RCT Discussion / OpenRCT: advantages and disadvantages

How did you do that without introducing a new file format? I thought all the available track piece IDs were in use?

https://github.com/O...nRCT2/pull/4963

So element 100 serves double purpose? Could the same trick be used for other stuff (e.g sloped brakes)?. There's a few other elements that are only meaningful on one track type (reverser turntable comes to mind).

So because some surface and wall textures are missing it's "unusable"? That's quite an exaggeration if you ask me.

 
We're a community about design and artistic expression in RCT. Most people see the game as a canvas to transform creatively. Textures, and really everything else too, absolutely must look right. It's really the minimum for me to consider this.

RCT2 didn't have those textures and plenty of parks have been created with it. Sure it would be nice to add them back in, and I'm sure it'll happen at some point, but it just isn't practical at the moment (I'm impressed they added launch sections without a new file format). OpenRCT2 is based on RCT2, so support for RCT1 features is still limited. It's being worked on but I think it'll be some time before it's perfect.

 

If what you want is to be able to view parks created in RCT1, why not just play RCT1?

Posix means that as a substitution for RCTLL in the way it is used on NE, OpenRCT is not suitable. Any LL park from the database here opened in Open looks awful, distorted in a way.

It's not a problem for me. LL is LL.

So element 100 serves double purpose? Could the same trick be used for other stuff (e.g sloped brakes)?. There's a few other elements that are only meaningful on one track type (reverser turntable comes to mind).

 

It would be possible, but it would also be messy. I made an exception for boosters because those were in RCTC, which exports SV6 files with boosters.

 

For other pieces I really want to wait until we have our own save format, so we can avoid too many hacks.

I've tried using the console to do anything but I really am at a loss as how to use it? is there a simpler way to get all the base entertainers into the savegame because it's really hard to do it this way...

The command for changing entertainer costumes is "staff set costume <id> <costume number>". To find the ID corresponding to the target staff member, run "staff list".

 

I am not aware of any other cheat for changing entertainer costumes, but it is possible to work around it by temporarily selecting the required scenery group in the object selection.

How do you know the costume number?

I just tried each one sequentially. Here they are

 

0=Panda

1=Tiger

2=Elephant

3=Roman

4=Gorilla

5=Snowman

6=Knight

7=Astronaut

8=Bandit

9=Sheriff

10=Pirate

 

EDIT: Corrected list

`staff set` will list all the options. That's where the names listed come from: https://github.com/O...en-GB.txt#L1784

Is there a list of all commands and what they do?

`help` is a good starting point, which I believe is even listed when you open the console. Then either `help <command>` or `<command>` without arguments or the best of them all: just read https://github.com/O...rface/console.c

There is one here but it's outdated. I'll update it.

OpenRCT2 is based on RCT2, so support for RCT1 features is still limited.

That's really the problem. Please can you guys consider to remove RCT1 from OpenRCT2, and do a proper standalone OpenRCT1? Even just a quick one will do, because....
  

...why not just play RCT1?

I am so used to OpenRCT2's display features at this point that it's very hard to live without them:
 
- resolution flexibility (especially native support of very high resolutions)
- pixel scaling
- uncapped framerate
- hardware accelerated rendering
- better windowed mode
 
That's really all I want for an OpenRCT1.

OpenRCT2 is GPL3, so you're free to fork the code and do OpenRCT whichever version you want. It is, however, not our goal.

That's really the problem. Please can you guys consider to remove RCT1 from OpenRCT2, and do a proper standalone OpenRCT1? Even just a quick one will do, because....

 

This is not a quick task at all, this would be an effort on the same scale as creating OpenRCT2 was in the first place. Having the OpenRCT2 source code would certainly help inform development of an OpenRCT1 because they're similar, but if you wanted to base it on the RCT1 code and not RCT2 you'd still be starting essentially from scratch. It took two years for them to finish decompiling RCT2.

 

You're free to start such a project yourself if you really want to do it that way, but it seems a lot of work for little gain. By the time you finished, you'd probably find OpenRCT2 has implemented remaining RCT1 featuers that are currently missing.

I didn't realise it took this long to decompile. Needless to say, I lack the skills or time to take on such project myself. My thinking is merely that it may mean an extra hassle, a painstaking entanglement to the developers, to mix both games in one, and stay true to their look and feel, their natures. You guys decide.

I guess this debate boils down to everyone's personal view on LL as being either a different game with its own value or merely a variation of RCT2. I'm with posix, but I can totally see why it appears differently to the majority of people. The way we play RCT is a niche and that is especially the case for LL.

 

I don't know much about coding. But rather than building OpenLL from the ground up, I can see it being much more viable to just take OpenRCT2 and convert it to OpenLL. OpenLL could be simply a 'switch' within OpenRCT2. Call it RCT1-mode, or whatever. Still not easy, but in my rookie eyes it seems simpler.