What's new
By:
FORUMS - COASTERFORCE

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

How Far Will Coasters Go?!

P

Pierre

Strata Poster
Well, thats what the BBC are wondering. Just came across this article which makes an interesting read. I always find articles from the general press interesting to get an 'outsiders' view so to speak.

It also features everyones favourite rollercoaster - Saw.
Also everyones favourite person - and top tips from him - Andy Hine

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/7937557.stm
 
Andy who? :p
Read this earlier... It was... Erm... Well, vaguely interesting I suppose :)

I'm not convinced by the whole psychology thing though. I do think it plays a part, but it's odd that it's cited as the next thing, when simple wooden coasters are currently en vogue.
 
That article is full of crap by a self-praising man.

"Most roller coaster fanatics prefer wooden rides, despite them tending to be smaller and slower than steel ones, partly because of the more anxious experience often involved."

Speak for yourself you old git.
 
Screw psychology. I don't want rides that attempt to mess with my emotional state (and probably fail spectacularly). I care about how the damn thing rides, and no crappy gimmick will make a terrible ride acceptable.

If we really have reached the limits of what a roller coaster can do, I'm really not bothered. We have fantastic technology already, and I'd much prefer it if the parks, designers and manufacturers would abandon the gimmicky crap already and start building better layouts with fantastic, forceful elements. We know what makes for good rides. Let's have more of them.

Unfortunately, a ride that's just a mind-blowingly awesome ride isn't as instantly marketable as "but ours is themed to Saw, and is steeper".

Edit: Damn, that was an angry, rambling post. I hope it made sense.
 
The ONLY time psycholoy has worked for a ride is Oblivion. End of.

Awww, Mr Hine isn't wearing his massive glasses, fail...
 
I dont understand why people are against the psychological thrills. :?
It dosn't have to compromise the physical thrills. I think if the right balance is struck, they will actually complement them! :--D
 
Psychology only applies to the GP, and not Enthusiasts. We have seen them all, rode them all and know too much, so the experience is embedded in our minds and it's just another stroll in the park.

The GP have little idea of the ins and outs of rollercoasters, theming and forces, therefore the experience of riding a rollercoaster can be scary and daunting.
 
As soon as they give you a literal orgasm and force you to go to the bathroom to fix that they will hit their limit.
 
Actually, despite what people are saying, I get good psychological thrills on some rides still, especially say if my dad is there, and he tries to psych me out beforehand. On drop towers, and things like Ka or Dragster, yeah, they scare the crap out of me psychologically (especially the drop towers).

Oblivion looks good for that too.
 
In the future...


  • Rollercoasters will go into space.
    They will be miles long, and last for 30 minutes.
    Invert more than one hundred times.
    Go at speeds faster than some planes of today.
Cannot wait.
 
I personally love the psychological thrill. The only downfall to this is that only Drop Tower (and I have no clue why) gives me this. When I get scared legitimately I get a bigger adrenaline high afterwards.
 
StormDragonJr said:

  • Rollercoasters will go into space.
    They will be miles long, and last for 30 minutes.
    Invert more than one hundred times.
    Go at speeds faster than some planes of today.
Click to expand...

And will kill you.

The rides themselves can change till the cows come home, but our human bodies won't. We still have limited forces we can handle and can't exceed.

Think about it: The maximum velocity of most objects can be reached by about 2,000 feet. Building that even would never be cost effective. It's why we have very few 250+ rides now. And if a ride exceeds 1,000 mph, I'll eat my hat. The friction and forces involved would make it a mechanical nightmare.

I'm sure someone will correct me on some of these things, but you get the general idea.

On topic:
I agree with most of the people saying that psychological thrills would be cool. However, everyone is afraid of something, and it's different for everyone. Example being I'm terrified of just the simple observation tower (See Kings Island), where as others don't give it a second thought. I know some are afraid of the littlest bugs which to me seem laughable. Psychological terror and thrill are never a perfect ideal. As such, it might scare some, but never all like most coasters do.

As for the coasters themselves: the idea hasn't changed since it all started, just the way it's presented. There will be many different ways we'll come up with that will deepen our need for thrills. Keep in mind: the simple corkscrew coaster was terrifying when it first came out, and we all consider it very mild.

Holy crap that's a long post.
 
^Exactly. To be honest, we're probably at the limit with height and speed right now. Kingda Ka has ripped itself apart twice, and the two coasters that are faster than it, Ring Racer and Formula Rossa, have trims after the launch. Parks also don't have enough space or money to build bigger as well. I don't expect coasters to get much larger anytime soon, nor do I want them to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top