RCT Discussion / Masculine/Feminine

~ Discuss a masculine building style.

~ Discuss a feminine building style.

NOTE: Masculine nor feminine is superior.

.
.

.
.

I understand you're wanting to explore the psychological process of building rollercoasters and theme parks, but I don't think this really applies here.

My intent is a serious discussion about certain style. And how really, if it's as broad as can be; there are only two (to start).

Okay, I'll bite

Masculine: RCTNW

Feminine: Freerider

Nothing above this sentence means anything.

This is actually a really intriguing idea here.

For a masculine building style, I'd see K0NG and Gee as major proponents of a similar feel. Their work is usually pretty hefty or beefy, suggests mass, and is generally in-your-face. I would almost say heavy-handed, but that usually carries a negative connotation and I feel the exact opposite about the twos' work. Their work always feels incredibly substantial, and I feel a lot of this has to do w/ the scale they build at; it's a bit larger than peep scale and everything has a set thickness beyond a wall piece. The rockwork and blockwork is thick and, again, substantial.

As for feminine, I find this a bit more difficult to determine, but I'll attempt this using more realistic builders. I'd see CP6 and RRP as having a bit more of a feminine style, where everything has a sense of lightness; the buildings are full of light touches, the composition of their work relies on light touches of various elements, and it's all about smaller things rather than the overall mass.

As for my preferations, I would say I actually prefer a bit more of the feminine style, as I really appreciate its lightness and subtlties. While I LOVE gee's and K0NG's work, I LOVE the subtle work/foliage/archy/detailing in a RRP screen. Still, either style is incredible and it all comes down to preference.

Rob really hit the nail on my perspective on this idea.

Masculine styles are vulgar in stature, and I would feel would feel more like a generic theme park that is filled with coasters and rides.

Feminine is relaxed, and is more natural. in both existence, and beauty.

Although masculine can be very peaceful looking as well, the color choices and ideas are bigger than the grid tiles that rct can hold.

Rob really hit the nail on my perspective on this idea.

Masculine styles are vulgar in stature, and I would feel would feel more like a generic theme park that is filled with coasters and rides.

Feminine is relaxed, and is more natural. in both existence, and beauty.

Although masculine can be very peaceful looking as well, the color choices and ideas are bigger than the grid tiles that rct can hold.

Ok, I'm gonna vehemently disagree with this post. First, you say that rob "hit the nail....." but, he used me as his main example of masculine building and I have never built anything that is even close to "a generic theme park that is filled with coasters and rides".
I have always, purposely, built in a "masculine" style...while at the same time always adding touches of "femininity" to whatever I build. You'll rarely see anything from me (yeah, I know...get it out of your system) that doesn't include some kind of lush topiary and/or waterfalls to contradict the more masculine style of the majority of my "park". Also...the reason that I consider my work to be masculine is that it's typically, as rob said, very much "in your face". But, that's not because it has any "vulgar" traits to it whatsoever. Nothing I build is crude, ignorant or tasteless. My posts might be. But nothing I build has those characteristics.
I try to build things that look like they simply sprouted from under the surface of the earth and appeared as though they belonged there in the first place. It's why I try to avoid using brighter colors (which I'm often criticized for) and staying with earthy tones as often as possible. Which is what, IMO, differentiates gee's work from mine...he uses much more bright color than I do.

I agree with rob's assertation of what makes a more "feminine" style (and, I'm not dissing anyone that does this because it's often brilliant). I see that as a cleaner, simpler style that involves more color and gives off a more "relaxing" vibe.

I'd go on here but, I'm buzzed and I (for once) think that I've said enough.

BTW...FantastiCo...you're about as bi-genre as it gets (which is what I think was the "compliment" you were looking for when you started this topic).

I personally think it is impossible to say whether a park in RCT or RCT2 would be feminine or masculine and be correct. Just because a park is more based on size than detail doesn't make it masculine. I think parks that are dark and cold with dull and natural colors would resemble a more masculine park and a bright cheerful park would be more feminine. I also think that it depends on the theme. Western and Medieval theming would be quite a bit more masuline than fantasy themed.

I don't think this really applies here.

you mean this with a feminine building style?

http://www.nedesigns...0/playboy-park/

I guess it depends on which cultural norm you're thinking of when you say things are either masculine or feminine.

BTW...FantastiCo...you're about as bi-genre as it gets (which is what I think was the "compliment" you were looking for when you started this topic).

I wasn't looking for any kind of "compliment". Btw, I'm totally strait. Why would I think being considered 'bi' is a compliment? It's because you're an ape stuck in a 1950's black and white epic.

doesn't this idea kind of perpetuate sexism? not that i don't appreciate the notion behind it, but it does kind of pigeon hole gender roles.

^ Well I would say it has more to do with style than gender. For example, not to say a feminine style is necessarily built by a feminine person.

I know some very feminine males and some very masculine females so I'd think gender isn't necessarily the focus here. I'd say that it's more about what has traditionally or historically been defined as masculine or feminine traits.

doesn't this idea kind of perpetuate sexism? not that i don't appreciate the notion behind it, but it does kind of pigeon hole gender roles.

Yes.

$agie and Emergo had feminine building styles, everyone else has/had masculine building styles.




/Thread.

[/thread][thread]...

come on man, don't be so shallow.

[/thread][thread]...

come on man, don't be so shallow.

Shallow... as in judging things by their looks/how they appear? ...

Shallow as in trav naming female builders having feminine styles and male builders having masculine styles. I think he completely missed the entire idea.