Not saying blind faith, but given its only been a few weeks since launch. And they have launched small patches supporting their release. Im saying calm down lol I say we are in March, and we hear nothing of new content, than worry.
I'm disappointed with the overall amount of rides, buildings and objects.
- Thread starter Rich1989
- Start date
Who said Planet coaster isn't finished? Just because it doesn't have everything you may have wanted, doesn't necessarily mean it isn't finished. What I was replying to was the fact that RCTW will never be finished because so much is still broken and the developers have already moved on to something else.
A lot of us feel that things are fine now. If everything had been put in that you are wanting, the game probably would not have been released for another 5 years and then more than likely people would still find fault with it because that is how human nature is. Some people are never satisfied no mater what. Any additions from here on is a plus, but I still would say that to a lot of us Planet Coaster is finished and any more is just gravy.
Just like rct3 wasn't finished, and rct1/2 wasn't finished, until it had a couple expansions. The devs have even admitted to continuing the games development. Things were scrapped or delayed like security and thats a shame. We all want more add-ons to be released! Just because a game has a "due date" doesn't make it finished
You are welcome to your opinion, just as many of us can disagree
Last edited:
FinalMantasyX
Banned
I mean, on some levels, it is objectively unfinished. We don't have Go Karts because they decided to shove them into the closet for a while in favor of water rides, which they themselves said in the stream that revealed them are not really fully realized! The devs themselves called water rides essentially unfinished, while saying they didn't finish something else to get them to that point.
There are missing pieces in many building sets, the spooky theme basically doesn't exist anymore, planned features didn't make it into the final release. There are aspects of it that were left in the dust rather than making it to release. Even if it's just one or two rides, it counts. [sad]
For me the major evidence of an early release is in the actual management. A majority of reviewers professional or otherwise agree with that. It is the biggest criticism levied against the game in every review out there. Plus we only got a single week of testing management before launch. Had these things been more feature-complete, we probably would have tested them earlier.
Last edited:
They responded to the demands of the community for water rides. Had they not included them, fully realized or not, the community would have come with torches and pitchforks. So they thought they'd make those people happy, and forsake other things that really weren't promised anyway. The community responds with pitchforks and torches anyway.
Frontier just can't win, period. There are threads on the forum complaining about EVERY aspect of the game. The complaints come down to expectations, and subjective complaints, about features that don't work the way the user wants them to.
"Win" ?
You think that if people are saying" Wow, it's soooooooo amazing, this feature is perfect", they win, but if people make suggestions, reviews and critics, Frontier lose ?
It's called "feedbacks", it's the best things we can do to help them to improve the game : Give feedbacks (or make "subjective complaints" or say "what features don't work the way you wants them to", you can call it like you want, it's the same.)
Being critical is the best (and the only) way to support a game you like (or love) on a the official forum.
The "nice comments", personally, I keep them for my facebook, twitter, my friends, or what I say about the game on steam. For when I want to promote the game for Frontier.
But on this forum ? It's just counterproductive.
At least, that's my opinion.
Last edited:
I couldn't have worded it better myself.
It's impossible to please everyone, there's always going to be people complaining that something is lacking, or something is not as they thought, or the devs promised X and didn't deliver.
Hey, an it may be the case, but this is a game (a product of entertainment) and Frontier designs it how they think it works better and prioritise what they think it will be better.
I love the pitchfork & torches image metaphor, it's pretty close to reality in many threads [haha]
Last edited:
To generalize the "complaints" to mere missed expectations and subjectivity is naive and dismissive. It's the "I'm in my own bubble" opinion. It's the "running into a brick wall nonstop without even noticing", type of opinion.
That's not how I like to formulate my opinions but to each their own!
Allow me a correction: I haven't said that everyone complains due to that.
I said that "there's always going to be people [...]" that complain due to that, which is not the same as "all the people" or "most of the people". I didn't quantify it at any point of my message. Hence I didn't generalised. Please, stick to my words [happy]
Last edited:
FinalMantasyX
Banned
No, not when the game is "making every person on the planet satisfied". But that's not the game we're talking about here. The game we're talking about right now is whether or not the game released with unfinished content and unrealized potential.
There is solid evidence that this is the case. There are folders in the game's files for things that we simply do not have. There are renders for rides we simply did not get. There are renders, folders, and CG shorts for staff members and features we do not have. We had one single week to give feedback on what the developers- in their own words- called the core of the game, and advertised as an evolution and a revolution in simulation games. We have building sets that are missing pieces. We have building pieces that look like placeholders. We have guest AI that doesn't seem to function how anyone would expect it to. We have features that don't really do anything when it comes down to it, and have little to no impact on the way the game plays such as the extras in food stores. We have shops that don't funciton properly like Balloon stalls. We have rides that are woefully imbalanced like the very same water rides, which draw massive crowds for no apparent reason. We have transport that doesn't function properly as transport roughtly 50% of the time and nobody really understands why it sometimes works and sometimes doesn't. We have a staff training system that is largely inconsequential and can be completely ignored if you so choose. We have two track ride cars for some reason implemented as completely separate rides, and those are the only examples in the entire game of alternate vehicle types for any given ride. We have a queue system that frustrates every player who touches it. We have a path system that is nearly unanimously scorned. We have a guest generation system where what you do and how you do it has no real tangible impact on park demographics, which will always hover around 1:1:1 ratios of guest group types, even though everyone expected it to work based on the contents of your park. We have no Scenario Editor despite the forums implying for the ENTIRE duration of the pre-release period that one would exist.
You get the point. A lot of aspects of Planet Coaster- WHILE AMAZING AND THE BEST AVAILABLE- are not fully realized. The reviews agree. Another couple months in the oven would have done this game some good.
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/03/planet-coaster-theme-park-sim-alpha-preview/
"A game so good they forgot to develop it". That's an Alpha review, but that line is pretty good. Planet Coaster is amazing but I feel at every turn that I'm still playing a beta. It is a great game. I intend on playing it for years. I still love and enjoy it. But it is not a good idea to constantly bemoan criticism with "Well they just can't win" and "they'll never be able tos atisfy everyone". (That review, by the way, details features that don't exist in the final game as well, like a different path drawing system, and worker shifts!)
I would like to assume they prefer criticism and hints and direction on what needs tweaking over a hugbox where nobody ever has any criticism to give because they think it's meaningless to do so. I'm sure they want the game to improve too?
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
You guys put it a lot more simply than I did while I was writing that [haha]
Last edited:
I will allow the correction.
However you did respond to BJ's post with "I couldn't have worded it better myself".His words were, "The complaints come down to expectations, and subjective complaints, about features that don't work the way the user wants them to."
Hey, I'm just sayin' man!
But, correction noted
Last edited:
Hey, I'm just sayin' man!
Haha fair point! Then I correct myself too: "I would have worded B.J. post slightly better" [up] [squeeeeee]
Last edited:
I'm not a proponent of blowing sunshine up Frontiers rear when it's not warranted. Bitter Jeweler nailed it on the head by saying Frontier can't win. As you put it FMX the question is did Frontier released unfinished content and unrealized potential. I won't argue the unfinished content. You can point to all the empty folders and place holder items you find in the game directory all day long. If Frontier had delayed the game to add extra content the lynch mob would have shown up. Frontier released the game and promised it was just the beginning. The lynch mob came. Again I'm not a proponent of not giving criticism. It's not perfect. But it's not the train wreck that is RCTW.
As for unrealized potential that's your opinion. You said you feel like you're playing a beta at every turn but then turn around and say you love it, enjoy it, and it's a great game. It's almost like a contradiction of everything you posted prior to that statement. It makes me just scratch my head to be honest as I feel like I'm reading a conspiracy theory.
The only true thing I agree with what you said is I think they would prefer criticisms versus a hugbox.
This summary is SPOT ON.
I'm a big fan of Paradox Games - Europa Universalis 4, Crusader Kings 2, etc.... Not only are the Paradox Developers NOT thin-skinned, they WELCOME pointed criticism / suggestions, and seem ❤︎❤︎❤︎❤︎ bent on correcting issues & implementing community suggestions in their IP's.
If you look at the Steam Charts, games like Crusader Kings 2 (which is constantly being fine tuned and given expansions) is STILL high up in the charts - MANY YEARS AFTER RELEASE.
If their is any of Developer out there Frontier should emulate, it's Paradox...
Most of the harshest critics on these forums are also PC's biggest fans!! Keep those critiques coming!!!
Last edited:
You people amaze me. Saying RCT3 had much more content at release is somehow supposed to be an unfair comparison but of course comparing PC to RCTW is fine.
And even if you think RCTW is a trainwreck, how does that make the mess that is PC better? Does it fix paths? Does it add management? Does it add content?
I'm just lurking around the Forums for 2-3 Days now, so maybe my view on this subject is wrong/biased etc....
To me it seems mostly people who wanted the managment part to be the point where this Game really shines are the
ones who have run into the biggest dissapointments. Most People who looked for a new Design-Sandbox on the other
side seem pretty happy with the possibilities.
Think one of the Problems is the difference in what the two extreme sides of the playerbase each expect from this Game.
Criticism from the Pro-Managment-side is definetly warranted, just how much managment is really needed for such a game.
Some of the Ideas i have read are nice and easy to implement, others are more like major changes to the way the simulation
works behind the nice Visuals.
Edit: Not saying managment is good as it is, not at all. Just preferring fixing it first and then think about expanding on it.End
And tbh, atm it think adding new Items to the existing collection is not nearly as time consuming as adding complete new
gameplay mechanics wich have to be tested etc., the Pro-Sandbox Side is way easier to satisfy at the moment.
I'm too a staunch advocate of the View mentioned above, you have to state your opinion in a way making it clear you don't
like something if thats the case, that's in no way direspectful or anything if done in a socially acceptable way.
Also many people waited long for a worthy successor of RCT so, maybe that's the case when
some people seem to be overly defendant when it comes to the Game.
To me it seems mostly people who wanted the managment part to be the point where this Game really shines are the
ones who have run into the biggest dissapointments. Most People who looked for a new Design-Sandbox on the other
side seem pretty happy with the possibilities.
Think one of the Problems is the difference in what the two extreme sides of the playerbase each expect from this Game.
Criticism from the Pro-Managment-side is definetly warranted, just how much managment is really needed for such a game.
Some of the Ideas i have read are nice and easy to implement, others are more like major changes to the way the simulation
works behind the nice Visuals.
Edit: Not saying managment is good as it is, not at all. Just preferring fixing it first and then think about expanding on it.End
And tbh, atm it think adding new Items to the existing collection is not nearly as time consuming as adding complete new
gameplay mechanics wich have to be tested etc., the Pro-Sandbox Side is way easier to satisfy at the moment.
I'm too a staunch advocate of the View mentioned above, you have to state your opinion in a way making it clear you don't
like something if thats the case, that's in no way direspectful or anything if done in a socially acceptable way.
Also many people waited long for a worthy successor of RCT so, maybe that's the case when
some people seem to be overly defendant when it comes to the Game.
Last edited:
Let's take a look at what they are saying about PC:
"The piece-by-piece construction is both easy to pick-up and powerful, rewarding you with limitless creativity. "
Sure? Counter-intuitive would have been the right words to describe it. I'll give you the "powerful" part but unfortunately there are built-in limitations, you know just because. But spot on with the limitless creativity - you'll be needing it to come up with work arounds...
"Finesse your creations with unparalleled freedom"
Tell that to someone struggling with the monster that is path placement... And sure, there's freedom, just not when you want to rotate building parts. Or when you try to re-colour that rounded piece of wall to make it match your straight wall. Or when you want to save scenery to blueprint. Or...
"mix & match the thousands of unique themed building components"
I didn't actually count them, but I'd say it's a stretch.
"The most sophisticated park simulation in gaming history makes management fun. "
I guess that's the reason I've stopped playing career mode, all the fun was just too much for me.
"Anything and everything you change has an effect on your guests’ perceptions of your park."
No it doesn't.
"Together your guests tell you at a glance just how well you’re doing."
Alright, the guests do give feedback: 'I'm thirsty!' 'This queue is too long!' Alas you're not able to do anything about it.
But why should I doubt anything the devs say, right?
Last edited:
Vampiro
Volunteer Moderator
Indeed!
People need to realize it is quality vs quantity... there is only so much that can be done within a certain timefrime on a certain budget.
My personal opinion is indeed, the game is lacking some content... A few of my personal favorites didn't make it into the game. Nor did some other rides that i think should really should be in a theme park game.
That being said, does that mean the game isn't finished? ... I don't think so, the game has enough content to be very playable and VERY enjoyable. When i look at the quality of he rides, the details, the animations, etc... im actually amazed they managed to get so much stuff in at release!
So in my opinion the game was ready to be released, but at the same time a game like this is -never- completed since there will always be stuff on our wishlists.
For that simple reason im very glad Frontier did what they did. Provide us with a very solid basegame with a satisfying amount of content.
Frontier always stated they want to do stuff the right way or NOT do it. I think that is exactly what we gotten. Everything we have right now is amazing and the bar has been set very high. And i can only hope (and it's strongly hinted) that we will get more content over the month's or even years to come. Because that's the -only- way we can have both quality and quantity.
Indeed!
People need to realize it is quality vs quantity... there is only so much that can be done within a certain timefrime on a certain budget.
My personal opinion is indeed, the game is lacking some content... A few of my personal favorites didn't make it into the game. Nor did some other rides that i think should really should be in a theme park game.
That being said, does that mean the game isn't finished? ... I don't think so, the game has enough content to be very playable and VERY enjoyable. When i look at the quality of he rides, the details, the animations, etc... im actually amazed they managed to get so much stuff in at release!
So in my opinion the game was ready to be released, but at the same time a game like this is -never- completed since there will always be stuff on our wishlists.
For that simple reason im very glad Frontier did what they did. Provide us with a very solid basegame with a satisfying amount of content.
Frontier always stated they want to do stuff the right way or NOT do it. I think that is exactly what we gotten. Everything we have right now is amazing and the bar has been set very high. And i can only hope (and it's strongly hinted) that we will get more content over the month's or even years to come. Because that's the -only- way we can have both quality and quantity.
I agree for the most part, well said!
The part i disagree with is the "quantity". I'm a perfectionist myself, and i know the work ivolved with game assets like this. But one thing that has not been taken into account is the "variation side of things". There are plenty of scenery items and gridlock items that could have served more than one purpose, as there is such a great need for little parts and "parts-of-parts" It's all laid out into "complete" items. For example, the Wooden Ladder would make a great Truss part if it was colorable. There are lots of items that are part of a "main" asset, like, let's say, the animatronic figures. You can't find the cubic base object as a separate item (on top of what's available, not replacing anything). Simple assets like just the wooden planks or art shapes in more variations, these things wouldn't cost additional time (it would cost some time but i hope you get what i'm trying to say) as you could just extract the files for parts of the models that are already in place.
The Scenery/Building split is optimal for this kind of approach and i don't get why there hasn't been any "parts-recycling", especially with such a great addition like the Building/Scenery split people use more of the smaller parts to achieve a certain design.
They wouldn't have had to come up with all kinds of new items, just make more efficient use of the assets which are already there. Also some logic additions are missing instead of some of the classic RCT rides like the Car-locked Track Rides (no Omnivover for Darkrides, no ride with a rotation (except X Dimension) setup to make use of all the cool stuff we can actually already build. Don't get me wrong, i'm quite happy with the approach they took on "evolving" the RCT concept further, but the asset management hasn't been optimal imo. [happy]
Edit:
Even simple things like allowing gridlock items to become freely placeable scenery items and vice-versa would already add to the quantity of available assets.
Last edited:
You do realize that you can't simply plug things into a game because what you put in might affect something else in the game unexpectedly. Some people think that all you have to do is develop the code for a ride or something else and stick it into the game, I don't think that it is that easy.
I was a ground controlled radar repairman in the Army for over 8 years , so I can only compare it to that. In electronic circuits like GCA, sometimes a failure of a component in one section might cause another section to fail. I think it is very similar when programming, by that I mean that placing code in one area can affect things in other areas and you have to be very careful as not to break something somewhere else.Things like this take time and can't be done overnight.
I was a ground controlled radar repairman in the Army for over 8 years , so I can only compare it to that. In electronic circuits like GCA, sometimes a failure of a component in one section might cause another section to fail. I think it is very similar when programming, by that I mean that placing code in one area can affect things in other areas and you have to be very careful as not to break something somewhere else.Things like this take time and can't be done overnight.
Last edited: