Park / Krustyland

37 Comments

  • geewhzz%s's Photo

    Krustyland Logo


    Sometimes the smaller parks are the most fun to build. Quick and simple, they’re a good way to showcase talent. This park certainly shows two new up and comers making a statement with their new Bronze park Krustyland! Read On...

  • In:Cities%s's Photo
    ehh i'm sorry guys, but i'm not too impressed with this.

    i mean, concept is cool and all, and the coasters are nice, but overall, its kindof meh to me.

    i think it just comes down to personal preference lol.
    its not that your work isnt great, i guess its just the fact that i tend to like parks that are much more 'full' and dont have as many empty spaces.

    but anyways, congrats on the accolades guys!
    i hope to see more from you two in the future:]

    (oh, and by the way, one of the signs near the back of the park says 'Kurstys';] )
  • Comet%s's Photo
    Kind of a small park for two people to be involved in.
    Not that I should talk with Manhasset Meadows but it seem like each of you just did three small buildings a coaster and a flat. High quality at though, and congrats with the accolade.

    I agree with a bronze here, and I hate to question the accolade panelists, but when you guys choose your number do you think to yourself "I think this is a mid level Bronze so I'll give it an 11". Because I want to ask Xcoaster and SSSammy about your scores, do you really think this should have been a gold?
  • Six Frags%s's Photo
    Congrats guys!

    For those of you who didn't knew, this was originally our (=Alpha Legends) park for round 5 against the Whzz Kids.. But a day before the deadline it wasn't completed, and we had another park (Schweizer Valley Amusements) as a backup that we decided to use, as we really needed as much votes as possible to advance to the playoffs, in case more teams had the same score..

    I still think you guys could have gotten more out of this concept, and some pieces of the park look very unrefined and almost unfinished still.. But there is a certain 'fun' factor to it too, which I can appreciate.. Bronze seems right though..

    SF
  • SSSammy%s's Photo
    the voting scale is based on enjoyment.
  • turbin3%s's Photo
    Well, I dont like anything in this park, except of the Haunted House.

    The landscaping was awful, one of the worst I've ever seen & the foliage wasnt good, too.
    Missing custom supports and a bad layout makes me hating the rollercoaster in the middle
    of the park.

    The woody was okay, nothing special, but not bad.

    Some houses were nice, like the Haunted house, but the rest was...not that good.

    All in all I'd have voted 8, sorry.

    I know better things from you two, especially Sulakke.

    Yannik
  • CoasterForce%s's Photo
    This is a fun little park, but I wish the ideas were developed more. Itchy and Scratchy could have been a great dueling/racing coaster instead of a "throwaway" ride and in general I didn't feel like the atmosphere was cartoonish enough. More details like the little entrance building, with some more dynamic, bright colors, could have made this memorable.
  • Comet%s's Photo

    the voting scale is based on enjoyment.


    Do you think this should have been a gold though?
  • J K%s's Photo
    I thought you could have expanded on the concept. The fun things that were in there were really nice, I just wanted more of them.

    Congrats guys, I think the woodie was a refreshing change and I loved the krusty entrance.
  • inVersed%s's Photo
    I enjoyed looking at this. I thought Zoominators layout was pretty unique and fun
  • Jazz%s's Photo
    I found this to be extremely mediocre. The hotel and the stadium were good, but otherwise nothing caught my attention at all. There was so much more room for expansion and innovation, certainly nothing more than a bronze.
  • Cena%s's Photo
    What did Sulakke built? When you look at older screens from him (Midgard and Goldbeach), this looks not so outstanding anymore. Don't get me wrong, bronze is the correct accolade for this and congrats on that, but I would have wanted to see more of that refined Sulakke style that he showed 18 months ago. 
  • zburns999%s's Photo
    Should have been Itchy and Scratchy Land, or even Duff Gardens, but whatever.

    It's okay, I suppose. Some real nice ideas, but overall I feel like it totally lacks the whimsical atmosphere I would have expected a Simpsons park to have. I don't know anything about The Simpsons ride, but I feel like you had so many more options going with a park from one of the episodes. Look at that Praise Land park that was built a while back (forget the NE member). Like, the only thing that really felt "Simpsons" about this park was the wooden coaster maybe.

    I kind of feel like how eyeamthu1 probably felt when he saw the Canes' Spider Man park. Being a Simpsons fan for so long, this concept is something that I have not only hoped somebody would take on, but have also tried to tackle myself. I just feel like it was an idea that never reached full potential. I think it passes as a bronze, though, as it was enjoyable. Nice job guys.

    And I'm with Comet on the way some people vote. I'm not calling anybody out for having an opinion, but how could this be a gold? Look at past gold parks. Indigo Hills, Bocastle Heights--hell, even the Masterpiece used to be a gold park. I'd consider these among the best parks ever made. When my paramount park got a "Blockbuster," (now referred to as gold), there were a few people saying things like, "just good enough for blockbuster." And I agreed. I spent two full years working on that, though. This park has probably 1/20th of the content, and I guess some people see it as a gold. Either that, or they are compensating for anticipated low votes. Don't take this is me being bitter or something...I just wanted to point out that the voting system seems to be a bit more lenient nowadays.
  • J K%s's Photo
    The voting system is perfect in my opinion but unfortunately its hard to find 20 players that have been here this long that they know how a park sits within the past releases of RCT. Basically what I'm saying is the system is fine but its the opinions inside the system that seem to be sometimes wrong. That said parks always appeal to some people rather than others so if two people really did want to give this park a 16 go ahead, it’s an opinion. Definitely not justified in my opinion but hell I don't think half the designs deserve the accolade these days.

    No disrespect to any of the rookies in the accolade voting but they're only starting to develop their game so anything better then them can seem awesome perhaps?

    That’s where I think the problem lies but I do believe this should be a Bronze and it got what it deserved. Anyway I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers, I'm just stating what I think is happening.

    Just so you know guys Cedarpoint and I did the review together so I’m not just whoring your topic out with off-the-subject content.
  • Evil WME%s's Photo

    Do you think this should have been a gold though?


    Sammy voted as he should, unfortunately other people aren't doing so.

    The idea is that everyone votes on a scale how much they enjoyed the park. The 15 votes then decides the accolade, but the individual votes are based (or should be based) on individual enjoyment. I believe it's not working out as originally intended, and posix is working on that.

    My vote was a 9, but I do feel bronze is the appropriate accolade.

    The idea of the accolade panel has always been to get a diverse view on things, and never based on how anything ranks with past parks (although, of course, in an indirect way, it does matter) Thus, what was said above, does not agree with the original intention of the voting system.
  • Xcoaster%s's Photo

    Because I want to ask Xcoaster and SSSammy about your scores, do you really think this should have been a gold?

    No, I would've gone with a high level bronze or low silver. But what WME said is right. We created the scale, so we don't have to vote according to how it's laid out. I personally keep a spreadsheet of all my ratings for different parks and designs, and rank the new ones accordingly. If I hadn't been on the accolade panel when we set up the score levels by voting on older parks, then I might not vote that way, but that's how I do it. If I stopped voting on the upper end of the scale, as I did when we set up it, then the scoring standards would be off.
  • posix%s's Photo
    Well, I don't necessarily think the scale should be "enjoyment", and I strongly believe that everyone is using past park experience and comparison when voting. But yes, reforming the panel voting system is one of the major issues we're trying to solve.
  • Six Frags%s's Photo
    Yeah, I really hope the new voting system works out, because the voting system at this moment is the biggest drawback this site is suffering under imho..

    SF
  • posix%s's Photo
    Pardon me? While I think there are things that can be improved, I definitely think it's still the best way to come up with accolade decisions this site has ever seen. Having only one person decide if it wins or not just isn't/wasn't fair.
  • Six Frags%s's Photo
    It's definitely more fair to let more people decide on the accolade, but to me there are a couple of accolades given that were undeserving of that accolade, with extremely high scores from certain persons that are in no relation to other parks that took a lot more time and skill to make..

    I agree it's better than previous accolade decision making, but it's far from perfect in my opinion at this moment..

    Don't get me wrong though, I REALLY appreciate the effort you guys put in to come up with a good way of judging submissions (and having access to the accolade forum I can see it took a lot of time and effort) and DO think it's the best way yet the site has seen, but the road to perfection on this is a long and bumpy one..

    SF