Realistic = Fantasy?

I've noticed that you can put a rollercoaster you upload into either Fantasy or Realistic, but does it really matter? Is there anyone here the rates differently, or look at the track differently if it's Fantasy or Realistic?

Realistic coasters i would expect to be able to see and built in real life, so if they are several thousand feet long and unrealistic design, i would dock marks from the Technical section

I do. There are fantasy support systems there more for look than efficiency and out of wack ideas. Where as on realistics, you have to be REAL, imagine that.

I dunno I think if someone is at all in their right mind and made a fantasy coaster they'd put in the description "this is supposed to be a fantasy coaster" so that people wouldn't get the wrong idea. Its more likely that they'd read the description than the little thing at the top that categorizes it.

Fantasy coasters IMO should be rideable (no RCT style building), but shouldn't be buildable in real life. (like a launched woodie or launched stand up coaster) Realistic designs should be something a company could build.

Fantasy coasters imo are an open build. They can have realistic qualities like g forces and such, but it isn't necessary. You have a little more freedom when you post as Fantasy, at least when I rate you do. Because I do not dock for higher g's unless they are seriously high or the coaster is rough because of them. It is possible to make a smooth coaster with high g forces. To me, Fantasy coasters are coasters that could not possibly be made in real life, so have fun with them.

Eh, I'd say the fantasy coasters still have to be rideable though. It simply has some things that make it unbuildable, maybe things like it's surroundings or odd support shapes. (that still appear to able to hold up the track, but are never used) Or maybe it would be a wooden coaster in a valcano with lava pools around it. It just has to be rideable, which means pumping, unsmoothness, and excessive/unrealistic g's still need to be taken care of. If fantasy was to be complete freedom, just imagine what junk some of the n00bs would upload, just a scrambled ball of crap that resembles track. Doesn't matter how nice or pretty the scenery around it looks, if they can't make the track at least half decent, then it's crap.

Originally posted by Edge

Realistic coasters i would expect to be able to see and built in real life, so if they are several thousand feet long and unrealistic design, i would dock marks from the Technical section

edge, name some coasters that ARENT sevreal thousand feet long? lol. i think u mean like 10000 or something, not 2000+. lol.

[coolbeans326]

Originally posted by coasteragent99

Fantasy coasters IMO should be rideable (no RCT style building), but shouldn't be buildable in real life. (like a launched woodie or launched stand up coaster) Realistic designs should be something a company could build.

There is a difference between doing something new and doing something that's not realistic.[;)]
IE, building a big ass wooden coaster an a large, unneccessible hill is fantasy. LIM's on a wooden coaster is not though, its different.
Building a 500 foot tall traditional lift roller coaster that would be way to large for almost all parks, if not all parks, to fit inside thier land would also be fantasy.

Eh, I'm not so sure woodies have the ability to handle launches though.

I count fantasy like something that is basically realistic, but has afew things that are too expensive, or overdone or something like that. Like unnecessary support structures, and fantasy settings or locations. The track itself is still quite realistic, just all the other stuff isnt? I hope i explained that how i meant too.

[hyyyper]

IMO realistic COULD be a re-creation, but from a ride that doesn't exist

fantasy is a coaster that has like 20 inversions, 150m lift hill, that kinda stuff, but still, smooth and gforce rating rules apply

[jayman]

fantasy should be something realistic in theory, but not really feasible in real life.. like a coaster that could be built but won't because of cost or space..or just downright crazy!!!

I definateely look at them diferently
a fantasy one i would look for elements that wouldn't be practicle in real life
in a realistic one I would pay more atention to the stats and all the other technical stuff

I agree coasteragent, pretty much. I usually go by, if it is a launched woodie, well its never been made before, therefore its not realistic, as i real, as it it exists. Lims on a woodie could definetly be possible, but it has never been done in real life before, which is fantasy.

I dont think its even been thought of before. The only way it could be done is by using steel supports which could still make it a wooden coaster but heres another thing: Friction.

For steel coasters they use huge poly wheels that can withstand going from 0 to some number in a short period of time. Dragster goes through a few sets a year per train.

Wooden coasters have steel wheels that ride on steel plates. I really shouldnt have to go on any more if you can imagine what the wheels and track would have to go through as a multi-ton train is ripped across it.

I see your point...

[Blade]

I view a coaster as realistic or fantasy based on gforces. For example, if a coaster is designed to at some point reach 500 positive g's, then clearly the coaster would be fantasy. Coasters that adhere to the standard laws of physics and the bodies physical threshold would be considered realistic. However, although things like a launched woodies dont exist, its not entirely impossible to have them and is therefore realistic.

Real, that's not necessarily true...who says a launched woodie has to go that fast to where it'll kill it's wheels quickly? Is it not a launch if it goes 0-40 in 4 or 5 seconds? Even with a faster or more quickly accelerating launch I don't see much of a difference between a launch, and the normal dynamics of a ride in relation to stress on the wheels.

I wouldn't be surprised at all to see Intamin build a launching wooden coaster with it's plug-and-play technology. Seems like a possibility to me.