Jurassic World Evolution - General Discussion - Page 11

Thread: Jurassic World Evolution - General Discussion

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 8910111213 LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 248
  1. #201
    Joël is offline
    Planet Coaster Security
    Volunteer Moderator
    Planet Coaster Ambassador Joël's Avatar
    Originally Posted by wowman View Post (Source)
    that is pretty funny...do they ever get full and stop eating people?
    The T-Rex? No, she’s always hungry for more
    Drink soda! Now available in your nearest Planet Coaster theme park.

    PLANET COASTERWebsiteForumsForum RulesSystem RequirementsFrontier Support

  2. #202
    stuk71 is offline
    Planet Coaster Security
    Volunteer Moderator
    stuk71's Avatar
    Great game, really enjoying it. I like that the customer take a more back seat role, and that buildings are ready to go. The focus is on the dinosaurs... Which is kinda the point.

    Planet Coaster is still my firm favourite to let my imagination run wild.

    Attention to detail, and sound design are all awesome as expected from Frontier.

    Well done guys, and congratulations on the sucessful launch.
    early bird : coaster head : vip

  3. #203
    Originally Posted by jrolson View Post (Source)
    I’m actually really enjoying the game. Just played it for about 6 hours straight. Maybe it’ll get stale after the honeymoon phase of the game, but right now I’ve actually really enjoyed it. I’ve always been interested in dinosaurs so I love getting to read up on them and unlock them. Management isn’t too crazy but I’m still on the first island.

  4. #204
    I played the game last night. I achieved at least one of the science campaign missions but have yet to unlock Sandbox Mode.

    I watched Lady designer's video of the game. I asked a question on the comments section and...… SHE REPLIED. She actually replied, a famous YouTuber, to my comment.

    I ran the game on Ultra preset and the graphics weren't as WOW as I was expecting, but it's still pretty good graphics and smooth fps.

    My goal is to unlock Sandbox Mode this weekend. I don't mind how we can't get too creative with piece by piece buildings like Planet Coaster. JWE has less bloat than Planet Coaster. And I'd prefer games with less bloat which can run at smoother fps than have a bunch of unnecessary options as I get enough of that with PC, although I quite like both games.
    My PC
    6th gen Intel Core i7-6700k (4.2Ghz, 4 cores, 8 threads), EVGA GTX 1070 SC (8GB GDDR5, 1885Mhz clock speed tested), 16GB DDR4 2400Mhz HyperX RAM, Corsair 300r windowed, Wi-Fi ac, Windows 10 Home, 1TB Samsung EVO 850 SSD (primary), 240GB Kingston Fury HyperX SSD.

  5. #205
    Originally Posted by ccfan007 View Post (Source)
    https://youtu.be/BiydoYsqqe4

    Bad reviews or not... letting the dinosaurs escape and terrorize your park is super fun! LOL
    Reading this HERE makes laugh (now im not pointing at you). But this seems to be fine and very fun in eyes of people here, but when we talked about accidents in PC, most people had full mouth of moral, how bad it is, how it does not belong to this kind of game...

    :/

  6. #206
    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    Reading this HERE makes laugh (now im not pointing at you). But this seems to be fine and very fun in eyes of people here, but when we talked about accidents in PC, most people had full mouth of moral, how bad it is, how it does not belong to this kind of game...

    :/
    For me that's not true.

    Accidents RARELY happen, one accident per park in a decade?

    Really major incidents even less. And that's why I feel it doesn't need to be in the game.

    This game however, is about the movies, and in the movies the dino's break out, because otherwise it would be a boring movie, so it makes sense to put in a game.

    But that is my opinion.

  7. #207
    xyphic is offline
    Planet Coaster Security
    Volunteer Moderator

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    Reading this HERE makes laugh (now im not pointing at you). But this seems to be fine and very fun in eyes of people here, but when we talked about accidents in PC, most people had full mouth of moral, how bad it is, how it does not belong to this kind of game...

    :/
    While the guests in PC are cartoonish, we're still simulating theme parks which exist in reality and where there have been accidents with real-life consequences. JWE simulates the type of park that only exists in film, so there's no real-life equivalency. It's quite plausible to find accidents in PC distasteful but guests being eaten by dinosaurs not so.

  8. #208
    Originally Posted by Luuknoord View Post (Source)
    For me that's not true.

    Accidents RARELY happen, one accident per park in a decade?

    Really major incidents even less. And that's why I feel it doesn't need to be in the game.

    This game however, is about the movies, and in the movies the dino's break out, because otherwise it would be a boring movie, so it makes sense to put in a game.

    But that is my opinion.
    Yes, I agree with what you say. On the other hand, this is a game, not a real-life (many people here like to remind itīs just a game). And games cannot be realistic as real life and they change/drop certain things from reality to make the game fun to play. Thatīs why we wonīt see opening hours in the game, because itīs realistic, but not fun. But thatīs also why accidents should be there. They could be gameplay influencer. Not realistic if they happen more frequently, but definitely added value for gameplay.

    If what you said about them was also Frontiers idea, then I donīt know why Frontierīs let us to crash the coaster in test mode and even let us to make the cart fly into the guests. I havenīt heard of park that did something like that in real life, did you? So I think this shouldnīt be looked at from that stand point.... And also, it was always part of RollerCoaster Tycoon games.


    Oh, I was wondering, has JPE day/night cycle? I heard there is none?


    EDIT:

    Originally Posted by xyphic View Post (Source)
    While the guests in PC are cartoonish, we're still simulating theme parks which exist in reality and where there have been accidents with real-life consequences. JWE simulates the type of park that only exists in film, so there's no real-life equivalency. It's quite plausible to find accidents in PC distasteful but guests being eaten by dinosaurs not so.
    To me, itīs concerning how people are getting sensitive over everything. In next 20 years, I expect grown up men start crying when they see a deadly accident in a movie. Maybe then sue the movie makers and it will lead to ban of such a scene in movies too. Because people can find it distasteful to see deadly car accidents in movies. Even worse, if there are people whos relatives died in similar accidents, right ? Very sad and our civilization will once fail because of this.

    The other point is that nobody is speaking about how these accidents can be portraied in the game. Nobody expects blood, heads and livers flying around....

  9. #209
    xyphic is offline
    Planet Coaster Security
    Volunteer Moderator

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    Oh, I was wondering, has JPE day/night cycle? I heard there is none?
    Each island is set to a specific time of day. It helps to differentiate them. The sandbox island allows you to choose which of the time-of-day presets is active.

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    To me, itīs concerning how people are getting sensitive over everything. In next 20 years, I expect grown up men start crying when they see a deadly accident in a movie. Maybe then sue the movie makers and it will lead to ban of such a scene in movies too. Because people can find it distasteful to see deadly car accidents in movies. Even worse, if there are people whos relatives died in similar accidents, right ? Very sad and our civilization will once fail because of this.
    I don't think it's about people being over-sensitive, it's more about considering the repercussions of including something like that in a game and how it might affect its reception. Major accidents at theme parks are extremely rare and as such tend to be heavily reported on. Take the Smiler incident: everyone heard about it and how it affected the lives of the people involved. If Frontier had included a feature where people can get injured in a rollercoaster accident, it would have been directly linked to that incident and they would have suffered negative press.

    The example of car accidents is not the same. Car accidents happen all the time and it's an accepted part and risk of our culture. I think it would be better equated to something like a game including an arena bombing, or a mass shooting - things that are out-of-the-ordinary and easily linked to specific events. TV episodes get postponed all the time because they happen to mirror something that was recently in the news. I also recall that one of the COD games was criticised for its portrayal of a terrorist incident.

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    The other point is that nobody is speaking about how these accidents can be portraied in the game. Nobody expects blood, heads and livers flying around....
    Indeed, but the implication is still there: even though you didn't see it, someone got hurt. I don't think anyone is upset by Frontier's portrayal of a coaster derailment in the game, but it's inconsequential to the sim.

  10. #210
    Originally Posted by xyphic View Post (Source)
    Each island is set to a specific time of day. It helps to differentiate them. The sandbox island allows you to choose which of the time-of-day presets is active.


    I don't think it's about people being over-sensitive, it's more about considering the repercussions of including something like that in a game and how it might affect its reception. Major accidents at theme parks are extremely rare and as such tend to be heavily reported on. Take the Smiler incident: everyone heard about it and how it affected the lives of the people involved. If Frontier had included a feature where people can get injured in a rollercoaster accident, it would have been directly linked to that incident and they would have suffered negative press.

    The example of car accidents is not the same. Car accidents happen all the time and it's an accepted part and risk of our culture. I think it would be better equated to something like a game including an arena bombing, or a mass shooting - things that are out-of-the-ordinary and easily linked to specific events. TV episodes get postponed all the time because they happen to mirror something that was recently in the news. I also recall that one of the COD games was criticised for its portrayal of a terrorist incident.


    Indeed, but the implication is still there: even though you didn't see it, someone got hurt. I don't think anyone is upset by Frontier's portrayal of a coaster derailment in the game, but it's inconsequential to the sim.
    So yes, that means people are over-reacting and way too sensitive. Nothing else. If rly anyone mind it, had such an experience at a theme park, I doubt that person would buy this game. Itīs interesting there were no scandals about it in the past, only now. But nowadays, itīs wrong to even point out someone has different color of skin.

    And the car accident is not different. Think about it. How different it is for these people? Itīs not. It doesnīt matter if your parents died in a car or on a rollercoaster. The fact one kind of accident is more common than other doesnīt make people to perceive it differently (and especially in virtual world). Itīs total nonsense.

    You say "Indeed, but the implication is still there: even though you didn't see it, someone got hurt." You once say, the implication is enough actually, even if itīs not visible. But then you, even in the following sentence say otherwise - that nobody is upset by current portrayal of derailments. Even current form is, however, implication. You can make it crash into a people and set them fly... So even in current game, nobody gets hurt, but you can derail the coaster and hit people with it.... Makes your argument completely wrong...

    It already is in the game, so put this "moral drama" aside. finish this feature and implement it into gameplay.

  11. #211
    xyphic is offline
    Planet Coaster Security
    Volunteer Moderator

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    So yes, that means people are over-reacting and way too sensitive. Nothing else. If rly anyone mind it, had such an experience at a theme park, I doubt that person would buy this game.
    It's not about that one person, or their family. It's about public perception. When a car crash is portrayed, we don't immediately think "that's a bit close to the mark, what about the families of those affected?" because they're one of those things that we filter out as being normal. However, when a game or TV show or movie portrays something that's close to an out-of-the-ordinary event that's in the public mind, we naturally wonder if it isn't a bit soon to be going there. I don't think that's people being oversensitive -- I think it's just naturally how our brains work.

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    Itīs interesting there were no scandals about it in the past, only now.
    There has been controversy in games going back decades.

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    And the car accident is not different. Think about it. How different it is for these people? Itīs not. It doesnīt matter if your parents died in a car or on a rollercoaster. The fact one kind of accident is more common than other doesnīt make people to perceive it differently (and especially in virtual world). Itīs total nonsense.
    See above -- it *is* perceived differently. Lots of people are terrified of flying because aeroplane crashes are always heavily publicised. Yet they're safer on average than car journeys and most people don't have a fear of getting into cars. It's just that we've normalised car accidents. If we didn't, nobody would ever go anywhere.

    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    You say "Indeed, but the implication is still there: even though you didn't see it, someone got hurt." You once say, the implication is enough actually, even if itīs not visible. But then you, even in the following sentence say otherwise - that nobody is upset by current portrayal of derailments. Even current form is, however, implication. You can make it crash into a people and set them fly... So even in current game, nobody gets hurt, but you can derail the coaster and hit people with it.... Makes your argument completely wrong...
    Well, no. In the current implementation it is explicitly clear that none of the guests are injured in any way by the derailment. In fact, they often look quite happy when flying through the air. The coaster cars pop out of existence quite merrily. Contrast that against a non-visible metric of how many people have died or been injured in your park, and it's clear that the implication is quite different.

    [edit] It's clear that we aren't going to agree on this, and rather than taking this more off-topic I'm going to leave it there. [/edit]

  12. #212
    Originally Posted by xyphic View Post (Source)
    It's not about that one person, or their family. It's about public perception. When a car crash is portrayed, we don't immediately think "that's a bit close to the mark, what about the families of those affected?" because they're one of those things that we filter out as being normal. However, when a game or TV show or movie portrays something that's close to an out-of-the-ordinary event that's in the public mind, we naturally wonder if it isn't a bit soon to be going there. I don't think that's people being oversensitive -- I think it's just naturally how our brains work.


    There has been controversy in games going back decades.


    See above -- it *is* perceived differently. Lots of people are terrified of flying because aeroplane crashes are always heavily publicised. Yet they're safer on average than car journeys and most people don't have a fear of getting into cars. It's just that we've normalised car accidents. If we didn't, nobody would ever go anywhere.


    Well, no. In the current implementation it is explicitly clear that none of the guests are injured in any way by the derailment. In fact, they often look quite happy when flying through the air. The coaster cars pop out of existence quite merrily. Contrast that against a non-visible metric of how many people have died or been injured in your park, and it's clear that the implication is quite different.
    Controversy in games will always be, some people cannot get over even the basic principles of video games and donīt understand them and consider them something evil. Anyway, you generalized that part to all games, but I was pointing at RCT series. Please, show me some controversy regarding any of the 3 installements that is related to accidents in the game. As far as I know, there are NONE.

    As for current implementation, Im fine with it, just make the guest leave and let them to complain (lower the park rating), park should get fined and attendance should get low. That would be cool and if anybody would be angry about this, than I have no words to describe it. That would be just absolutely insane. But iīm sure degeneration of our society is not yet that far...

  13. #213
    https://www.pcgamer.com/frontier-und...ffer_pcgamerfb

    I donīt know. I trust Frontiers less and less. Every time different excuse. And this one is nonsense (weird Cities Skylines did it). If they wanted, they would add it, but these reasons are fake imo.

    Whatever, if they are really worried about this, they still can give us modding ability to some extent (adding our own models, flatrides and other things maybe not so related to the coding....).

  14. #214
    Seems like a very good explanation to me.

    It's not even an excuse, they are just saying. No, because we want to have control over our own games.

    You can like it or not, in the end you have nothing to say about it. I like the fact they stick to their own plans.
    Even though a minority of people would see this as a failure in running a business.

    It doesn't seem to affect their sales in anyway.

    Same as with other companies, like EA. Nobody likes EA and their marketing plans, and microtransactions. Yet still they keep doing it, and people still keep buying their games.
    So for the larger part of it, nobody really seems to care, they just want to play the game and not be bothered by these kind of things.

  15. #215
    Originally Posted by Luuknoord View Post (Source)
    Seems like a very good explanation to me.

    You can like it or not, in the end you have nothing to say about it. I like the fact they stick to their own plans.
    Even though a minority of people would see this as a failure in running a business.

    It doesn't seem to affect their sales in anyway.

    Same as with other companies, like EA. Nobody likes EA and their marketing plans, and microtransactions. Yet still they keep doing it, and people still keep buying their games.
    Aehm, if you want to call "minority" all the people who complain about it elswhere (PC gamer,facebook and other discussions), then I highly recommend you to visit also other parts of the place called "internet".

    I honestly also couldnīt understand, how can anyone be happy with getting less then he could. Modding would be only a profit for every player and if anyone wouldnīt like to use mods, then nobody force it on you.

    I accept others opinion, but itīs needed to say that now you are just completely wrong on this one and you are actually hurting yourself....

  16. #216
    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    Aehm, if you want to call "minority" all the people who complain about it elswhere (PC gamer,facebook and other discussions), then I highly recommend you to visit also other parts of the place called "internet".
    I don't really know actually. Let's say some people then.

    How many are there?

    Do you have figures, what percentage of the player base is it.

    I dare to take a bet that it is less than half of the total playerbase. So I think with Minority I am correct.

    And I didn't say I am against modding. I just said I can see why they don't and I am content with their explanation.

  17. #217
    Originally Posted by Luuknoord View Post (Source)
    I don't really know actually. Let's say some people then.

    How many are there?

    Do you have figures, what percentage of the player base is it.

    I dare to take a bet that it is less than half of the total playerbase. So I think with Minority I am correct.

    And I didn't say I am against modding. I just said I can see why they don't and I am content with their explanation.
    Well, some of those people are not in the community, because they said lack of modding is what is turning them away from buying it. For instance.

    Iīm not counting it and wonīt do a research or something. Just a look at discussions is enough for me. There was nobody who would say "I donīt mind it" or agreed with this. Agreement with this approach is only found at the official forums and usually only people like you, who bscly in 99% defend developers.

    I canīt see how you can content with their explanation. I play games and mods for quite some time and games were receiving updates since they exist. And updates usually also made mods broken. Well, yet, modding survived till nowadays. This explanation is just lie. And as I said, itīs weird for every game, they have different excuse, even though they use the same technologies for them...

  18. #218
    Originally Posted by MR.sugar View Post (Source)
    Well, some of those people are not in the community, because they said lack of modding is what is turning them away from buying it. For instance.

    Iīm not counting it and wonīt do a research or something. Just a look at discussions is enough for me. There was nobody who would say "I donīt mind it" or agreed with this. Agreement with this approach is only found at the official forums and usually only people like you, who bscly in 99% defend developers.

    I canīt see how you can content with their explanation. I play games and mods for quite some time and games were receiving updates since they exist. And updates usually also made mods broken. Well, yet, modding survived till nowadays. This explanation is just lie. And as I said, itīs weird for every game, they have different excuse, even though they use the same technologies for them...
    Didn't took you long before you started not accepting and respecting someone else's opinion......

    Have a nice day. I'll leave you here.

  19. #219
    Originally Posted by Luuknoord View Post (Source)
    Didn't took you long before you started not accepting and respecting someone else's opinion......

    Have a nice day. I'll leave you here.
    Because there is no valid argument that would support your opinion and with your, lets call it "Fanboyism", you go against yourself and players. What they said is not valid argument, because itīs nonsese (if it was valid, modding wouldnīt bscly exist) and because they change these explanations way too often (therefore I rightfuly think itīs a lie)
    But thanks for leaving me here, bye.

  20. #220
    As a Skylines player I don't think modding is a good idea for JWE (or Planco). The amount of problems that mods cause in Skylines particularly when new updates are released means a lot more problems for the developers who then have to deal with customers complaining that their game isn't working properly and then finding that it's due to a mod they've installed.

    It's also an issue for the mod creators as they would have to keep up with updates as and when they are released in order to avoid problems.

    Shane

Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 8910111213 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not edit your posts
  • You may not post attachments