RCT Discussion / Disenchantment

I think we here at New Element have been surrounded by quality parks so long that we've learned to not appriciate them anymore. Just look at the opinions of the last spotlight or in the h2h forums, it's obvious many of us have hit a point where we're past enjoying this game. And even if it doesn't seem like it I'm rather fusterated with the whole thing as well.

The problem (from where I'm sitting) lies in the "creative" choises these days and the styles being used. I try to be open minded this way and I'm not telling people to change, even though I'm bored with most of what's coming out now. Personally the only parks that still do much for me are LL fantasy parks like WOMB and Mt. Sinister. Rct2 has a few that I can still enjoy (Mala never fails and X-sector,Toon and Kevin can still catch my interest) however it's pretty much lost my favor for the moment. I think it's because we're all doing the same things these days and everyone's afraid to change things up, and those who are stepping out of the box are (for the most part) doing so in ways that are not visiually pleasing. I don't think I've seen a genuine LL fantasy park in a good while now, like since City Of Dreams. Maybe Ouest will be able to change my mind on that one though... Rct2 has a few however they're not going into the same kind of style. They're going into the Jkay/Kumba colorful mess fantasy. What's wrong with using 2 bright colors and 3-4 neutrals people!?

I guess I'm just fusterated because it seems like we've forgotton a lot of what rct once was. Both games are being used in "classical" rct style with some realism (South Beach Amusement Park is a good example) and fantasy here and there. We seem afraid to adjust into something different than the status quo. Basically I'm tired of "classical" rct parks, that's where all the praise is now, sure, but it sucks. Look back at the "classical" days people. Those D-net park were almost entirely fantasy or realism, classical parkmaking was started by the few people that really did it well, and further refined by a few more inspired by the firsts.

*sigh* I guess I'm just loosing it. I still see that no one is really happy. People hate it when you use bright colors and 1/4 tiles because "it's too hard to look at" but they piss and moan that a park that uses full-tile architecture with neutral colors is "boring".

Feel free to discuss, just try to aviod pointless flaming.

ride6

*sigh* Where's Mala when we need him?

Jkay/Kumba colorful mess fantasy.  What's wrong with using 2 bright colors and 3-4 neutrals people!?

You'd be surprised how much my style has refined I think, especially when I unleash the beast....**R.T.P.**

but yes, you have made a lot of good points there about where the game of rct2 has gone these days. I personally think atmosphere, style and execution (which pretty much encapsulate theming) are far more superior than the visually tangible compenents of high-quality park (i.e. colors, architecture, foliage). The last two spotlights, while visually stunning, were not necessarily stylish representations of their respective creators imo. The last rct2 spotlight to to fully immerse me in well-executed style was RoB, which has set the bar pretty high in that aspect. CoD would be latest LL effort that really shows style beyond visual effects....Innovation is also important to me, especially in the lines of pushing the games their utter limit of style and creation. so, the challenge is there, its just not people are up to that great of a challenge....

And one thing you need to realize ride6, is there are far too many styles out there today to impress everyone. People just aren't taking the game a personal level to develop a signature style that is required to create "the next" park...

Um, you do realise it's been this way for 5 years? Right?

What way?....

It seems to me that both games have evolved in some good some bad ways, which has constantly changed the standards for what makes the next great park.

What way?....

This way:

guess I'm just fusterated because it seems like we've forgotton a lot of what rct once was. Both games are being used in "classical" rct style with some realism (South Beach Amusement Park is a good example) and fantasy here and there. We seem afraid to adjust into something different than the status quo. Basically I'm tired of "classical" rct parks, that's where all the praise is now, sure, but it sucks. Look back at the "classical" days people. Those D-net park were almost entirely fantasy or realism, classical parkmaking was started by the few people that really did it well, and further refined by a few more inspired by the firsts.

*sigh* I guess I'm just loosing it. I still see that no one is really happy. People hate it when you use bright colors and 1/4 tiles because "it's too hard to look at" but they piss and moan that a park that uses full-tile architecture with neutral colors is "boring".

First of all, I think that your wrong about that. I think there are different camps. Some people rip apart the bright color parks, others rip apart the neutral color parks.

Personally, I rip apart both. I don't care about colors, although, actually, I prefer rich, earthy, tones. What I care about is composition, and rides. If something is "boring" to me, I usually don't find it to have an engaging composition.

I want the composition of a work to draw me in, with multiple different layers of stuff in every view. Say, a beautiful building, with a pathway next to it, leading you down into a courtyard, with a display of flowers perfectly framing the entrance of a rollercoaster. It draws you in.

And then once you get to that rollercoaster, I want to it to do the same thing. Not just run around all crazy-like, nor just sit there being boring, but take you out of that courtyard, and up the lift, down the drops, through the loops, and so on.

I want it to engage me, excite me. Transcend just being a park, and become, well, a work of art.

In some ways, I think that's what everyone wants, it's just that few are good enough to build it, so they settle for less, and take sides. Color vs Neutrals. Who cares?

I'm not going to name names, because that only causes trouble.

I agree with you ride6, and I commend you for thinking about this and taking the time to post it. It just seems that whatever people do, no one is satisfied. I myself put far more emphasis on atmosphere than anything else, and, now I think about it, composition, as cg? said. Please catch me on AIM cg?, i'd be very interested as to what you think of my park.

I think we have to accept that in such a large community, you can't please everyone.

I'd like to see more FANTASY PARKS. That's where the creativity lies - it's all within the imagination. I'm not largely impressed by alot of the realistic-park spotlights.

And let me state that there are WAY to many Disney Re-Creations around... and Six Flag's one's. Yeah, it may be nice to make your own version of a popular park chain - but it's getting a bit repetetive guys.

Gimme a park compareable to any of Mala's, and I'll be happy. Something groundbreaking, unique, and individual.

Please catch me on AIM cg?, i'd be very interested as to what you think of my park.

I'd love to... but I haven't used AIM for years... don't even remember my password... very sorry...

i just a got a little comment about the whole not "stepping out of the box" ordeal for some parkmakers. its not that we're afraid, its because of disguest among the alien terrain. i use we, because i experience it. i look at my work, and i think, how can i do something different or spice something up a little bit. the end result, i find to be ugly and just not "me." while others like it, i dont. and for that, i remain in my spectrum of the whole subtle, classical, realistic, and "whatever else you want to consider it" style. changing things up for me is not satifying. if i change, im not being true to myself, my style, and everything that defines me. and im pretty sure some parkmakers deal with it the same way i do. regardless of their style.

and btw, you cant blame us sublte/realistic parkmakers for the overflow of the style. its just that noobs can come in and copy the form easier due to its relation to real world/natural instinct, while fantasy usually requires deep insight on the game. thats probably a reason others go after the style that dominates the times now. the mix between the two. its easiest and us older parkmakers know a lot more things and can handle the mix of fantasy easiest. thats not to say that anybody can/can't do, its just a thought.

I think it's very possible to create something "outside the box" while remaining traditional / classic / semi-realistic / whatever, and if anything is destroying the RCT scene right now, it's the lack of people who realise that.

Edit: Come to think of it, another thing possibly destroying RCT right now is the lack of people who realise it's possible to create a "fantasy" park without looking "outside the box", and that, in fact, most of them don't.

I think it's very possible to create something "outside the box" while remaining traditional / classic / semi-realistic / whatever, and if anything is destroying the RCT scene right now, it's the lack of people who realise that.

Edit: Come to think of it, another thing possibly destroying RCT right now is the lack of people who realise it's possible to create a "fantasy" park without looking "outside the box", and that, in fact, most of them don't.

that, and the quip master jay said about fantasy requiring deeper insight, is just so fucking true.

right on, chauncey and jay.



(... ride6 hates me )

I personally think that too much thought is put into this game... but that's just me.

ride6, as chauncey said, the problems you described are presents since ages. you should be used to it by now.

oh and yeah, we all know fantasy parkmakers are more intelligent, more imaginative, more creative and just better human beings. because i mean fuck, they have the insight and the thought and the courage to "try new things" and step out and just be ...cool, you know.

(... ride6 hates me )

Since when?

Anyway I've just tired of seeing the same park over and over just in different packages with different names by different people. Phatasy parks somehow keep their identity better, however even those often fail to excite. It's true though, why can't someone apply unearthly architecture to just building a classical amusement park? Is it really that hard?

ride6

I'd love to... but I haven't used AIM for years... don't even remember my password... very sorry...

Could you please PM me your email address then?

Hello.


It's these reasons why i barely play or do anything in rct anymore.
I started playing scenarios in RCT 3 a few days ago. I forgot how fun they can be...

Then I look at my current project and laugh after spending an hour or so on a scenario. It's almost pointless for me to even attempt to make anything. I am only good at one thing in the game, and even then people don't realize that or even comment.

I released a park, finally, after 3 years, and did I get one reply? no.
We have grown too accustomed to greatness here, that anything anyone does is compaired unfairly to something else. Nothing in this game will be new and original ever and it's been that way for some time.

LL died 3 years ago for me.
RCT 2 died last year.
RCT 3 was DOA.

I have no clue where to go from here, but it's probably not up.


Raven-SDI
§

[font="tahoma"]oh and yeah, we all know fantasy parkmakers are more intelligent, more imaginative, more creative and just better human beings. [/font]

put that to you quotes please.


as i already said in another thread "elegance is everything". too many people nowadays just try to create something special and forget what a good park is really.
creating a elegant park and creating a colourful piece of art (fantasie) are two very differnt things and can't be compared to each other. some people like to use rct more to create parks other are going for fantasie.
to me non of those ideas how to use the game is better than the other. it's a completly different kettle of fish.

as long as people have fun and like what they build everything is fine.

I would argue that elegance and fantasy are not opposing things. Magnus just pointed out the biggest thing I'm trying to say here and that's that everyone seems to think that fanasy parks can't be elegant and that elegant parks can't truely be fantasy. That's a complete lie. When the goal is to creat an "elegant" park the result is (admittedly) not going to be "fantasy" most of the time however it is not impossible for it to be. See "eleganse" simply implies flow, a uniting of elelemnts in a way that is pleasing to the eye and the human mind. This can happen within a "fantasy" environment.

ride6

Just stop being so obsessed about labels and styles and build whatever you feel like.

You're the man, and I totally agree. A game is for enjoyment, so enjoy it.