Wooden Hypercoasters

[reddude333]

Anyway, I still hope CP doesn't have to demolish Mean Streak if they decide to go for the record. I adore it.

You really think Mean Streak is that good? I'm sorry, but I feel like it is one of the more disgraceful coasters at CP due to all the changes they had to make...it's all just opinion though :-/

 

[s15c]

Oh, I'm sorry. That was to bizarrofan who said it. My bad. Blame the ADD.

But to my discussion with you, I agree that CP doesn't care for the title as much as MM. But honestly, again using Wicked Twister as an example, I find it to be a cheap grab. It doesn't seem too well planned to me. No theming, no music, they even had to add on extra supports after the ride was built. I'm also going to mention Wildcat. That... thing should have been taken out a long time ago. They could build a Wild Mouse or something a little more thrilling on the plot of land. Maybe a restaurant. Because it has horrible hourly capacity, is worth almost nothing (I got off feeling queasy, so I wouldn't exactly say it is for the little kids), and for the sake of God, it is portable! They could ship it off to some theme park in the middle of nowhere very easily. Anyway, that's my evidence about them holding on for the record.

You have a good point that they aren't spewing out coasters left and right, but up until now they had had the record.

Beyond the evidence, it is an opinion about how you want to interpret it. This is why there are judges and juries for court cases. You still have to decide whether the evidence points to one side or the other, and in this case, it doesn't seem too clear.

 

[gavin]

^But Wildcat is the smoothest thing there.

 

[reddude333]

Not that I disagree with much of these claims, but Wicked Twister was hardly a "cheap grab" at 9 million big ones. That's more than many of the coasters at CP. I will admit there is a lack of theming but really, its just an impulse coaster and I like the beachside view.

Also, maybe the fact that Wildcat is still there means something about records, but its not like it is new or something (operating since 1979) so the coaster race hadn't really heated up at all. Its capacity isn't good I'll admit, but its just 100 below TTD and Wicked Twister (according to RCDB)...just thought I'd throw another statistic out there...

 

[s15c]

Hey. I never said they cared as much as MM. You're comparing them to MM over and over. MM is OBVIOUSLY going for the record. And as said about CP, they haven't exactly been building coasters willy nilly, but they've also had the record for a few years now. To justify this, I mean that since they have the record, there is no reason to try for it. If SFGadv built a taller coaster, people would think they're stupid.

As for naming three coasters at the park that ARE well themed, I will take Dragster, I'll take Maverick (as it has plenty of scenery, water cannons, a super fancy tunnel that looks like a mine with streaking blue lights on the side), Disaster Transport (no denying), Iron Dragon (the trees nearby and water cannons are very awesome), and if you really feel like reaching because you like CP so much, both their kiddie rides. I'll count that as four total because Iron Dragon and the kiddie rides are about equal to one well themed ride And you say a major hit with the public? I'll not even mention the rides at CP that aren't major hits with the public, you should know.

And about your trying harder than that remark, I do see that land occupying a Wild Mouse. And as mentioned earlier, I wouldn't mind them even replacing it with a nice restaurant. Also, though I do love it, if CP cared about quality, they would wreck Mean Streak :'(

And thanks, Gavin, for your wonderful message.

 

[reddude333]

First, I just thought I would point out that a maverick is an unbranded cattle which would at the very least explain the type of "theming" they went for. Perhaps the train is transferring the cattle or something...I am by no means trying to say that there is a clear reason for their theming or that there is an established backstory, but at least I think it is harsh to say that the theming is useless (not that anyone has said that). But I definitely agree that the water cannons, and maybe even the mine, are just present for the sake of having some sort of effect. But you know what, I really like those effects, so they obviously didn't miss the mark there.

As for themed coasters at CP, yes not many really, but I would like to point out that Disaster Transport does have theming even if its really outdated now. The queue time isn't nearly as long as I assume it used to be so there really wasn't any time for me to realize the exact story, but I believe there is one. Plus I think it is clever the way that CP changed a alpine-themed ride into a space-themed ride due to issues they were having...

All to say, theming at MM is much more consistent and vast than theming at CP (no offense to CP obviously, I still think it to be the best park in the country if not the world).

And speaking of irrelevance, how about this entire discussion you two are having on this thread...oh wait, did you guys forget that this is supposed to be about wooden hypercoasters and the only reason CP was brought up was because of Mean Streak. Anyway, I don't have any problem with this discussion I just thought it was funny that you brought up relevance when this topic is so derailed at this point...

 

[reddude333]

How long have you been a member at this site? I brought up relevance as it pertained to the discussion at hand. You know, the discussion you weren't a part of and really didn't contribute anything to...?

Is this supposed to mean that because I have not been a member of this site for very long that I am not entitled to my own opinion? You need to understand that I was not butting heads with anyone when I made my last comment...you asked what Maverick was supposed to be, I answered. You two were discussing Disaster Transport at one point, I decided to add my own input. I agreed with you about that lack of theming, you told me to shut it. I guess if a discussion has been started and I want to add my input that's not allowed...oh WAIT that's what you did on my topic...except what you did was turn it completely irrelevant.

I think Disaster Transport is well themed considering the issues the park was facing with the open ride...if you don't agree, fine, but don't tell me that I can't believe what I do.

I also said that I don't think the theming at Maverick was done well in the sense that there is no story that they use to back-up the western look, of course you somehow took that as me not agreeing with you about something even though I was just trying to contribute to the conversation.

 

[ciallkennett]

I dunno about everyone else, but I'd like to shove a 200ft woodie up UCs arse right about now...

 

[reddude333]

At least don't tell me I really didn't contribute to the discussion that was going on because that is plain wrong. I gave my opinion and backed up what I had to say about the rides I commented on.

I also stated that I had not problem with the discussion that was going on involving CP's theming. I only stated that I thought it was "funny". Therefore I had no "motives" and I wanted to actively contribute to the discussion.

I am glad we see eye-to-eye about Maverick...I wanted to try coming up with a back-story even though I know there isn't one. I thought it was fun...

Regarding the UC-ciallkennett convo---uuuh...awkward, haha

 

[tks]

I dunno about everyone else, but I'd like to shove a 200ft woodie up UCs arse right about now...

Wouldn't touch the sides.

 

[reddude333]

I suppose I just didn't understand why you'd spend three paragraphs "contributing," and then turn around and complain about it being off-topic in "your" topic.

I didn't complain though, I just said it was funny, perhaps even ironic that you were saying something s15c said was off-topic when the whole discussion had become off-topic. I had no complaints there...

 

[s15c]

But honestly I would like for CP to get rid of Mean Streak and replace it...with anything!!!

Cedar Point always likes to hold that record for whatever reason.

But I love Mean Streak and would rather have them keep it than go for some crappy record that nobody cares about.

Anyone else find it interesting how far this discussion went based on this pair of sentences? And being the contradictory person that I am I had to defend myself when someone called me incorrect?

But, honestly, UC, you've gone to using poor theming as your side of the argument. Last time I checked, doesn't that work for my side in saying that they're just building rides and not caring about the quality (which is totally wrong, but still). You're saying it is all well-planned, and if I continued to insult CP I could pull out the mistakes you already mentioned.

And, overall, isn't having the best park with the most rides of high quality the ultimate goal? So maybe they don't care about most rides, but most high quality rides is sort of the drive behind an amusement park. The more good rides, the more guests, the more guests, the more money. If CP didn't care about the number of coasters, they would have stopped building a while ago. All parks would have. You need to build more to get more guests.
And don't say that more rides need to be built to keep the guests coming, because if you are satisfied, you come back. You don't go to a restaurant and have a satisfying meal but never go back. If CP is high quality, people will go. It's the step of getting it to higher quality and becoming the best park with the most coasters that attracts not only the previous visitors but NEW visitors.

And so, in a sense, your point is proven. This is their business plan. And it works. But their business plan involves having the most coasters and the best coasters. Being the best amusement park. And in my mind, and in most other people's minds, the best amusement park has the LARGEST NUMBER of good rides (along with cleanliness and non exorbitant prices and such, but even if you have the cleanest park in the country with the lowest prices for food and drink [Holiday World, I believe but not for sure, holds both of those] but only three or four coasters, you won't be getting crowds from a very large radius). Why none of us thought of this earlier I have no idea.

 

[Snoo]

And don't say that more rides need to be built to keep the guests coming, because if you are satisfied, you come back. You don't go to a restaurant and have a satisfying meal but never go back. If CP is high quality, people will go.

If that were true, Disney would have never changed their original park from how it was when it was built. Parks need to evolve and add new.. bigger and better rides.. to keep up with not only other parks but with changing public demand. On top of the fact that we, as a society, always want the newest, biggest, loopiest, thing with more airtime, more speed, and more fun. To sit happy with what you got because some guy was happy 3 years ago would be insanely stupid.

 

[Xpress]

I nominate UC for the "Poster of the Year" award.

 

[reddude333]

I gotta admit, UC does put a lot of effort into posts. I can't say the research and thought isn't there. But I have to ask, what does "Lurker of the Year" mean on CF because it seems pretty obvious that you don't just browse topics; you actually post a lot...I know I am a noob here, but I'm trying to learn the ropes...

 

[Snoo]

You know the Coasterforce member awards? Well UC went away for a while because of school/job.. and he just lurked and posted every once in a while.

He actually had the most amount of posts until we deleted the old stuff.. ect ect.

 

[reddude333]

You know the Coasterforce member awards? Well UC went away for a while because of school/job.. and he just lurked and posted every once in a while.

He actually had the most amount of posts until we deleted the old stuff.. ect ect.

Yeah I know about the awards...he filled me in otherwise, thanks

 

[s15c]

So then explain to me why Cedar Point wouldn't just totally stop building coasters altogether and work on becoming more like Disney World? Disney World attracts more customers, so why wouldn't every park work on being like Disney World and stop building multimillion dollar coasters and work on cleanliness and shows and small things that little kids like? Building more coaster beyond that is obviously a poor investment if you can get bigger crowds with less (at least with the way you're saying things). It's because having the most high quality coasters is what thrill seekers are looking for (as said earlier, along with not being dirty or vandalized or have GANG activity like MM). And there's a lot of thrill seekers out there. You know what I'll do? I'll make a poll. What constitutes a good thrill park? Most people will say the whole package or however you like to state it. But the whole package includes the most high quality coasters.

Clearly the masses don't see things the way the are "in your mind" - and clearly it has very little to do with how many coasters you have.

This is just plain wrong. If it had nothing to do with coasters, there wouldn't be any. If it had little to do with coasters, each park would have one or two and call it a day. They OBVIOUSLY matter, a lot. If you're going for the thrill seeker masses, you need a large amount of high quality coasters, cleanliness, non-exorbitant prices, and no vandalism. Honestly. You just pulled this out of your butt without thinking. You said the number of coasters had little effect on crowds. What website are we on? COASTERforce. Not nice clean amusement park with lots of shows and kiddie rides force.

A second metaphor for you- If you went to a concert of some random band that you liked, you wouldn't want them to play two songs, even if it is their two best songs. Even if the crowd was quiet and didn't bump around or anything, going to a concert with two songs, four songs, six songs, would be a rip-off and stupid unless you lived very close by and it didn't cost too much. On the other hand, if they played 17 songs you would be pretty satisfied and think you spent your money well. I think this is a great metaphor- You don't necessarily need to have the most ever, but the quantity matters. You want a longer concert with more songs, you want a bigger park with more GOOD coasters. it's just silly to say that the quantity of coasters matters very little, because if it did we wouldn't have nearly as many.

The goal for all businesses is to become the best at what they do, no? Doesn't make sense to ry for second best, really. So thrill parks should want to become the best in the country and/or world. And you aren't going to become the best when there's another park that has nothing in particular wrong with it and has a larger number of high quality coasters in it.

You really need to stop insulting me. You're comparing Pizza Hut to McDonalds and saying that since McDonalds doesn't have better pizza it can't be the best.

 

[RCF]

It seems to me that UC has it right. Quality over quantity works 99.99% of the time. That other .01 percent are those people who think more rides= better park (s15c). Whilst having the most coasters is a big title, it really (at least in my mind) sort of a cheap gimmick to bring people into a park. Yes I'm sure Magic Mountain is a fantastic park already, but the fact that they have the title, "Amusement park with the most roller coasters" it'll bring a lot more people in.

Look at it from the GP's POV. If you're planning a trip to go to any amusement park, which one would you choose? A small, yet quality park such as Knoebels? Or the park with the most roller coasters, Magic Mountain/Cedar Point (time not of the essence)? Naturally you'd choose the park with the bigger, and most, rides. Half the rides could suck, and people will continue to be brought in because of the coaster title.

 

[tomahawk]

It seems to me that UC has it right. Quality over quantity works 99.99% of the time. That other .01 percent are those people who think more rides= better park (s15c). Whilst having the most coasters is a big title, it really (at least in my mind) sort of a cheap gimmick to bring people into a park. Yes I'm sure Magic Mountain is a fantastic park already, but the fact that they have the title, "Amusement park with the most roller coasters" it'll bring a lot more people in.

Look at it from the GP's POV. If you're planning a trip to go to any amusement park, which one would you choose? A small, yet quality park such as Knoebels? Or the park with the most roller coasters, Magic Mountain/Cedar Point (time not of the essence)? Naturally you'd choose the park with the bigger, and most, rides. Half the rides could suck, and people will continue to be brought in because of the coaster title.

That theory is really based on location though. A family won't go halfway across the country to go to the park with the most rides unless it has something ELSE to offer. That would just be dumb, quality wins 100% of the time. The best park I ever have been to hasn't added a new REAL coaster, since what, 2005? (SFGAm) and that park is just amazing. It has everything, which 99.999999% of people look for when planning a trip. Sorry, but that mentality that people go only for coasters is wrong.

s15c
Why do you honestly think Disney has the type of crowds they do? Two things. One, history. They are historically known as being great in every aspect for the families. When you go to a Disney park, besides DCA until now, you literally feel like you are in a magical world. If I go to SFMM, CP, WoF, etc. it feels like I am just in a park, or concrete park, not a different "world" so to say. Secondly, its called the mouse. You know, the most iconic cartoon character in the world. Kids don't look at Snoopy and go ape **** like they do for Mickey. Its a global brand, and thats why people make the effort to go to Disney more than other places.

When Disney does do coasters, they DO COASTERS. There are no parking lots, no graffiti, no bottles in plants etc. They theme it to the nth degree, excluding DCA again. You get thrown into the story, not walk by it as if its something to look at if the line is long. They get away with 1-4 coasters per park, because guess what, they don't need more. They hit capacity a lot, and they offer so much more than coasters.

For enthusiasts, yeah we WANT more coasters, but you know what, as enthusiasts, WE DON'T bring them the money. We have passes, back our own lunches, get free cups of water, MAYBE buy an occasional shirt, but thats it. Families buy multi day tickets, spend tons of money on food, gifts for relatives, they make the trip be memorable by the **** they bring home, what do we make it memorable by? Were the credits worth it.

So it is 100% quality over quantity. I would much rather see rides with a story, theme, then another parking lot coaster, or, since Mean Streak constantly gets brought up, a new wooden coaster to replace it, because 90% of the people who don't come yearly, or care, will think its the same ride since its wood. I.E. Terminator.