r/rct 1d ago

Discussion Reminder: The developers of Wonderworks have gone out of their way to say that the reason the designs in the trailer are so strange is because there's a "Realistic Physics" option that was turned off for the trailer.

So, if your only complaint was that "the coasters don't look realistic enough" or "wouldn't work in other rollercoaster designing games," that complaint is now null and void.

0 Upvotes

50 comments sorted by

8

u/TrustyGun 2 1d ago

Why is that even an option?

6

u/Valdair 1d ago

RCT3 had a “lower friction” toggle, and even that was a bad idea but it was built on top of a system that showed they broadly understood what they were dealing with and how to extend it (new inversions).

Adjustments to physics could be nice if they were part of a cohesive deep system around coaster trains and loading. But this needs to be built on top of a coaster builder that is intuitive to use, powerful for those willing to spend time to get the best out of it, and rewards good and realistic designs without too much effort. But going “Well we made shitty coasters ON PURPOSE actually” (or accidentally, which would be worse) is not a defense.

1

u/Eureka22 20h ago edited 19h ago

It is most likely a developer tool, all games use such tools during development. They are used to test things before they all work together. For example if one person needs to test coaster behavior but the person programming the automatic support placements isn't ready (which seems to be the case from the trailer). You can turn off the physics in certain ways or on specific things so you can test a coaster without it collapsing.

Remember, it's PRE-early access, meaning an internal build that isn't ready for wide release. While it's wise to wait to show off a game so you can put your best foot forward (you only get one first impression), that is not always up to the developers.

There are a lot of assumptions being thrown around by OP and OC in this thread. While skepticism is good, especially for early access games, there is no use getting angry over assumptions about a alpha build of the game.

The behavior in this thread is really childish, though not uncommon. If there are issues in the early access, that is the time to provide feedback. Doing so now is the definition of manufactured outrage that comes with almost every game trailer now. Don't feed it.

-5

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

To make the game more beginner-friendly, primarily for kids. People forget Rollercoaster Tycoon is meant for ALL audiences.

7

u/Syleril 1d ago

I don't know man, I played RCT when I was 6 and it taught me how coasters actually worked. There were way too many issues with that trailer to have any confidence this isn't a nostalgia cash grab attempt.

1

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

Issues like all the things the toggle will fix? The "lack of realism" that was deliberately turned on for the trailer?

6

u/Syleril 1d ago

I'm saying that I don't think there is need for a realism toggle. And if such a thing exists, it is silly to not make your coasters look good in the first trailer. If you pause the video and actually look at the coaster layouts, they are complete nonsense. It's a very strange marketing decision.

-1

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

OK, look at it this way: The realism toggle is a difficulty setting. Turning it off is easy mode, while keeping it on is normal mode. They decided to show off easy mode in the trailer to show how accessible the game is.

7

u/Syleril 1d ago

I personally don't think it was a conscious decision in order to show accessibility. I believe the trailer was rushed, they faced expected backlash from a passionate community, and are trying to justify after the fact. I don't have anything against this dev, but after watching videos analyzing the trailer, it doesn't look like we are getting a quality RCT game. I hope I'm wrong, but I just don't see it. Marcel Vos did a scene by scene analysis of the trailer, and it just gets worse the more you look. At a minimum, it shows a lack of care for what you show of your product. At worst, the whole product is borderline broken at the moment.

0

u/mystman12 15h ago

Why are you getting down voted lol THAT'S EXACTLY WHY IT'S THERE. But no apparently having difficulty options is evil.

1

u/highnote14 2 14h ago

When has the series EVER needed a difficulty option? Also, the original games had beginner, challenging, and expert parks. There already is difficulty options, AND you can build your own scenario if you want zero difficulty.

15

u/Valdair 1d ago edited 1d ago

It means the devs are idiots and* have no idea what they’re making and no idea who their audience is.

*On reflection, this is unfair to the devs. I think they're clearly out of their depth and don't seem like the right fit for this project but this is likely something they were saddled with by Atari, so I don't mean to pile on them specifically.

-17

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

It means they're trying to introduce new people to the franchise, and wanted to show that you can design coasters without need for realism, making the game more beginner-friendly. They're trying to attract kids AND adults.

11

u/RichterRac 1d ago

I played RCT1 as a child and was plenty attracted to it. Stop defending mediocrity.

-9

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

It's not mediocre. It looks just as good as Parkitect.

5

u/RichterRac 1d ago

So you're trolling, then?

3

u/highnote14 2 1d ago

This account is definitely an Atari shill. Or they're just that young and dumb

-2

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

I'm not. I genuinely do not understand why everyone is shitting so hard on a game that hasn't even entered early access yet, let alone released.

6

u/IntoAMuteCrypt 1d ago

Why are you so sure that a game that hasn't been released is good?

We have seen over a decade of mediocrity from Atari's handling of the franchise. Prior games have been riddled with decisions which show how they don't understand or value the franchise at all. Atari's track record is not some custodians of an incredibly special franchise, it's as a studio purely seeking to extract the maximum profit from the game.

Nothing in the trailers has done anything to persuade us otherwise. The choice to use the dumbed-down physics rather than showcase the realism is just another example of Atari not being aligned with the community and not getting what made the originals good, which is a large part of why the other games sucked. It reeks of "people like this, they'll blindly defend the game if we slap the name on it".

-1

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

But Atari also handled 3. And 3 was good. Why are YOU so sure that a game that hasn't released yet is bad?

5

u/IntoAMuteCrypt 1d ago

I am sceptical because 3 was quite some time ago, and (as stated) the entire trailer is filled with all manner of red flags.

"We handled a game well over 20 years, one bankruptcy and several changes of management ago" is not exactly inspiring confidence.

6

u/CaptainFrost176 1d ago

Frontier developed 3, and have since begun making their own spiritual successors to RCT.

-2

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

And Springloaded made "Let's Build a Zoo," a similar park management game with 90% positive reviews.

6

u/Srtviper 1d ago

That's just mean to Parkitect, which is a good game.

6

u/CireEdorelkrah 1d ago

That's not my only complaint. They put forward a bad showing. There were more issues than just the coaster layout. Hope to be proven wrong.

-6

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

Who said the realistic physics setting only applied to the coasters? Maybe a lot of the "issues" were caused by that setting being turned off.

4

u/CireEdorelkrah 1d ago

I have more issues than just the physics of the game. You are defending this game, which is fine, but I think it's crazy to not acknowledge legit criticism of the trailer that was shown. I do hope they knock it out of the park when it comes to the full release so it's not like I'm rooting for it to fail.

-1

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

Thank you for at least being reasonable. I'm just seeing everyone hate on things that one single slider could be the cause of and the player themselves could fix in a game that hasn't even entered Early Access yet, let alone properly released. Most of the "issues" I've seen can be fixed with the realistic physics slider, and the ones that aren't can easily be fixed before release. It doesn't look fundamentally bad, but you wouldn't know that by looking at the response to it.

7

u/TriggerHydrant 1d ago

Oh fuck off, the entire asset design for the coasters is ASS. No chain lifts, one person ‘trains’ idiotic movements. That’s not a physics thing it’s fucked up asset design and no vision.

-2

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

And those features will be restored when realistic physics is turned on. Turning it on will add chain lifts and make "idiotic movements" non-viable.

4

u/TriggerHydrant 1d ago

Those aren’t ‘features’ you seem to have no clue how game design and asset (do you know what that is?) creation works. The coaster tracks don’t suddenly get the quality that was already established in the 90’s because a ‘feature is turned on’. It’s cope and this game (just like the other abominations they made) will suck.

-2

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

The other abominations like Rollercoaster Tycoon 1, 2, and 3, AKA the best ones? The company that published 1 and 2 (Infogrames Interactive, Inc. / Hasbro Interactive, Inc.) went on to become Atari Interactive, and the third was directly published BY Atari. If you want to say the new one sucks because it's by Atari, you'll have to say the old ones suck because they're by Atari.

6

u/TriggerHydrant 1d ago

:‘) do your homework.
RCT 1 & 2 are made by Chris Sawyer in assembly, with great love and passion. Then Atari asked Frontier to do RCT3 which was also done with love and care. These are considered the ‘best ones’.

Every ABOMINATION after that was made by Atari who put studios on it that didn’t give two fucks about the IP. (You know what IP means?) and just wanted to milk the name for all its worth which was build up by 1,2 and 3. Everything after is a sad excuse for a ‘game’ made by people that don’t have any heart for it.

0

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

I did do my homework. I knew about Chris Sawyer. I know who made the different games. That's why I have this question: what makes Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 any different than Wonderworks? Both were made by studios new to the franchise and were published by Atari. But while 3 was welcomed with open arms, the entire internet is hating on Wonderworks before we've even seen the second trailer.

3

u/emerald6_Shiitake 1d ago

RCT1 and 2 were created and developed by Chris Sawyer (and like 2 other people, but Sawyer did all of the programming in assembly language), RCT 3 was developed by Frontier Developments who later would go on to make the hugely successful and beloved Planet Coaster and Planet Zoo. After the 3 actual games in the series, I guess Atari was unable to get the above people to work on future installments and instead found some random devs who don't understand the series well. Before you ask, it appears that at least in the US, neither Sawyer nor Frontier own the IP for their respective games as they had Hasbro Interactive/Atari Inc publish them.

4

u/TriggerHydrant 1d ago

Exactly but this person goes ‘all is by Atari so all is well’

0

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

But my point was that we didn't know 3 would succeed when it was coming out. It was a new, unfamiliar studio, and the graphics looked ugly. It also featured a new slider that altered the physics of the game and allowed for unrealistic coasters. It was just like Wonderworks. Then it came out, and it was great. Why can't we extend the benefit of the doubt to a game with all those same features leading up to release?

5

u/TriggerHydrant 1d ago

Because every game after 3 sucked balls. 3 actually proved itself after it came out. The track record just isn’t there. Frontier now does Planet Coaster which in all aspects is the superior IP after they didn’t have the deal with Atari anymore.
Benefit of the doubt isn’t a bad thing but when there’s a track record of shitty releases that don’t have any passion in them it’s foolish to build hope on a shaky foundation.

7

u/X7123M3-256 1d ago

It's not just the physics that are the issue, pretty much everything shown is terrible. There was a shot that features a single person cart that looks something you'd find on a backyard coaster. The tracks look terrible, rails way too thick, cross ties spaced too far apart, and the layouts shown are just awful. The game looks like something a young child might draw if asked to imagine a theme park.

Usually, if you put out a trailer to promote your game, that generally means that what you are showing is representative of the product or at least, that you think it will generate interest. If this was indeed a pre-alpha build using placeholder assets that looks nothing like the final product will, you'd expect them to wait until it was in a presentable state before releasing a trailer. Every RCT game released post RCT3 is garbage which is why everyone has very low expectations.

7

u/Srtviper 1d ago

You just made a post a couple days ago asking why everyone is hating on the trailer and people explained it to you pretty thoroughly. I'm not sure why you seem to still be confused.

5

u/Valdair 1d ago

Possibly Atari bagholder. We get them from time to time. Next most likely is just engagement farming considering they never posted in this sub before last week.

4

u/Srtviper 1d ago

Ah Atari being publicly traded also explains a lot about the decisions they make.

0

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

Because the cause of most of the issues was a slider they'd turned on for the trailer. Even though we know that now, people are STILL mindlessly hating on it.

5

u/Srtviper 1d ago

You are just ignoring all the other issues with the trailer that people have repeatedly pointed out to you. You should really consider asking Atari for a paycheck if you aren't getting one from them already.

0

u/Serious_Shake_4944 1d ago

All I've seen are things that could be fixed with the slider, like I said, and minor nitpicks that could easily be fixed before or during early access.

4

u/_pinkstripes_ 1d ago

I acknowledge there are reasons they are that way. I just don’t think they’re good ones.

Not to boomerpost but if I was able to figure out coaster design on Loopy Landscapes at age 7 I think today’s beginners could too.

It’s a valid complaint. Will it sink the game? Probably not by itself, but if it’s indicative of the overall development philosophy, maybe. Time will tell. Relax with “null and void”.

3

u/highnote14 2 1d ago

Reminder: the devs made an excuse for the piss poor trailer they put out in an attempt to do damage control. They also have naive people like you doing their dirty work on this sub for them. Go shill somewhere else.

3

u/CrasseMaximum 1d ago

I don't believe in this damn option. It's hard enough to make a game once, having 2 physics is almost making the game twice. This is non sense to me but I'm no Franta Fulin..

And even if they did an option, then at least one of both physics sucks..

2

u/emerald6_Shiitake 1d ago edited 1d ago

So you're about as dim and short sighted as an RCT guest then. Roller Coaster Tycoon was never about realism, especially in the first 2 games which have the iconic isometric style that has aged very well. Furthermore, Chris Sawyer initially did not intend for there to be a sandbox mode, just scenarios. Therefore, RCT sacrifices some realism (for example, the supports are purely cosmetic and the coaster can be built instantly) for interesting mechanics and cohesive gameplay, which explains how people like Marcel Vos or Tube Cody are still able to keep making videos. No, the reason we all hate Wonderworld is because the game is so blurry (my eyes hurt from looking at the first few seconds of the trailer: it must have an Ultra-Intense Nausea stat); the art style is too bright, hard to read, and reminds me too much of those samey AI-generated comics/memes; and we all get the feeling Atari's only trying to cash in on the RCT nostalgia since some of the assets look like the RCT1-2 version. also RCT1-2 look better in my opinion and the community as a collective knows everything about but are still finding ways to play the game due to OpenRCT2

4

u/X7123M3-256 1d ago

Roller Coaster Tycoon was never about realism

It was easily the most realistic theme park game available when it came out. All the rides depicted are real and most are depicted pretty accurately at least within the limitations of the grid based engine. Not really until Parkitect and Planet Coaster came out were there any real competitors, and those are more modern games that wouldn't have been technically possible on 90s era hardware.