The new restaurants and attractions (indoor rides) should be...

[rct-uwe]

Hello,
as Mattlab announced, there will be restaurants and new category of rides called attractions, which includes all indoor rides like laser tag and other stuff...

Restaurants should defnetly have a design which matches to the menu.
Maybe some themed versions, if the menu matches to the themes gererally (eg a steak restaurant with common style and one with western style).
Please add a no design version which we can hide behind scenery walls! Scenery walls should include walls with doors for peeps.
Peeps are which are dining in a restaurant spend more money and should have a "toilet level" setted to zero as they are leaving the restaurant.

Attractions should have the same design options as restaurants. Indoor "rides" (madhouse) should be ridable. indoor "games" like laser tag, playground, arcade and so on (not visualizable) should be gimmicks to RCTW -> minigames: laser tag could be a shooter game, arcade -> classic ATARI game

[dwwilkin]

There is speculation that we see a Sushi restaurant in one of the pictures, (PVT Leuk saw it) so that seems to be an idea.

For Attractions I hope that they are not interactive, Why use the time to program, then the file space, and cpu needs for something that I would hazard more don't want then do.

Think about it. If it has breakout, for instance, which you can play in many other places. A classic Atari game, your playing a peep in 1st person, you go around, and what would you rather do, Play Breakout there in the virtual park, or go around and see the scenery of the layout, ride the coaster in 1st person, experience things that you have no other place you can experience it. Visit another person's park and you have already played breakout, or lazar tag once in a previous playthrough, Are you going to play it again now? Or are you going to ignore it and go for the hypercoaster?

[king_austin95]

There is speculation that we see a Sushi restaurant in one of the pictures, (PVT Leuk saw it) so that seems to be an idea.

For Attractions I hope that they are not interactive, Why use the time to program, then the file space, and cpu needs for something that I would hazard more don't want then do.

Think about it. If it has breakout, for instance, which you can play in many other places. A classic Atari game, your playing a peep in 1st person, you go around, and what would you rather do, Play Breakout there in the virtual park, or go around and see the scenery of the layout, ride the coaster in 1st person, experience things that you have no other place you can experience it. Visit another person's park and you have already played breakout, or lazar tag once in a previous playthrough, Are you going to play it again now? Or are you going to ignore it and go for the hypercoaster?

i agree with you

[Mr_Sleepless]

i agree with you

I agree with your agreement

[king_austin95]

ok then lol.

[rct-uwe]

I just thought about how to stop a flood of "nothing attractions" (buildings with any named ride and nothing inside) in nice packages.
This would probably allow to create less real/visable attractions...

Maybe the minigames are too much, but they should not only create empty packages

[dwwilkin]

Uwe- Sure the attraction could be a room of arcade games, even games that a peep stands in front of and looks like he is playing for x ticks of time per $.25 or whatever the charge is. Just not something that if you controlled the peep in 1st person would then be able to use controls to play (though I could see an easter egg of Breakout-this is Atari and Breakout was BIG) but it would detract from the core gameplay, building a park, if you had mini games. And the replayability of a mini-game is low. Non-existant for some of us.