Park / Krustyland

37 Comments

• 

  J K Offline

  Seriously Imo all you have to do is raise the score up for the hopeful designs and thats half the problem solved right there.
  
  I'm sorry this is in Krustyland Maverix and Sulakke. Should we maybe start another discussion somewhere else so we can throw some ideas around?

  posted 15 years ago

  • #21
  • Back to top
• 

  Jaguar Offline

  I'd say to make things fair, I think the owner or admin that usually has the best opinion (Not bias or doesn't generally vote too low or too high) should pick the parks. It would be alot quicker and more efficient, as some parks that took much more time than this didn't get an accolade. I think it is kinda redicuous how a 58x58 park got a 16 though, and I have also noticed that many parks are under rated. It seems very hard to get a design, and I also notice that (In my opinion...) many of JKay's parks are under rated. They are kinda odd, but many of them deserve more than a silver. I don't think spotlights should be based on park design, but what scenery the person used, and how good it is because I haven't seen many traditional parks anymore. There are many other parks that I would consider underrated or overrated, such as phatage's SFWOE, that park is more realistic than any other park I've seen. I know everone has their opinions, but I don't think the accolade panel is accurate.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #22
  • Back to top
• 

  Comet Offline

  You have to realize that none of the parks you mentioned were voted by an accolade panelist
  Ironically those were chosen the way you suggested, which is how it was done back in the day

  posted 15 years ago

  • #23
  • Back to top
• 

  robbie92 Offline

  ^^What?
  
  Of course a spotlight should be based on park design. If it was based on the scenery, then Gee's bench alone could get spotlight...

  posted 15 years ago

  • #24
  • Back to top
• 

  SSSammy Offline

  you should stfu jaguarkid.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #25
  • Back to top
• 

  Todd Lee Offline

  There's no way that any voting will ever be "fair". It's all a matter of opinion. Nothing is factual.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #26
  • Back to top
• 

  Splitvision Offline

  Agree with Guy Smiley. It's all comes down to personal taste, so it's impossible to have a fair voting system, or atleast a system which everyone's happy with. I'd compare it with musical competitions like that piece of junk program "american idol" and such shows. It's easy enough to hear if a person sings false or not (a park clearly not deserving an accolade at all) but when you have decent singers (parks) they will be graded ranging from okay to great, depending on the person grading them.
  This is true for all forms of art. You can't "measure" it.
  
  I think that the system we use now is reliable, but there's always room for improvement.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #27
  • Back to top
• 

  CoasterForce Offline

  There will never be a system that pleases everyone. I don't know what idealistic past people are referring to, even back when iris would pick everything himself. I've been around here for 6 years and even in that period (others have been around longer) I have seen controversy. Six Flags' argument is just a lot of bullshit when it all boils down, even after he chose to modify it once posix spoke up, you can't criticize people on the panel for high scores that are not correlated with previous parks, because even the "veterans" continue to do the same thing and modify their standards. The landscape of the game is constantly changing; having a wide range of people vote on the panel with wide ranges of "experience" only improves the outcome. The system is perfectly fine the way it is and I challenge someone to come up with a better way of evaluating parks--the accolade panel forum is active every day with many people posting and parks are constantly being released- I don't know what else you could realistically want.
  
  that said, the only change I am in favor of is raising the design cutoff another couple of points, maybe to 15 at least (as JK said). I think that a park of small quantity should make up for the the size with increased quality, for the simple reason that a design that is just "nice" isn't worth a download and careful viewing any more.

  Edited by CoasterForce, 15 September 2009 - 01:38 PM.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #28
  • Back to top
• 

  Jaguar Offline

  you should stfu jaguarkid.

  
  WTFs the problem SSSammy, I haven't said anything mean to you so stop being an asshole and making a big deal about my posts.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #29
  • Back to top
• 

  SSSammy Offline

  hye, youre nothing special. ill say that to anyone who posts ignorantly.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #30
  • Back to top
• 

  Six Frags Offline

  Six Flags' argument is just a lot of bullshit

  I can't take your post seriously if you can't even spell my username right..
  
  SF

  posted 15 years ago

  • #31
  • Back to top
• 

  Jaguar Offline

  Whats so ignorant about that post. Most people prefer to have a conversation, not argue sssammy.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #32
  • Back to top
• 

  Goliath123 Offline

  Most of it was incorrect. You just come in here thinking you run the place, most people don't like you because you don't listen to them.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #33
  • Back to top
• 

  In:Cities Offline

  ^^well for one, you're posting in this thread just to argue about a voting system rather than discuss the park that won an accolade the fact that you dont have a valid point when you argue makes it ignorant.
  
  please guys, lets just discuss the park here.
  if you want to debate about the voting system, make a topic about it.
  
  
  
  oh, and jesus loves you.
  

  Edited by In:Cities, 15 September 2009 - 03:13 PM.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #34
  • Back to top
• 

  Jaguar Offline

  Ok fine, I'll discuss the park:
  
  The park has a good clean atmosphere, no random foliage, supports, jagged rocks (I know...), and it is a fun park overall. I personally liked zoominator as it was a nice wooden rollercoaster with a unique layout. The park's steel rollercoaster also seemed to be kinda nice as it had a very simple look. The whole park was clean and simple, though I guess it is a little bit too simple. The thing I have against the park is that the itchy and scratch ride is an eyesore. I juste felt that is seemed crude and unnecessary. It is simple easy and fun, so I'd prabably give it a 10-11, and smaller parks are the easiest, quickest, and funnest to build.

  posted 15 years ago

  • #35
  • Back to top
• 

  Louis! Offline

  I can't believe this was actually made by you two.
  
  The idea was behind the park was brilliant but the execution was just plain poor. If I wasn't told that Maverix & Sulakke had built this I would have assumed it was built by 2 builders relatively new to RCT.
  
  I enjoyed the park but I just didn't understand why it wasn't built to the high standards both of you normally produce. It was Bronze worthy but it could have been Gold if done better.

  posted 14 years ago

  • #36
  • Back to top
• 

  Liampie Offline

  You both can do better. At least you could've filled the empty spots with something interesting... I really liked the foliage in the center, which made it bronze-worthy to me. 11/20
  
  Congratulations.

  posted 14 years ago

  • #37
  • Back to top
• 

  Levis Offline

  btw i noticed the read on link doesn't work.
  it needs to be www instead of forums

  posted 14 years ago

  • #38
  • Back to top