News / NE Survey

1 - Write-ups should be a requirement for important parks before they are released.

2 - Logos should be a requirement for important parks before they are released.

3 - Great screens are more entertaining than viewing the respective park in-game.

4 - The NE accolades are useful indicators for RCT quality.

5 - When there's a great park I want to open it in-game. Looking at screens is not enough.

6 - Improving my current rank motivates me to finish parks.

7 - Winning the NE Design or NE Spotlight accolade motivates me to finish parks.

8 - Improving my hall of fame ranking motivates me to finish parks.

9 - The opinions that others will post on my park motivate me to finish parks.

10 - Placing high in official NE contests motivates me to finish parks.

11 - The above questions do not capture what really motivates me to finish parks.

  • posix%s's Photo
    As admins, we care for the site and look closely at what's happening in the community. We also think about future developments we'd like to see and discuss ideas and plan accordingly. However, we also sometimes reach a point where we're simply not sure whether Option A or Option B is preferrable. Since we want to design the site in a way that will cater to the community's needs, we're curious to find out a bit more on what attitudes exist regarding the questions you will find in the poll.

    Please answer with sincerity. The poll is pretty much anonymous. If we wanted to we could investigate who voted what, but we won't care. Only the choices themselves matter, not who is behind them.

    Thanks for taking the time to do this. It is not unlikely that the turnout will have a certain influence on the site's future, so please take it seriously. Also, please ensure all your choices are correct, as it is not easy for us to fix misvotes.
  • J K%s's Photo
    I think this site is pretty much perfect. I think it's down to someone's reflection if they don't finish their work not the site you guys are running so well. You guys do an amazing job and the only thing I need more is a certain competition. But anyway I don't want to start that discussion here because we've heard it ten times over the past year.
  • Cena%s's Photo
    IF YOU DON'T LIKE ME, OR IF YOU DON'T WANT TO REPLY SERIOUS TO THIS POST, PLEASE DON'T POST AT ALL IN THIS SERIOUS TOPIC, THANK YOU.

    Hi Guys, I got a PM from Posix two weeks ago about this matter, that I only read earlier tonight, he asked the following:

    Cena,

    you are one of the few members- maybe the only- who voices his discontent with the point system.

    Could you summarise for me why you dislike them? We are considering changes to the system, so we are interested in hearing positive and negative opinions.

    Thanks


    I said to him that I was busy the last 3 weeks with a house moving / exams at school and that I would reply within a week. However, since he started this topic here now, I thought it would be good to be open about what I think about this poll, and more in specifically, the point system.



    Write-ups should be a requirement for important parks before they are released.
    Agree: I think these are a requirement, because it shows what a person from the accolade panel thinks about it, and it also can give more detailed information about the park, the rides, or the player who made it, with background information and so on. However, I feel the last 6 months, these write-ups are kinda underrated. Not sure it's because the new site layout or whatever, but since a while (6 months for my feeling atleast) the write-ups are underrated, always within 10 lines of text. They could be a little bit larger, now it looks the writer took 10-15 minutes for it, while the logo often takes longer (hour or more) and I think it doesn't credit the player enough for sending in a great design/park.
    For example, a design write up, could have more information about the ride itself, espiacially with realistic design, there could be real-life reference information, about speed, height, or maybe even a picture of it. It adds a bit more value to the write up.
    A park write up, could have the same, but maybe even more pages, with a page for each themed section. I don't expect every shop/stall to given credit for, but atleast 2-3 rides per area. When the article is good written, they will be a joy to read.

    An example of what I mean, is on this website where they review tech-products etc: They have most of the time between 5-10 pages for a product, I think that should be here as well, a few examples of what I think are good articles: (They are in Dutch, but they make my idea pretty clear):

    iPhone Battlefield 3 HP Laptop

    And then I specifically mean the little box under: Inhoudsopgave and the information displayed on the different pages, if you want to understand what's in the pages, put the page threw Google Translate :)


    Logos should be a requirement for important parks before they are released.
    Strongly Agree: Simple as that, they give a player credit for it, but more importantly, they give the park/design a face to be recognized with. There should nothing chance about this thing, although it maybe takes up too much time for the logo-artists.


    Great screens are more entertaining than viewing the respective park in-game.

    Strongly Agree: When you view a park, atleast I do, I often am finished looking at it, within 10-15 minutes. Designs most of the time within 5 minutes. That's because ingame you see much more things on your screen and you are faster done with anylyzing/viewing/reviewing the park, then when you visit the forums, and see a new screen every 2 weeks. I feel that when you are on the forums, you take more time per area, to watch it... You have more focus for those little details in a screen, then in the park, because you are looking at the larger picture. Most of the time I only view parks because of A. hacks, or B. Atmosphere, those things are hard to capture good on one static image on a internet forum.


    The NE accolades are useful indicators for RCT quality.
    Strongly Disagree: I disagree about this, because a design of 65% or a design of 90% are still both designs. However, a design of 65% is acchievable for a medium-good player. When a 90+ % design is only acchievable for the very best in the game. I think that when you both label them with design, you are overrating a 65% design and underrating a 90+ design. For parks this is more spread out with the Bronze-Silver-Gold-Spotlight system, something similar would be cool for designs as well, I personally thing, this would be a start:

    Park:
    Spotlight Park: 80% or more+ 80% Yes vote.
    Gold Park: 75% or more
    Silver Park: 65% or more
    Bronze Park: 55% or more

    Design:
    Spotlight Design: 80% or more+ 80% Yes vote.
    Gold Design: 75% or more
    Silver Design: 65% or more
    Bronze Design: 55% or more

    With this system, all accolades go up a little bit in value, and spotlights parks and designs are given the credit they deserve. Espiacially with the designs, there now is a thing to aim for. Now it's: I want 65% and I have my page+logo+accolade ... I would really see an improvement in this.

    When there's a great park I want to open it in-game. Looking at screens is not enough.
    Undecided: What makes a great park? I think this question is for everyone different. When a 90% spotlight park has been released, you would expect it to be good, but when the creater has shown 99% of the park in the Advertising District and you can view the aerial to see how everyting is put together, I don't see a reason anymore, to download the park, unzip the files, boot up RCT and look at it AGAIN. All by all, it depends on how much the creator has shown before, to make me want or not want to download the park.
    This is also a hint to all players, if you want more comments in your release topic, don't show too many screens while being in your advertising topic.

    Improving my current rank motivates me to finish parks.
    Strongly Disagree Uhm, maybe when I was younger I could care about it, but being famous on a internet forum doesn't satisfy me in any way. Therefore I can't care about being in lists, like the current rank top 30. Sure, for some people the recognition is a thing to aim for, however, I don't care about how big my E-Penis is. And in the end, I play this game for my own enjoyment, and not yours. If I don't want to play, I don't play, it's that simple. However, being in these lits doesn't mean that much, I mean, look at the current top 30. Place 30 has like, 20 points or so? That's one failed design and you are in the list ... No need for the list if you make it top 30, better make it Current top 10, and Hall of Fame top 20/25. Again, more credit is giving to the top players.

    The opinions that others will post on my park motivate me to finish parks.
    Agree Although, playing for my own enjoyment, I do like reading reactions with tips to improve my park/design. The reward for those tips, should be a release in the end, it's that simple. However, if I feel that I didn't got enough tips during building, or not enough reactions, I feel, that people wouldn't care about the park, and therefore I don't see the point in releasing anything. Again, the whole point system is fucked up, as it is right now, and I will explain it more on later (already did a bit, above about the design ratings ...)

    Placing high in official NE contests motivates me to finish parks.
    Undecided I haven't participated in enough official NE contests to comment on this, I did enjoyed H2H5 a lot :D !

    The above questions do not capture what really motivates me to finish parks.
    Agree, Although it has a few reasons, the main reason is that I dislike the current system with the points being awarded for a release. I feel that, if you want the points so badly, you can acchieve them easily with low-point releases. A design of 90%, with a multiplier of 4, only gives you 360 points. While a 55% Bronze, gives you (with a multiplier of 3) 165 points. So almost two average Bronzes, gives you the same amount of points, as a freaking awesome 90% design. I think this is completely weird and a flaw in the current system. I think, the higher percentage you score, the higher the multiplier should be, to really have people something to aim for.

    Another example, a spotlight is acchieved with 80% score, and gives you a multiplier of 13, this gives you 1040 points. So, 6 bronzes is equal to a spotlight in the point system ... Or a spotlight equals to 4 designs, with the minimun lowest scored value: A minimum design scores 260 points, a spotlight 1040, so 4 designs are the same as a spotlight, however, a spotlight takes a lot more skill. Often there are more then 4 significant coasters in a spotlight park, with a more difficult park layout, with more supporting rides etc, plus a larger park, often takes A LOT more time to create. The reward is just not right, I think.

    As I sketched above, I think a redesign of the accolade system should be needed, and with that, the multiplier thing as well. Or a differnt thing could be, to drop the multiplier thing completely, and solely have an average percentage of how good a player is. But this would be difficult to imply, since contests don't have percentages attached to them...

    The solution for this problem is in my opinion this: (And I have thought a long time about how to make it better):

    Have the system as I said above for releases:

    Park:
    Spotlight Park: 80% or more+ 80% Yes vote. (with multiplier 18)
    Gold Park: 75% or more (with multiplier 10)
    Silver Park: 65% or more (with multiplier 4)
    Bronze Park: 55% or more (with multiplier 2)

    Design:
    Spotlight Design: 85% or more+ 80% Yes vote. (with multiplier 8 )
    Gold Design: 75% or more (with multiplier 5)
    Silver Design: 65% or more (with multiplier 3)
    Bronze Design: 55% or more (with multiplier 2)

    With this system, you really do award the best releases with the most points. But you also let people aim for higher quality parks/designs. A spotlight now really means something again, instead of being 6 weak bronzes or 4 weak designs.

    The system is easily to make, you only need a few new buttons for the new Design catagory. I think of a buttom system with a coaster on it, with bronze/silver/gold color, and one with platinum color with a accent to it for spotlights. Same could go for the park catagory.

    ** The flaw in the current system is easily to see on Louis! his profile (no offence buddy) but he has a lot of points, way more then some spotlight winners, but in fact has only finished designs)

    In the new situation, points are like this:

    Spotlight Park: 1440 (18 x 80%)
    Park Gold: 750 (10 x 75%)
    Park Silver: 260 (4 x 65%)
    Park Bronze: 110 (2 x 55%)

    Spotlight Design: 680 (8 x 85%)
    Design Gold: 375 (5 x 75%)
    Design Silver: 195 (3 x 65%)
    Design Bronze: 110 (2 x 55%)

    (The old system was as following btw:)

    Spotlight Park: 1040 (13 x 80%)
    Park Gold: 490 (7 x 70%)
    Park Silver: 300 (5 x 60%)
    Park Bronze: 150 (3 x 50%)
    Design: 260 (4 x 65%)

    In the new situation, you need 2 Golds, to have the same as spotlight. Or 3 Park Silvers to have the same as a Gold. Or 14 bronzes to have a Spotlight. It just makes it a lot more fair, for those people who are the best around here. And the more lower class players (no offence) have something to aim for and to try to improve their game, to capture the higher accolades, with more rewarding points.





    The End, let the discussion begin.

  • gir%s's Photo

    Improving my current rank motivates me to finish parks.
    Strongly Disagree Uhm, maybe when I was younger I could care about it, but being famous on a internet forum doesn't satisfy me in any way. Therefore I can't care about being in lists, like the current rank top 30. Sure, for some people the recognition is a thing to aim for, however, I don't care about how big my E-Penis is. And in the end, I play this game for my own enjoyment, and not yours. If I don't want to play, I don't play, it's that simple. However, being in these lits doesn't mean that much, I mean, look at the current top 30. Place 30 has like, 20 points or so? That's one failed design and you are in the list ... No need for the list if you make it top 30, better make it Current top 10, and Hall of Fame top 20/25. Again, more credit is giving to the top players.

    I'm going to have to fundamentally disagree with you here. I guess it's all perspective, but for me the ranking system is not about being famous, popular, having a large e-Penis, or whatever. It's about personal achievement, and the points are one way to measure that. Do you think footballers play for the fame? No, they play for the love of the game, and they want to play at the top level to face the best competition and simultaneously improve their own game. Sure, some are just looking for glory, but I'd say they're in the minority. I think the ranking system increases competition among players, which should increase the quality of releases.
  • CoasterForce%s's Photo
    Couldn't agree with you more gir. Posix, I think y'all have done an amazing job running the site--everything is so much more organized compared to the old days, and to go along with gir's notion of "personal achievement" I think that definitely is a major factor. I would also like to emphasize that NE official contests are an essential part of the site and I think have given rise to some of the best work ever done in RCT. As long as time isn't THAT much of a factor, people are forced to construct parks in fresh ways. It is definitely an important motivator.
  • Brent%s's Photo
    Are you meaning that YOU Have to include your OWN write-up and logo before released?
  • Louis!%s's Photo

    ** The flaw in the current system is easily to see on Louis! his profile (no offence buddy) but he has a lot of points, way more then some spotlight winners, but in fact has only finished designs)


    I see your point, and it is valid. I'm glad you used me as an example, because yes it is easy to see on my profile as I have only got designs.
    This reason is mainly because I rarely start full-sized parks, I believe that I am not yet skilled enough to produce a full size park, I commend anyone that does so, and so always produce designs to improve my skill base, plus I find that I can produce nifty little concepts and single coasters without having to think about the greater picture (again a weakness of mine).

    However I have been involved in 9 winning designs. I fail to see how this is not impressive, and is not of the same impressiveness of someone who has one 1 spotlight. To achieve 9 wins to me is something I am proud of, and I like to think that I am more proud of those 9 wins than I would be on 1 single spotlight.

    But your point is a valid one, and I do agree with what you have said, and am glad you used me as an example.
  • Midnight Aurora%s's Photo
    Cena, I still think you're being overly dramatic about the point systems. I think it's a natural byproduct of the site's judging process to add them up considering that every submission has a point total attached to it. You're now claiming that the system is flawed because of its weighting when you've said all along you'd only submit things for the joy of doing so and not because its prestigious. Don't knock a system you don't ever plan on using.
  • chorkiel%s's Photo
    ^though, he has a point with the designs.
    Vulture got the same ''label'' as tomahawk, which wasn't nearly as good as vulture.

    The weighing isn't that important if you ask me, a spotlight accolade is worth more than the points I think.
  • prodigy%s's Photo
    the point system is perfect atm imo, please leave it as it is, just recalcing it more often would be great... and h2h6 of couse, the hole rest is fuckin' perfect.
  • posix%s's Photo
    Guys, thanks a lot for so many votes in so little time. This is great!

    Cena, thanks for your elaborate feedback. It's really nice to find someone with the reputation of a troublemaker also shows he has motivation to suggest updates to the site that he thinks will do it well.

    The point balance was a topic of serious headache and back and forth for geewhzz and I before we launched NE4. And although I assure you we really tried, e.g. I remember we spent several nights in front of excel sheets in google docs comparing different point distributions of spotlights, designs and contest releases, it is still now easy to find flaws in how the points are lined up, as you have done. It seems pretty much impossible to get the point distro "just right". Thus we were wondering if maybe the points are really as effective as we had hoped them to be. But before the data of this poll isn't properly analysed, which is what I intend to do next week, one shouldn't jump to conclusions. I just find it nice, and necessary, to reflect upon what we have and be open-minded about potential improvements.

    prodigy, could you elaborate what you personally love about the point system?
  • RRP%s's Photo
    I think the whole point system is more hassle than its worth.I couldnt care less if all of it went
  • JDP%s's Photo
    honestly, dont change a thing
    -JDP
  • Turtle%s's Photo
    ^I sort of agree, but if it's already in place, and doesn't require much grunt work to change (am I right to assume most of it is automatically updated from a database?), then I don't see the point in changing it.

    Overall, I would maybe get rid of full scale aerials to encourage the opening of more parks, but I don't think even this is a problem.

    If it ain't broke, don't fix it? I don't think anything's particularly wrong, at the moment.
  • SSSammy%s's Photo
    i appreciate the sentiment involved in the rejection of aerials, but what about the ones who don't own the game? are at college? now i can open any park, so i'm thinking purely hypothetically here, but it would suck to have to wait/potentially never be able to see the park in at least some manner of detail.
  • K0NG%s's Photo
    I have to agree with SSSlammy only because of those who are unable to actually see the parks in-game for whatever reason. Personally, I've never been a fan of the aerials because to me, nothing compares to opening a park and enjoying it from every angle. So, I never even bother with them. But, if for some reason, I was unable to see them in-game, I'm sure I'd be checking the aerials as closely as I could.

    Also, as much as I hate to ever agree with Cena...I think the idea of a tiered Design accolade is great. Personally, I'd never be satisfied with obtaining a lower-tier accolade of any kind and it might make some people work just a little harder to achieve a higher level of accolade. Chorkles makes a very valid point in regards to a Design such as Kumba having the same "ranking" as something like Diamondback... both "Designs" yet worlds apart.
  • Cena%s's Photo

    but for me the ranking system is not about being famous, popular, having a large e-Penis, or whatever

    Tell me then, why do we call it the Hall of Fame, and why are popular people always famous in real life?

    I think the ranking system increases competition among players, which should increase the quality of releases.

    I think it does increase, but not enough for my likings. Look at current designs/parks, they are basically the same as during H2H5. With the only exception of Geewhzz his hack. I saw a major boost in detailism after H2H5, now it's basically the same shit we see on the frontpage for the last 2 years. People aren't as innovative anymore as they were during summer 2009.


    Are you meaning that YOU Have to include your OWN write-up and logo before released?

    Not sure if you replied to me, but I think getting an accolade + review + screens, is something made possible by the NE prep panel, sort of like a 'thank you' for sending in a great design/park.


    I see your point, and it is valid. I'm glad you used me as an example, because yes it is easy to see on my profile as I have only got designs.
    This reason is mainly because I rarely start full-sized parks, I believe that I am not yet skilled enough to produce a full size park, I commend anyone that does so, and so always produce designs to improve my skill base, plus I find that I can produce nifty little concepts and single coasters without having to think about the greater picture (again a weakness of mine).

    However I have been involved in 9 winning designs. I fail to see how this is not impressive, and is not of the same impressiveness of someone who has one 1 spotlight. To achieve 9 wins to me is something I am proud of, and I like to think that I am more proud of those 9 wins than I would be on 1 single spotlight.

    But your point is a valid one, and I do agree with what you have said, and am glad you used me as an example.


    Thanks for seeing my valid point on this one. This is exactly what I meant. Yet you do have skill, you have a different skill assets then Robbie92, who had designs+spotlight. Therefore I think an overhaul of the system would be in place. You can still score a lot of points with designs, in fact, more then you previous could, because of the higher awards for Spotlight Designs/Golds. So all by all, everyone should be happy with the system I came up with. Since good players get more points for amazing releases. The weaker players have something to aim for, therefore more competetion will be added to the website, and their is a difference in designs, more on that later.



    Cena, I still think you're being overly dramatic about the point systems. I think it's a natural byproduct of the site's judging process to add them up considering that every submission has a point total attached to it. You're now claiming that the system is flawed because of its weighting when you've said all along you'd only submit things for the joy of doing so and not because its prestigious. Don't knock a system you don't ever plan on using.

    I said I would submit things for the joy of doing so, because I felt the current system didn't satisfy me. When the system is overhauled, I will reconsider on using it, I said in the past. Posix asked me to give my perspective on it, and I did.

    ^though, he has a point with the designs.
    Vulture got the same ''label'' as tomahawk, which wasn't nearly as good as vulture.

    The weighing isn't that important if you ask me, a spotlight accolade is worth more than the points I think.


    A spotlight accolade is worth more indeed, but the points reflecting the player skills in the ranking doesn't line up with the quality of release. Thank you for seeing the point about designs.


    Guys, thanks a lot for so many votes in so little time. This is great!

    Cena, thanks for your elaborate feedback. It's really nice to find someone with the reputation of a troublemaker also shows he has motivation to suggest updates to the site that he thinks will do it well.


    I am trying to put the Troublemaker reputation in the past, I hope this topic with my posts help a little bit in that. I hope you really reconsider my earlier post, in spefically, the part about the design accolades. That's my biggest complain. If you want more information, or my opinion on things, just drop a PM or email me.

    Turtle:
    ^I sort of agree, but if it's already in place, and doesn't require much grunt work to change (am I right to assume most of it is automatically updated from a database?), then I don't see the point in changing it.

    Overall, I would maybe get rid of full scale aerials to encourage the opening of more parks, but I don't think even this is a problem.

    SSSammy:
    i appreciate the sentiment involved in the rejection of aerials, but what about the ones who don't own the game? are at college? now i can open any park, so i'm thinking purely hypothetically here, but it would suck to have to wait/potentially never be able to see the park in at least some manner of detail.

    Kong:
    I have to agree with SSSlammy only because of those who are unable to actually see the parks in-game for whatever reason. Personally, I've never been a fan of the aerials because to me, nothing compares to opening a park and enjoying it from every angle. So, I never even bother with them. But, if for some reason, I was unable to see them in-game, I'm sure I'd be checking the aerials as closely as I could.


    Well guys, the problem (as I see it) with the aerials are that they are a 'too much in your face' on the accolade page. Just leave the clickable image away and people will start downloading more. If you do want to view the aerial, just click on the button, next to the download button (currently under the image, as you can see). This would solve the 'too much in your face' image, but people without the game, can still get an idea about the park/design.


    Also, as much as I hate to ever agree with Cena...I think the idea of a tiered Design accolade is great. Personally, I'd never be satisfied with obtaining a lower-tier accolade of any kind and it might make some people work just a little harder to achieve a higher level of accolade. Chorkles makes a very valid point in regards to a Design such as Kumba having the same "ranking" as something like Diamondback... both "Designs" yet worlds apart.

    Well, since the two of us together agree on something, it should be a good idea then. Let's introduce it in NE 4.1 :D But anyways, it was exactly my point as what you and Chockles describe now. Now it's waiting and hoping for a change.
  • prodigy%s's Photo
    @posix: i simply love the point system, cause it motivates me to stay building the most i can imagine and i think that's not only me. of course not everybody, but that's no contra imo. in comparison to the parkmaker-ranks before i think it's way better. the point system cares for every activity, the parkmaker-ranks just did for spotlights, what splitted the community into two parts, members who had been parkmakers and members who had not been parkmakers. and to whom should be brought more attention, somebody who did one single spotlight and nothing else, or somebody who did 50 gold parks and 100 designs? of course that stays a difficulte question, cause maybe the skill of the one who did the single spotlight could be higher or there could be something that makes his park totaly unique in an uber way, but imo the point system solves that problem much smoother than any other thing could do. i would leave it as it is and put all resources into an hopefully soon coming h2h6, that would help the community the most (imo).
  • gir%s's Photo

    Tell me then, why do we call it the Hall of Fame, and why are popular people always famous in real life?

    I really don't know, because someone thought it was a clever name? But it's just that, a name. And like I said, that's my own perspective. Of course people will play for the "fame" (lmao, famous on an RCT website), but otherwise it's still a good system for measuring your accomplishments. I have no idea what you mean by the second half of your sentence though...maybe a bad translation. Fame and popularity are two different things.
  • K0NG%s's Photo
    In regards to Cena's "diss" of Louis for his multiple, mediocre designs but nothing else...I've said before that I thought the majority of Louis' designs were rather weak. That's one of the main reasons that I really like the tiered "Design" idea. I mean...honestly, I could have as many design accolades as Louis if I lowered my standards drastically. I currently have one accolade in total (that scored 91.54 as compared to his average of 69.08...with a high of 74.62) because I won't. Ever. Consistent mediocrity shouldn't be rewarded the same as straight-up "kick your fucking ass when I do release something because I actually care about quality".

    Quality releases take time and dedication. And should be rewarded justly. Mediocrity can be accomplished in a week. If you dispute this, just say so and I'll prove you wrong. In about a week. Once.

    Some of us care a fucking lot about what we release...others, not so much. As long as it gets some attention.

Tags

  • No Tags

Members Reading