Park / Red River Delta
-
04-June 09
- Views 27,313
- Downloads 1,012
- Fans 3
- Comments 120
-
78.75%(required: 70%) Gold
Cocoa 90% Xeccah 90% chorkiel 85% Liampie 85% CoasterCreator9 80% G Force 80% Jaguar 80% bigshootergill 65% Poke 65% csw 60% 78.75% -
3 fans Fans of this park
-
Full-Size Map
-
Download Park
1,012
-
Objects
331
-
Tags
Similar Parks
-
Om Mani Padme Hum
-
Delta Desert Base
-
BioShock - Welcome to Rapture
-
Kidderbrook Amusement Park
-
7 Days in Prison!
-
Myst
In my own opinion I think it's the other way around.. it's the coasters a park needs and it's the scenery that is just something "fun" to put it.
-JDP
Edited by Panic, 06 June 2009 - 03:25 AM.
i can understand anyone who says he did not like the park for it was not following the concept of a realistic park, because he likes those better, but saying one did not like the park because there was no coaster to check out is kinda disregarding the whole idea of the park and allows to guess you did not understand the reasons why the park was made the way it was at all. after all, you do not have to create parks with the game. or rollercoasters. not even if it's called rollercoaster tycoon.
i should add however, that this was the reason why i did not like the park's entrance much, because it looked too much like it was imitating reality and, in my opinion, therefore broke with the concept of itself.
another thing i wanted to get out: say we did an h2h6, maybe it would be an idea to change the votings as such that all 6 parks are being posted at once where people are supposed to rank them from 1 (most favoured) to 6 (least favoured), and each week we average the rank a park gets. in the end, the team with the best rank average wins.
the idea is to allow giving some "score" to parks that were good but maybe not as good as some other park also in the round, which, should both parks go up against one another in the match mechanism we're using right now, would win 100% and the other 0%, simply because it was better and people can only choose one. the 1-6 ranking would then not disregard by "how much" it was better, or worse. i see a benefit created here because i don't see how a team like the minutemen, who produced nice parks throughout the season, could possibly end it winless. i don't think that's a turnout they deserve.
From the overview I thought I'd like the LL park more. Inside there was something missing for me. It just seemed kind of tricked. In a way, it is newer built in an older medium.
The RCT2 park reminded me of something I myself could make. Both coasters were interesting enough to me to watch them, full circuit. The woody was especially impressive. The theming wasn't perfect, but had it's moments. It's not the best park so far by a long shot, but I had a lot of fun looking at it. It felt more nostalgic looking at this park than the LL park.
The LL park is leaning towards winning, which would make the third winning LL park. SWS was a different story to me, but these matchups can lead to the belief that LL parks actually have an advantage as mentioned above. This matchup is by no means clear to me, though, so in order to carry that argument, for me, i'd say a clearly inferior (to me, again, obviously) LL park would have to beat an RCT2 park. These parks are both nice, and very different, and it thus becomes a matter of opinion.
The fact that some people think the only reason the LL park is winning is because its LL and those of us judging the LL parks don't understand LL...what kind of crazy remark was that? If we have LL, you can pretty much assume we have been around awhile and 'understand' LL. I think it is the RCT2 people who are not being objective and not seeing the big picture...i.e. aren't looking at both parks objectively. Milo brings up an excellent point about why H2H4 LL parks didn't win. The way of judging this year is soooo much more objective.
Secondly, rides and coasters...people, seriously? You don't tell people how to make parks. You can certainly not like a park without rides or coasters...your prerogative. But you can't tell me that I shouldn't like a park because it doesn't have a ride or coaster. Cam has that right.
Oh and Kong, I'm probably one of the few here who got your War song...so
Louis and Milo are the ones talking sense here and since Milo is interested in knowing my reasoning for picking the LL park, here goes:
You are right, I like traditional parks (yes, rides and coasters)but I like fantasy once in awhile too, especially if its LL...no I'm just kidding
And this is a hard argument for me to make because all three LL parks this season have been very deserving of a win.
Edited by zburns999, 06 June 2009 - 08:53 AM.
In my opinion what really matters is how strong the concept is and then how well and cleanly it is executed. No matter the game. And the Elemenatlist's park did a very good job here.
Now, let me get my position straight. As one of the Minutemen, who are pretty much buggered season wise if this park doesn't win, I obviously want it to win. However.
"Would the Elementalists' park be winning if it was made in RCT2?" Honestly, the answer for me would be NO. But the fact remains that it wasn't made in RCT2. It was made in LL, and you DO have to work harder in LL to make the same effect. I'm sure some people build in LL for exactly this reason. And I actually really love looking through this park and seeing the new usage of rides and scenery to create a vision. For example, the waterfall rapids sections as larger sections of wall, really nice touch. The crashed monorail, bloody brilliant. The battleship coming out of the hangar, in a kind of forcefield black effect. UNBELIEVABLE.
Hey our park is good too. There's plenty of small touches. You should look for them.
I will agree with you there. If a park that is shooting for realism but is lacking the realistic vibe, I then feel as if the park fails. As everyone knows, coasters are my stand point so I would pick a fantasy park over a park with bad roller coasters.
And posix I like that idea for h2h6.
-JDP
Assault on Earth Base was extremely creative. From the overview it looked sterile, empty, and boring. But I think it is definitely a park that needs to be seen in game. I normally am wary of claims of this sort, but exploring it is definitely worth it. There are, in fact, rides everywhere. All themed to the T. The hacks were all genius and pulled off flawlessly. There were some parts that were clunky though. And the Austin Powers bits were icing on the cake. The discussion about the lack of a rollercoaster does not make sense to me at all. I've never really cared if a park had a coaster or not depending on the concept. A while back, me, SirSpinster, and Ello started a park called Archicon which was meant to be architecture only. It was eventually completed by almost everyone in RCT Fusion as one of our last club parks. So, maybe I'm biased on that point. It eventually did have coasters, but it was originally not meant to. In addition it had a very limited selection of custom scenery to push people to be more creative with what was available.
River Delta was a very solid park. It has a lot of atmosphere and is themed very well. The flyer was great. I thought the woodie had some pacing issues though. The building tucked in behind the woodie was nice though. You could tell a lot of planning and work went into this park, so it is a shame it will probably lose this round.
As for the RCT2 vs LL discussion...I think this matchup is a great example of the strengths of LL and the current weaknesses of RCT2. The beauty of LL is in its constraints. It demands an efficiency of its builders and a level of creativity that is less important in RCT2. Each element used has a much greater necessity and is much more thought out in its use and placement in LL. I think the overabundance of scenery in RCT2 is currently one of its most restrictive attributes. People are allowing the scenery to dictate the creating rather than using the scenery as a tool. This park shows that. It is a fairly generic theme choice with a limited story behind it but is jam packed with scenery pieces. The LL park has an immersive story and each hack and each piece of scenery has been bent to fit that idea. The detail level and atmosphere are there in the RCT2 park but the creative control, and immersive quality are not.
maybe i am just a little pissed off because the voting public seems to be fickle at best. also, i will not get into the changes made that i think ruined this season of h2h.
I think the reason for a panel of judges is and has always been a matter of suspense. you submit a park and await judgement to see how you did based on the comments of a cross-section of the community. if everyone voted it would defeat the purpose. though I would say judges are generally selected based on their ability not to be biased, which would certainly be an issue with your vote in this round.
chapelz, i sense bitterness in your posts these days.
critisising the opsing parks most of the time.
im usre if these parks werent against you you would enjoy them.
I just got a chance to look at Assault, and I have to say it was pretty neat even though I'm not a huge fan of fantasy-style parks. I understand why people think LL parks have an advantage, but I think it's a poor excuse. I certainly respect the beauty of the Minutemen's park, perhaps even more so if I could view it in-game. However, in this competition--and I think this has been known a long time--looking good isn't quite good enough. That's all I have to say off the top of my head right now.