Park / Sabretooth

20 Comments

  • geewhzz%s's Photo


    It's apparent the old saying third time's a charm isn't always true. Comet strikes gold with his second design submission in a matter of two months. Zephyr, his first attempt at design just missed with a score of 11.55 showing he needed just a bit more to make it over the 13.00 threshold. Sabretooth barely squeezes by with a score of 13.08. We know Comet has the drive to finish small projects, but does he have the motivation to finish something bigger? He teased us a few months back claiming to have given up on Bayside Amusement Park. Still unreleased, everyone must be wondering if Comet has an Ace up his sleeve in the coming months. Read on

  • Goliath123%s's Photo
    It's good but i jsu think some of the architecture could be better. There's to many trees as well but i suppose it is set in a forest...
  • RRP%s's Photo
    Congrats on the design comet.As said above there were too many trees in places.I think it would have helped to thin them out a little closest to the ride.Really enjoyed the little details and the station though.
  • KingArv%s's Photo
    Gotta say the level of these accolades/designs/parks has been going down lately, and sorry, but this is no exception...perhaps the judges should go back and review all the previous entries that are archived, and they will see that the latest 4-5 entries are not quite up to par.
    I know many of you will disagree, and I respectfully figure you will have just cause, but when I see a design of this level I have no anxiety about opening it like I have with so many in the past; the layout is not that great, the atmosphere is lacking, and the overall look/landscaping/foliage does not add to the park.
  • Milo%s's Photo
    While I understand your thoughts on this Design KingArv, I cannot understand how you can possibly say the quality level has been going down the last 4-5 releases. You are honestly telling me that you couldn't find anything to like in Valhalla and Wildcat? Bayon Falls? These are very nice releases from very solid players imo and I don't see how they show a decrease in quality. Quite the opposite in fact. We've also had some nice work from up and coming players in the mix as well and just because Almeda Pier was probably more Bronze quality and this Design isn't ground breaking doesn't mean they shouldn't have won anything or show that we're just accepting anything. I hate to come off like a jerk here but I'd like to hear something a little more concrete than "boy, the quality level here sure is going to hell" after such nice releases.


    anyway, congrats on the Design Comet. You're improving and I'm starting to like your style more and more. Hopefully you continue to build and improve but with this you had a real nice calm, natural feel that worked well.
  • Six Frags%s's Photo
    Maybe you should create an extra category for designs too, like with "full" parks..
    Something like;
    -e-ticket: Attraction designs like El Encierro/Arch Angel
    -d-ticket: Attraction designs like Sabretooth

    Because while I agree this design isn't really on par with recent NE releases I agree with Milo it should win something..
    Anyway, congrats comet.. I hope to see the forementioned solo in the (not so near) future!

    SF
  • zodiac%s's Photo
    i suppose my score reflects my feelings for this. in my opinion, it was a huge improvement over Zephyr. it still kept the focus on the ride, the landscaping, and the foliage, but it was built in a way to give off an amazing atmosphere. the whole entry just seems so friendly, like it's a real park. great work, Comet, and i hope to see you building again.
  • posix%s's Photo
    milo, i agree totally with what you said. no "coming off as a jerk" at all :D

    kingarv, i can understand your standpoint as well, though. please do not forget that this submission barely managed to win with a score of 13.08. -0.09 and it would already not have won. and then i can guarantee you people would go "comet got robbed!!!" at us again. i agree with you that alameda pier shouldn't have won silver, but well, that's what the panel voted it to be. like milo mentioned though, you seem to be noticing the "weaker" releases more than the solid ones. i think we've had some pretty nice releases as of late and not everything can be absolutely amazing. if you were a panelist, what score from 1-20 would you have given sabretooth?

    comet, i'm sorry if i'm labeling your design as "low quality" or anything. i definitely think it should have won, hence my 13 vote, but it wasn't really groundbreaking. i love your sense for realistic style parkmaking and i know the screens of your more recent work have greatly impressed me. i'm really happy to see people going for this kind of parkmaking because those who can really pull it off well are rare and it's even more rare for them to actually finish a project. i have faith that you can do it though. thank you for sending us your creations :)
  • Turtle%s's Photo
    Like posix said, I think the 1-20 scale perfectly demonstrates the differences in quality between submissions. There are clear guidelines as to what score is required to win, and the opinions of a whole panel of people are taken into account when generating this score.

    It's a great way of working this out more objectively than before, and it's working very well.

    Comet, I liked this without it jumping out at me. I can already tell you've moved on from this, which is very encouraging in such a short time span. I think the ride as a whole was a little too small. I understand it's a realistic terrain woody, and as such without a ridiculous (unrealistic) terrain it can't be too large. But I felt that if a ride is going to be this small, it needs to be themed beautifully throughout to make it special. This wasn't, to be honest, although parts were brilliant. I loved the station, very nice. I still find stations one of the hardest things to get right, I don't think i've ever built a station that i'm proud of afterwards, so I am envious of those of you who it seems to come to so naturally.
  • Steve%s's Photo
    I think what sets this back a bit is definitely the lack of real "substance". The ride is nice, no doubt, but it's surroundings (I mean the extensive foliage) are lackluster. However, I find the architecture to be excellent. The station? Well, how great was that? I'll tell you: it was really great. I agree with Turtle in saying that you have certain aspects of your parkmaking mastered with things like stations/layouts/whathaveyou, but when it comes down to actually giving the coaster life through it's surroundings, I feel like it's the one thing holding you back from crossing the threshold from "average" to "excellent". You still have numerous skills, Comet. I thought the log flume interaction was amazing and ride interaction always grabs my attention, and your architecture abilities are strong and I know they're still developing.
  • eyeamthu1%s's Photo
    First of all, to add my two cents regarding the 'quality of designs': the voting system seems solid to me and personally, I've agreed with the vast majority of scores which releases have been getting. This for instance, I would say is a 13/20. Also, I for one think the new, fairer voting system has encouraged submissions - this is one reason for the increase in new releases. And personally, I'm glad to see NE releasing a new design or park near enough once every week, rather than once a month - if you were lucky.

    All in all, I guess my feelings on Sabretooth have already been posted. I thought it was a really solid design, without ever being spectacular or groundbreaking - but it still definitely deserved to win a design spot. The map was well presented, and whilst not particularly unique, nonetheless conveyed an atmosphere and sense of theme, but vitally remained realistic. I really liked the Log Flume, although it was a tad short; I liked how the opening of the ride (the little drop from the station) went past the picnic tables - nice realistic touch, and shows that you're thinking about the design from a peep's point of view. Didn't really dig the Log Flume's station, but the pond under the final splashdown was very nice.

    The interaction between the Flume and woodie was nice. As the write-up says, you get the feeling the Flume's been there for a while, and the park has designed the coaster to fit around it. Likewise, I also agree with the write-up when it says how good night-rides on the coaster would be! Overall, the coaster looked really fun to ride; its only downsides were that it was a little short and I thought the final brake-run was a bit weird, with the odd forced s-bend back into the station.

    Really liked the majority of the architecture; the ride station, BBQ restaurant and souvenir shop all spring to mind. I think you over-used the red flowers, green shrubs and the brown long-grass a little too much, but it didn't impact too much on the design. There wasn't quite enough on the map to hold my attention for that long - as I say, I think part of the reason is that the coaster itself is quite short. All in all though, a solid entry - it doesn't break any boundaries - but who says it has to? - it's still well worthy of a design spot, and I'm glad to see it as another new release on NE's frontpage.
  • Xcoaster%s's Photo
    I liked it. The interaction with the log flume reminded me of Legend. And I liked the landscaping and archy.

    And just fyi, I keep track of all my votes, on both accolades and the earlier test votes, for making comparisons when I vote. On this one I was between 15 and 16, and I went on the higher end. My personal design cutoff is somewhere around 14 or 15.
  • SGT BLOOPER%s's Photo
    I guess no matter what, the line between good enough and not good enough will always be hard to determine. Is there really any perfect scoring/judging system?

    Either way, nice design and congrats! (for whatever it's worth coming from a newb :p )
  • posix%s's Photo
    eyeamthu1, it's posts like yours that motivate me to update more :)
  • Comet%s's Photo
    Thanks for the comments everybody.

    The first thing that actually came to mind when I heard that this won was "oh shit there's gonna be a lot of contraversy over this one", guess I was right.
    Anyway it feels great to finally win an accolade, on only my second try at that. I really appreciate all the lengthy reviews, thanks for those as well.

    Finally thanks to the prep team for the amazing page, and in particular to whoever did the write-up.
  • geewhzz%s's Photo
    eyeamthu1 pretty much summed up my thoughts.

    glad you all took notice to my write-up as I feel while writing it, it opened up spots of the design easily overlooked otherwise.

    i too liked the log flume next to the seating area, so much i almost made that the shot for the banner rather than the actual coaster, but i chose the spot that looked to be the best point on the ride.

    also, KingArv, i hope you realize how ridiculous you sound. last 4-5 designs not up to par? what? i'll leave it at what milo said...

    there is no, design or no design anymore, there is a range of 13.00-20.00 that a design can achieve.

    i also agree about the station, i loved the roofing with the fence and the wooden beams, very creative.

    i think your foliage needs a lot of work however. my suggestion is to take a look at RRP's recent works and bust out a notepad.
  • KingArv%s's Photo
    ok, I knew I'd be stepping on toes when I wrote what I did, but it did incite discussion and that was mostly what I was hoping for. I'm not a parkmaker, and not a self-proclaimed or renowned critic for that matter. In spite of my obvious comments, no disrespect to Comet, as he has a design and I do not, nor would I bother to try, I am a purist and consequently too severe on my own work to produce something I would even deem worthy myself. That is also where I'm coming from.

    So, from what pretty much everyone has written in reply, people seem happy with this being design, consequently I have no leg to stand on. So, only thing I have to say is that I was generalizing when I said the "last 4-5 entries" and was not specifically singling out anyone's work. RRP's a legend at NE, as well as many others.

    Parkmaking has changed since RRP's Sea World Atlanta, and Nevis's Atlantis (#2-3 on the list of course). There is a growing trend of realism since RCT2 came out and RoB for sure, and it has forced parkmakers to be more technical; architecturally and in terms of the amount of detail. So, in light of that, this park, imho, doesn't offer that required level of detail. Even so, 5 years ago this wouldn't have made design I don't think. So, it lacks the detail for modern parkmaking standards, and it lacks more than that for historic parkmaking standards.

    So, I will very respectfully disagree with some of the great names at NE right now, but you may disregard this minorities voice and I will not in the slightest be offended.
  • geewhzz%s's Photo
    I respect your opinion KingArv. I think what everyone needs to realize is that you can't be everything to everyone. There will always be critics and the closer a design scores to the 13.00 threshold, the more people are on the fence. But a line has to be drawn somewhere. We feel that line is at 13.00 for design, and design after design, I think the level is correct.
  • Milo%s's Photo
    yeah, I respect your opinion too so you don't have to act like you're offending anyone or "don't have a leg to stand on". I just always resent the implication that everything winning accolade now is just not up to par with past accolade standards. First off, I view this as a non issue, I'm not going to compare every park now to RoB as my standard just because it was, and still remains, one of the all-time great releases. I focus on the here and now in accolade voting and with the current system there is a standard to be reached. This achieved that standard... albeit by a narrow .08 margin. NE is being run very differently now than any time in the past and as gee said, there's a range not just a clear cut 'yes or no' but a scale that an accolade land in.

    And I wasn't saying you were singleing out RRP's work... but when you say the last 4-5 entries being sub-par no matter who made them I just can't agree. And I do understand RRP is a legend but again, I'm not comparing everything to SWA just because that was a great release back in the day.

    You seem prone to focusing on old great releases, which really isn't a problem because that timelessness is what makes them so great, but forget that the trends of here and now are what these accolades are being based on, not old Spotlights. And even if they may not have made the cut 5 years ago, I view them as very solid releases of current times and implore you to try and focus on the good in each one and not what makes them bad by past standards. That's all I ask.
  • Gwazi%s's Photo
    i fail to see how current releases are any worse than those in the past. just different is all.

    that said, good stuff Comet. i agree with the others on the foliage, but you have it down pretty well otherwise.

    EDIT: actually, it seems to me that everyone is stuck in the 'glory days' of RCT. everyone always seems to think that past parks were made so much faster (which is true, i have to say) and were so much better and more frequent. honestly, i wouldn't say that's true. if it is, why do you think that parkmakers just suddenly lost their quality? what makes the other parks better than they are now?

    the fact that we are probably just getting used to seeing different ideas and ways to do things nullifies our amazement when a new park comes out. just because you've seen an amazing hack done time and time again doesn't make it any less amazing than the first time, but you are used to it. that's why i think people say all the old parks are good and nowadays parks can't live up to the glory of the past. to me, a good park is a good park, regardless of its ingenuity, and there are many good parks from many different periods of NE.