H2H5 / [H2H5] Round Robin | Round 3 | Match 1

Nice read-me, Levis.

^ Yeh, agreed with that. Thanks for that. Include it in the zip next time please!! It really does give a thorough insight into the park and explains its concept. It also helps you find a few otherwise hidden things - for example, I hadn't noticed the Jesus walking on water bit!

Still absolutely loving the Vekoma Madhouse btw.

I think I have a very good idea as to who made the Testament, so its no wonder most of it is incredible. The "pearly gates", the Genesis dark ride (with show scenes!), the three crosses atop the hill... so many details. Wonderful work on this park, guys. The South Park... park, is decent. What really throws me off is that the park is a "studio" and starts out as one in the entrance, but then it loses all credibility as a studio because apart from the entrance gate there is nothing studio-like about it. Some of the architecture is good, and I really enjoyed the inverted coaster and that smaller area around it. "Big Gay Al's Big Gay Boat Ride" had so much potential as well and it was wasted on a boring, flat, lifeless ride. The custom boats added something to it but there was no adventure or excitement to it (forgive me if the actual ride in the series is like this, I don't watch the show). I liked the use of the diagonal paths near there, too; adding more of this would have really given the park some semblance of edge in my opinion. Still, a solid effort. It's not mediocre by any means, its just that a better park is up against it. Well done, still!

I don't think it's fair to post a readme after the match went up (especially such an elaborate readme which is basically a park brochure-a small notepad file would be fine)..
I mean, it costs time for our team too to make the readme and it adds something to the park.. Like for example I wouldn't post sound files which were initially meant to go with the park but due to time constraints couldn't be attached to the park.. It's also not allowed to post screens of your park in this topic to explain or show some of the details in the park so why is it allowed to post a readme then? It could pull people over the line who were doubting to vote for the park but when they read the readme understood more about the park and then voted for it..

SF

Since when is it a rule you can't post screens?

I remember in previous H2h's you were not allowed to post screens..
I think that is fair too anyway, because otherwise you could kinda pimp your park and these topics could turn out to be a "show the best parts of your park" topic..

Anyway, I still think the readme levis posted is unfair..
It's something that must be created during the time you had for the park, and not afterwards.. edit; Or AT LEAST after the voting is over..

SF

all I can say SF is that Panic posted a screen of our park that pointed out flaws... things that might not have been so visible to people if that screen hadn't been posted.

and I don't see a problem with it and as far as I'm concerned people can post whatever last minute stuff they want about the parks or full reviews with screens because there is no guarantee that it'll make much of a difference. Especially in this case... I'm certain it didn't change the outcome of the match.

Edited by Milo, 21 May 2009 - 03:06 PM.

Well, forget about the screens.. It's not really the point I'm trying to make..

A readme is something that's part of the park.. As long as NE exists they always are attached to the park file in a .rar archive..

I don't know, it just feels wrong to me to post the readme afterwards while the voting isn't done yet.. Voting percentages are very important this H2H so I think every vote counts here, even if you guys are beating us big time..

SF

I lul'd way too hard at "The Last Supper" being a restaurant and show...

imo it's the same idea

if you're going to post a screen that has flaws circled why can't we post a file that points out some highlights of the park? for the sake of fairness it actually balances out

I don't fully understand this idea that a readme is a sacred thing that HAS to be in the file either... if the text had been in a post it would still have the same effect. In fact being a readme possibly means that fewer people will actually bother to look at it

Edited by Milo, 21 May 2009 - 03:15 PM.

Well, it wasn't a team decision what panic did
I can understand why he did it though, as he really is a coaster perfectionist and can build coasters like no other, and because of that is bugged by things like he pointed out..

About the readme attached to the park file; I think it's a great way to give an insight in what the park is meant to be and pointing out some details that could easily be missed..
I agree with you though it could also be explained in the topics, so that kinda weakens my argument..

Maybe make a new rule for this one, because we don't have enough rules yet?

SF

the readme wasn't a team decision either

but I'm in favor of just leaving things as they are and allowing people to post screens. I'd love to see some more things like what gee did recently... it shows what people like and don't like in the park. As far as teams posting stuff, I personally think it's fine to post a readme (although just a detailed post might work better ) or even files of music that were intended to be in it. But that's just me.

and since I got my last final done today but haven't had the time to do writeups I might go back and do full reviews of parks with "little things" screens

I'm gonna agree with SF here. IMO, a read me is part of the park and should be included in the original zip. Especially an elaborate one such as this one that clearly was created after seeing posts from some people stating that they didn't 'get' parts of the park. To me, that's akin to sending in an unfinished park and, while the polls are still open, posting a link to a finished version of the same park.
Also.....I thought that Panic posting screens with circled 'flaws' was a cheap shot.....I mean, maybe after the voting poll has closed (unless you're posting flaws of your own work), but....it most certainly can influence votes. Not like there can be a viable 'rule' against the posting of screens....I guess it has to be left to ones integrity.

Fortunately, in this case it appears that neither had any real effect on the outcome of the match.

Edited by K0NG, 21 May 2009 - 04:06 PM.

^^Well, Geewhzz made me make my decision (or, make up my mind) about that match-up (so I think you get my point now)..
I think I'm fine with non-team members posting those kind of replies (although it could be biased too when a team wants another team to lose to benefit their own, but that's a whole other subject) with screens, but I think the teams involved should wait with posting extras and reviews until after the voting.. The reviews are (or could be) biased and the extras should be part of the building time every team has (but that's just me )

Anyways, those write-ups of you are great to have again for this h2h! I thoroughly enjoyed them last h2h..

SF

I think it's always been a kind of unofficial rule in past h2hs to not really do a whole lot with screens while the voting is going on... Especially in a match with LL because people without LL would then be able to see things that they normally wouldn't and it would sway them to vote on the screens only. But if the person doesn't have LL then they probably shouldn't have been voting anyway (at least that could be argued). This is just another example of how the vote codes change the whole scope of the contest. I think it really frees up the teams because it's as level a playing field as you can get. Now imo people can do things that couldn't be done before because it's impossible to just vote on the screens/info provided.... at some point you have to open these parks up and see for yourself.

And to explain why I think people should be allowed to post extras after the match has started... I think that a H2H match is quite similar to a release of an accolade, just in a more structured setting. And when an accolade is released the creators almost always have questions and comments to answer and even post some things they missed. You could argue that being anonymous means people have to be quiet but seeing as the whole team has at least seen the progression of the park I think they can all be an available source of information. People keep mentioning about how lot of time is spent making these parks... that's true and it would suck to see people miss out on certain details or maybe it was sent in but a key ride isn't open. I don't see any reason why teams can't set the record straight on a problem or give in depth comments about the opposing park. In case it wasn't clear... I didn't think Panic shouldn't have posted what he did (unless it is deemed we shouldn't have posted a readme), I've talked about rides and ride design with him a lot in the past and understand why he would make the comment he did.

What I'm trying to say is that with the way the community is today and the fact that people have to open parks to vote, I don't think the park being put in a match should be a one shot deal on getting all the ideas across... and you can never be sure how people will take your park. People are going to make comments and I think teams should be allowed to respond how they want to (short of posting another version )... making posts of little things in their parks, posting what they didn't like in the other park, posting music or even custom music files to put into the park, posting specific videos or songs or pictures that were an inspiration for those who might not know ("oh hey, such and such ride was based on this South Park episode") and even setting the record straight when something is wrong in the park ("such and such ride is closed and shouldn't be, you can open it up and watch it run") should be allowed.

It's that sort of activity in the community that I like to see and it helps everyone without ruining the integrity of the contest imo. I don't think it's right that teams have to accept a concept that people might be alienated to if they have the drive to put together a post of info from what the park was based on. I think it would be really cool to have seen a detailed post of the Bioshock park, with clips and screens from the game and then screens of the park... the same could be said about the AL park in this round... a post of SP clips along with their rct ride counterparts would be hilarious and really informative for those who might not know the show. And sometimes things just go wrong in a park and you don't catch them until it's already released...

Just my 2 cents on that

Edited by Milo, 21 May 2009 - 05:03 PM.

everyone who replies to these match threads is biased and pointing it out in their comments, so if your argument is bias towards a park with screens/comments/readmes whatever, then we might as well just get rid of all comments on a match before voting is over, which I think is a terrible idea.

milo, that is an excellent post there and i totally agree..

Maybe it's because it wasn't really clear to me that these kind of things are allowed, but now I know they are we will be preparing some extras to be posted in our next match-ups..

SF

Ya'll need to chill out.

^Huh?
Can't we have discussions over here anymore?
(because that's what I like about these forums)

SF

Do people not build for fun anymore?