Last Free Update? Three basic things are still missing!

the one thing that is truly evolved and revolutionary to the genre is the way Planet Coaster handles terrain!

Maybe if you have the patience to mold terrain for hours and hours. I cant stand how slow the terrain is. In RCT i could lift a huge mountain sky high, then drop that same mountain down into a very deep pit, all in a matter of seconds. The terrain in PC is tedious just like the majority of features. I want square terrain shapes, and why no click + drag for walls? How is that not a basic feature to have click + drag for walls?
 
Last edited:
With all due respect I feel you're going a little over the top with this thread and being completely unreasonable in your expectations. The way you have worded the OP makes you do really come across as very demanding and arrogant if I'm being honest.

I read on the forums that the next update will be the LAST FREE UPDATE! That is entirely unacceptable until we are finally given the ability to build paths underground! Come on now, guys. This was something that RCT3 did 13 YEARS AGO! It's old graphics technology.

You read something that you don't know is fact and choose to define this as being unacceptable because a feature that you want is not in the game? Even if it was the last free update why do you feel something that you supposedly feel so passionate about takes priority over everything else that is being added to the game (that we are aware of and what we aren't)? Comparing something with RCT3 is irrelevant, do you think for one second it may not be as simple as you make out? How much experience do you have in game development serious question? Based on what you have said I would hazard a guess that you believe things to be far easier than they truly are.


I have seen so many ridiculous requests for this game, like goats and chickens and, you know, stupid ❤︎❤︎❤︎❤︎❤︎❤︎. But I sometimes wonder about basic things. Has the majority of players forgotten what makes building a park an awesome experience? For me, it's immersion. I have been to many great parks in real life, and I prefer to build in such a way that I can picture myself there in the park I am building, just as the real ones. The coaster-riding feature introduced years ago, of course, made it all the more realistic ... so there's that. With that being said, RCT3 involved major tasking to create awesome parks, but some of the important BASIC features were there, regardless, and with a bit of elbow grease and lots of time, I could get the Park Builder to do, mostly, what I wanted it to do. It's just disheartening to me that it seems the devs at PlanCo have overlooked some essential basics in favor of content that could have been added later. And with each update content news release, I am let down when I find out those basics are being left out, once again.

You want features to be added to the game? Fine, request them and hope the devs consider implementing these improvements but when you rant and rave if they're not added it doesn't reflect well on you. It's not just about what YOU want and you don't speak for the 800k players that own the game.
 
Last edited:
With all due respect I feel you're going a little over the top with this thread and being completely unreasonable in your expectations. The way you have worded the OP makes you do really come across as very demanding and arrogant if I'm being honest.



You read something that you don't know is fact and choose to define this as being unacceptable because a feature that you want is not in the game? Even if it was the last free update why do you feel something that you supposedly feel so passionate about takes priority over everything else that is being added to the game (that we are aware of and what we aren't)? Comparing something with RCT3 is irrelevant, do you think for one second it may not be as simple as you make out? How much experience do you have in game development serious question? Based on what you have said I would hazard a guess that you believe things to be far easier than they truly are.




You want features to be added to the game? Fine, request them and hope the devs consider implementing these improvements but when you rant and rave if they're not added it doesn't reflect well on you. It's not just about what YOU want and you don't speak for the 800k players that own the game.

I'm also shoked by the negativity of this thread.Frontier has given us so much free updates and have put so much work into this amazing game.I can't understand how people can still complain about it.I know that there are a lot of things missing,but i think that the devs will implement these things either in the next free update or in big expansionpacks,that i'll gladly pay.Don't forget that everything the've done appart from the base game in updates was free and that's a lot of stuff![rolleyes][up][yesnod][heart]
 
Last edited:
I'm also shoked by the negativity of this thread.Frontier has given us so much free updates and have put so much work into this amazing game.I can't understand how people can still complain about it.I know that there are a lot of things missing,but i think that the devs will implement these things either in the next free update or in big expansionpacks,that i'll gladly pay.Don't forget that everything the've done appart from the base game in updates was free and that's a lot of stuff![rolleyes][up][yesnod][heart]

Not a complaint ... suggestions before the devs stop the free updates. The only negativity was from the "inspectorgadget" troll.
If you would like me to praise the game and the work that has been done on it to seemingly even things out, then fine. I think the game is amazing, and I respect and appreciate the fact that the devs have continued updating with new and improved content, unlike SO many other games out there, especially on Steam. That goes without saying, that's why I didn't say it. But now I have. Okay?

Take care, fellow rollers!
 
Last edited:
With all due respect I feel you're going a little over the top with this thread and being completely unreasonable in your expectations. The way you have worded the OP makes you do really come across as very demanding and arrogant if I'm being honest.

Well that's your honesty, not mine. The written word is subjective in tone. There was no arrogance in my intention, only the concerns of a paying customer.


You read something that you don't know is fact and choose to define this as being unacceptable because a feature that you want is not in the game?

No, not necessarily. I used something I later, admittedly, did not know was fact to start a thread to raise some serious concerns that this paying customer (yours truly) would have in the event something like that were to occur.

Even if it was the last free update why do you feel something that you supposedly feel so passionate about takes priority over everything else that is being added to the game (that we are aware of and what we aren't)?

And how is it wrong to not be upset about, as you say, "something (I) feel so passionate about"? Is that a crime? Is it trolling? Is it unacceptable? Nope. AND ... I did not discount "everything else that is being added to the game."

Comparing something with RCT3 is irrelevant,

NO ... comparing something to RCT3 is NOT irrelevant. Now you're being arrogant. RCT3 was the first 3D Rollercoaster game of its kind out there. So it is only logical to compare subsequent attempts at a similar model to the original. I don't know about you, but I compared the 80s Ford Mustangs to the 60s Ford Mustangs when they came out each year, and the result was that the 80s brands were POS. So, if you understand science or even common sense, you must have a control item in a test of how good or bad a product is; something you base your new findings against to determine its worthiness, staying power, acceptability, and countless other parameters.

do you think for one second it may not be as simple as you make out? How much experience do you have in game development serious question? Based on what you have said I would hazard a guess that you believe things to be far easier than they truly are.

As far as game development goes, like I said, 17 years ago, it worked. And here, Frontier has done a pretty good job thus far, however, considering what they have accomplished up to this point would posit that they are fully capable of manipulating the development in such a way that paths could be built underground. I wasn't saying it should be VR. Simply that something that was a basic feature in a 17-year-old game should have been a basic feature in this case. You are making excuses for the devs, just to be a troll, it would seem. But then again, like I said before, the written word is subjective, so I have no idea what tone you were attacking me with.

You want features to be added to the game? Fine, request them and hope the devs consider implementing these improvements but when you rant and rave if they're not added it doesn't reflect well on you. It's not just about what YOU want and you don't speak for the 800k players that own the game.

First of all, I requested them before the game was even released, chief, and that was a considerable amount of time ago. Secondly, "rant and rave" is a suggestive term. Writing during a moment of frustration is what it was, and who are you to determine what kind of reflection that leaves in my case? Are you some kind of emotionless, Zen-type perfectionist who never becomes concerned about anything, letting life go by wielding its causes and effects while you nonchalantly chant, "Oh, well. That's life. Oh, well. That's life. Oh, well. That's life."? And by the way, if I "request them," then those requests ARE about what I want. Additionally, I have spoken to many people who want the same things. It's not just me, ace.

On another forum, under every person's user name and just above the avatar are the words, "Human being with feelings." So, if you continue to find the need to be rude, which you were by being well beyond the scope of "subjective tone" in this last statement, consider that we are ALL humans, and we ALL have feelings, and not ONE of us deserves to be disrespected by another.

Last note: You started off your trolling by saying "with all due respect." There wasn't a bit of respect in a single word you wrote, and that doesn't reflect well on you.
 
Last edited:
3. VERY VERY IMPORTANT: Let's get this paths/underground building thing finished up. Right? Like I said, this ability should have been completed up front, before the game was even released. RCT3 did it in 2004! That's almost a decade-and-a-half ago! By the way, while you are at it, make it so that glass tunnel paths can be built through water, as well. Shouldn't be too hard.
We have voxel terrain with surface nets for greater precision. The terrain system in Planet Coaster is the best in any game available at this time. We can create all the tunnels, overhangs, mountains, canyons, and other shapes we desire. What you're really asking for is:

  1. a path tool where you click a button to add a segment of path rather than fiddling about with the mouse
  2. adhesion of terrain to paths rather than the other way around as it's done in game now
Ok, I get it. These mechanics can be tightened up. It's hard to do and computationally-intense to do with voxels plus surface nets terrain. Don't act like tunnels aren't possible though. I've made so many of them, and you can too. You have to plan for them rather than just inserting them into tight spaces like you could in RCT. Tunnels should be placed before rides and scenery to limit collision problems.

I'm not going to argue your other points because I agree, although not quite so abrasively. I just wanted to squash this tunneling complaint because this is something the terrain engine is adept at doing once you get the hang of it. You'd be complaining about a complete and total lack of tunnels if we still had heightmap terrain like in the RCT games. Remember that RCT3 didn't even have tunnels until Soaked came out!
 
Comparing something with RCT3 is irrelevant

How come? Do you forget that Frontier developed RCT3 using a very similar engine as PC? Actually the engine Frontier uses is called Cobra, and even though the version of Cobra used on PC is different than the Cobra engine of 2004, they do share many similarities including the same name. I don't understand why people think its wrong to compare PC to RCT3.... like doesnt every platformer get compared to Mario, every shooter gets compared to Doom, every open-world gets compared to GTA??? I think when somebody says were not allowed to compared PC to RCT3 its simply because they cant look passed the pretty graphics of PC to realize how many things were better in RCT3
 
Last edited:
I don't get why we aren't able to compare games.

I understand we won't get as many flatrides as rct3 right away. It's simply because everything has so much more detail now it takes much more time to make. However, comparing game features or mechanics is perfectly reasonable, since there not much is changed.

For example: Would it really be that much harder to have a slider in the scenario editor where you can set the average guest money in planet coaster than it would be in rct3? I don't think so. So yeah, cosmetic and graphic-wise stuff takes longer and it's unrealistic to set the same expactations as rct3, but gameplay-wise we should totally have many core features from rct3 by now.
 
Last edited:
While I have never played Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 or Planet Coaster. Please let me chime in on this discussion about comparing the two games when it comes to visual. In my honest opinion, You really cant compare the two games. The visual aspect of Planet Coaster is simply one of the best I have ever seen in PC games while Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 still looks cartoonish in my opinion. The only visual part that I am not fond of are the waterfalls as I think those could have been better. Other than that, Planet Coaster is spot on when it comes to the visual side of things. However, I have never been a big PC gamer to begin with except when it comes to some old racing sims such as GTR 2 , Rfactor, and Microsoft Train Simulator. Since the release of GTR 2 back in September of 2006, I have never seen a game with this type of visual.

A few weeks ago while I was on youtube, I stumbled across a few videos of Planet Coaster and I was blown away by the visuals of the game itself. It made me want to buy the game right at that moment, but I knew I had to get a new PC before I can run Planet Coaster as the PC that I have right now wont run the game. I have already started saving up money for my first gaming rig which I plan to buy around the holidays, so I can catch a great sale on the gaming desktop that I want. In fact, if it wasnt for Planet Coaster. I would not be buying a gaming rig as I rarely do any PC gaming these days. except GTR 2. That is how good the visual looks to me that I am willing to spend nearly $1500 on a gaming rig in a few months just to play Planet Coaster.

Like I said, I never played Roller Coaster Tycoon 3. In fact, the only theme park sim that I have played was the original Roller Coaster Tycoon when it first came out back in March of 1999. While I did enjoy playing the original tycoon game back in the day, It got old very fast as the visuals were just too cartoonish for my taste. However, the visuals for this game are simply amazing. I wish a company would put out a train simulator with these type of visuals as I would be very happy if they did. However, I dont see that happening anytime soon as Microsoft scrapped their plans for a second edition of their train simulator about 5 years ago.

Last, but not least, I have to agree with Ramm with what he stated about the flat rides. This game has much more detail than Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 has. I do see Frontier releasing more flat rides in the future and hopefully some day. They will release some water park stuff as most of the major theme parks of today have a water park.
 
Last edited:
While I have never played Roller Coaster Tycoon 3 or Planet Coaster. Please let me chime in on this discussion about comparing the two games when it comes to visual.

Just because something looks delicious doesn't mean it tastes good. If all your interested in is watching Planet Coaster, than of course it is far superior from a visual perspective. But unless you have played both games hands on, then you are only experiencing not even half of what you are critiquing. If PC was purely a visual experience, then gameplay would not matter, but PC is a video game and it requires a lot of work to make great creations in this game, and the scenarios are not advanced in anyway compared to previous games.

Where as in RCT3 everything is much more fun as its easier, less time consuming, and simpler to build, but the "pay off" just isnt as great simply due to poor graphics. Obviously, PC has more advanced tools, but not everybody wants to spend months working on their designs. And if you consider that RCT3 is 14 years old and if you look past the graphics, you would see that certain aspects of PC are not quite as good as they could have been when compared to the RCT3 toolset

In my honest opinion, You really cant compare the two games.
I have a friend who argues with me all the time because I'll say that a game looks bad, and he says I can't judge it until I've played it. But the thing is, I have played enough games in my life to know whether a new game is good or not. And since you have no experince in RCT or PC at all, I have to say your opinion is very limited.

I think its funny how you say RCT was too cartoonish, at least RCT has deaths and coaster crashes, in PC when a coaster crashes into guests the fly around like party balloons with confetti. If you understood the difference between "cel shading" and "photo realistic" you would know that PC is very much a cartoonish based game with its artstyle

Anyway, theres 2 types of people that play PC, those who enjoyed the management aspects of RCT, and those who enjoy building. Unfortunately for some of us who played RCT, management is not as impressive as we would have hoped, and the building tools could also be improved greatly to reduce tedium and increase productivity. I'm sure you will enjoy PC but give it time, you will find things about the game that annoy you as you play more [wink] thats the nice thing about having fresh eyes though, don't judge the game based on the things you read
 
Last edited:
Like I stated a few hours ago Brezer, I was just giving my outsider opinion just from watching a number of videos with no game time with either sim. When it comes to the visual perspective , Planet Coaster wins hands down. The only thing that I dont like when it comes to the visual perspective of Planet Coaster is the waterfalls. I think they could have done a little better when it comes to that area. The one thing that I have to give RCT3 a advantage over on Planet Coaster is how their log flume and rapids ride look when it comes to going down a falls as I think Planet Coaster did not do that great when it comes to that area of the game. However, when it comes to everything else such as playing the game itself, I cant give my honest opinion as I have never played either game.

When it comes to the crashes in RCT 3, that is something that I would have no desire to see as that is not what the game was meant for. If it was, RCT 3 would be called Roller Coaster Tycoon crashes. As for my type of play in Planet Coaster, when I get the game. I want to download a few parks and visit them before I start working on a theme park myself as I am someone who is more interested in building and theming parks than the management side of the game. which is what I did when it comes to my train simulator gameplay. I spent more time in the route builder for Microsoft Train Simulator than playing the game itself., but that is what I enjoy the most. I have thought about if I wanted to recreate my home theme park (Six Flags Ne England) or just going on the fly and I think for my first park. I will just do the theme park on the fly instead of trying to recreate my home park.
 
Just because something looks delicious doesn't mean it tastes good. If all your interested in is watching Planet Coaster, than of course it is far superior from a visual perspective. But unless you have played both games hands on, then you are only experiencing not even half of what you are critiquing. If PC was purely a visual experience, then gameplay would not matter, but PC is a video game and it requires a lot of work to make great creations in this game, and the scenarios are not advanced in anyway compared to previous games.

Where as in RCT3 everything is much more fun as its easier, less time consuming, and simpler to build, but the "pay off" just isnt as great simply due to poor graphics. Obviously, PC has more advanced tools, but not everybody wants to spend months working on their designs. And if you consider that RCT3 is 14 years old and if you look past the graphics, you would see that certain aspects of PC are not quite as good as they could have been when compared to the RCT3 toolset

I have a friend who argues with me all the time because I'll say that a game looks bad, and he says I can't judge it until I've played it. But the thing is, I have played enough games in my life to know whether a new game is good or not. And since you have no experince in RCT or PC at all, I have to say your opinion is very limited.

I think its funny how you say RCT was too cartoonish, at least RCT has deaths and coaster crashes, in PC when a coaster crashes into guests the fly around like party balloons with confetti. If you understood the difference between "cel shading" and "photo realistic" you would know that PC is very much a cartoonish based game with its artstyle

Anyway, theres 2 types of people that play PC, those who enjoyed the management aspects of RCT, and those who enjoy building. Unfortunately for some of us who played RCT, management is not as impressive as we would have hoped, and the building tools could also be improved greatly to reduce tedium and increase productivity. I'm sure you will enjoy PC but give it time, you will find things about the game that annoy you as you play more [wink] thats the nice thing about having fresh eyes though, don't judge the game based on the things you read

Exactly. These are some of the points I was trying to make in the OP. I wasn't bashing the game by any means. But someone up there, I think it was gadget-something tried defending the game with rude and demeaning talk. Look, I love the game. It's not bashing when suggestions about basic fundamental qualities of a game that are not currently in it are suggested to devs. If I was a developer, I would want people giving me ideas as to how to better my product; not criticizing for the sake of defending my position thus far. Anyhow, other than that, this has been a wonderful and productive discussion, methinks.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom