What do you think of Flying Turns?

[nealbie]

What I first suggested this ride will probably not be that great people acted like I'd said some unholy unspeakable thing.

Is there something wrong with a coaster simply being fun? Not every coaster has be better than the last.

Oh no, not this rhetoric again.

There's an issue if "fun" isn't as fun as it should be.

What does "great" mean if not "fun"?

Just stop. It's patronising to the ride itself and everyone's opinion of it when you go "it might not be good but it's still fun". What does that even mean?

"Fun" can replace what's considered to be traditionally accepted as "great", and thus make a roller coaster increasingly special to individuals.

eg: Coasters like Temple of the Night Hawk, Millenium Coaster and Wild Mouse at Blackpool are not "amazing" roller coasters by any stretch, but do provide a surprising and "fun" experience to many riders which boosts them up in riders estimations. I think Jerry rates Wild Mouse quite highly for this reason and furie adores some seemingly "average" (on paper) racing woodie in America because it's good fun (I want to say Lightning Racer but I'm not sure).

So, yeah, whilst it's true that it doesn't apply to everyone, to dismiss the "fun" argument out of hand is ridiculous and ignorant.

To myself and many others, Flying Turns looks "fun".

 

[furie]

Yeah, I know what he means (and it's Lightning Racer Neal, yes ).

I also find rides like Raptor Attack and the old Space Invader at Blackpool great fun. Avalanche at Blackpool is another that really works for me.

I never come of thinking "that was brilliant, I really think that was the greatest ride ever". I come off with a great big grin though.

On a ride like EGF or something, you hit the brakes and your heart is pounding and you've experienced a thrill. "That was a great ride" is what comes to mind, but I think what you actually mean is "that ride thrilled me".

Obviously "fun" and "thrill" are completely subjective, but there's a definite difference and I think - think - that maybe when people say "great", the actually mean "thrilling".

Can you have both? I suspect that's why I adore Boulder Dash as it covers both bases. It's certainly why I love Megafobia...

I think it's a very tricky thing to pin down though.

 

[therick311]

I never come of thinking "that was brilliant, I really think that was the greatest ride ever". I come off with a great big grin though.

To be clear, when I said fun, this is what I meant. Not mind blowing awesome sauce. Not world class. Not top 10 ride. Just an enjoyable ride. A fun ride.

I haven't ridden Flying Turns, but I would like to some day, because it looks fun. This is after all why I am into coasters, because they are (usually) fun.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

I think lightning racer is a critically good coaster, primarilly because its fun.

It's not the "its fun" argument that I'm dismissing, its the idea that "fun" and "good" are wildly different. "Its fun" is such a patronising comment, if its loaded with "but not very good".

If a coaster is good but not fun, why the **** is it good?

Sent from my HTC Wildfire S A510e using Tapatalk 2

 

[ThomVD]

I agree with the entire fun/great thing. For example, Joris en de Draak is probably the coaster I've had the most fun on with my friends, while I would consider Goliath in WH a better ride, but I've never had as much fun on Goliath as on Joris. To me, Joris has a higher fun factor while Goliath is a more thrilling ride.

 

[furie]

I think lightning racer is a critically good coaster, primarilly because its fun.

It's not the "its fun" argument that I'm dismissing, its the idea that "fun" and "good" are wildly different. "Its fun" is such a patronising comment, if its loaded with "but not very good".

If a coaster is good but not fun, why the **** is it good?

I only wish I'd made the distinction clearly in my post :roll: