Menu
What's new
By:
Filters

Blue Fire, seriously?

Sandman said:
What might be an issue? That I have an opinion of Blue Fire without riding? Of course, I said my opinion is based on not riding but on how it looks and could easily change after riding. Everyone has opinions of rides prior to riding, hence being an enthusiast. Also I'm failing to see the absurdity of subjective opinions! ;) But very well.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry if my post was subject to misinterpretation. I'm not saying that your post in particular is absurd (hence the line break). Nor that subjective opinions are stupid. Just that, between the non-constructive bashing and the pre-judgements, this topic has been running on fumes for some time.You cannot deny that BF has some moments of hangtime and airtime. Are they enough ? Well, that is subjective. But some people here are just denying hard facts.

For the issue of look v. ride dread, I totally agree with Ireeb, it is the best thing to do is your core visitors are not roller-coaster veterans - as it is the general case with European family public.
Make a coaster that ride scarier than it looks and you are going to create a lot of unhappiness, some distrust for coasters and even some trauma. Make a coaster that looks scarier than it rides and you are going to make a lot of people happy, and/or proud of having the guts of daring it and being able to enjoy it instead of bracing and wailing for their lives.
Every park that is not oriented toward casual thrillseekers (amusement rides still offering some rather petty thrill, I know they are never marketed toward true adrenaline junkies) should have this in mind when building a new ride.
 
balrog said:
Make a coaster that ride scarier than it looks and you are going to create a lot of unhappiness, some distrust for coasters and even some trauma. Make a coaster that looks scarier than it rides and you are going to make a lot of people happy, and/or proud of having the guts of daring it and being able to enjoy it instead of bracing and wailing for their lives.
Click to expand...
I just wanted to pipe in and say, yup. This.

Visual design of a coaster is so important to conveying the ride experience. I wouldn't necessarily say that all rides need to fit into these two categories, but they certainly need to work as a cohesive whole and so often do not.

The absolute worst example of aesthetics and arguably design intention not matching ride experience is Skyrush, which despite its height looks tame and family friendly. And from a couple of interviews, park directors even implied it was intended to be a family ride. More detailed explanation here ;) http://themeparkthoughtsblog.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/skyrush-at-hersheypark-review.html


I've still not ridden Bluefire, but I'm willing to bet that half of the initial hype was simply down to Europa being a great park with no great rides. It makes anything half decent stand out dramatically. This is the problem I have with Cedar Point, too. Is Maverick, for example, actually that good in a world context? Or does the backdrop of mediocrity across the park elevate it? I don't know, it's been a while since I went to both these parks tbh...


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
The thing about the initial post is that it centres on the supposed hyperbole of Blue Fire. This is one hell of a mixed bag coaster when based on enthusiast reviews, which I think is what Martyn was referring to and not the GP perception. Of course, the GP could love it and sure, it could be successful at what it does for the GP. But then again, there are some god awful rides out there that the GP love, and some amazing rides that they wouldn't even consider noteworthy. That's GP logic for you.

I also think the conception of Helix has played a part in enthusiast opinions and reviews. Many people have now been and experienced Helix, which seems to be exclusively top 10 material (more so Top 5) according to the majority who have ridden it. Following up Helix with Blue Fire (which is what many enthusiasts have done) must surely be somewhat disappointing?
 
I love Blue Fire. But then again, I'm the kind of enthusiast that can appreciate less forceful coasters as long as they are fun. Forces aren't everything to me. Blue Fire is such a comfortable, re-ridable, fun family-thrill coaster with a couple of stand-out elements (the inversions mainly). I don't see how anybody could find it awful? Disappointing, sure, but it doesn't do anything bad or offensive. After I rode Helix it did go down my rankings a fair few spots but it's still a coaster I look forward to ride every time.
 
Blue fire is a solid and fun coaster - like all of Europa's coasters - none are the 'best' of their type - but as a collection of coasters in a family-market park they are fine! I really enjoy blue fire and silver star!
 
I just think Mack launch coasters are extremely overrated in general. You can't have a launched roller coaster without the right amount of force during the launch!
 
astead04 said:
I just think Mack launch coasters are extremely overrated in general. You can't have a launched roller coaster without the right amount of force during the launch!
Click to expand...

Comparing Mack launch coasters to other launched coasters is a bit futile really, mainly because a Mack launch is not the focal point of the ride. It's just an alternative method to using a lift hill to generate the first instance of speed. Intamin launches are usually a central part of the experience.
 
astead04 said:
I just think Mack launch coasters are extremely overrated in general. You can't have a launched roller coaster without the right amount of force during the launch!
Click to expand...
Except if the launch isn't the point of the coaster. It's nice to keep an open mind
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top