gir Offline

i looked at daemonen, actually. i'm not sure, but isn't it still pulling out of the element the "right way"? I'll have to think about it some more. :\
posted 17 years ago
- #642
- Back to top
Panic Offline

In Daemonen the rolling half of an immelman is continued past the point of being level into a bank that goes the opposite direction. That's all I thought people were worrying about over this.

I could have sworn that Gerstlauer did something with an immelmann that curved out the opposite direction. A dive loop that came up from the opposite side is weirder to think about, but Schwarzkopf's Euro Star did the first half (the important half) of that with a zero-g roll.

This is kind of demonstrating my point about following real-life coaster standards too obsessively, though.
posted 17 years ago
- #643
- Back to top
gir Offline

True, but Chimera's immelmann is still different than Daemonen's from my perspective. I won't even talk about that anymore though, because it's just the way each person interprets the element. I still think that you're relating creativity and fantasy too closely though. The fact that realism has its restrictions is fun to me, because it's challenging to create something that I could envision in real life. The fact that fantasy doesn't is boring to me, because who/what is there to challenge you (besides software)? Some would argue that that's what's fun about fantasy, but I guess that's why I'm not you or anyone else.

The fact that I enjoy looking at and building NE-style parks further illegitimizes my posts.
Edited by gir, 14 June 2007 - 04:21 PM.
posted 17 years ago
- #644
- Back to top
geewhzz Offline

It's about the degrees of rotation, twisting it the wrong way and then exiting the roll on a certain side of the track adds degrees of rotation to the element that in real life would probably take away from the feeling the immelmann element provides.

gir, you're my new favorite person on this site.
posted 17 years ago
- #645
- Back to top
Panic Offline

Gir, I completely respect your opinion. I just think you're being a bit too cautious.

Mystery Mine at Dollywood. That is an Immelman in the background. Instead of the barrel roll in the foreground they could just as easily have made a banked turn off towards the right of the picture, which is exactly what Peeee's element is like. The barrel roll comes off to the left, true, but the overall element goes off to the right.
Sure, it's Gerstlauer, but it proves it's possible. And sure, it wouldn't be as pretty as a straight immelman off to the right, but its RCT2 simulation (e.g. Peeee) looks way better than a true immelman, which looks like crap. It just depends what your priorities are.
posted 17 years ago
- #646
- Back to top
geewhzz Offline

Stop digging yourself deeper, Panic.
posted 17 years ago
- #647
- Back to top
Panic Offline

I will stop making a big deal about this after this, but I was just trying to make a point. The picture I just provided shows that it's perfectly feasible, and Daemonen, while I am fully aware it's not the same thing or "exit side," shows that even the very conservative B&M is not afraid to hint at it - that even a B&M immelmann doesn't always have to end up with perfectly level track going off in the same direction the rolling half would be thought to lead it in. Daemonen's immelmann curves back towards the parallel and ends going the exact opposite direction it started, not 20 degrees or more off, which is the classic immelmann e.g. Alpengeist; and Daemonen's only looks probably 60 feet high. Make it higher and make the descent out of the inversion less steep - in RCT it is just a flat barrel roll, mind you, no descent whatsoever - and you could easily curve it back over to the other side with space to spare.

All I'm saying is that yes, it's good to stay true to real-life standards as a guide so that you don't wind up doing physically impossible or painful things in RCT, but there are some elements that are completely feasible and harmless that simply haven't been done yet explicitly in real life. It doesn't mean they should be illegal in RCT or something (particularly when they're aesthetically preferable in the game to their have-been-done counterparts).

I mean, if someone thinks they are making an immelmann when they do that, then yes, they are in error. But you were incorrect when you said that this one was obviously built to be an immelmann; Peeee said he consciously switched it up because he preferred it. If someone intentionally plays around with the element to produce a result they like more and which is perfectly possible in real life, should we frown upon them?
posted 17 years ago
- #648
- Back to top
RCTNW Offline

If someone intentionally plays around with the element to produce a result they like more and which is perfectly possible in real life, should we frown upon them?

I say Nay!
posted 17 years ago
- #649
- Back to top
Carl Offline

I'm just now catching up on the "big debate" that went on while I was away this afternoon/evening, and being the opinionated person I am, I had a few things I wanted to comment on:

Peeee's Immelman turned the right "RCT way", im not sayin its the same way they do it in real life, but I am sayin its the way it should be done in RCT. If you do it the other way, you get a very ugly "bump" in the track, that is both unsightly and unnecessary. Screw RL in this case, the nature of the game demands other considerations.

Peeee's inversion choices after the MCBR might have been a tad on the conservative side, but they were perfectly practicable alternatives.

About the location of the MCBR, it doesnt have to be in the middle. Heres how I usually make coasters, first I build my "large" inversions, then I build my MCBR, then I build my "small" inversions, or something along those lines. Its not set in stone, its wide open to interpretation. If you want alot of "large" inversions and only a few "small" ones, than obviously the MCBR will be more toward the end of the layout, and vice versa, if you want more "small" than "llarge" inversions, and theres nothing wrong either way.

deanosrs, I agree that the exact amount of "completeness" of your entry is up for debate, but what did you smoke before you said you "finished" far more of a map than any of the other entries actually did? Did you finish more than Peeee did? No. Did you finish more than Levis? No. You didn't complete more of your entry than any of the other entrants. Yours may have been 80-90% complete (almost complete), but theirs were all 100% complete, so what was that statement all about?

gir - "Don't build something because it looks good though"
Me - WTF??
Gir, you're crazy, dude! You would give up beauty for the sake of realism? Thats insane! And not only that, theres no need to do it, either, you can have both easily in RCT, so I guess its a moot point, so n/m

Panic, you are dead on about Daemonen's immelman continuing "past the point of being level into a bank that goes the opposite direction", way to cite precedent (and give creedence to the "turn the other way" supporters). I basically agree with you in this whole debate.
posted 17 years ago
- #650
- Back to top
gir Offline

gir - "Don't build something because it looks good though"
Me - WTF??
Gir, you're crazy, dude! You would give up beauty for the sake of realism? Thats insane! And not only that, theres no need to do it, either, you can have both easily in RCT, so I guess its a moot point, so n/m

I guess I'm just a really confusing person, but I mean for things to have a purpose when you build them, not "oh that's looks fantastic, i think i'll put a random tree in the middle of the path." No--put a tree in the path to provide shade for tired guests and improve the atmosphere of the area. But still, I would sacrifice "beauty" for realism because a killer atmosphere beats purposeless beauty any day. I never disputed that you couldn't have both, either.
posted 17 years ago
- #651
- Back to top
Carl Offline

But the whole point of playing this game is to "make it look good", so to speak, isnt it? If "it" looks like crap, then why would you keep "it" (whatever "it" may be)? You wouldn't, you would demolish "it" and start over. My comment is regardless of fuctionality, Im assuming function is inherent in the design. Also, you cant have "killer atmosphere" without beauty. One of the key ingredients in atmosphere is beauty.
Edited by ride_exchanger, 14 June 2007 - 08:41 PM.
posted 17 years ago
- #652
- Back to top
gir Offline

So the City of God area of BGSS doesn't have a killer atmosphere? There's certainly no "beauty" to it. That isn't to say everything should be ugly and dirty, but it's just an example, and it isn't really my point, because I never said that making things look good was bad. I'm just saying "sure, it's not the prettiest thing to look at, but it gives the park realistic values that make it more enjoyable as a whole."
posted 17 years ago
- #653
- Back to top
Ling Offline

But the whole point of playing this game is to "make it look good", so to speak, isnt it? If "it" looks like crap, then why would you keep "it" (whatever "it" may be)? You wouldn't, you would demolish "it" and start over. My comment is regardless of fuctionality, Im assuming function is inherent in the design. Also, you cant have "killer atmosphere" without beauty. One of the key ingredients in atmosphere is beauty.
Actually, I'm pretty sure the point of the game is to build roller coasters and have fun. But I guess with stiff "requirements" for recognition (Spotlight, SRU, RU, Design) we've forgotten that.
posted 17 years ago
- #654
- Back to top
Panic Offline

Ride_exchanger, I appreciate your support, but you're now taking this argument into dangerous territory. I've learned the hard way about the disadvantages to trying to build something solely based on "this might look pretty here." I am pretty sure gir got at least some of his philosophy from talking to Posix, since they did a park together about the time that Posix' parkmaking mindset switched to that, and it is a philosophy that certainly has some good things to say.

I have one more piece of evidence to post and then I promise I will shut up. This is the other coaster I mentioned earlier, Euro Star.

Note the first half (the left half) of the zero-g roll in the foreground. It's subtle, but there is a bit of extra rotation and it begins on the left side of the inversion's axis before curving up completely naturally into a rightward barrel roll. If you think about it, the left side is the "wrong side" for a rightward-twisting roll in this debate. It crosses over the axis of the roll and then proceeds into the roll instead of keeping to one side. If you took off the second half (the right half) of the zero-g roll and replaced it with a half loop - by no means a dangerous or ill-advised action - you would have a small "wrong way" dive loop. It's that easy. It would only be the "wrong way" by a few degrees in this case, but we are talking about a 40-something-foot inversion here. The curve could easily be extended to 90 degrees, a la Peeee's inversion under question, if the entire element were taller.
posted 17 years ago
- #655
- Back to top
deanosrs Offline

ride_exchanger - I meant in terms of squares of land completed. My map was by far the biggest and although I didn't 100% finish it all, it was probably about 3-4 times the size of levis' pirate ship and definitely bigger than the other entries.

And also, personally I wouldn't give a shit about the immelman turning the wrong way. But then I don't know about roller coasters. Gir is obviously of an opinion exactly opposite to this. Therefore, it seems a pretty good idea to just accept that everyone plays rct for different reasons.
Edited by deanosrs, 15 June 2007 - 03:30 AM.
posted 17 years ago
- #656
- Back to top
X_Fusion Offline

I can use a Roller Coaster in next round “Create The Best Adventure Ride (June 18)”?

what other types of you laugh I can use?

[[]]
posted 17 years ago
- #657
- Back to top
Levis Offline

you can use every tracked ride ... as long as the ride tells a story
posted 17 years ago
- #658
- Back to top
X_Fusion Offline

Ok Levis !

Thanks !!!!
posted 17 years ago
- #659
- Back to top
Kumba Offline

atm I have 0 Adventure ride entires
posted 17 years ago
- #660
- Back to top