I kinda need an elevator for my tower but the transport rides that we have really cant go up in any way without using lots of space. It would be great if we were also able to make extra stations for our coasters so we can use those as transport rides too. Like in the old games. Also maybe regular elevators and chairlifts [heart][big grin]
Use coasters as transport rides and elevators
- Thread starter Ramm
- Start date
Coasters as transport would require multiple stations. The devs have said that would be too difficult or time consuming to add multiple stations to coasters, and they have no plans of adding that feature anytime soon [blah] I can understand that transport rides work differently than coasters, but it wouldn't seem all that different to at least add a transport ride with a steeper lift hill or more customized features like power launches [up] one problem would be that not all guests would be willing to ride though.
Elevators and chairlifts are definitely requested a lot around here [yesnod]
How about a large boat or ferry? maybe even a blimp/hotair balloon or helicopter that can act as a transport ride?
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/showthread.php/23962-Experimenting-with-elevators
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/sh...-guests-go-UP-and-easier-to-reach-high-places
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/sh...ible-Moving-Platform-for-Attaching-to-Scenery
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/showthread.php/22397-Is-there-a-way-to-make-an-elevator
Elevators and chairlifts are definitely requested a lot around here [yesnod]
How about a large boat or ferry? maybe even a blimp/hotair balloon or helicopter that can act as a transport ride?
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/showthread.php/23962-Experimenting-with-elevators
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/sh...-guests-go-UP-and-easier-to-reach-high-places
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/sh...ible-Moving-Platform-for-Attaching-to-Scenery
https://forums.planetcoaster.com/showthread.php/22397-Is-there-a-way-to-make-an-elevator
Last edited:
Well if this is true then I wont be bothering with any paid expansions or add ons in the future. Multiple coaster stations is the only thing I want. I have hardly played the game since the last update.
After finding that duelling coasters still have to be separate coasters I quit the game and haven't played it since.
I tell a lie, I did load it up for ten minutes when the cheats were announced, I made everyone puke, and realised the friction cheat just ruins all your coasters apart from the one you want it to work on.
If they are not ever going to add multiple stations to the game then I'm done. I cant see how its that hard to program. It should have been in the design brief from the start of development.
RCT3 Is still the king in my eyes. R.I.P Planet Coaster.
I've seen people build duelling coasters with one track using blocking sections, or with multiple tracks using synchronization, so not sure what the problem is there
why does the lack of multiple stations make you not want to play the game? I mean I can understand it being a cool feature that you might want, but to not play the game ever again because of that one thing?? like really??
Because in RCT2/3 90% of my coasters were using two or more stations. I used them as transport rides and as duelling coasters, or separate loading/unloading stations.
If I can't do what I want with the coasters then it's frustrating. Frustrating = no fun. Why would I spend money on any future expansion packs if it doesn't address any of the things that frustrate me.
I came here to make coasters first, and decorate them second. If I can't make the coasters how I want them, then I don't want to decorate them either. The rest of the game is pointless. Paying for expansions that adds only redundant stuff doesn't interest me, as I still wont be able to make the things I want.
If the game was marketed as a theme park scenery simulator then I would be more forgiving. The name Planet Coaster implies that the coasters are the main feature of the game, when you can't make the coasters do what you want then you get disgruntled.
Its like going on a date with a really beautiful looking person only to realise they are shallow and boring when you talk to them.
The problem here is timing, Its difficult to make them synchronised with only one station. I don't want my duelling coasters to be separate tracks, I want them as one track with two stations.
So to sum it up, If I can't make what I want then the game is no fun and not worth spending any more money on.
I can understand your concern, it is a pretty big feature to be lacking, and there should be no restrictions to customizing creativity
Last edited:
[up] +1 on multi-station option for most coasters.
As a general rule, anything that was implemented in RCT3P not directly related to swimming pools, zoo exhibits, or coaster types almost nobody cares about? A current version should be baseline standard in Planet Coaster. It's a decade later, there's no good reason for this. RCT3P had multi-station coasters, Planet Coaster should have multi-station coasters.
Exactly. [happy]
No. Just because game X had something doesn't need game Y needs it. Planet Coaster is not the sequel to RCT3 and it doesn't try to be. It's a different game. Frontier probably didn't feel the need to implement multiple stations for coasters since in real life only so few coasters actually have multiple stations.
With that said, I do hope we will see multiple station support for coasters. Frontier did say it is likely not going to happen any time soon because of the complexity of the coaster stations. But I don't really buy this argument. The transport rides can have multiple stations, why not coasters? What makes it too complex for coasters and not for transport rides?
My guess:
The transport rides still have an entrance AND an exit, while on the coasters the intention is to only have 1 entrance and the other station will only be using an exit. Maybe this creates problems in the design of things.
I don't mind having the option of multiple stations. It doesn't decrease wait time and so but it would be an okay feature.
Eventhough Planet Coaster is a different game Frontier also made RCT3 and you can be proud of that because it was a very fun game that held up great so it's nice to see more features of it back.
I also wonder why transport rides can have it but coasters not. And how about normal track rides?
RCT3P and Planet Coaster are two different games in the same genre -- a genre that (in the opinion of many) reached its peak with RCT3P and hadn't done as well since, in large part because what made RCT3P great was ignored. Then there's Planet Coaster, made by the same people who did all the best work on RCT3P, and what do they do? They make the same mistakes* as the wannabes: they shrug off including fan-favorite and expected features that are expected because they were in RCT3P, which set the standard a decade ago. Ten years later we shouldn't be told "It's too hard to implement" or "the engine won't support it" because after ten years of industry advancement that not plausible.
* They're doing better, and I appreciate it -- but we shouldn't have to wait for them to do better. These are baseline expectations because of their work a decade ago. Of all game developers on the planet, these are the people who should've understood that from the beginning.
What exactly is the definition of a sequel? Answer: a published, broadcast, or recorded work that continues the story or develops the theme of an earlier one. For the record, a series of books can have different names and still be a sequel
Was the original Super Mario Bros 2 a sequel? No SMB2 was originally called something different, and they slapped marios face on it. Was Super Mario 64 a sequel? Well sort of, its a new series based on the original. Is New SMB a sequel? Its a new fresh re-start of an old series. Is the TV Show Super Mario Bros 3 a sequel or trilogy? No it was a one of a kind. Is Super Mario Maker a sequel or the first in its series? Its both!
Is RCTWorld a sequel to RCT3? I dont think so, RCTW is made by a different developer with a different engine. RCTW is a new game that tried to copy an old game and had the old games name slapped on it, and IMO it doesnt even feel anything like an RCT game. I'd rather just ignore that title and pretend it never existed.
Frontier has made several other theme park games, thrillville, disneys kinect, zoo tycoon, scream ride, and more! But are those sequels? Is PC a sequel to thrillvile? Hmmm lets think about that. PC was originally called Coaster TYCOON [wink]
Since Planet Coaster is made by Frontier, using the Cobra engine that Frontier made to design RCT3, and since Frontier worked with Chris Sawyer on the RCT2 expansions before making RCT3, does that not mean that PC has some history with RCT? Does PC not also share some similar qualities and features to RCT? Or is this some other game you can think of that feels more like an RCT game than PC?
Why is it so bad to call PC the sequel to RCT3? Nobody is saying the sequel to RCT3 needs to be an exact copy of RCT3, nobody is saying PC needs to be just like RCT3, but people do expect a series to keep what worked and fix what didn't. And in this specific case, they removed a feature that was in all 3 previous titles. Its a valid concern for some people. Same reason why a lot of people expect to see rain, umbrellas, park maps, cheatcodes, etc.
Also, there are other games besides RCT that people request features from. Just because another game has a feature that somebody requests, theres no reason to tell them to go play that other game. Its the sharing of ideas that can help improve PC and I think thats what everybody wants in the end, right?
what is rct3P why do you keep adding a P?
Last edited:
Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 Platinum -- a lot of what're today considered standard RCT3 features were added in the Wild or Soaked packs (like tunneling and billboards) so if the point is that it was in RCT3 so it should be in Planet Coaster, a legitimate counter-point could be made that tunneling wasn't in RCT3, it was added in an expansion pack. [blah]
As a general rule (IMHO), anything that was implemented in Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 Platinum (which includes the expansion packs) not directly related to swimming pools, zoo exhibits, or coaster types almost nobody cares about? A current version should be baseline standard in Planet Coaster. It's a decade later -- RCT3P had multi-station coasters, Planet Coaster should have multi-station coasters (or whatever missing RCT3P feature's being discussed at the time).
RCT3 was in many ways a very simple game, everything was based on a single grid. Planet Coaster is miles more complex than RCT3, and that it is 10 years later doesn't make it 'easier' now to implement the features RCT3 had. Just because it is the same genre doesn't matter. It is clear Planet Coaster has chosen an entire different direction than RCT3 so it basically started with from the ground up. It chooses to make its tools way more complex and implement things we haven't seen yet in the genre. You can still play RCT3, you know. [tongue] For instance, getting rid of the grid system alone already creates so much more content than RCT3 had in my opinion. Also, engine limitations are a real thing, doesn't matter we are 10 years later. Saying that shows you really have no idea about how complex PC's systems, or game development/coding in general, are.
Of course I like to see more of the options RCT3! The more options the better, and I am sure the game will receive many of the "missing" options from RCT3 over time. Again, Frontier chooses to focus on different aspects than what RCT3 focused on, and for me this is a good thing. I love RCT3 for what it is, but after having played PC the game feels so incredibly limiting (which it is!) I am really glad Frontier made the base systems that more advanced.
It is understandable people see PC as a sequel to RCT3. The thing is, PC tries to steer away from the traditional RCT game systems. It basically tries to redefine the genre in that sense, so it is logical it isn't as fleshed out as RCT3. I'm not saying the features that RCT had and are missing in PC should not be implemented. Quite the opposite actually and you should know that. I am 100% for more options and features that offer us more gameplay and complexity. But saying that "because RCT3 had it and that game is TEN years old" is a stupid argument I completely disagree with.
The biggest difference between RCT and PC is the grid system, but most things are very similar between the two. Shop and ride placement is basically the same, staff management is about the same, only thing is now the scenery has more tools and blends together very nicely. I do think Frontier raised the bar for quality and content with the steam workshop, and I don't think we will see any competition in the genre for quite some time. And I doubt will see another RCT either (at least I hope not) so to me, PC may have replaced RCT but they will always be part of the same series in my mind [wink]
I get your point about "if a 10 year old game can do it.." I mean the lack of terrain textures does suck, even if we understand why there is that limitation. As for multiple coaster stations, one could argue that the game allows it with transport rides, why not coasters? Just because the devs said they can't do it, I think they also said they couldn't remove collision detection when the game first released, so clearly they are listening and many people have requested this.
Last edited:
I was more talking about the actual implementation of said systems; a spline based coaster builder instead of a pre-made piece builder that's stuck on a grid, or the 'voxel' terrain system, guest brain etc.
You are right. The reason the devs gave for not being able to have multiple stations on coasters is very vague. I asked the very same question myself as well; why can transport rides have multiple stations but coasters cannot? I really wish Frontier would communicate more about these kinds of things.
First, even if that was my argument, your disagreement would be your subjective opinion vs my subjective opinion -- referring to it as objectively stupid is objectively inappropriate. Second, my argument is that Planet Coaster should have had, out of the gate, current versions of all RCT3P features not directly related to swimming pools, zoo exhibits, or coaster types almost nobody cares about, because RCT3P established these as industry standards a decade ago, and the failure of subsequent games in this genre that didn't include them confirmed these standards -- at minimum the developers (of both games, let's not forget) should be committed to bringing current versions of these features into Plan Coaster. Variations on "it's too hard to implement" or worse "we didn't think of it early enough, now the engine won't support it" I find especially galling from this development team.
Sounds like your argument to me. [rolleyes]
Opinions can be stupid.
Now you make that argument you didn't make again.
What failure? Do you think Planet Coaster failed because it doesn't have all the features RCT3 has? What about all the stuff Planet Coaster had that RCT doesn't? Doesn't that count? Developing a game is a very difficult task, you can't have 'everything'. Planet Coaster does not want to copy RCT3, it tries its own thing; namely, improving the basic foundation of themepark games. When that is finished and working properly they can add the smaller features.
basic foundation of... theme park games? I think we both know your talking about RCT3 (the previous installment in this genre) not sure why your back on the "not copying RCT3" thing...
I think Kicks point is that he hopes it gets added at some point, and is not something that "will never happen" like with having more terrain textures.
You make it confusing, if your talking about RCT3 without expansions, most people call it RCT3 vanilla [up]