PDA

View Full Version : Will we ever get the amount of CS we had in RCT3?



Deuce
03-10-2015, 01:08 PM
I'm thinking now of RCTW, but also in general any new or upcoming coaster game. I remember RCT3 really captured peoples imagination as it was the first realistic(ish) theme park sim that would allow you to show off what you had built in videos first person style.

Obviously everyone posting videos of their parks and coasters on youtube wanted to outdo each other, so sooner or later many started to make their own scenery to make sure they had the best possible video :)

This in truth is what made RCT3 last for 10 years. It's still a good game in it's own right of course and would have stayed on peoples hard drives, but it made it also stay in the public arena and be shared for a full decade, and still going strong in fact. There are people out there that have worked on parks for years and are still only part way complete!!!

So in the RCTW, do you think the same will happen? Or was it only a one time deal, driven by the excitement of '3D' for the first time?

As a point of reference, when TPS first became available there was quite a lot of CS created in a short space of time, but then it seemed to dry up almost completely. wonder of those creating it felt that the audience just wasn't big enough to feel very rewarding. A shame because frankly TPS really will rely upon a LOT of CS being available if it's going to become a big deal.

I would love Jcat's input on this one :)

Wabigbear
03-10-2015, 01:42 PM
I think it depends on how easy it will be to import CS into RCTW, and how well the game engine handles it. A lot of people still have the models used for CSO in RCT3, if those can easily be imported without a lot of changes, that will add a lot quickly.

In my opinion part of the reason CS has slowed in TPS is because so far you're limited in what you can build. Many people find that after they build a coaster they can't build much more, so there's not a lot of demand for things needed to build a more complete park. Even RCT3's limits are a lot higher that TPS currently

ExtraCheese
03-10-2015, 02:33 PM
It would also depend on the game itself. If its really ****, no one will want to invest time in it to improve it.

redyar
03-10-2015, 02:51 PM
If the game is awesome, then the modding community will be huge.

sourcerage17
03-10-2015, 02:56 PM
I might sound like a non fan or not a diehard but... CSO?

Deuce
03-10-2015, 03:01 PM
I might sound like a non fan or not a diehard but... CSO?

The game should stand on it's own legs without it, if it's good enough. Some people actually made a point of creating amazing rides and parks using only original game assets in RCT3.

But to last a decade and still be able to produce ride/park vids that can compete with more recent games, CS is pretty much vital.

The other way of looking at CS is that when RCT3 came out the poly count was pretty low (a bit like RCTW lol :)) but over time as PC's became faster it was realistic to use more polygons, so CS became more complex and attractive. I think it's fair to say CS kept RCT3 current and able to compete graphically.

redyar
03-10-2015, 03:05 PM
Custom Stuff: Check this (http://www.customscenerydepot.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=6955236e79841174fc6675c8503b62 7f&action=downloads)



The other way of looking at CS is that when RCT3 came out the poly count was pretty low (a bit like RCTW lol :)) but over time as PC's became faster it was realistic to use more polygons, so CS became more complex and attractive. I think it's fair to say CS kept RCT3 current and able to compete graphically.
But there are limits by the game engine, like the bad lightning or max amount of faces, 32 bit and so on. Thats why we need a new game..

k1ng r4t
03-10-2015, 03:12 PM
I could be wrong but I think he was asking what CS is. In which case it's custom scenery...

Nickster
03-10-2015, 03:30 PM
If we're getting toothpick supports again then we're going to need custom scenery.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 03:37 PM
Custom Stuff: Check this (http://www.customscenerydepot.com/index.php?PHPSESSID=6955236e79841174fc6675c8503b62 7f&action=downloads)


But there are limits by the game engine, like the bad lightning or max amount of faces, 32 bit and so on. Thats why we need a new game..

Yes - I was talking about the importance of CS to keep a game going in between main releases. But sure, it's been over a decade, a new game is due!!!

Deuce
03-10-2015, 03:38 PM
If we're getting toothpick supports again then we're going to need custom scenery.

But how could that possibly work when the track is flexible but the scenery still adheres to the grid? If that's the case, it's very possible you won't be able to make a coaster as realistic in RCTW as you could in RCT3

imiha
03-10-2015, 03:42 PM
If ai remember orrectly mattlab said that scenery won't adhere to the grid, only attractions and rollercoaster stations will.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 03:53 PM
If ai remember orrectly mattlab said that scenery won't adhere to the grid, only attractions and rollercoaster stations will.

Yea he said that shortly before confirming the upcoming trailer would show off a theme park game in a way only RCT can...

And all the times we got a 'next week' promise...

It's entirely possible scenery doesn't adhere to the grid in the same way RCT3 scenery kind of didn't. Who knows? Either way not much use have a tree that you can position at 76 degrees north if every ride and shop is aligned in a grid. It's either all or nothing.

darkhorizon
03-10-2015, 04:22 PM
But how could that possibly work when the track is flexible but the scenery still adheres to the grid? If that's the case, it's very possible you won't be able to make a coaster as realistic in RCTW as you could in RCT3

Well, assuming the support models aren't hard coded into the game and instead are located in some sort of resource file (like in RCT3), all you'd have to do is replace that model with more realistic ones. This was done with RCT3. Of course this would require some reverse engineering of the resource file format they are using, which is generally illegal if you have to modify the files supplied with the game.

Of course this can be avoided by just supplying realistic supports to begin with, or giving us a tool to create custom scenery which includes creating custom supports, and not having a grid restriction (or at least a smaller grid)...

Who knows though. I agree that the toothpick supports are gross and don't resemble anything remotely realistic. If those were used in real life, coasters would be falling apart all over the place.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 04:34 PM
Well, assuming the support models aren't hard coded into the game and instead are located in some sort of resource file (like in RCT3), all you'd have to do is replace that model with more realistic ones. This was done with RCT3. Of course this would require some reverse engineering of the resource file format they are using, which is generally illegal if you have to modify the files supplied with the game.

Of course this can be avoided by just supplying realistic supports to begin with, or giving us a tool to create custom scenery which includes creating custom supports, and not having a grid restriction (or at least a smaller grid)...

Who knows though. I agree that the toothpick supports are gross and don't resemble anything remotely realistic. If those were used in real life, coasters would be falling apart all over the place.

You would also need to reposition the supports, not just change the models on which they are generated. This is the problem. In RCT3 they were all inline with the grid. In this game we have a grid which (we assume) all scenery is located against but coaster tracks that can twist freely.

RCM88x
03-10-2015, 04:37 PM
This post made me laugh, the CS support in RCT3 IS A JOKE. RCT2s CS support is light years ahead of RCT3's, its not even close. If this game has a system similar to RCT3 that would be a massive headache and step back, the RCT2 system is more advanced than the RCT3 system, I mean, the objects port automatically with saved games... what a revolutionary idea.

I highly doubt CS support, as it would reduce the need for DLC, and therefor reduce profits.

coaster6
03-10-2015, 04:39 PM
This post made me laugh, the CS support in RCT3 IS A JOKE. RCT2s CS support is light years ahead of RCT3's, its not even close. If this game has a system similar to RCT3 that would be a massive headache and step back, the RCT2 system is more advanced than the RCT3 system, I mean, the objects port automatically with saved games... what a revolutionary idea.

I highly doubt CS support, as it would reduce the need for DLC, and therefor reduce profits. What are you talking about?

Mattlab
03-10-2015, 04:40 PM
This post made me laugh, the CS support in RCT3 IS A JOKE. RCT2s CS support is light years ahead of RCT3's, its not even close. If this game has a system similar to RCT3 that would be a massive headache and step back, the RCT2 system is more advanced than the RCT3 system, I mean, the objects port automatically with saved games... what a revolutionary idea.

I highly doubt CS support, as it would reduce the need for DLC, and therefor reduce profits.

Actually we have previously announced that we plan to fully support custom scenery and will include systems for it as a free post launch update.

darkhorizon
03-10-2015, 04:41 PM
You would also need to reposition the supports, not just change the models on which they are generated. This is the problem. In RCT3 they were all inline with the grid. In this game we have a grid which (we assume) all scenery is located against but coaster tracks that can twist freely.

Hmm, I don't know. I have no idea how the coaster system works. I would assume that the support position depends on the position and direction of the track spline, so the support position is irrelevant since the coaster builder dynamically determines the support position, rotation, height and model. But this is all just speculation on my part. :)

Nickster
03-10-2015, 04:41 PM
You schooled him Mattlab^ TBH seeing Mattlab active on the forums makes me happy, hopefully it happends more often!

Deuce
03-10-2015, 04:42 PM
This post made me laugh, the CS support in RCT3 IS A JOKE. RCT2s CS support is light years ahead of RCT3's, its not even close. If this game has a system similar to RCT3 that would be a massive headache and step back, the RCT2 system is more advanced than the RCT3 system, I mean, the objects port automatically with saved games... what a revolutionary idea.

I highly doubt CS support, as it would reduce the need for DLC, and therefor reduce profits.

I should have said but I seperated (in my head...) the difference between 2d/3d CS. I know RCT2 was absolutely massive and still has a cult following an active community. But speaking of new games, it's all 3D now so I was just comparing the 3D content and motivation ppl have to create it.

But to keep you happy... When I first played RCT3 I was blown away, finally I was able to build AND experience a realistic park on my PC. But when I first played original RCT, I was even more blown away. Everything I had wanted to do in theme park was available, it was as if they had read my mind. So fear not, I am a huge fan of the early stuff too. I just think it's harder to relate/compare that to the current crop of modern games that RCTW is coming up against.

Nickster
03-10-2015, 04:46 PM
I hope it's manuall installation and workshop.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 04:48 PM
Hmm, I don't know. I have no idea how the coaster system works. I would assume that the support position depends on the position and direction of the track spline, so the support position is irrelevant since the coaster builder dynamically determines the support position, rotation, height and model. But this is all just speculation on my part. :)

Thats the exact problem. The builder determines the position of each support. In RCT3 you could remove the supports you didn't want and put them in where you did want them. With a spline based system the supports would be generated automatically where the track goes. So even if you can delete them, how do you use CS which is grid based to go back into the same position?

Hopefully the track editor will include the ability to reposition supports - although the gameplay trailer does show them uniformly spaces as in RCT3. Truth is, we just don't know. But the likelihood of grid based scenery being able to neatly replace dynamically generated supports outside of the grid is not the best.

Nickster
03-10-2015, 04:51 PM
If you can freely rotate items then you will be able to adjust and just shift to lower the custom supports.

coaster6
03-10-2015, 04:51 PM
Thats the exact problem. The builder determines the position of each support. In RCT3 you could remove the supports you didn't want and put them in where you did want them. With a spline based system the supports would be generated automatically where the track goes. So even if you can delete them, how do you use CS which is grid based to go back into the same position?

Hopefully the track editor will include the ability to reposition supports - although the gameplay trailer does show them uniformly spaces as in RCT3. Truth is, we just don't know. But the likelihood of grid based scenery being able to neatly replace dynamically generated supports outside of the grid is not the best. the problem isnt whether we can place them off a grid base, but how are people going to make 1000s of scenery pieces so the supports connect to the track.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 04:52 PM
I hope it's manuall installation and workshop.

I would actually champion workshop these days. If PC gaming is to survive it probably will do best via a single resource point for games and assets. Steam isn't inline with traditional pc gaming but it has probably saved pc gaming. I remember as a kid people kinda new pc was best but they stayed with their consoles because 'on pc you have to install things and fiddle around'.

It's not my personal preference but thinking commercially it would do the game a favour if the whole process was dumbed down and made super easy!

darkhorizon
03-10-2015, 04:54 PM
Thats the exact problem. The builder determines the position of each support. In RCT3 you could remove the supports you didn't want and put them in where you did want them. With a spline based system the supports would be generated automatically where the track goes. So even if you can delete them, how do you use CS which is grid based to go back into the same position?

I'm talking about replacing the support models that the coaster builder uses for the automatic supports...so instead of the game grabbing the toothpick supports from whatever resource file they're located in, it would grab the more realistic supports that we replaced them with. I'm not talking about custom scenery - as you said, that definitely wouldn't work.

Edit: here is an example, as this very concept was done for RCT3: http://www.shyguysworld.com/index.php?topic=10186.0

Deuce
03-10-2015, 04:56 PM
the problem isnt whether we can place them off a grid base, but how are people going to make 1000s of scenery pieces so the supports connect to the track.

Just another example of why it can't work as it did in RCT3! If they are dynamically generated along the track AND repositionable AND we're given a choice of what type of support goes where then we have no problem, we can just override the original model files with some more realistic ones. But somehow this strikes me as not in line with what Atari probably want to be a very easy to use product for the newcomer.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 04:58 PM
I'm talking about replacing the support models that the coaster builder uses for the automatic supports...so instead of the game grabbing the toothpick supports from whatever resource file they're located in, it would grab the more realistic supports that we replaced them with. I'm not talking about custom scenery - as you said, that definitely wouldn't work.

Edit: here is an example, as this very concept was done for RCT3: http://www.shyguysworld.com/index.php?topic=10186.0

Yes but if you want to replace one single support with another type of support, and move it back 3 squares then your suggestion wouldn't work.

It's easy to replace sticks with detailed models - you can hack any game to use a different asset from that originally included. But putting them where you want and choosing the type requires either those options in the original game or the abilty to use the grid to wipe out an auto generated support with the one you put in its place.

darkhorizon
03-10-2015, 05:03 PM
Meh, I wasn't saying that replacing them would be the best route. :) It was just an idea on how it could possibly be tackled if we are succomb to a grid and no flexibility when it comes to support placement, which seems to be the case.

I agree that just being able the place supports wherever would be the best option.

Deuce
03-10-2015, 05:07 PM
Meh, I wasn't saying that replacing them would be the best route. :) It was just an idea on how it could possibly be tackled if we are succomb to a grid and no flexibility when it comes to support placement, which seems to be the case.

I agree that just being able the place supports wherever would be the best option.

I love it when a well fought debate ends in 'meh' :)

Trust me it's a potential headache for the mod community to sort out compared to RCT3. But of course where there's a will there's a way. I do believe that whatever the system someone will make it a matter of pride to find a way to improve the original supports.

The question is, should we have too? Atari must have looked at 10 years of RCT3 history and realised people were jumping through hoops to make curved paths and realistic supports. I have to say that these things should have been on the 'not optional' list of what was to be included in the new game.

Fingers crossed!

RCM88x
03-10-2015, 06:02 PM
Actually we have previously announced that we plan to fully support custom scenery and will include systems for it as a free post launch update.

Lets see if you can follow up on promises... That post launch update bit usually isn't a good sign.

ddrplaya4638
03-11-2015, 09:36 AM
I understand using CS. I use it like crazy in RCT3 but... the least they should do is make the supports nice enough for us to want to keep them.

Deuce
03-11-2015, 09:38 AM
I understand using CS. I use it like crazy in RCT3 but... the least they should do is make the supports nice enough for us to want to keep them.

Yup. apart from anything else I'm pretty certain that years of adding CS supports in RCT3 has given my repetitive strain injury :)