--------------------

--------------------

i like that idea, i'll come up with one two

The originality rating style for that is freaking ridiculous. If a coaster has no new elements, who cares? I make realistic coasters, and so do many other people, and I will never make a new element making the coaster unrealistic just to be original. Taking off a point if the terraformer isn't used is stupid also. Sure, it might benefit to the coaster somewhat in adrenaline, but to take off for it is so [r]. Also, What if somebody doesn't know how to make 3ds or an environment and the coaster they make is awesome? 3ds are a cool additon to a coaster but tracks don't need them. And what do you mean about "Improve New Supports"?

originality will be rated like you rated my coaster

--------------------

true, i dont agree with the new element, i'd keep it simpler then that.


Here's mine
Technical
0/4 G's in check (if there not your dead)
0/2 Supports (custom or not and will it hold you up)
0/3 Smoothness

Adrenelin
0/3 Spectacular Events/Elements
0/2 Good transistions
0/2 First Drop (Did i say OMG! going down it)
0/3 good speed, no slow spots

Origionality
0/7 Errors (support colisins, tree colisions, exc.)
0/3 Personal (did it look good)

BTW, where can you download 3D's because i have no clue how to make them

--------------------

Here's mine
Technical
0/3 Good G's
0/1-2 Supports (higher for good and cust. supports)
0/4 Smoothness
0/2 Overall Felling

Adrenelin
0/3 Speed
0/2 Intensity
0/2 First Drop
0/3 Fun

Origionality
0/4 Errors
0/3 Personal
0/3 Apperance, overall

Here's mine,

T/A/O

0/10 Every aspect you can think of spread over the three subjects.

So far it looks like a lot of members don't understand what rating is about yet. Rating is not just about giving a score. Also not about giving a score and explaining why you gave it. A good rating gives a constructive comment that tells the user how to improve certain errors and what to pay more attention to or put more time into. If you look on this site, I think about only 1 on 10 comments are good constructive comments. Others can be nice because the rating is high.
Also some people have yet to learn to take comments and not get pissed about them. Here our policy is that someone can rate almost any score if his explaination gives good reasons for it. Some users then don't like it when they get a low score with a constructive comment. But this is just a process of trail and error.
There just some many things to watch when you ride a coaster: layout, smoothness, E-stop, clearance envelope, 3ds theming, cartextures, environments, supports, coaster type, building technique, adrenaline, difficulty, custom supports, G forces, capacity, timings, originality and I probably forgot a lot more. So if you say in your comment: wow, this was cool and rate it with a 10 overall that is useless for everyone and ratings like that will be deleted in the future if we come across them.

More on writing ratings: Here (wws.com) or Here (cc.com)

That's my $0,02

[gouldy]

Yeah, glad someone said that, i was reading this forum thinking, WTF?? surely you can't have a set system to rate rides by. The idea is to have fun on the ride, then when it comes to rating it, you just put down what you think and score it how you think, If you thought it was crap, put it was crap and give it a low rating, If you thought it was good, put, it was good, and, give it a good rating. Ratings shouldn't be generic, they should be personal to a ride and rider.

GFA, people shouldn't rate on 3ds, theming, environment, and cartexture [;)] They should rate on the track and supports.

Originally posted by IntaminFan397

GFA, people shouldn't rate on 3ds, theming, environment, and cartexture [;)] They should rate on the track and supports.

[approve][approve]

mainly bcuz not everone knows how to do it

javixxxx.. on your tech module, it only adds up to 7, how do you get 0/10??? it should be 0/7....right? or you need to add more points to end up with 10 hehe.

it does add up to 10

[Kev]

Originally posted by Dj-Javixxxxx

originality will be rated like you rated my coaster

You should be very careful about making comments like this. It will make everyone wonder whether your ratings reflect your true feelings.....

Think about it. [;)]

Originally posted by pacoasterrider

Originally posted by IntaminFan397

GFA, people shouldn't rate on 3ds, theming, environment, and cartexture [;)] They should rate on the track and supports.

[approve][approve]

mainly bcuz not everone knows how to do it

Well, I know not everyone can do them. However anyone who wants to can do cartextures and environments since there are good tutorials for them. I don't think you should give someone a penalty and say: "You didn't use 3ds, thus this ride was crap." That's not the way I mean it. If someone uses 3ds or other forms of theming it does mean the user put time in giving the ride it's final touches and that deserves some points.

** Staff Edit **

hahhahaha, anyway, i agree with If397, like me i have no clue how to make 3ds and really dont feel that if i dont have any my coasters should be rated bad, i dont have a very top of the line computer yet, so when i put in 3ds it really eats away my FPS, if i coaster is good then rate it good, if it is great, rate it great, if it is unbeilvable, well u know were i am going with this.

I think something should be done about the originality/accuracy.
I think originality/realism would be better, because i, like others, want to make coasters that we could really immagine in real life. Building a coaster in the "style" of companies like B&M and Intamin is just as hard as making some fancy elements.