News / Chamonix & X-Men: 2 New NE Designs

Because it's probably the least amount of work of any update on the site. If a person can not even make a coaster and theme it, then they don't deserve to get credit for other peoples work. It's not hard to make a good Design by yourself, it takes the least time out of anything. Seriously, if a Design is too much for someone then they should just give it up.

I agree iris. I really didn't put more than 4-5 hours into X-men, which is quite minimal effort to get such mention in a NE design. The thing with X-Men was that Kumba and I had actually planned a full Marvel Theme Park and it ended up fizzling out as being a feasible project. So, we decided since I in had 3-4 hours invested and Kumba had much more, to try to release it somehow. Kumba had always wanted design and at that point I didn't really care out it got released, I'm just not one to build something without releasing it. I personally would've been ok with a forum or RCTF release. So iris/corky, I appreciate you making it a NE design, because the fact that its two designs in one really makes me wonder why I didn't let Kumba do this all himself from the start. Oh well. I've got my rct2 solo now. And Kumba, it was interesting to say the least building this with you.

Thanks for the comments everyone. Marshy, you've heard my feelings on your design. A good NE debut for you and welcome to admin warz.

These are terrible. They're both cliche, unengaging, and filled with false "realism" (isn't true "realism" bad enough?).

However, I'd say Marshy's was the worst of the two.

If you presented me with "X-Men", didn't tell me who did it, and then asked, I probably would have said "Jkay?", and then if you said there were two, I'd probably say "Oh, Jkay and Kumba?" But Marshy's is just like everything else everyone else builds, with nothing distinct about it, at all.

But, the pacing on X-Men was pathetic.

What happened to this site? Oh, yeah, it was always like this . Too bad all my favorite parkmakers are here, or will come here whenever, and if ever, they return from retirement.

I just awnt to make it clear that no more 'duo' Designs will be accepted.

Fuck it.

iris, i don't necessarily think it's a matter of "too much" but rather a matter of "more fun". depens, of course.

false "realism"

so basically you're saying that all fantasy parks are shit and only realistic parks mean anything. o.k, whatever cg?. are there any threads where you DON'T over opinionate it with your highly-specific non-acheivable standards of RCT?

Oh c'mon, you should know by now that everything cg? says is utter spewage.

No. False realism is when people do things which are supposedly "realistic", but are actually unrealistic, especially when the game frequently offers a more realistic alternative. Examples include most custom supports, fake "block sections", etc.

For example, in your park there's a brake run in the middle of the ride. Why?

"Because it's 'realistic'".

But it doesn't actually do what such brakes run are intended to do in real-life. So, instead of being actual "realism" it is "false 'realism'". Understand?

That actually makes sense to me. Good point there.

this exactly why i am against mixing styles. parks become "false". pure things are always easier to consume and have a more direct effect. although i admit that is pretty vague.

That actually makes sense to me. Good point there.

Thank you. But I'd like to think all my points are good ones... maybe I just don't word them properly, so people don't "get" them? I'm starting to think that's the real issue, especially now that I know that I have an illness which makes it difficult to properly express your ideas in a way understandable to others... anyways...

Yeah, yeah, that makes sense cg?.....unfortunately, it does. So i guess there's fantasy and "false" realistic parks....two different things. and 80% or more of what is being built in RCT is "false" realistic which constitutes our park being cliche....

*scratches head*...

I don't see what it is about Marshy's design that makes it any less origonal than everything else that has been comming out recently.
Sure it was cliche', but I found it to be a fairly well executed ripoff, personally. Failed to hold my attention for more than 30 seconds or so, but then again, few parks do. Short attention span, you know.

No. False realism is when people do things which are supposedly "realistic", but are actually unrealistic, especially when the game frequently offers a more realistic alternative. Examples include most custom supports, fake "block sections", etc.

I would actually consider many of the game's alternatives much less realistic than the "fake" ones we come up with. Most real coasters arn't held up by the skinny little pipe-cleaner things found on RCT coasters. Therefore, we often choose to make our own, in order to better fit real life spefications. Thats not to say all custom supports are truly realistic, of course.

About the block brakes, they usually look realistic, even if they don't perform realisticly. Since most of our perception of RCT is visual, I'd say most block breaks are fairly realistic, even if their presence is completely pointless in terms of the coaster's performance.

I'm not trying to defend these, but you just seem to generalize all personal additions as being less realistic than their game counterparts, which I think to be false. But then again, you probably wern't, so, whatever.




BTW, are there any other designs you have to release, Cork? Or perhaps, did they just suck, and you are sparing the community by not posting them?

Not to get this too far off topic, but I don't think the game's supports are "pipe cleaners". If you actually look at the scale of them, they're slightly less big around as the humans in the game, which is about right. They're not as complex are real supports, but then again, it's a game.

Here's a picture to show you what I mean, incase you didn't understand, or don't believe me.

See how they're about the same, in terms of scale? Maybe even a little BIG?

Right on Butter.

Sure, on your standard corkscrew coaster (or of the like), but consider some other types. This suspended, for example:

The supports look substantially bigger than the armspan of a human. Although it could just be a bad pic.

The pipe cleaner crap is really beyond the point though. What I was aiming at was that RCT is not the most realistic of coaster games, and our custom supports and the like are an attempt at catching a true to life look that RCT lacks in places.



This is painfully off topic (It barely even pertains whay cg was talking about to begin with), so I'll comment on the other coaster, I guess.

So, um.....
Perhpas not your best work, but had a few strong spots. Although it does err on the side of unorigonal, I wouldn't call it cliche', as aforementioned. While many builders now-a-days theme their stuff to something very vague (or nothing at all), this had, for lack of a better word, a specific theme. "X-Men". Not too generic or overly common.
Now the coaster layout I might call cliche'. I guess I am just so sick of these... what do you call them... "cookie-cutter" beemers. Yeah.

Chamonix
Marshy

I didn't like this one that much. When I first opened the park, I was like...wow, this archy is good and looks nice. But it was that same exact style throughout the whole "park". Don't take this the wrong way, but I am getting sick of people like Marshy in this case, and Artist (with a few good exceptions), who use the "safe" theme with their rides. Nothing at all makes this stand out except a few nice interactions with the waterfall. I got sick of this after looking at it for two minutes, it was just all the same style, and what it is, is (what I call) the "safe, normal" style of parkmaking, and people are really overusing that these days. Also, the pacing on the coaster itself was pretty bad and seemed to slowly pass through those turns. I give you props to making a suspended coaster for a design, and I know it's not the easiest one to make, but I really am getting sick of that style. I know it may be "realism" but I wasn't feeling that, if that's what you were going for.


X-Men
Kumba and JKay

This design has became one of my favorities. The coaster itself had a pretty unique and untraditional layout, and that's always good. The pacing was great for the most part, and heck, I even liked the ending with the corkscrews. The theming worked great for me, and I thought in-game, it was one of the better JKay color-schemes I've seen. Also, the archy was very innovative and unique, but wacky at times. Very nice job both of you, and a well deserved design.

This design has became one of my favorities. The coaster itself had a pretty unique and untraditional layout, and that's always good.

What?

The layout was anything but unique and untraditional. Actually, it is very traditional, and not at all unique. Did you actually look at the layout, or just all those crazy colors?

The pacing was great for the most part, and heck, I even liked the ending with the corkscrews.

The pacing was crap.

I'm not sure about you, but when I look at a rollercoaster's pacing, what I look for is a consistant, or consistantly increasing, high rate of speed through the peaks of manuevers, or a VERY good reason for this not to be the case (like a ride I'm building now which nearly STALLS at the peak of an inversion, before finally making it through, which was intentional, and builds exicitement by making the riders feel like something is going wrong.)

The pacing started out decently, but with each manuever it LOST speed, eventually crawling through the final few elements, and the only reason I can see for that is bad design.

at cg?'s rctpeep/Ed comparison.


Anyway, to chime in on pacing, I don't think a coaster has to INCREASE speed through inversions as the layout progresses. That goes against basic physics. For me, there are target speeds for certain inversions. I never think a coaster should dip under 20 MPH unless it's going through brakes or at the end of the run, and most peaks of inversions should be between 25-30 mph (which is actually on par with real life coasters). Zero-G-rolls should be over 30 if you want some nice snap to them. Corkscrews should generally be under 30 to prevent excessive forces.

In terms of overall pacing, well, that DOES depend on what you want to give. You can have a crawly inversion... if it's clear that it's part of the story and such. But making a Batman the Ride recreation and having it go 10 mph through the vertical loops is just stupid.

They look pretty cool.

I must congratulate whoever made the X-men logo...that is a really sweet logo!