RCT vs RCT2
Knight37
--
Knight37
Don't be bothered with what kind of engine the game uses, just play it and
shut up about things you no nothing about.
-- Smiley on csipg.action
Jeremy Reaban
"Knight37" <knig...@email.com> wrote in message
news:Xns92AB9638C...@130.133.1.4...
> What's new in RCT2?
The interface, mostly. It's cleaned up a little.
The peeps now stare at rides. They seem a bit smarter. There's a few
new shops. And some new rides, though that seems mostly padded,
because some things that were one ride in RCT are now several - one
for each different vehicle. Like there's an antique car ride, and a
sports car ride.
There's something of a scenario editor. And a ride/track editor, which
is basically just a blank map.
You can actually import most your old rides from RCT, but it's
something of a pain to use prebuilt rides in the game, because it
complete fucks up the entrances and exits. It tries to do them for
you, but in practice, it makes a big horrible screw up of them, and
you have to spend lots of time fixing it.
Anyway, it's cheap. Best Buy had it for $24 or so, which is why I got
it (plus the fact that RCT won't run on my PC)
Ed Driscoll
130.133.1.4:
> What's new in RCT2?
As far as I can tell from the reviews, not nearly enough. RCT is one of my
all-time favorites, but I can't manage to scrape up any enthusiasm for this
one.
I warned them that it was going to be called an expansion pack if they
didn't update the graphics, but did they listen?
- Ed
Carole
would love to import to version 2.
As far as the entrances and exits are concerned, did you mean it
screws them when importing old rides from RCT 1, or in general? I
didn't notice anything weird with entrances/exits when using pre-built
rides created in RCT 2...
Thanks.
On Fri, 18 Oct 2002 16:19:41 -0500, "Jeremy Reaban"
<j...@connectria.com> wrote:
>You can actually import most your old rides from RCT, but it's
>something of a pain to use prebuilt rides in the game, because it
>complete fucks up the entrances and exits. It tries to do them for
>you, but in practice, it makes a big horrible screw up of them, and
>you have to spend lots of time fixing it.
--
Carole
____________ ____ ___ __ __ _ _
Carole
RCT 2 also includes quite a few new scenary items (like walls, roofs,
and blocks) which allow us to build some pretty complex scenary or
structures around the rides. We can also hold down the shift key to
place these items up in the air (to build hanging structures and
such.)
Trees are now automatically removed when placing rides on the map or
building paths (yeah!)
A ghost of the selected track is displayed on the map when placing a
ride.
Tracks can now also be saved with or without the surrounding scenary
(the game can automatically select all surrounding scenary, and then
with can selectively add or remove items from the scenary to be saved
with the track.) The only problem I have with that is that if you
delete the ride, the scenary that was placed with the track remains
and has to be manually removed (one item at a time) if you want to get
rid of it...
Tracks that you create and save will automatically show up with a
preview image of the rides when selecting them (including the
surrounding scenary if it was saved with the track) and they can be
viewed from all angles -- in RCT 1, we had to use a separate utility
to create pictures of our own rides, which was most inconvenient.
The scenario editor allows you to select a "No money" option for you
maps, which lets you play in "sandbox" mode. We can also convert any
saved game into a scenario.
On 18 Oct 2002 19:46:02 GMT, Knight37 <knig...@email.com> wrote:
>What's new in RCT2?
--
Carole
Fat Tony
>What's new in RCT2?
It looks pretty much the same. The graphics which were adequate in
the days of RCT are now rather quaint/retro (okay, old and dated).
You think you've got a ton more rides and coasters, but on closer
inspection, they've taken things that were once a single ride with an
option to choose from multiple car types and turned them into multiple
rides.
On the upsides, there is a scenario editor which I haven't had a
change to play with, and a coaster designer which is good for fiddling
around with the coaster design outside the game.
And there is a ton more scenery and theming optiosn available for
dressing up the rides and parks.
Many have accused the game of really being Rollercoaster Tycoon 1.5
and I would have to agree. But then agin, it's priced rather low if
one takes the attitude that it's just another expansion pack, then
it's a decent deal.
The borrom line is I don't regret buying it. I'm enjoying playing it.
And I think I'm going to get my money's worth out of it.
Jeremy Reaban
"Carole" <tioronerREMOV...@lycos.com> wrote in message
news:l2g1rucskthf232rd...@4ax.com...
> How do you import rides from RCT to RCT 2? I have a few good rides I
> would love to import to version 2.
>
> As far as the entrances and exits are concerned, did you mean it
> screws them when importing old rides from RCT 1, or in general? I
> didn't notice anything weird with entrances/exits when using
pre-built
> rides created in RCT 2...
Pretty simple, actually. You just go into the track manager from the
main screen, pick "Install new ride", then simply go into the tracks
directory of the first RCT. All the (or so it seems) rides show up in
the file menu (though you think they shouldn't, since they have a
different file extension), and you just load them to import them.
Undocumented feature, apparently.
My problem with the exits and entrances, is that when I build a ride
far away from a path in my park, it connects the entrace of the ride
to the exit with pathes. So I have to spend a lot of time removing
those pathes, and connect it to the pathes in my park.
Arnulf Guenther jr.
<j...@connectria.com> wrote:
>
>"Carole" <tioronerREMOV...@lycos.com> wrote in message
>news:l2g1rucskthf232rd...@4ax.com...
>> How do you import rides from RCT to RCT 2? I have a few good rides I
>> would love to import to version 2.
>>
>> As far as the entrances and exits are concerned, did you mean it
>> screws them when importing old rides from RCT 1, or in general? I
>> didn't notice anything weird with entrances/exits when using
>pre-built
>> rides created in RCT 2...
>
>Pretty simple, actually. You just go into the track manager from the
>main screen, pick "Install new ride", then simply go into the tracks
>directory of the first RCT. All the (or so it seems) rides show up in
>the file menu (though you think they shouldn't, since they have a
>different file extension), and you just load them to import them.
>Undocumented feature, apparently.
Caution, this does not work with all ride types. I have built some
mini steel coaster designs with RCT 1 and trying to import them into
RCT 2 only gives me an incompatibility error. Anyway, apart from that
it's pretty cool.
>
>My problem with the exits and entrances, is that when I build a ride
>far away from a path in my park, it connects the entrace of the ride
>to the exit with pathes. So I have to spend a lot of time removing
>those pathes, and connect it to the pathes in my park.
These are scenery that were included with the ride. You can switch
them off.
-Arnulf
Arnulf Guenther jr.
>On 18 Oct 2002 19:46:02 GMT, Knight37 <knig...@email.com> wrote:
>You think you've got a ton more rides and coasters, but on closer
>inspection, they've taken things that were once a single ride with an
>option to choose from multiple car types and turned them into multiple
>rides.
If you look closely again you'll notice that they did it only with the
boat hire and the car ride. And actually they added monster trucks to
the car ride, I mean as a separate ride of course. And these allow
steep slopes. And look cool.
>The bottom line is I don't regret buying it. I'm enjoying playing it.
>And I think I'm going to get my money's worth out of it.
I did already.
-Arnulf
TH
news:gpm1rukgkn8c82s2t...@4ax.com:
I'd agree with the assessment here. I do think its Rollercoaster Tycoon 1.5
but Circuit City had the game for $20. As an expansion pack price, it's a
pretty good value.
Tom
Pat Traynor
>What's new in RCT2?
Not enough for me, as it turns out.
I played the original until I was absolutely sick of it, picked it up
a couple times after that and wore myself out on it again, and I found
that after buying RCT2, it only took a few hours to be sick of it once
more. It just seemed like the same thing with a few additional
features (most of which, I wasn't interested in).
They improved the task of laying pre-made rides, which is really nice,
but aside from that, it seems to be just an upgrade. Lots of scenery
and whatnot. I have no need for a scenario editor. From my
perspective, I paid to play the game - not design it. I understand
that many are into that sort of thing, but not me.
I could get into the scenery/theming if the graphics weren't so
archaic. But they look like little tiny cartoons on an EGA monitor.
The difference between one theme and the next is pretty insignificant.
I mean, if the quality was something along the lines of Dungeon Siege,
where you could get up close and appreciate the detail, I could get
into designing beautiful parks.
BTW - does anyone know an easier way to remove the fields of asphalt
that are in some of the scenarios? I want to remove some of these
walkways that are 6x20, and the only way I can do it is to right-click
on each sector. And even then, it seems that I have to hover the
mouse over the sector for a while before I can delete it.
Derek
>
> Not enough for me, as it turns out.
>
> I played the original until I was absolutely sick of it, picked it up
> a couple times after that and wore myself out on it again, and I found
> that after buying RCT2, it only took a few hours to be sick of it once
> more. It just seemed like the same thing with a few additional
> features (most of which, I wasn't interested in).
I think this is what we were discussing in the "indie developer" thread;
releasing just a slight improvment and incrementing a number up by 1, and
labeling it a sequel. I certainly hope indie developers don't take this
their business cue by this example (which by the way, is basically RCT 1.5
IMHO, after playing it a few hours; I can almost bet that 93% of the code is
unchanged).
Derek
Stormcloud Creations
http://www.stormcloudcreations.com
Jeff Vitous
news:ur308dn...@corp.supernews.com...
> I think this is what we were discussing in the "indie developer" thread;
> releasing just a slight improvment and incrementing a number up by 1, and
> labeling it a sequel. I certainly hope indie developers don't take this
> their business cue by this example (which by the way, is basically RCT 1.5
> IMHO, after playing it a few hours; I can almost bet that 93% of the code
is
> unchanged).
While Chris Sawyer is a small developer, RCT was one of the most popular
games in the history of PC gaming (it spent over 4 years in the Top-10 sales
list). His publisher, Infogrames, is not exactly without resources either.
There is really no excuse for RCT2 not being a fabulously new game, taking
the concept up to the next level or two. Releasing a RCT1.5 is like
roasting the golden goose...it may still sell well, but a lot of return
customers will feel burned in the process. If RCT3 proves to be everything
RCT2 should have been, will anyone be interested enough to notice?
--
Jeff Vitous
Director, Special Project Development
The Wargamer
www.wargamer.com
Ed Driscoll
news:CJWcnQB3sdsaESygXTWcpQ@GNcache:
> While Chris Sawyer is a small developer, RCT was one of the most
> popular games in the history of PC gaming (it spent over 4 years in
> the Top-10 sales list). His publisher, Infogrames, is not exactly
> without resources either. There is really no excuse for RCT2 not being
> a fabulously new game, taking the concept up to the next level or two.
> Releasing a RCT1.5 is like roasting the golden goose...it may still
> sell well, but a lot of return customers will feel burned in the
> process. If RCT3 proves to be everything RCT2 should have been, will
> anyone be interested enough to notice?
An excellent question. I'd also add:
- If RCT2 tanks, will the developer or publisher conclude that there isn't
sufficient interest to do an RCT3?
- Given that it took 2 years to develop this sequel, how long would people
have to wait for a "real" one?
It does seem kind of a shame for such a classic and well-received title to
get such a disappointing follow-up. Oh well.
Jeff Vitous
news:Xns92ACA080BF479...@216.168.3.40...
I don't think RCT2 will tank, but it is quite possible that it will be a
momentum-killer, with RCT3 being a the primary casualty. While Chris Sawyer
alone doing RCT was quite an accomplishment, perhaps he should have
surrounded himself with a larger studio for the sequel. Lightning of this
sort rarely strikes twice.
I am just simply amazed that it appears nobody at Infogrames was paying
attention to this. Perhaps they consider even their successful PC games
beneath contempt and unworthy of proper attention.
Jeremy Reaban
> An excellent question. I'd also add:
> - If RCT2 tanks, will the developer or publisher conclude that there
isn't
> sufficient interest to do an RCT3?
> - Given that it took 2 years to develop this sequel, how long would
people
> have to wait for a "real" one?
>
> It does seem kind of a shame for such a classic and well-received
title to
> get such a disappointing follow-up. Oh well.
Well, let me ask you this. How many sequels that are dramatically
different than the original, are actually improvements? And actually
sell better? Damned few.
Look at X-com. The first sequel was IMHO, the best, because it was
basically just the original game with different graphics. The 2nd
sequel took years and years to make and apparently tanked. Microsoft
is no longer around. The Gollop brothers are now reduced to running a
2 man company.
Josef Drexler
My guess is that it's more than 93%. Remember that RCT was written in
100% assembly plus a thin layer of DirectX calls. Even changing the map
size could mean that he had to rewrite major parts of the code. Of
course I don't know this, but assembly code is notoriously
unmaintainable.
In fact, I was really surprised to hear RCT2 being announced, seeing as
he's said in several interview that he wasn't interested in a sequel
until computers are powerful enough to do it in 3D with a level of detail
comparable to 2D graphics. So, either he changed his mind or his
publisher made him do it. Or, maybe he ran out of money... who knows.
Either way, I don't think it was an easy task to come out RCT2, little
obvious improvement as that may be.
--
Josef Drexler | http://publish.uwo.ca/~jdrexler/
---------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Please help Conserve Gravity | Email address is *valid*.
Put the toilet seat down. | Don't remove the "nospam" part.
Ed Driscoll
news:ur401s2...@corp.supernews.com:
> Well, let me ask you this. How many sequels that are dramatically
> different than the original, are actually improvements? And actually
> sell better? Damned few.
>
There's a big difference between "dramatically different" and "barely
discernable". There have been plenty of games that had sequels which
managed to go far enough without going too far -- HoMM, Civ, Panzer
General, Age of Wonders, *Craft [although not to my personal tastes], etc.,
etc., etc. I'm not saying RCT2 should have been totally unrecognizable,
but new rides, scenery, and a couple of minor feature tweaks just ain't
gonna do it for me in this case.
Obviously, I'm happy for anyone who is enjoying RCT2; it just doesn't look
like enough for me and, I would guess, many other fans of the original.
Regards,
- Ed
Ed Driscoll
news:MPG.181bd4bfc...@server.our.house:
> In fact, I was really surprised to hear RCT2 being announced, seeing
> as he's said in several interview that he wasn't interested in a
> sequel until computers are powerful enough to do it in 3D with a level
> of detail comparable to 2D graphics. So, either he changed his mind
> or his publisher made him do it.
I'd say it looks more like he didn't change his mind at all :).
First I've heard of the first one being written in assembly. That's
interesting if true. Possibly all the more reason that the sequel should
have been a rewrite...
Josef Drexler
> Josef Drexler <nospa...@joesbox.cjb.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.181bd4bfc...@server.our.house:
>
> > In fact, I was really surprised to hear RCT2 being announced, seeing
> > as he's said in several interview that he wasn't interested in a
> > sequel until computers are powerful enough to do it in 3D with a level
> > of detail comparable to 2D graphics. So, either he changed his mind
> > or his publisher made him do it.
>
> I'd say it looks more like he didn't change his mind at all :).
There's that... although I haven't actually seen RCT2 yet. I'll go to
the mall tomorrow and see how much it costs around here. If it's not too
expensive, I might buy it.
> First I've heard of the first one being written in assembly. That's
> interesting if true. Possibly all the more reason that the sequel should
> have been a rewrite...
It's stated at http://www.chrissawyer.com/faq3.htm and from what I can
tell it's true. It's pretty obvious looking through the RCT code that
it's not generated by a C compiler. No calls use the stack except to
save registers, the DirectX layer being an exception of course.
However, a total rewrite would probably have taken way too long, people
would have forgotten about RCT by then. It's already been three years
since it came out, and one and a half years since the last expansion.
Then again, who knows what else he's been working on. Secretly I hope
it's transport tycoon 2 rather than yet another RCT expansion/sequel.
Arnulf Guenther jr.
wrote:
>"Jeremy Reaban" <j...@connectria.com> wrote in
>news:ur401s2...@corp.supernews.com:
>
>> Well, let me ask you this. How many sequels that are dramatically
>> different than the original, are actually improvements? And actually
>> sell better? Damned few.
>>
>
>There's a big difference between "dramatically different" and "barely
>discernable". There have been plenty of games that had sequels which
>managed to go far enough without going too far -- HoMM, Civ, Panzer
>General, Age of Wonders, *Craft [although not to my personal tastes], etc.,
>etc., etc. I'm not saying RCT2 should have been totally unrecognizable,
>but new rides, scenery, and a couple of minor feature tweaks just ain't
>gonna do it for me in this case.
>
On the surface it almost looks like the first one. Turn off landscape
smoothing and ignore some minor graphical improvements and one could
believe this is RCT+LL and nothing more. But: there is so much more
than meets the eye.
Scenario editor, separate coaster designer, track design manager,
stackable scenery, just to name the more obvious ones. I'm still
finding little improvements here and there that make it superior over
RCT 1. One example, remember when building path bridges with the old
RCT that the last piece would blink in and out of existence? If some
lonely guest would stray onto this piece and it would blink out, he
would fall down (probably into water and drown subsequently). Now
this is gone. The piece that would be built is now shown in a white
outline. And guests do not go onto these not-yet-built pieces. I
like this.
-Arnulf
Ed Driscoll
> However, a total rewrite would probably have taken way too long,
> people would have forgotten about RCT by then. It's already been
> three years since it came out, and one and a half years since the last
> expansion.
I wonder. Two years seems like an awfully long time especially when, as
Jeff Vitous points out earlier, the massive success of the earlier titles
would make you think that plenty of development resources would have been
made available.
Even so, I'd rather have waited another year or two for a beefier upgrade.
I really doubt people would have forgotten. (Civ 2 -> Civ 3, 5.5 years).
Regards,
- Ed
Josef Drexler
> Josef Drexler <nospa...@joesbox.cjb.net> wrote in
> news:MPG.181be830...@server.our.house:
> > However, a total rewrite would probably have taken way too long,
> > people would have forgotten about RCT by then. It's already been
> > three years since it came out, and one and a half years since the last
> > expansion.
>
> I wonder. Two years seems like an awfully long time especially when, as
> Jeff Vitous points out earlier, the massive success of the earlier titles
> would make you think that plenty of development resources would have been
> made available.
They may be available, but Chris Sawyer prefers working alone...
Trying to coordinate an assembly language project is extremely difficult,
anyway. So he's working alone, which means you get consistent quality,
but it takes longer. I think I'd rather wait a bit longer then.
--
Josef Drexler | http://publish.uwo.ca/~jdrexler/
---------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Please help Conserve Gravity | Email address is *valid*.
Carry a helium balloon. | Don't remove the "nospam" part.
Carole
<nospa...@joesbox.cjb.net> wrote:
>There's that... although I haven't actually seen RCT2 yet. I'll go to
>the mall tomorrow and see how much it costs around here. If it's not too
>expensive, I might buy it.
Josef, if you get RCT 2, do you plan on making a patch/cheat utility
for it, like you did for RCT 1?
>Then again, who knows what else he's been working on. Secretly I hope
>it's transport tycoon 2 rather than yet another RCT expansion/sequel.
That would be wonderful indeed! Even now, I still find Transport
Tycoon enjoyable! One of the best games ever IMO.
Ed Driscoll
> Then again, who knows what else he's been working on. Secretly I hope
> it's transport tycoon 2 rather than yet another RCT expansion/sequel.
>
When you refer to transport tycoon 2 here, do you mean exactly the same
graphics and game engine with a couple of new units thrown in? :)
- Ed
Josef Drexler
> On Sat, 19 Oct 2002 23:08:24 -0400, Josef Drexler
> <nospa...@joesbox.cjb.net> wrote:
>
> >There's that... although I haven't actually seen RCT2 yet. I'll go to
> >the mall tomorrow and see how much it costs around here. If it's not too
> >expensive, I might buy it.
>
> Josef, if you get RCT 2,
They didn't even have it...
> do you plan on making a patch/cheat utility for it, like you did for RCT 1?
Maybe. See http://www.strategyplanet.com/rctuk/rctpatch/
> >Then again, who knows what else he's been working on. Secretly I hope
> >it's transport tycoon 2 rather than yet another RCT expansion/sequel.
>
> That would be wonderful indeed! Even now, I still find Transport
> Tycoon enjoyable! One of the best games ever IMO.
Then I'm sure you know about my *other* patch, now with new ship models
for Transport Tycoon! If not, get it at http://www.ttdpatch.com/
--
Josef Drexler | http://publish.uwo.ca/~jdrexler/
---------------------------------+---------------------------------------
Please help Conserve Gravity | Email address is *valid*.
Carry a helium balloon. | Don't remove the "nospam" part.
Buffy The Cache Coder
> While Chris Sawyer is a small developer, RCT was one of the most popular
> games in the history of PC gaming (it spent over 4 years in the Top-10 sales
> list). His publisher, Infogrames, is not exactly without resources either.
> There is really no excuse for RCT2 not being a fabulously new game, taking
> the concept up to the next level or two. Releasing a RCT1.5 is like
> roasting the golden goose...it may still sell well, but a lot of return
> customers will feel burned in the process. If RCT3 proves to be everything
> RCT2 should have been, will anyone be interested enough to notice?
Well, what should RCT2 have? I'm not trying to defend the game, since
every review I've read on the Usenet and in magazines confirm my suspcicion,
and that is, it's not very new game.
But on the other hand, if you like RCT for what it is, why mess with changing
the fundamental formula -from the point of view of the gamer, and from
the point of view of the developer?
I loved Civ1, and RCT1, and I just thought in the back of my head
"if they could only tweak it here, and there, it would be a perfect game."
But no, with an almost perfect game, what the developers do is usually
mess it up with lots more bells and whistles that it's fundamentally
a different game, and not always more fun. I just wanted to point
this out, because I am not the only gamer who thought, "they just
needed to tweak the existing game, not add all these new fluff in the
sequel".
Well with that aside, I understand where you are coming from and agree
with you. :) Here is what I wanted in the 2nd version:
1. I want to ride my darn coasters from a rider's point of view.
2. I want to be able to see what my attendants see as they walk through
my park.
3. I want to be able to integrate the water riedes with the natural geography
of the land, for rapids, and swan boat rides.
Point 1 is big. If RCT2 had just point 1, then I would buy it.
Ed Driscoll
news:e3850c89.02102...@posting.google.com:
> Well, what should RCT2 have?
Good question!
- Updated graphics (hey - a lot of the fun of this game is just looking
at your park).
- UI improvements (e.g., assigning patrol areas to janitors was a big
hassle).
- Ability to test an incomplete roller coaster. I always hated building
out a huge coaster only to find I built an overly high-G turn in the
middle of it. There are probably other improvements you could make to
the coaster building process to make it smoother and help the player
avoid painting herself into a corner.
- More emphasis on park aesthetics - make it easier to tell which parts
of the park wow the customers visually and which ones are an eyesore.
Reward me more for all that work I'm doing to landscape and build themed
areas.
- Customized hats and t-shirts to go with your rides.
> But on the other hand, if you like RCT for what it is, why mess with
> changing the fundamental formula -from the point of view of the gamer,
> and from the point of view of the developer?
Why make a sequel at all then? You answered your own question of
course...
Cheers,
- Ed
Dweeb
I thought a lot of the RCT code was based on Transport Tycoon - and when
did that come out?
Knight37
whispered:
> While Chris Sawyer is a small developer, RCT was one of the most
> popular games in the history of PC gaming (it spent over 4 years in
> the Top-10 sales list). His publisher, Infogrames, is not exactly
> without resources either. There is really no excuse for RCT2 not being
> a fabulously new game, taking the concept up to the next level or two.
> Releasing a RCT1.5 is like roasting the golden goose...it may still
> sell well, but a lot of return customers will feel burned in the
> process. If RCT3 proves to be everything RCT2 should have been, will
> anyone be interested enough to notice?
Based on what I've been reading about it, I have to agree with you
wholeheartedly. Instead of taking the time and effort to release a whole
new graphics engine using the same great gameplay and interface of RCT1,
while adding some new slick features (like maybe the ability to RIDE the
rides!), they instead just gave a minor upgrade to RCT1, essentially
releasing an expansion pack and calling it RCT2. It will probably sell
pretty well, but I bet it doesn't achieve mega-blockbuster status that it
possibly COULD have achieved if they'd have taken the trouble to actually
make a SEQUEL and not just an expansion disguised as a sequel. Of course,
YMMV, and this is just MHO. :p
At $20 I think it's probably a pretty good value and I'll proabably pick it
up soon though. Just to have it remove trees automatically is a big plus
for me. I would have prefered a whole new game, of couse.
--
Knight37
Knight37
and whispered:
> They may be available, but Chris Sawyer prefers working alone...
>
> Trying to coordinate an assembly language project is extremely
> difficult, anyway. So he's working alone, which means you get
> consistent quality, but it takes longer. I think I'd rather wait a
> bit longer then.
They should have moved Chris into a designer role and not a coder role.
Coding what a TRUE RCT2 should have been isn't a one-man job, and
definitely not a job that you write completely in assembly language.
But instead, they let him do it all again, so we got RCT1.5... better than
nothing but not what I'd dreamed for.
--
Knight37
Humans are kind, intelligent, well-adjusted creatures. Until you get to
know them.
-- Dogbert
Pat Traynor
Coder) wrote:
>Well with that aside, I understand where you are coming from and agree
>with you. :) Here is what I wanted in the 2nd version:
>
>1. I want to ride my darn coasters from a rider's point of view.
>2. I want to be able to see what my attendants see as they walk through
>my park.
>3. I want to be able to integrate the water riedes with the natural geography
>of the land, for rapids, and swan boat rides.
Those would be great, but I wouldn't have expected #1 - that sounds
tough.
I'd simply like to get a MUCH closer look at everything. Your #2
would probably have covered that.
Ed Driscoll covere several of my wish list items.
I'd also like to be able to save sections of track. Sometimes I'll
come up with a sequence that works well and could be used in multiple
track designs.
I'd like some visual notification that a ride has degraded in peeps'
interest so that they're not willing to pay the admission price.
I'd like to be able to rotate the map smoothly. Sometimes a complex
network of paths/tracks crossing over one another is difficult to
figure out. It's like an M.C. Escher drawing. (Is that path above or
below that other path?)
Pat Traynor
wrote:
>Josef Drexler <nospa...@joesbox.cjb.net> wrote in
This is probably the problem. Every time they come out with a
finalized version of TTD2, Josef releases a new patch which is more
advanced than what they came up with. =-)
Jeremy Reaban
"Knight37" <knig...@email.com> wrote in message
<snip>
> They should have moved Chris into a designer role and not a coder
role.
> Coding what a TRUE RCT2 should have been isn't a one-man job, and
> definitely not a job that you write completely in assembly language.
> But instead, they let him do it all again, so we got RCT1.5...
better than
> nothing but not what I'd dreamed for.
I think he's pretty much a free agent - he does what he wants, not
what the company tells him to do. Still, I was kind of surprised
there wasn't a ride your ride in 3D thing. He did the PC port of
Elite 2 (and wrote it all in assembly), so clearly the guy also knows
3D graphics.
Jeff Vitous
news:slr8ru0915eat9875...@4ax.com...
> On 20 Oct 2002 16:58:45 -0700, buff...@hotmail.com (Buffy The Cache
> Coder) wrote:
>
> >Well with that aside, I understand where you are coming from and agree
> >with you. :) Here is what I wanted in the 2nd version:
> >
> >1. I want to ride my darn coasters from a rider's point of view.
> >2. I want to be able to see what my attendants see as they walk through
> >my park.
> >3. I want to be able to integrate the water riedes with the natural
geography
> >of the land, for rapids, and swan boat rides.
>
> Those would be great, but I wouldn't have expected #1 - that sounds
> tough.
Bullfrog did it 4 years ago (SimThemePark).
Jeff Vitous
> At $20 I think it's probably a pretty good value and I'll proabably pick
it
> up soon though. Just to have it remove trees automatically is a big plus
> for me. I would have prefered a whole new game, of couse.
At $20, I would have bought it today, but Best Buy was charging $30. In
time, though....
Jeremy Reaban
> At $20, I would have bought it today, but Best Buy was charging $30.
In
> time, though....
Circuit City has it for $20...(or did last week, think they still have
it at that price)
Game Player No. 1058
just wanted to keep RCT1 in the top 10 list all that much longer. I know I
wouldnt have purchased RCT1 if I knew for fact that RCT2 was in development.
--
Visit:
Everything your sims need at www.simsdirectory.com
Auction off your old unplayed games at www.gameauctioneer.com
"Josef Drexler" <nospa...@joesbox.cjb.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.181bd4bfc...@server.our.house...
Knight37
whispered:
>
There's a vast difference in 3D graphics used for Elite 2 and 3D graphics
used today, though. I still think RCT2 couldn't have been done properly by
one person.
--
Knight37
"Tsk, tsk, tsk. Such ingratitude after all the times I saved your life."
-- Blonde, from "The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly"
Knight37
>>1. I want to ride my darn coasters from a rider's point of view.
>>2. I want to be able to see what my attendants see as they walk
>>through my park.
>>3. I want to be able to integrate the water riedes with the natural
>>geography of the land, for rapids, and swan boat rides.
>
> Those would be great, but I wouldn't have expected #1 - that sounds
> tough.
Competing games have done it, but they've lacked in areas where RCT excels.
The best of both worlds (RCT's sim-ness and coaster designing, with the
ability that other games have had of riding the rides) is what many people
seek, including myself.
> I'd simply like to get a MUCH closer look at everything. Your #2
> would probably have covered that.
This would also be cool, and the ability to "possess" the attendants in a
first person view would be cool for walking around the part and/or riding
the rides.
--
Knight37
Err, anyway, truth is irrelevant in matters of ideology. The point is to
clearly identify who is 'us' and who is 'them' so that no embarrassing
mistakes are made when the shooting starts.
Carole
wrote:
>- Ability to test an incomplete roller coaster. I always hated building
>out a huge coaster only to find I built an overly high-G turn in the
>middle of it.
How are you able to do that? I tried to test an unfinished coaster in
the designer and still got the "track is not complete" message...
Ed Driscoll
news:ruecrugl7l5c5ddhm...@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:46:44 -0000, Ed Driscoll <ejd...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>- Ability to test an incomplete roller coaster. I always hated building
>>out a huge coaster only to find I built an overly high-G turn in the
>>middle of it.
>
> How are you able to do that? I tried to test an unfinished coaster in
> the designer and still got the "track is not complete" message...
You're not able to do it, as far as I know. It's my list of things that I
wish they HAD put into RCT2.
- Ed