I Did Some Investigation Into Queue Scenery

[Jay Oddity]

Firstly, apologies if you guys had already tested this, it can be quite hard to keep up with everything. However I didn't know how this worked so I went ahead and did some experiments.

I am going to write my findings but if you want to check the video I made because reading is hard you can!

[video=youtube;MDxio266oWg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDxio266oWg[/video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDxio266oWg

Right.

How Does Queue Scenery Work In General?

It seems that every scenery piece gives a certain % of queue scenery rating if you are close enough to the queue.

If you are in distance you either get the full amount or if you are out of distance you get nothing. The distance is likely to be just a medium sized circle or square. You can see the distance briefly in the video.

There seems to be a link between scenery cost and % rating given - as you would possibly expect. However it seems that a lower value piece gives a higher % rating dollar for dollar.

Does Queue Scenery have to be varied?

The answer as far as I could tell was no. I did a test with a 3.5% scenery piece which was accurate up to 35% and the golden chests which give 50% with 2 of them gave me 100%. So variation does not seem to be needed.

What gives the most queue scenery rating?

So I didn't look at what single item gives the most % scenery rating because I didn't go through them all but I suspect the $10k chests will be the most at 50%

I think the most efficient scenery pieces will be the $1 primitive piece which give 1% rating each. Meaning you could get 100% for $100.

Why?

I think this is the game making you either make stuff with lots of blocks, or trying to naturally force a combination. For example a large piece will not give you 100% but a large piece and some cheaper ones will get you there.



TL: DR

Scenery is proximity based, you either get the %increase or you don't.
Cheaper Scenery is more efficient if trying to get highest % for lowest cost.
Likely way to get 100% in fewest items - 2 x Gold chests = $20k
Likely way to get 100% cheapest - 100 x $1 primitives.


Hopefully there is at least one person interested! Thanks guys

 

[FinalMantasyX]

So basically it's imbalanced as all get-out, very simplistic in design, and ultimately just a matter of slapping whatever you want wherever you want without any attempts at actually making something nice.

I think they should have only tagged specific pieces as scenery/counted towards the rating, excluding every single wall/roof piece, and only counting decorations. Then the actual rating should have been a mixture of cost and variety of pieces used, with each successively re-used piece counting much less than the previous piece. And instead of percentages, a number score, out of a rather high number, so those diminishing returns meant more.

 

[DMWCincy]

I found that putting the queue inside a building helps a lot, although that can just be because the collective % of the walls and ceilings.

 

[Jay Oddity]

So basically it's imbalanced as all get-out, very simplistic in design, and ultimately just a matter of slapping whatever you want wherever you want without any attempts at actually making something nice.

I think they should have only tagged specific pieces as scenery/counted towards the rating, excluding every single wall/roof piece, and only counting decorations. Then the actual rating should have been a mixture of cost and variety of pieces used, with each successively re-used piece counting much less than the previous piece. And instead of percentages, a number score, out of a rather high number, so those diminishing returns meant more.

I think agree with some sort of variety system but would it have been pointless complication without adding much? Maybe. Though I suppose diminishing returns may have been okay. Personally I think the system is fine enough, simplisticish but understandably so.

I found that putting the queue inside a building helps a lot, although that can just be because the collective % of the walls and ceilings.

Yeah, in my vid I mentioned I tried a wall but I actually didn't, I tried a random building piece and the result seemed similar. I reckon buildings are easyish ways to get the number of parts up naturally.

 

[BlueShamu]

Thanks for doing the research Jay. This was helpful

 

[MineTimelapser]

So basically it's imbalanced as all get-out, very simplistic in design, and ultimately just a matter of slapping whatever you want wherever you want without any attempts at actually making something nice.

I think they should have only tagged specific pieces as scenery/counted towards the rating, excluding every single wall/roof piece, and only counting decorations. Then the actual rating should have been a mixture of cost and variety of pieces used, with each successively re-used piece counting much less than the previous piece. And instead of percentages, a number score, out of a rather high number, so those diminishing returns meant more.

What if you have a row of the same trees? In that way, it would be way worse than a odd fusion of objects off all different themes mashed together. The thing is that every system you use would have no idea if it's a carefully crafted composition that looks stunning, or some mashed together objects and then a more simple system would work better than having a lot of variables influencing it.

 

[DMWCincy]

I wonder animatronics give a higher %. It would make sense since they move around and are more interesting than staring at a wall.

 

[Jay Oddity]

What if you have a row of the same trees? In that way, it would be way worse than a odd fusion of objects off all different themes mashed together. The thing is that every system you use would have no idea if it's a carefully crafted composition that looks stunning, or some mashed together objects and then a more simple system would work better than having a lot of variables influencing it.

Yeah I agree with this, having a computer work out what is pretty or not is not going to be sensible right now.

I wonder animatronics give a higher %. It would make sense since they move around and are more interesting than staring at a wall.

I just checked, doesn't seem to be too consistent, sleeping $50 rat 5% and $50 statute 2.5% I think. So maybe a little more than average.

 

[DMWCincy]

I think nature should exempt from the diminishing return rule. A flower the middle nowhere is boring, but a whole collecting flowers cool. Also a tree and forest, rock and a cliff face, etc.

 

[Astrobia]

Colour coordination and theme tags should probably give a boost. The more scenery has the "sci fi" tag sticking to theme should increase their value. Certain rides should probably benefit from certain themes as well. I wouldn't go as far as to penalise themes. Volume of scenery should also factor into the formula. The idea that 2 chests is enough for 100% is frankly insane. Make the 10k chests a multiplier sure but it is way too easy to max out the scenery rating without actually building much of anything. The impact for 100% scenery is also rather minor as well... You can not bother and not suffer any major losses. You get the odd guest thought, that queue looks boring. But it's not enough to make guests unhappy or stopping rides making a profit once you have 4 or 5 rides bolstering your park rating.

 

[Jay Oddity]

Colour coordination and theme tags should probably give a boost. The more scenery has the "sci fi" tag sticking to theme should increase their value. Certain rides should probably benefit from certain themes as well. I wouldn't go as far as to penalise themes. Volume of scenery should also factor into the formula. The idea that 2 chests is enough for 100% is frankly insane. Make the 10k chests a multiplier sure but it is way too easy to max out the scenery rating without actually building much of anything. The impact for 100% scenery is also rather minor as well... You can not bother and not suffer any major losses. You get the odd guest thought, that queue looks boring. But it's not enough to make guests unhappy or stopping rides making a profit once you have 4 or 5 rides bolstering your park rating.

I think the chests are a bit of an extreme example, that is why I tried them.

Asking them to have colour coordination is trying to program beauty. I'm not sure a computer could do that easily. I think this thing with small pieces giving the most % actually will mean that volume is taken into account normally.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

With this suggestion, you will now require large mansions be built at every ride ticket booth. What if people don't want to do that for every ride?
What if people just want a few flowers and a tree, and that only gives them 3% scenery value. Tough luck? Since that scenery rating helps attract peeps, they shouldn't be punished because they don't want a mansion built at the ticket booth, nor have the space for it. Sinking items underground is a nice way to reach the target, and be able to maintain your own vision for your park. By your "diminidhing returns" metric though, the mansion wouldn't count for very much either, just that one wall piece that's repeated 50 times, that one window, repeated 20 times, that on roof piece repeated...etc. Same way with your coaster track rating. All those trees you placed? 1%. All those rocks? 1% That cool tunnel you made using only 3 diferent pieces? 3%. You realize how many different kinds of scenery you'd need to place, going way beyond the scope of your vision, to get that "high" coaster rating?

 

[Antimort]

Firstly, apologies if you guys had already tested this, it can be quite hard to keep up with everything. However I didn't know how this worked so I went ahead and did some experiments.

I am going to write my findings but if you want to check the video I made because reading is hard you can!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDxio266oWg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDxio266oWg

Right.

How Does Queue Scenery Work In General?

It seems that every scenery piece gives a certain % of queue scenery rating if you are close enough to the queue.

If you are in distance you either get the full amount or if you are out of distance you get nothing. The distance is likely to be just a medium sized circle or square. You can see the distance briefly in the video.

There seems to be a link between scenery cost and % rating given - as you would possibly expect. However it seems that a lower value piece gives a higher % rating dollar for dollar.

Does Queue Scenery have to be varied?

The answer as far as I could tell was no. I did a test with a 3.5% scenery piece which was accurate up to 35% and the golden chests which give 50% with 2 of them gave me 100%. So variation does not seem to be needed.

What gives the most queue scenery rating?

So I didn't look at what single item gives the most % scenery rating because I didn't go through them all but I suspect the $10k chests will be the most at 50%

I think the most efficient scenery pieces will be the $1 primitive piece which give 1% rating each. Meaning you could get 100% for $100.

Why?

I think this is the game making you either make stuff with lots of blocks, or trying to naturally force a combination. For example a large piece will not give you 100% but a large piece and some cheaper ones will get you there.



TL: DR

Scenery is proximity based, you either get the %increase or you don't.
Cheaper Scenery is more efficient if trying to get highest % for lowest cost.
Likely way to get 100% in fewest items - 2 x Gold chests = $20k
Likely way to get 100% cheapest - 100 x $1 primitives.


Hopefully there is at least one person interested! Thanks guys

How simple this game really is. This is the evolved game....? I mean, they talked about this so often, how advanced this stuff should be. Can you do this with showing how the "guest brain" aka A.I, really is(n't) working? [cry]

 

[Jay Oddity]

With this suggestion, you will now require large mansions be built at every ride ticket booth. What if people don't want to do that for every ride?
What if people just want a few flowers and a tree, and that only gives them 3% scenery value. Tough luck? Since that scenery rating helps attract peeps, they shouldn't be punished because they don't want a mansion built at the ticket booth, nor have the space for it. Sinking items underground is a nice way to reach the target, and be able to maintain your own vision for your park. By your "diminidhing returns" metric though, the mansion wouldn't count for very much either, just that one wall piece that's repeated 50 times, that one window, repeated 20 times, that on roof piece repeated...etc. Same way with your coaster track rating. All those trees you placed? 1%. All those rocks? 1% That cool tunnel you made using only 3 diferent pieces? 3%. You realize how many different kinds of scenery you'd need to place, going way beyond the scope of your vision, to get that "high" coaster rating?

I think each method has plus points and down sides. Diminishing returns would only stop spamming of one item and I don't think it will be a big problem, if people want to game the system they can perhaps.

Do not do this. PC fanboys can hate you for showing how simple this game really is. This is the evolved game.... lol Can you do this with showing how dumb the "guest brain" aka A.I, really is? [cry]

I'm not trying to show how simple the game is or isn't. I am just trying to understand how things work! I love Planet Coaster! This particular system may seem slightly simple but I understand why. Anything else would possibly raise new issues.

 

[Stream]

With this suggestion, you will now require large mansions be built at every ride ticket booth. What if people don't want to do that for every ride?
What if people just want a few flowers and a tree, and that only gives them 3% scenery value. Tough luck? Since that scenery rating helps attract peeps, they shouldn't be punished because they don't want a mansion built at the ticket booth, nor have the space for it. Sinking items underground is a nice way to reach the target, and be able to maintain your own vision for your park. By your "diminidhing returns" metric though, the mansion wouldn't count for very much either, just that one wall piece that's repeated 50 times, that one window, repeated 20 times, that on roof piece repeated...etc. Same way with your coaster track rating. All those trees you placed? 1%. All those rocks? 1% That cool tunnel you made using only 3 diferent pieces? 3%. You realize how many different kinds of scenery you'd need to place, going way beyond the scope of your vision, to get that "high" coaster rating?

I think this is something that needs to be more balanced overall then. Meaning, maybe you don't need a 100% scenery rating for people to really enjoy your ride, but maybe people would be more inclined to queue for a longer period of time if your queue is all decked out. Just looking at it from a personal perspective, I definitely didn't mind queuing for hours for the Hogwarts ride at Universal because the theming is so amazing that the queue is part of the ride experience. I think it's a balance that can be reached fairly simply that would give the illusion that a crazy decked-out queue experience attracts more people, when in reality they're just more inclined to stand in line if that makes sense. This "plop down things until you win" - trend that's going on in this game is one of the reasons why the management aspects feel so shallow, and it's a shame really...

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

I agree, but, I am pointing out why the proposed fix, fails on many levels.

Currently if you put two queues side by side, and theme between, they will both get the "bonus". Why is that wrong? Why is that gaming the system? So to make it "harder" now you need the caveat to disallow that. Now you are back to telling people how they must do things to be able to achieve these rewards. I don't see that as fun. For every new "rule" that can be put in place, there will be a way to game them. Then creative people wil complain that they can't be creative, and that there are too many restrictions.

Like I said in the other thread. If you want the game to be harder, financials is the place to get there.

 

[Abletudu]

Is it possible at some point that the game takes duplication of items into account?

 

[Stream]

I agree, but, I am pointing out why the proposed fix, fails on many levels.

Currently if you put two queues side by side, and theme between, they will both get the "bonus". Why is that wrong? Why is that gaming the system? So to make it "harder" now you need the caveat to disallow that. Now you are back to telling people how they must do things to be able to achieve these rewards. I don't see that as fun. For every new "rule" that can be put in place, there will be a way to game them. Then creative people wil complain that they can't be creative, and that there are too many restrictions.

Like I said in the other thread. If you want the game to be harder, financials is the place to get there.

They could do things like building over the queue itself counts differently than building around it, that way that scenery only counts for that specific queue. It's definitely difficult to implement so that everyone is happy, but I feel like there are a lot of ways to improve it at least. I think the main issue is that it's way too easy to get 100% with the scenery, coupled with that getting a high percentage impacts whether people want to go on the ride or not, where I think it would serve the game a LOT better if it impacted whether people wanted to stand in a long queue or not, and maybe how they feel about the whole experience, meaning whether they'll go on the ride again or not.

 

[Bitter Jeweler]

Any solution people come up with, I can find flaws.

Building over the queue counts more? Fine. All my queues are now covered. Not because I want them to be, because the game dictates they be, regardless of my creative desires. That metric did not make it harder. At all. It just shaped what I have to do.

Let's say "scenery" around shops increase their sales.

FinalMantasy says walls shouldn't count, only decorations.
Or, the diminishing returns of walls metric.

How big will your shop buildings have to be, to gain that bonus?

Now lets say it can't be duplicated. Every building must be unique.

How quickly will that be tedious?

What about when you have four shops in one building? Does only one get the bonus?

I can go on and on.

At some point, people have to admit, that some things can be easy.
The whole point of the scenery bonus is just to get people to build. And get a little reward for doing so.
This does not need to be a difficult challenge.

Back to the argument that it's the finincial end that should make the game difficult. Not the creative end.
Building pieces should be more expensive. It should cost you $1000 (or more?)to put that building around the shop, or queue.
It's too easy to make money in the game, THAT's the core problem. Not getting a bonus because you placed a few speakers , which should cost more money to operate so that while you get your bonus, you will also incur operating costs, for life.

 

[Stream]

Any solution people come up with, I can find flaws.

Building over the queue counts more? Fine. All my queues are now covered. Not because I want them to be, because the game dictates they be, regardless of my creative desires. That metric did not make it harder. At all. It just shaped what I have to do.

Let's say "scenery" around shops increase their sales.

FinalMantasy says walls shouldn't count, only decorations.
Or, the diminishing returns of walls metric.

How big will your shop buildings have to be, to gain that bonus?

Now lets say it can't be duplicated. Every building must be unique.

How quickly will that be tedious?

What about when you have four shops in one building? Does only one get the bonus?

I can go on and on.

At some point, people have to admit, that some things can be easy.
The whole point of the scenery bonus is just to get people to build. And get a little reward for doing so.
This does not need to be a difficult challenge.

Back to the argument that it's the finincial end that should make the game difficult. Not the creative end.
Building pieces should be more expensive. It should cost you $1000 (or more?)to put that building around the shop, or queue.
It's too easy to make money in the game, THAT's the core problem. Not getting a bonus because you placed a few speakers , which should cost more money to operate so that while you get your bonus, you will also incur operating costs, for life.

I definitely agree with you. It should be harder to make money, and it should be harder to build scenery around a queue to make it more attractive, and I also think it shouldn't matter as much as it does at the moment. With that said, I also think the brain behind the game could be a bit smarter and deeper when it comes to how things are awarded. You shouldn't be able to plop down 50 of the same prop and you have a 100% rating. For instance, they could have a linear downgrade of how much you're awarded per duplicate. Maybe it never even reaches zero, but it at least means that you'd have to build 1,000 of the same props to get 100% and it sort of forces you to be more creative and use different elements in your queues. And of course it would have to be balanced so you don't have to build a mansion to get a 100% rating. But that are things that you would have to work out as a developer. Build something that you think would make the rating 100% and work backwards to set a score per object based off of that structure basically. Maybe it could even differ between rides, some kiddie rides maybe doesn't need as many props as a coaster to reach 100%.

I'm literally just riffing off the top of my head, and I think others are doing the same thing here. Of course there are flaws in what we're suggesting, but at least we're trying to give suggestions on how the game could be made deeper. But I agree with you, it's too easy to make money, and the props and stuff are too cheap. But I also think that a lot more can be done to improve these things than just adjusting for those two things, and it feels like that's what people are missing from the game right now - a deeper experience.