News / OpenRCT2 and submissions: A poll

With the advent of OpenRCT2 and the myriad of new options available within the game, some parks are left incompatible with the base game. These parks have issues varying from objects appearing in one game but not the other, to error trappers that prevent a park from opening entirely.

How we choose to handle parks that contain these kinds of differences is an important decision for the way the site and the game will move forward. We thought it would be best to pose that question to you, the users of the site, to tell us what you want to see with regards to OpenRCT2 submissions, especially those which are not strictly compatible with the base game.

This is not a binding referendum, we merely want to see how the community thinks about this issue and spark discussion.

I think we should go for progress and allow OpenRCT2 submissions. Honestly, what would be an argument against it? The only one I can see is that some people won't be able to open the park if they don't have OpenRCT2. But who's problem is that? Certainly not the problem of the park maker, it's the problem of the people who can't open the park.

 

I think that in a couple years OpenRCT2 will be the standard anyways as more and more new features get added that go beyond the base game. Staying behind on RCT2 is like doing a road trip with a horse and carriage when you have a car available.

Yes, but without guarantee that enough panelists can open it to get scored

What is that supposed to mean? Because in my opinion, every panelist should have OpenRCT if there are submissions that only can be opened with OpenRCT.

^ Do you know think there should be some responsibility on the part of the builder to make sure the park functions properly in both games? At least at the stage we're at now anyway, where bugs are still being ironed out in Open.

Not really. If someone just wants to use an option in a drop down menu instead of doing tons of work for invisible stations, then let him do exactly that. Plus, OpenRCT will be way more important than RCT2 in the long run.

What is that supposed to mean? Because in my opinion, every panelist should have OpenRCT if there are submissions that only can be opened with OpenRCT.

We are a website about RCT1 and RCT2. Some things cannot be opened with either of these games: things created with No Limits, RCT3, Parkitect, and OpenRCT2 under some circumstances. We are not obliged to facilitate anything that is not compatible with the games this site is about. Because most OpenRCT2 parks CAN be opened with the default games, it wouldn't be fair to put it in the same category as No Limits and RCT3... But a comparison with WW and TT does make sense. We make no promises for the expansions either. We're not going to decide for our panelists which games they should have installed, it's their computer and their decision. And as long as these problematic submissions are as rare as they are now, we're not going to let it affect our selection of accolade panelists.

This is the way it is right now. If you think we should 'legalise' OpenRCT2, simply vote for 'Always' in the poll.

^ Do you know think there should be some responsibility on the part of the builder to make sure the park functions properly in both games? At least at the stage we're at now anyway, where bugs are still being ironed out in Open.

 

Why? If a player wants to play in OpenRCT then why should he not be allowed to? Why should he go trough all the trouble to make his park backwards compatible? It's not his problem when other people can not view his park right? If people want to view his park then they should be the ones to take action, and otherwise they should just accept that they can not view the park.

Duh, of course it's everyone's decision to have OpenRCT2 installed or not. I'm just questioning, whether this person should remain a panelist or not. I mean you guys can push this decision further into the future, but at some point you will have to agree with me, so I can wait.

Always.

 

To me, OpenRCT2 isn't another game but an upgrade from the Vanilla version. It makes it a lot easier and less time consuming to build (I did 2 years of 50% of FUCK, in about the last year since I decided to use OpenRCT2 I already finished the other 50%...). With the integrated functions and cheats etc trainers etc will not be needed anymore. I think people will see the advantages more and more and step over to OpenRCT. It is happening, I think most of the site members already have it, so I think it's safe for NE to let OpenRCT in.

I have no problem with parks being made in OpenRCT2 that will then become rather incompatible with the default RCT2, but I would suggest making it clear on the site that the park cannot be opened through normal RCT2. So people who don't have OpenRCT2 or people who are new to RCT2 won't waste their time.

I say ALWAYS.

 

Though right now I'm making my parks compatible with Vanilla, anything to draw more builders to the site is vital! If you look at reddit players, which always brings over some new players to NE, the majority are using OpenRCT. So if we limit ourselves on NE, we are limiting growth too. Perhaps there is a way to indicate with each release which version of the game it opens in, maybe simply adding a tag: "OpenRCT Only".

 

Plus, for future contests, the speed at which we can build, matched with the very high quality of parks expected in last year's H2H, and people's busy schedules, OpenRCT offers way too many advantages to not allow it.

 

As for the panelists, they can download it for free, so there isn't much reason not to have it, at least none that I'm aware of.

The not enough panalist thing seems silly. We don't even have enough Panalists to vote on LL at the moment. Area 52 never got enough votes to be put through. As far as i know its still sat there waiting. Not that I'm bitter

I think, with time, the list of features that are only available through trainers will shrink and the list of features that aren't compatible with vanilla will grow, so making parks compatible with vanilla will be increasingly limiting as time goes on.

 

OpenRCT2 also has better compatibility with platforms other than Windows than vanilla does. I can't get the vanilla game to run through Wine, so it's hard for me to verify that a park can be opened in vanilla even if I think it should be able to.

The not enough panalist thing seems silly. We don't even have enough Panalists to vote on LL at the moment. Area 52 never got enough votes to be put through. As far as i know its still sat there waiting. Not that I'm bitter

 

Well, we only guarantee there'll be enough LL panelists to (eventually) vote on a park because LL is still viewed as an integral part of NE and people are actively producing exciting LL work.  The approach is really the same as WW/TT - the votes come in based on panelist interest in the park.  There's been a WW park in the maps queue for months because nobody can be assed to open the expansions just to map.

Good reason for a larger pannel that includes members with both games and all expansions....

I have to admit I voted no but am already sort of reconsidering. I don't know that it should be instituted yet but I'm sure as they keep improving Open it'll turn out to be far superior. Hopefully people at least try to make it compatible with the standard game though.

Besides using the Invisible Huts in OpenRCT, I don't know what would be make incompatible with vanilla, but I haven't explored all of Open's features yet. But that invisible hut hack with 8cars can be tough to get right. I can do it in like a minute now, but it took some time to really get the hang of it. Would be tough for members you don't know 8cars very well to figure it out. Just sayin...

Good reason for a larger pannel that includes members with both games and all expansions....

 

[ntamin22' timestamp='1460413473' post='695258']There's been a WW park in the maps queue for months because nobody can be assed to open the expansions just to map.

This is not true. That old map job is actually a bug we cannot get rid of easily. The actual park has been released a long time ago.

And the current panel size is perfect. We did away with the 50+ people panel for a reason and I don't see any real reason to complain about how the panel currently functions.

it's twenty people right? If so I think 5-10 more panelists would be a good number. Idk if it's "needed" or not but it seems like a good number. Also I don't see what the big deal is about not having openrct. It just doesn't make sense. The download only takes a few minutes and then BANG your in buisness.