Some points i really get off my mind... (Warning: CRITIC)

[Pherax]

Some points i really get off my chest... (Warning: CRITIC)

Hi,

I just have to get some points of my chest.
I really, really enjoy PlanCo. I really do. But to be honest, there are a lot of points that bugged me from the first day on. And the most annoying of those points is propably the insane amount of repetition - or like Frontier likes to call it: "diversion".
What do I mean? Well, the game officially has 48 coasters right now - this sounds like a decent amount, does'nt it? Well, now counts how many of the same kind with some minor alterations we are down to just 36 - and if you want to be more accurate, the number goes down even more. That's 24 coasters wich are multiple times in the game - that's 50%!

Werewolf and Enigma - Both tracks can do absoluetely the same, but the cars are different. Ok, one is floorless and has a different station, but do we really need this the only difference? Why do'nt give us an option to build a looping coaster with that type of track and choose the train we want? The station could be easily be automatically adjusted accordingly.
We have a whopping 4 coasters with Arrow/Vekoma style tracks. 4! 2 Boomerangs and 2 Looping coasters wich ONLY differ in the train! Do we need a seperate coaster for every different train design? Talking about just switching trains: Steel Vengeance and Malice Unchained? The same, only with different cars. Monster, Zephyrus and Gnarler? 3 Wooden coasters wich only differ via the trains. Wendigo & Dragon - same Story. Anubis and Rage - Check. Jixxer and Interceptor? Same here.
Those rides only differ in the trains used. Why do you have to act like this were different coasters when they are'nt? Why ca'nt we get less crouded menues and presumebly fewer coasters and give us the option to switch the trains as possible in the Beta? You already included this option early on, and it is still onboard, and used, today.

Back to the Boomerangs: I get the point that those have different track pieces as the classic loopers, but would it be so hard to add those pieces to the loopers as well? Build a coaster, and choose if you want it to be a boomerang or not. Or build something crazy in between, half boomerang, half classic coaster. It was possible with RCT 3, wich Frontier worked on, so why is it not possible in PC? The game is not meant to be ultra-realistic, but to be able to provide a way to build some crazy things and themeparks. Why do we have to get rid of this option, but get the same ride just with different trains? "Can I copy your homework?" - "Sure, but pls change something so it does'nt look to obvious"
The coming SLC is the same thing - Bakasuka as a basis, but with different trains and without the boomerang elements. And to be honest, i would not wonder if the 9 rides coming soon include the SLC with 2 types of trains, wich makes it only 8 new rides.

Then we have the Wing Coasters: Different Trains - check. And the track differences? One offers a chainlift and the other one LSM. That's all. Would it be so hard to be able to use both elements on one ride? Even Boa and Rival are the same, only offering different trains. In reality, one is the family version and the other one is the thrill version with inversions and all sorts of crazy stuff.

No the Tracked rides: Connie Express and Iron Horse: The same, just with different Trains. The Steamboats? I'd give them a pass here as they are using different types of tracks. 4 Go-Kart Tracks? Only different cars... Same goes for the Cats and the Sleigh Ride... Why do you keep acting like you have more rides then you actually have?
Talking of this... the flats... oh how do I get started. Most flatrides are kind of similar in reality - you mostly get spun arround and this way or another. So it is normal that lots of them are quite similar in game. And thats fine most of the time. Except for Monte Leone and Weisshorn - both the EXACT same ride, but one as a skin with a roof and the other does not. The ride itself is absolutely the same. And yes, i will ignore the whopping 5(!) ferris wheels as they all differ in some way from another.
Often times, one ride is just a scaled up version from another. Like the new carrousel we are getting. Or Hurricane and Scizzler. The ride itself is the same (though one is faster), but one is bigger then the other one.

Then there is the issue of the rides included. Lots of rides do'nt get asked for and a usually some unique or very rare kind of ride. That's not a bad thing, as it is cool to see some rare attractions in a game - if i get the most common ones as well. Since the Beta, players have been aksing for a Schwarzkopf Looper (wich could be marketed as 2 rides as there is also a launched version around), Intamin Blitz and Mack Megas. None of them is included - 2 years after release. One little fix would be the possibility to build a chainlift on the Gigacoaster - does not fix the lack of common and popular rides, but makes an existing ride more versatile.

And finally: The rides footprints. Why do the rides in PlanCo tend to use up twice the space as they are actually needing? Horror Heights for example, is more then twice as wide as the ride itself! Good luck trying to build a halfway compact tower of terror with this one. But this applies for pretty much all of the flatrides. You have the ride itself and maybe the ride-op on the outside and then a huge space around them wich is just there to annoy the players. You can'nt use it for anything as it counts as the ride itself. To be honest: This is propably the most annoying thing in PlanCo. Flatrides are usually compact and can be put in pretty small plots of land - but in PlanCo most of them are bigger then some rollercoasters.
Oh and yes, i do know that some rides need more space as they swing out during operation - that's fine. But rides like Sun Flare do not, at least not unless the peeps are really high up in the air.

Ok, i think it's time to wrap this up. Do I still enjoy the game? Yes. But i could enjoy it much more if some points would get fixed, and if Frontier does not try to act like they have way more rides then they actually do.
Thanks for reading, and i really hope that someone from Frontier takes my words and rethinks some of the descisions they've made.

 

[g3rox]

I must agree with you. Always hated that some rides are duplicated in the menu for some minor differences. Consider it just as that at Frontier, they simply are not cappable to design UI and some others aspects in the early production stages (aka they don´t think about what certain decision can do in the future). I just think they didn´t think out the system very well and that they rly didn´t bother.

My idea is the similar regarding walls for instance. Why having hundreds of same walls in the menu, only with a different texture? Why not have a single wall there and let us just choose a texture we want to apply on the wall?

Yes, this bothers me for two reasons. Same as you, I dislike that they say they have certain amount of rides, while in reality, there is less of them as a lot of them are duplicated. The second reasons is my comfort. It´s harder to navigate and choose items/rides in the menu, as it is overflowing with undeeded (duplicated) things. I just think this could be improved, but I also think that would be hard to do at this point, therefore I think this might be a good suggestion for Frontier in case they one day gonna do PlanCo2.

 

[WingardiumLevicoaster]

I suspect the multiple rides thing would be a technical design decision rather than a UI design decision, which means it is rather difficult to change now. However, they did add the feature of being able to switch out trains once the coaster is built which is useful as a work around if you change your mind.

From my own experience as a business software developer, (not games but I am sure this is still valid) sometimes software architecture decisions are right at the time, but later down the line you realise it would have better better differently, but it becomes almost impossible to change without significant risk or the time vs payoff is not worth it. It is quite hard sometimes to anticipate the impact on the product later down the line, and when juggling 1000s of decisions as a team, you are bound to get some wrong. Most likely there was a valid reason at the time. Usually things like this are not taken lightly.

 

[caterpillar]

Just clarifying :
About the Monte Leone and Weisshorn, one was added especially because players were complaining about the roof cover. (and made it a bit smaller in footprint)
I reckon the reason behind the Hurricane and Scizzler is the same : players were disliking the version with the name of the ride on it.


Some future flatrides with a smaller footprint would be great!

 

[g3rox]

I suspect the multiple rides thing would be a technical design decision rather than a UI design decision, which means it is rather difficult to change now. However, they did add the feature of being able to switch out trains once the coaster is built which is useful as a work around if you change your mind.

From my own experience as a business software developer, (not games but I am sure this is still valid) sometimes software architecture decisions are right at the time, but later down the line you realise it would have better better differently, but it becomes almost impossible to change without significant risk or the time vs payoff is not worth it. It is quite hard sometimes to anticipate the impact on the product later down the line, and when juggling 1000s of decisions as a team, you are bound to get some wrong. Most likely there was a valid reason at the time. Usually things like this are not taken lightly.

I kind of put it in a bad way. I agree it´s about the technical design. The thing is, they cannot design things to work together flawlessly. I don´t know, I very often have feeling some features are... "mounted" ? I don´t know how to say that, but it feels like they were added to the game the way some modder would do that. Like it wasn´t meant to be part of the game, but was added and now there are things that don´t feel allright, because it´s like something extra that do not belong to the way the game was designed?

You know, like they cannot design certain feature to work good across all "departments". There sure is many other ways how to technically implement rides and make it work better with UI and the rest of the game (AI included).

 

[RealWar]

1) Talking about just switching trains: Steel Vengeance and Malice Unchained?
2) Monster, Zephyrus and Gnarler? 3 Wooden coasters wich only differ via the trains.
3) Anubis and Rage
4) Why can't we get less crouded menues and presumebly fewer coasters and give us the option to switch the trains as possible in the Beta? You already included this option early on, and it is still onboard, and used, today.
5) Which makes it only 8 new rides.


Then there is the issue of the rides included. Lots of rides do'nt get asked for and a usually some unique or very rare kind of ride. That's not a bad thing, as it is cool to see some rare attractions in a game - if i get the most common ones as well. Since the Beta, players have been aksing for a Schwarzkopf Looper (wich could be marketed as 2 rides as there is also a launched version around), Intamin Blitz and Mack Megas. None of them is included - 2 years after release. One little fix would be the possibility to build a chainlift on the Gigacoaster - does not fix the lack of common and popular rides, but makes an existing ride more versatile.

And finally: The rides footprints. Why do the rides in PlanCo tend to use up twice the space as they are actually needing? Horror Heights for example, is more then twice as wide as the ride itself! Good luck trying to build a halfway compact tower of terror with this one. But this applies for pretty much all of the flatrides. You have the ride itself and maybe the ride-op on the outside and then a huge space around them wich is just there to annoy the players. You can'nt use it for anything as it counts as the ride itself. To be honest: This is propably the most annoying thing in PlanCo. Flatrides are usually compact and can be put in pretty small plots of land - but in PlanCo most of them are bigger then some rollercoasters.
Oh and yes, i do know that some rides need more space as they swing out during operation - that's fine. But rides like Sun Flare do not, at least not unless the peeps are really high up in the air.

1) From what I've heard about Steel Vengeance/Malice it is that way because of the deal they have with CP.
2) Fun Fact, that isn't true. The Zephyrus has a different wood texture, a different flexicolor map, and a different support spawning algorithm.
3) Anubis can have a curved chain lift; the Rage can not.
4) This was in the first phase of alpha (when technically, coasters weren't supposed to be in, but they let us mess around with them via a cheat). It took a very long time for that system to work it's way back into the game.
5) It's been confirmed there are 9 NEW rides + 1 ride that is a variant of one of the 9. (10 rides in total)

Yes, I'd like to see more "common rides", or adding a few new segments to existing ones (your chainlift on the giga idea would be nice for remaking the Superman Intamin Hypers, etc.)
Also, yes to smaller footprints.