In yesterday's stream, which showed the four lovely finalist parks in the "Sub-Zero" park competition, Chante and Steggs mentioned that they received a lot of entries - it's work and time consuming to download and open dozens (or more!) parks.
The judging criteria was about as loose as possible: favorite parks.
Now, that's fine, but does not give park builders guidance. While all four finalist parks were lovely, three were more-or-less realistic and one was abstract; and there was a distinct deficit in coaster adrenaline (except for one bobsled) in favor of lovely buildings. Three of the parks had interesting terrain editing, and one was flat as the prairie.
Also, building a park is such an enormous effort that the contest time frame seemed too short (at least for me [uhh]).
So, I suggest that future park competitions - mentioned in the stream - have a framework that provides guidance to contestants, and makes judging less burdensome.
Here's how:
Hold simultaneous, mutually exclusive competitions - you may enter in one category only. Judging occurs in one category per stream. With, for example, three categories, judges presumably would have 1/3 the number of entries compared to the most recent competition. If park competitions are, say, a quarterly event, players have enough time to engage in real life as well as build a park.
Add objective criteria and weight the criteria as part of the contest announcement.
Some possible categories:
A contest may include multiple categories (Park size and era, for example)
Overlay contest criteria on the category. An example of judging criteria:
Use of the contest category/categories: 50%
Dark ride: 10%
Two coasters: 10% each
Other buildings and rides: 20%
Criteria might also include a weighting for use of animatronics, lighting, or fireworks, or (more subjective) total park adrenaline.
There are almost limitless combinations of categories and criteria. Personally, I would prefer to build small or medium sized parks that include interesting terrain features. "Super parks" just crawl to almost a halt on my computer.
The judging criteria was about as loose as possible: favorite parks.
Now, that's fine, but does not give park builders guidance. While all four finalist parks were lovely, three were more-or-less realistic and one was abstract; and there was a distinct deficit in coaster adrenaline (except for one bobsled) in favor of lovely buildings. Three of the parks had interesting terrain editing, and one was flat as the prairie.
Also, building a park is such an enormous effort that the contest time frame seemed too short (at least for me [uhh]).
So, I suggest that future park competitions - mentioned in the stream - have a framework that provides guidance to contestants, and makes judging less burdensome.
Here's how:
Hold simultaneous, mutually exclusive competitions - you may enter in one category only. Judging occurs in one category per stream. With, for example, three categories, judges presumably would have 1/3 the number of entries compared to the most recent competition. If park competitions are, say, a quarterly event, players have enough time to engage in real life as well as build a park.
Add objective criteria and weight the criteria as part of the contest announcement.
Some possible categories:
- Park size (small, medium, large): No building (possibly even more restrictive - no terrain editing) outside park boundaries.
- Quantity/size of coasters and/or rides.
- Future/realistic//retro
- Urban/rural/wilderness/fictional (such as the surface of Mars or the Moon)
- Use of a particular scenery type (western, spooky, sci-fi, etc.) (not meant to exclude other scenery types, just that one type is featured)
- Creative use of terrain editing/realistic use of terrain editing
- Well known books or movies: Harry Potter, Star Wars and Indiana Jones are obvious ones, but choosing classic out-of-copyright books/themes like Alice in Wonderland, Around the World in 80 Days (perfect for World's Fair and Vintage Packs and hot air balloons), King Arthur & Knights of the Round Table might avoid possible IP issues
- Historical eras or events including particular features (examples, "Best pyramid" in an Egyptian-themed contest, "Best Roman coliseum", or "Best world wonder" in an ancient era contest)
- Specialty or fantastic landscape features ("Best mountain", "Best volcano", "Best cave", "Best waterfall", "Best parting of the sea")
A contest may include multiple categories (Park size and era, for example)
Overlay contest criteria on the category. An example of judging criteria:
Use of the contest category/categories: 50%
Dark ride: 10%
Two coasters: 10% each
Other buildings and rides: 20%
Criteria might also include a weighting for use of animatronics, lighting, or fireworks, or (more subjective) total park adrenaline.
There are almost limitless combinations of categories and criteria. Personally, I would prefer to build small or medium sized parks that include interesting terrain features. "Super parks" just crawl to almost a halt on my computer.