Ratings??

ok 'Real' i am not a physics professor or anything, and you have corrected my ignorance for the relation between G-Force and adrenaline. I am sorry for misleading anyone on that matter. My main point to start with however was that the ratings at this place need to be standardised, and i am annoyed that they are not. I know my rides should not be getting 9's i am not asking for that. I am just saying that i see so many coasters, i know that are worse than mine get rated higher. The perfect example, is what somebody mentioned, gets rated really high, then really low. It needs to be sorted out.

Is it out of spite?

Oh, i think being downrated for colour is a joke too. Just becauase the designer has chosen a different colour to what you think it should be, does not mean you should down rate. Its a 1 second fix, you can change the colour of a downloaded coaster yourself if you are that bothered.

I would also like to know, if its a worthy cause to downrate a coaster because it includes new inversions for that type of ride. For example i included a corkscrew in an SLC and got downrated? hmmmm.

Ok prime example here. Barone mentioned his coaster KEOPE. I looked at that, it scored well, then was downrated with a reference to transitions/bumps etc. The downrating here was extremely harsh. Now look at http://www.coastercrazy.com/track_exchang ... p?tid=7454
I rode this coaster, it had a lot of bumps, track work was in desperate need of smoothing and sorting out. Yet, 8 on technical? very interesting indeed. I have had my coasters downrated for pumps, but this one, especially the first review basically says, don't worry about pumps, they can be sorted? I know im pointing the finger now but i am just illustrating my point.

One last thing. Thanks to everyone for getting involved with this. Its good to see there is a strong feelings about this matter, from a broad spectrum of users.

Well, I try to stay simple when I rate. Was the ride smooth? If it is posted as a realistic did it violate any g-force constraints? Was the ride exciting and did the layout hold my interest? How did the builder use the props (3DS) to interact with the ride? These are pretty much what I go by. I don't claim to know anything about real-world coasters and NL as well as my other coaster sims are fun for me. Taking it to the technical side and being really critical down to the color of the track drains the fun out of it.

[hyyyper]

Originally posted by Princess_G

If it is posted as a realistic did it violate any g-force constraints?

If the coaster is fantasy, it should also have the g's in control, only the wooden recreaction of CrystalBeachCyclone and that kind of rides have high G's allowed

Ok, now i don't know how people are going to take this, so *braces self*

First off, MONOLITH, your claims that because you've only posted however many times you are getting poorly treated are completely untrue, and to acuse people of patronising you is slightly unfair. The reason brt assumed you were new is that you are new to the site, asking a question that has arisen hundreds of thousands of times in the past.

While i agree that the rating system here isn't perfect, unfortunately, there is little you can do about it. If a rating is well explained with good reason, there is, by definition, nothing wrong with it as it is a subjective opinion. We can't simply tell people what to think because we know it is right in our own minds. This can be seen when looking at raters such as DjJavixxxxx, who almost always seems to rate lower than anyone else on the site, but always provides reasons. IMO, the problem in this case is who has rated the ride.

The "pumping can be fixed" rater should, in theory, say the same if he rates your ride, and if he doesn't then by all means complain about the unfair rate on your ride, as you are absolutely right. As he (i assume) has not, there is little you can do. I should point out, however, that i do agree that many of the rates on the hyyyper track are very high considering what they have said.

At the moment, i am without a no limits disk, but when i get mine back, i will download your rides and give my honest opinion, as will most other members of this site. Surely you cant ask for more than that?

My last post will be this: I think you are taking this too seriously. Its one thing to say theres a problem but another to be as annoyed as you seem to be with it.

Color is, IMO, an intregal part of a rides design. Some color choices are beautiful and add tons to a ride. Others, add nothing. Some, take away. I think you use the word "Downrate" far to often and give most ratings a negative connotation. I do not "downrate" anything. Instead, I dont give it points. I dont have any set rating scale so if the colors are off, it just doesnt get full points in Originality.

The color thing isnt about being bothered but looking at the coaster also from an artistic standpoint. I find coasters that are carefully built and sculpted can look like works of art if properly designed and colored (not to mention supports)



I think what you should get out of this is not to take all of these ratings so seriously. Im trying here to give you feedback on certain issues youve brought up but every issue will not be resolved and standardized rating, while perfect in a utopian world, wont work. People need to express their opinions and you need to be able to live with it and not be upset.

ok i take your point. As you said Real, people need to express their opinion. All i was doing was expressing mine, but i stand with my beliefs so thats why i am tenatious at getting my point across. I will not speak anymore on this matter and i thank you for your comments to this situation. I don't think the word is upset, i am just annoyed. I would just like to see a more standard rating system. I hope this has not caused too much destruction within the weeweeslap community, as that was not my goal at all. I simply wanted to express my opinion and not keep quiet about it, after all everyone is entitled to one, as you so put.

I am glad you PMd me about this Monolith so we could chat offline -- and for those wondering here is the link to the ride he was talking about (Koepe) ... and I am sure my rating of it was hinted at. But no worries here.

http://www.coastercrazy.com/track_exchang ... p?tid=7440

Monolith, I do understand your plea for a more standardized system. Personally, thats what I would like to see.

But that would probably turn this place into more of an Elitist fest than it is (and its mild...so far). It would only breed more trouble I think than its worth to be honest.


But Im all for anything else that does help in any way with the broad spectrum of rates that get thrown out.

A more standardized system?It would be boring...c'mon this site is not an examination!Here we can exchange our creations,we can discuss about coasters or anything else,we can find many interesting articles(very important for me living in Italy),we can steal points[;)]I think nothing hasn't to be changed here!I had some "behaviour"problems in the past caused by your same reason MONOLITH!Surely I haven't been kind to some people,once I also said that I wanted to be cancelled![sillyme]...but at the end I chose to come back with my coasters[;)]
I hope not to have gone out to this topic[B)]but this is what I wanted to say!
Bye!

Originally posted by hyyyper

Originally posted by Princess_G

If it is posted as a realistic did it violate any g-force constraints?

If the coaster is fantasy, it should also have the g's in control, only the wooden recreaction of CrystalBeachCyclone and that kind of rides have high G's allowed

I know this is something that will not be popular here, but to me a Fantasy ride is one that could not be built in real life and one that is made simply for the adrenaline factor. G-force is a concern of course but it is not necessary for it to be real-world g's. I've made URDC coasters that pulled 10g's or more that I labeled as Fantasy. I guess that's still a good thing about UR is that if you post a ride as Realistic you had better make sure it is and if you post a ride as Fantasy you won't get dinged so much for g-force violations.

One problem as I see it how the staff often leaves bad ratings up.

For one recent example: http://coastercrazy.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8261

If rates are bad, they should be removed, period, end of story.

amen to that tyler. and wws, what you said here:http://coastercrazy.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8261 makes no sense at all. if both rates should be cancelled, kill them. dont leave them up b/c it averages out, if it should go, then let it go.

Personally I rate for the "fun factor" of a ride and also the overall presentation. -I know now I am guilty of overating a few certain coasters lately- but I believed at the time they WERE fun, well presented rides with a lot of work gone into them. Is that bad?
It seems rates are down to the personal taste of the rider.

I have much to learn it would appear.

Simply put from my point of view - Anybody who takes the time to build a NL ride has put alot of effort into it just by working in the builder. I agree with you CoasterKarl, and I too rate for the fun and enjoyment factor. I realize this is a technical coaster simulation, but doesn't it take the fun out of the sim when things start to get too technical?

One thing I've noticed too is the downrating of rides that use prefabs. I'm not understanding why this is such a bad thing because if you look at it this way, an element in real life is prefabricated also. It has a core design that is pretty much standard for the particular inversion/manuever. If a builder cannot make a certain inversion on their own then why not use a prefab? As long as the end result is a fun and well layed out ride then using prefabs shouldn't matter.

I don't think so. Not trying to be cocky or anything, but seeing some of the high rated coasters lately I could upload something like them in just one day of work. Technicality brings a lot more into a coaster, and something most coasters uploaded lately are severely lacking.

Yeah G. I tried to use elementery, -could only make simple loops. the maths and calculations involved gave me a headache! Expert builders only I guess...

Using elementary and purg does not require a massive amount of mathematic knowledge. You just play about with variables, measuring the degrees and radius of an element and link them all together. Its not too hard. The thing i am finding tough at the moment is say create custom lead-ins to elements such as batwings. I can create a smooth lead in, but from a set position. I am finding it hard to say do a downward curve into a corkscrew as you not only have to get the vertical radius right (of the corkscrew going up) but the lateral radius as well (the corkscrew going to the side). Its a tough one.

Yes, using wizards in the Elementary only will require you to use some simple addition/subtraction. Making the formulas is what requires the math.

About that problem your having MONOLITH, thats because when using the wizards for the loop and corkscrew in Elementary, you can only set one radius, not two. Here's another example of what (I think) your talking about:

yeah precisely right. Do you know of anyway around this? you can get either one correct, but not the other. It is really annoying? is there gonna be a release of HSAK that allows radii to be set for both the horizontal circle and the evelevation?

As you show in your second pic, you can link the two really smooth, but not in a continuous arc, basically its like a really smooth pump if you know what i mean.

Could somebody please check on coastersims for me if there are any more updates or new wizards about? I would be very grateful for any information (i know im not the most popular guy now) but i can't seem to access my account. So if someone does do this, i would very much appreciate it.

Thanks

I'm almost 100% sure that there is no way around this with the wizards that are currently available. I also find this annoying, since it restricts me from creating certain element transitions (ie. airtime hill leading into overbank).

I visit CS often and there are no updates to the HSAK that I know of. There has been one, small change to add a variable if I remember correctly, but I don't think its anything significant. I do know that there have been no updates yet though that allow a way to solve this, but it is definitely feasible to create a formula that does this. Unfortunately, I know nothing about writing the formulas, so I have to use whats available.

Cool mate, cheers for the update. Will just have to persevere with it. The variable you mentioned is a increasing/decreasing radius smoothing variable, but as you said it does not make too much difference.