RCT Discussion / RCT "Attitudes" Survey

The debate will never end. Why not take a poll to show people where you stand?

How do you feel about vehicles/CTRs as scenery?

Very positively... think of the potential for motion. Walto's "This is Art" was an ingenious micro, and even it, I think, is scratching the surface of the amount of insane fantasy stuff you can create with custom rides.

Should RCT "look like RCT"?

NO! Part of art is deconstructing the medium, dammit!

How do you feel about trackitecture?

Very positively... trackitecture is like a key element of RCT2's aesthetic. River rapids walls are the best. Also, when I see coaster track used for sculpting, it reminds me of when people build statues out of scrap and recycled objects in a good way. Trackitecture is very abstract but also very utilitarian.

What era/style of RCT are you most nostalgic over?

Pro-tour era... parks from 2004-2006 were in that sweet spot where they were more experimental than the 'primitive' RCT2 and more creative than a lot of what came after as the community became a lot more standardized and closed-minded. Also, seeing all the millennial-era references from these parks makes me happy.

Is the current amount of detail expected in content harmful to the game?

Somewhat. Although this has been a problem since well before I played tbh. When most people built with base blocks and walls, the megapark was a viable format. I think quarter tiles have resulted in parks gradually getting smaller and smaller over time while simultaneously taking much longer to finish... this is also probably a reason communities like DKMP are more prolific with releases than NE. A big park can take several years to build compared to, say, 2 months.

Is crunch ever necessary?

Preferable but not 100% required.

What are your feelings on crunch?

Personally a big fan and I always try to incorporate it whenever possible, but you can still make a good park without crunch. Crunch is hard in NCSO and LL but good fundamentals will take a park in that style a long way.

Is RCTLL still an important and relevant facet of NE?

Considering we just had a contest partially based around it and LL golds still dropping to this day, I'd say so. I at least want it to be; it's so fun and refreshing compared to the super detailed RCT2 meta.

How important is size and content when considering spotlight contention?

Very.

How do you feel about recolorable "ncso" objects (DKSO)?

Indifferent but slightly leaning positive. Could never get the hang of the DKSO style but the new transparent and void colors take them a long way.

How important is technical accuracy in your enjoyment of parks (assuming realism)?

I'm not a filthy thoosie stickler, but I prefer realistic and accurate layouts over ones with obvious kinks.

How important is geographical accuracy in your enjoyment of parks (assuming realism)?

Not a huge issue to me tbh.

What is non-realism's importance compared to realism?

Definitely more of a non-realism guy but I think both are equally important and valid. I also believe that non-realism can become even more effective when borrowing from realism but turning it on its head.

Is contest success important in a parkmaker's legacy?

Absolutely. There are players who are pretty much only known for their contest parks and hardly have solo work to their name, yet the quality of said contest parks could put them among some of the best when factored in. For instance, take every contest park (counting Seasons since it started as one) out of AVC's name and all he has is a 13 year-old silver and a tantalizing WIP that still hasn't seen the light of day.

To you, is RCT more of a solo or cooperative game?

Both with a slight solo lean. The game was designed around solo play and taken to the next level with big solo releases and spotlights, but Head-2-Head and DKMP contests really show off the value in bringing a collaborative work to life.

Should a accolade panelist be "good" at RCT themselves?

At the very least they should have a good enough understanding of the game and what goes into making a park to give it a fair score.

What exactly counts as "ncso"?

Everything that comes with ORCT2 and nothing more. I am a very loud and obnoxious supporter of additional colors being considered NCSO and I think transparency redefines the meta.

Are you intrinsically or extrinsically motivated to build?

Mostly extrinsically. I have a lot outside of ORCT2 and it's usually a contest that gets me to build because I'm terrible without deadlines. I also feel like I've been one of those up-and-comers with a lot of potential and I always try to go above and beyond (or at least do the best that I can) to help realize that. At the same time, if I'm not enjoying the process then it's a completely worthless validation ploy.

Are recreations as valid as non-recreations?

Yes, but they're like apples and oranges.

Do gimmicks hurt or help your enjoyment of parks?

Yesssss jingle those keys in front of my face

Does execution or ideas/concepts matter more to your enjoyment?

As a mostly concept-driven player, I really think a proper execution is far more important. I can come up with the most crackhead idea ever and it'll lose a lot of its value if I don't execute it to its fullest potential.

Is parkmaker status a useful construct for determining a player's skill and impact?

Definitely not. It's such an arbitrary system but with such rigid boundaries that players who miss it by a hair don't qualify. In a perfect world, Terry, Otter, AJ, and Ethan would all be parkmakers by now. It's also pretty pointless because players I would call the best in the game haven't even hit elite parkmaker status, even if parks they led but didn't get an 80% share on have hit those elite parkmaker percentages. If parkmaker status were an accurate measurement of skill then Leon and Walto would be at least elite by now. Even then, who exactly is the most skilled can be up for debate.

How do you feel about trackitecture?

Been a fan since I discovered it like seven years ago. It's so powerful in NCSO/LL and can create great rounded forms in CSO as well.

How do you feel about vehicles/CTRs as scenery?

Again, I've been a big fan. It's so good for off-the-grid scenery, and the new offset features in the ride vehicle editor are going to break the game in due time.

Should RCT "look like RCT"?

Pointless ass debate. Do whatever with the game and if you render your rides and objects right it's always gonna look like RCT in some capacity. I love well-executed NCSO parks that have that classic RCT charm to them, but we've redefined RCT as an art form and we should do whatever the hell we want with it.

Is the current amount of detail expected in content harmful to the game?

I definitely feel like it slows down the building process unless you're a crackhead or have a lot of scenery manager skill. Pardon me for being a boomer, but more classic building styles like LL, NCSO, and PT2 get done way faster without the constant need for crunch and micro detail. I'm a huge detail crunch micro fan for sure, but I can't deny as the potential for micro detailing goes up and up and up it gets harder to finish a substantial park that can keep up.

What era/style of RCT are you most nostalgic over?

The modern realism/MP server era. When I think NE nostalgia, I think lurking in Tycoon Paradise and the NE server, fanboying over the latest G Force spotlight, and watching Riverland come together in real time. 2017 was a hell of a year, which answers the question right after this one.

Do you own RCTLL? If so, do you play it?

LLLL

Is New Element your primary RCT community?

Yes, but I'm also part of RCTClub and have entered a few DKMP contests as well. Hawaii 0-Five is still semi-active too so of course I consider them as much of a community as any other.

What is your nationality?

Happy second 4th of July babyyyyyyyy

I'm not going to vote in the poll at this time, but here are my "attitudes" in greater detail.

Is crunch ever necessary?
It is up to the builder to decide what is necessary for the piece. Sometimes, it enhances the aesthetic. It is not necessary for a builder to use crunch in order to be considered a top-tier builder, and the best builders in the game can create great maps without it, but it is a skill that, when used masterfully, can create a new layer of magic upon something that is already great.
 
What are your feelings on crunch?
I enjoy it when it is used well. Seeing builders create new textures and patterns that push boundaries and enhance areas is a positive experience for me, and I myself enjoy experimenting with the game this way as well. It should not be expected as mandatory, however, as not every map or area calls for it.
 
Is RCTLL still an important and relevant facet of NE?
Certainly important, and not just as a historical component. Its relevancy seems to depend on how many builders are actually releasing parks within the medium, but viewers still respond positively to new LL. A new Lurker park is always enough to get NE excited to open LL, for example, even if some can only do it through OpenRCT2. While we have lost some big names over the years due to general inactivity (not LL retirement specificaLLy), we still have a core group of LLoyaLL builders releasing enough material to keep the game afloat. 
 
How important is size and content when considering spotlight contention?
To me, a Spotlight must appear iconic and recognizable even from the furthest zoom level. Content is the most important to me--the map must be fun and engaging throughout as well as aesthetically pleasing with as few jarring/questionable choices as possible--but it also must feel like a work of art from every zoom level. Size factors in relative to all of these aspects, but I do not think of a map as a Spotlight if I can see everything from close zoom levels or if it runs together and is difficult to read from far away.
 
How do you feel about recolorable "ncso" objects (DKSO)?
I do not use them personally unless a CS map calls for it, but when viewing DKSO parks, I much prefer the colorable versions to the original WW/TT pieces. Like any other object, if it is used well, it looks good.
 
How important is technical accuracy in your enjoyment of parks (assuming realism)?
I have a preference for parks that go the extra mile when it comes to detail, so I consider the ability to add details that are true to the piece and enhance the experience to be an important skill. This does not stem from a desire to see everything as "accurate" as possible, however; it just becomes a more immersive experience in a realism park, for example, when there are things in there that resemble something one might actually see in that park if it were to exist outside of RCT. Technical accuracy to someone who may visit one theme park every five years is different from technical accuracy to someone who regularly spends time in that environment.
 
How important is geographical accuracy in your enjoyment of parks (assuming realism)?
It certainly enhances the experience when the park looks like where it is set, if anywhere in particular, but I'm not going to take points off if you build a Hardee's in California instead of a Carl's Jr.
 
What is non-realism's importance compared to realism?
All styles are of equal importance. What matters most is that they are built thoughtfully.
 
Is contest success important in a parkmaker's legacy?
Whether a park wins or loses is not important, as that depends ultimately on the park it is up against and how the voters feel about both parks in relation to each other. The greatest impact a parkmaker can have on their legacy during contests is to build high quality parks - that is remembered more than how the park stands in a match.
 
To you, is RCT more of a solo or cooperative game?
I lean towards building solo since I tend to go at my own pace--my two building speeds are "snail" and "cocaine" with nothing in between--but that is not to say that it is a solo endeavor if I am building by myself. If I am feeling that something is missing in something that I am building, for example, it is very helpful to send the work to other builders to see if they can help me see it from a new perspective. In a contest, I enjoy being in a partnership or on a team, as I feel greater satisfaction completing something on time that benefits people other than just myself, thus I have a greater chance of accessing my "cocaine" building speed (which J K has recently witnessed and my current GT partner is about to discover over the next week). My main motivation for releasing parks in general is to bring joy to other RCT enthusiasts, just as other builders do for me all the time, so while I do build for me, I never build only for me.
 
Should a accolade panelist be "good" at RCT themselves?
A panelist should be able to assess the quality of RCT, but that skill is not directly proportional to one's building ability. One can understand and appreciate the medium at the necessary level to be a panelist without being able to translate that understanding into their own creation process. NE happens to be a community where the creators are also the critics, but this is not the case with all forms of media.
 
What exactly counts as "ncso"?
NCSO means no custom scenery objects, so it can evolve over time. These days, it is more of an umbrella category, so distinctions should be made for its subcategories:
- Classic NCSO (called "Modern" in this poll), which uses only scenery and objects made by Chris Sawyer and his team. Unwritten rule against WW/TT pieces since they throw off the aesthetic. No new track types, modified objects made "official", custom palettes or invisible/void color scheming, though it can evolve towards using the expanded color palette. The dominant form of NCSO before Open began to add new items. Think Storybook Glen, Ancient Worlds, Raspberry Acres, and Blue Oak minus the custom paths.
- Vanilla NCSO, a more extreme version of Classic that does not allow for the use of hacks or features that exist beyond vanilla RCT2 that alter the aesthetic, such as clearance checks and tile inspecting. The RCT2 equivalent to LL's "no hacks" category. Think ar2910.
- Expansion NCSO, which is Classic with WW/TT object use encouraged. Think DKSO before the colorable versions of WW/TT objects were introduced.
- NCSOpen, which allows for any object, track, and color scheme available in default OpenRCT2. X7's tracks, invisible paint, and and CS made "official" by the development team. Because this is still the default setting for OpenRCT2, it falls under the NCSO umbrella, as there is nothing "custom" in relation to what is now the base game. Though we have not seen many major releases that fall purely under this category (Taxi 2.0 would qualify since it uses Single Rail track), it will likely become the dominant form of NCSO going forward.
 
Are you intrinsically or extrinsically motivated to build?
About 50/50. I am motivated by my enjoyment of building just as I am motivated by the joy my work brings to others. A highly successful park for me is one that others enjoy viewing as much as I enjoyed creating it, but even if others do not receive the same amount of pleasure from a park I've built, it does not take away the enjoyment I received from building it. 
 
Are recreations as valid as non-recreations?
All parks are valid. There is no such thing as an invalid park. Except Green Fir Grove. What the hell was that builder thinking.
 
Do gimmicks hurt or help your enjoyment of parks?
Context must always be taken into consideration, but I have never enjoyed a park less due to the presence of a gimmick. A good one enhances the experience, while a poorly executed or badly contextualized one just adds nothing without subtracting.
 
Does execution or ideas/concepts matter more to your enjoyment?
A strong mix of both is always going to be preferred above all else, but I would prefer to see a well-executed park with less conceptual emphasis than a poorly executed park with strong concepts. 
 
Is parkmaker status a useful construct for determining a player's skill and impact?
No. Ask me again in a year or two.
 
How do you feel about trackitecture?
Is there an option above "Very Positively"? Seriously though, switching to OpenRCT2 and harnessing the capabilities of the tile inspector truly reinvigorated my desire to expand my building capabilities, and after a decade and a half of using only the default roof colors and textures (I was hardcore Vanilla before 2017), discovering a way to color roofs however I wanted with greater sloping capabilities without downloading additional scenery brought a new level of excitement for me. Pushing the limits of NCSO was a major aspect of my drive to build before I switched to Open, and it really exploded over the years that followed, but after I played more with CS, I found it to be a more stimulating realm of possibilities. The response of some builders claiming that track roofs detracted from their viewing experience admittedly killed some of my drive to create more NCSO, as I felt it was a signature element of my style that was being rejected, but I still dabble in it occasionally, and there's still plenty of trackitecture when I do.
 
How do you feel about vehicles/CTRs as scenery?
Any object that can be used in the proper context is welcome in that context. The idea that "rides are rides" and "scenery is scenery" is a limiting belief and only an arbitrary distinction aesthetically.
 
Should RCT "look like RCT"?
It can if that is the builder's goal, but it is only one style that RCT permits. The idea that RCT should be one thing and one thing only is another limiting belief, though there is nothing wrong with favoring a certain style above all others as long as one does not discount the other legitimate styles for simply not being that one. Of course, using jarring objects that clash with their surroundings within the game is generally going to detract from the experience, so RCT objects should fit with other RCT objects.
 
Is the current amount of detail expected in content harmful to the game?
Only when context is not taken into consideration. I often see complaints of architecture not being detailed enough, for example, when the architectural style does not call for a greater level of detail. In general, there is a difference between going further for the enhancement of the map and adding detail for the sake of detail. 
 
What era/style of RCT are you most nostalgic over?
Pre-Ancient Worlds NCSO, when trackitecture ran free and builders were pushing the limits of what sorts of details could be included on a map without sacrificing aesthetic value, and the Starpointe-to-Riverland era of realism that pushed the boundaries of what a map could feature within the .sv6 object limits. Trackitecture-heavy NCSO done well will always have a special place in my heart, and I've never had as much fun in RCT as I did building Raspberry Acres. And I've regrown the mustache several times, so that's not it.
 
Do you own RCTLL? If so, do you play it?
I have three LL projects in the works--one no hacks design, one hackarific design, and one large map--but we may not see them for a while since I'm typically in snail mode for non-contest works these days.
 
Is New Element your primary RCT community?
Yes, I arrived from RCTgo originally and participated in both communities equally for my first couple years here. Since about 2019, I've not spent much time in any other RCT community save for a few contest entries in various Discord servers sporadically.
 
What is your nationality?

Do I look like I'm from this planet? Come on.

I answered nearly all of these with the neutral/ambivalent option. Does that mean I'm boring or the questions are?

Is Crunch ever Necessary?
Probably for some concepts at least, with the way the game is now.

What are your feelings on crunch?
Overall positive, from a viewing perspective. I like clean, I like crunch, mostly what I care about is that the builder was consistent with it. Building, not so fun, but that might just be me being bad at it.

Is RCTLL still an important and relevant facet of NE?
Said yes though I'm probably quite biased with my love of LL or retro parks in general. I will say, NE is the most active and best place I've found since returning to the game for LL content.

How important is size when considering spotlight contention?
Fairly important, from what I've read and seen traditionally a spotlight is a big, full park that takes some time to explore. Surroundings that give the park context add to it for me as well, which takes space.

How do you feel about recolorable "ncso" objects (DKSO)? 
I've had some good fun building with these, and DKMP players have done some cool stuff with them, though for me the object conflicts have taken a lot of the fun out of it, and I'm shifting more towards NCSO + The new colors as that gives me some of the same flexibiliy.

How important is technical accuracy in your enjoyment of parks (assuming realism)?
I won't knock points off right away for inaccurate things, but well done details will definitely add to a score I give. One thing I do like is stuff that doesn't exist but plausibly could, like a launched B&M invert or a custom SLC layout that doesn't exist IRL.

How important is geographical accuracy in your enjoyment of parks (assuming realism)?
My view is pretty similar to the question above actually, not 100% the most important but definitely helps. A deep knowledge and careful research will definitely add to the score I give.

What is non-realism's importance compared to realism?
I think both are important and have a place, I can enjoy a total realism park or a high fantasy one just as well as the other.

Is contest success important in a parkmaker's legacy?
Kind of depends to me, some of the most memorable players to me never did many contests, others made their name in them. 

To you, is RCT more of a solo or cooperative game?
Solo for sure, doing collaborations is an exception for me. I don't tend to like feeling like I can let someone else down and it can be hard for me to manage working with another player, though I've learned a good bit and had good experiences with the few co-op builds I've done.

Should a accolade panelist be "good" at RCT themselves?
I feel like a panelist should have some experience with the building for accolades or contests at least, like at least a bronze or two, or a good contest finish.  And they should know the site's culture, preferably have been around for a while, and of course be good at reviewing or at least fair with scores. Having a variety of players is good too I think, parkmaker and non-parkmaker, contest and solo oriented players, to give a good variety of viewpoints and opinions.

What exactly counts as "ncso" to you?
The objects that shipped with RCT2 on release day, to me the "purest" NCSO is a .sv6 file that can be loaded in the vanilla game, though I'd still count a .park with those objects. The new colors (Especially the invisible option) I consider something different (I've taken to calling it NCSOpen as I saw suggested).

Are you intrinsically or extrinsically motivated to build?
Mostly intrinsically, I usually choose to build things based on how much I'll enjoy building them, and pick styles that I personally like. But I do care some about how my builds score and are reviewed, and want people to enjoy what I build.

Are recreations as valid as non-recreations?
Having tried and mostly failed to recreate things, I definitely think there's a lot of skill needed to recreate something properly in RCT, maybe different than non-recreations sometimes but still definitely a skill. Things like making an interpretation of an element that doesn't exist in RCT, dealing with grid and space constrains and deciding when to take artistic liberties to make it look right is tough sometimes and people will have their own way of doing it.

Do gimmicks hurt or help your enjoyment of parks?
A good technical trick or flashy opening sequence will definitely impress me (Especially ones that are interactive, I find those fun), but a gimmick-free park is also good, and better in some contexts to me.

Does execution or ideas/concept matter more to your enjoyment?
A good concept does a lot for me, love a creative setting or original idea and I've given contest entries higher scores for a good concept before. But execution does matter, if a park with a good concept but a lot of glitches, issues or rough areas goes up against a very technically well-done one I'll probably vote for the latter.

Is parkmaker status a useful status a useful construct for determining a player's skill and impact?
Some of my favorite builders are non-parkmakers, but when I see a green name I definitely think "Quality player" pretty much immediately, plus I like the tradition behind it. 

How do you feel about trackitecture?
I've seen it over-used (Especially outside of NE), and I have a tendency to still read it as "Ride tracks" (If that makes sense), but used well as I've so often seen here on NE (Especially recently with the single rail track) it can add so much to a park, I also use it myself when I need to, so I'm not against it.

How do you feel about vehicles/CTRs as scenery?
It can add some fantastic effects, so I think it's good in the right context and concept. Though I lack the skill and patience to really use it much myself.

Should RCT "look like RCT"
I absolutely love the base game's artstyle, and retro-style parks with that classic "RCT" look, but some of my all-time favorite parks are well into "Doesn't look like RCT" territory, so I don't think it has to.

Is the current amount of details expected harmful to the game?
While I love seeing the mind-blowing level of detail (Especially in some recent contest parks) and the amazing skills in it, I think it can cause burnout and make parks take longer to finish, reducing the chances they get done. It might also turn some away, players that simply don't enjoy micro-detailing every inch of a park.

What era/style of RCT are you most nostalgic over?
I love very old stuff, so probably the style of 2002-3, LL and those early RCT2 parks, though 2005 is quite nostalgic for me as well.

How old were you when joining NE?
Early teens

What year did you join New Element?
2003, back then I mostly just got into fights, got banned for being an idiot, and only ever finished one very small park. Eventually wandered off and only really returned in 2020.

Do you own RCTLL? If so, do you play it?
Yes, pretty frequently and got most of my best NE results with it.

Is New Element your primary RCT community?
I've been most active on DKMP, and also jump around to several different servers, including some casual and scenario play-focused ones as I enjoy scenarios. NE has become a pretty major part of my playing the game recently though.

What is your nationality?
United States, born and raised.
 

Do i get like reward points towards a gift card for filling this out.

Wow this is way too long. Started filling it out but then missed a null vote option on too many questions. Guess you won't add one as it's too much work (?).

Do gimmicks hurt or help your enjoyment of parks:  I think some are great, especially if they are clear in their execution, and add a certain amount of humour or cleverness to the park. However, if it's a gimmick based on a joke or reference, in particular, something said in Discord, but not necessarily brought over to NE, I can find this rather confusing and alienating. However, as an NE member who rarely frequents Discord, this is obviously a very personal opinion, and I'd understand if others didn't feel the same.

Is the current amount of detail expected in content harmful to the game:  Not the game as such, but somewhat so on a player-by-player basis. I believe some people see the current levels of detailing and are put off from creating content themselves - either feeling like they will never match that level, or starting but getting burnt out (and abandoning projects) in the pursuit of it. However, there are some players who seem completely unfazed by it, and are able to create incredible content with vastly less "detail", either owing to a mastery of negative space, landscaping, minimalism, suggestion, or just a style that conveys beauty and intent with just the bare bones.