1986: An Imagineering Competition - Hub Thread

[TheOriginalTiki]

@PerGron

Creativity: 8/10
Realism: 9/10
Detail: 4/5
Total: 21/25

I think this definitely won based on practicality more than "Cool" factor, as like you said on the podcast in the air there's really not a lot to be done with transitional areas the likes of which B-Wolf and Outbound perfected in their projects. That being said, I think this concept was the perfect Venn diagram of an effective transportation system that's both unique and also thematically makes sense within every area of the park. The Skyliner has ABSOLUTELY given me cofidence using it first hand that a gondola system can be a super effective form of transportation, so on that level I'd say this is the most practical of the bunch. It's not the most stimulating ride, but it's EASILY the most realistic and efficient.

 

[Mickeynerd17]

Here's my review for the other two Veto projects that I missed.



@Mickeynerd17

Creativity: 7/10
Realism: 7/10
Detail: 3/5
Total: 17/25

I know there was some miscommunication with the way the prompt was worded, but regardless I felt like this was just kind of a boring concept, if I'm being completely honest. The whole thing just felt like a slightly more elaborate Subway system. I think making this a spiritual successor to the Viewliner would have evaporated pretty much every problem I have for this, but as it stands now it's definitely too focused on Tomorrowland and the idea just doesn't leave much to the imagination. I will give you credit though, @b-wolf95's project was definitely a factor in why this one just doesn't stand out as much. You and B-Wolf had VERY similar projects, but B-Wolf definitely put more effort into the transitions. Overall a solid enough idea, but there's not really a lot here to make it stand out from the pack.

Understandable, I wrote half of it at 1 am on Thursday and the rest this morning, which was the time I had to do this, so that definitely showed through.

This ain't my best work. Next round will be way different.

 

[TheOriginalTiki]

Understandable, I wrote half of it at 1 am on Thursday and the rest this morning, which was the time I had to do this, so that definitely showed through.

This ain't my best work. Next round will be way different.

Love that attitude! Carry it with you into the next round

 

[TheOriginalTiki]

By a vote of six to two, @NateD1226, you have been evicted from the House of the Future.

Week 5
Head of Household Competition
Blue Sky Tomorrow

Tomorrowland always seems confused. It's not going to be in Blue Sky Disneyland. Your Head of Household challenge this week is to create a cohesive Tomorrowland with a fully formed theme. Will you go for fantastical Steampunk? Clockpunk fantasy? Pulpy Raygun Gothic? Optimistic Utopian? Or maybe something entirely different? It's up to you, so long as it's fully formed and cohesive.

The houseguest who stands out the most will be awarded Head of Household.

This project will be due on Wednesday, October 21 at 11:59:59 EST/8:59:59 PST.​

 

[NateD1226]

By a vote of six to two, @NateD1226, you have been evicted from the House of the Future.

Week 5
Head of Household Competition
Blue Sky Tomorrow

Tomorrowland always seems confused. It's not going to be in Blue Sky Disneyland. Your Head of Household challenge this week is to create a cohesive Tomorrowland with a fully formed theme. Will you go for fantastical Steampunk? Clockpunk fantasy? Pulpy Raygun Gothic? Optimistic Utopian? Or maybe something entirely different? It's up to you, so long as it's fully formed and cohesive.

The houseguest who stands out the most will be awarded Head of Household.

This project will be due on Wednesday, October 21 at 11:59:59 EST/8:59:59 PST.​

Aw sucks to leave so soon. See y'all outside the house!

 

[TheOriginalTiki]

Going live in 90 minutes with the Four Winds Square review.

 

[TheOriginalTiki]

Going live at midnight Eastern/9PM Pacific.

 

[AceAstro]

The House of the Future presents...

CenterCore Expo​

 

[spacemt354]

CenterCore Expo Review

This was definitely a land that I was looking forward to. There had been teases and brainstorming pitches since the game's inception for an Epcoty land somewhere in this park. CenterCore Expo fits that bill from the aesthetic design down to most of the attraction lineup. The simplicity of the design on display through the atmospheric descriptions as well as the brilliant Sketch-Up concept art provide the reader with visuals that portray the intentions of the land.

I'll also quickly address the teamwork, starting with one of the defacto leaders of this week. After coming up short but nonetheless always enthusiastic, this was @Mickeynerd17 's best week since the Minecraft infused Week 1.

You've earned your ears, facilitating the brainstorming while also encouraging others with reminded on their parts of the project throughout. It's your first time in a role like this, but I think a Tomorrowland was up your alley and a good one to try it on.

One piece of advice moving forward, if you take a leader role (and you weren't the only leader so this is also a general statement) the mission statement/synopsis of the land shouldn't be written a few hours before the due date. While the synopsis in a way makes sense, I think it could have been more cohesive than it ended up being with the Marvel infusion mixed with more classic Epcot style attractions.

In terms of the land, I really appreciate the map from Outbound, as well as even the attraction map for InnerSpace Mountain from Hulk. Beginning with New Horizons, I can best describe it as a love letter to the original. Part of what makes designing a new Horizons attraction so difficult is that you don't want to deviate too much from what made the original successful, while at the same time you don't want it to just be the same ride. I think you tried to blend the two, overall I can tell there was a lot of thought put into this though, which to me is more important than the impressiveness of a write-up or the attraction; whether there was passion behind it can stand tall, and this definitely had that in spades.

The Iron Man attraction, on its own, I enjoy it. You were able to create potential longevity out of the attraction by removing RDJ so age doesn't play a role in it feeling dated. And the concept itself sounds like a really fun attraction. However, aside from being an 'expo' in the broad sense, this attraction really sticks out to me as not fitting with the rest. This feels like a Tomorrowland or Avengers Campus attraction rather than an Epcot attraction. That being said, perhaps this land was going for the Epcot aesthetic, but without the ties to Epcot style attractions, in which case, that's fine but I'd have to go back and wonder what the message of the land is then? It would seem odd to me that both Horizons, Living with the Land, and the Peoplemover (once planned for Epcot) get new attractions here mixed with a more fantasy Marvel expo. Going back to what I was saying though, this combined with the Convention Hall I think are very well written attractions and exhibit areas.

I can't really hide my own personal preferences but InnerSpace Mountain just seems like an attraction I'd go on over and over again. Wonderfully crafted from the detail in the images showcasing where in the attraction you are, to again the great Sketch-Up, all around very neat. Sustainability I think encapsulates the edutainment vibes of Epcot the most out of any of the attractions here. As a Living with the Land fan, I appreciate the homage to the guitar riff and the overall purpose to this attraction. It's something very unique for a Magic Kingdom park but then again most of what has happened in this park stands on its own for traditional MK parks.

The dining I thought was very well designed in terms of the Menus themselves. The names and themes though I think could have used a touch-up. A Salad Bar does make sense but the name could have been a bit more creative, and the seafood restaurant to me at least feels like it fits better in Harbortown than here? Perhaps this is a transition to Harbortown sort of like Tomorrowland Terrace? Retail as always was well thought out, VendorPort was definitely a near concept.

In the end, I think this has a lot of individual high points - all-together I think it's very good, but could have been better integrated. I think there were steps in the right direction such as Mickeynerd's request for similar music played throughout, as it is a fantastic soundtrack choice, however in general I think would have also been beneficial to not combine so many classic concepts into one Expo.

Creativity: B+
Realism: B+
Detail: A+
Presentation: A+
Teamwork: A-
-------------------------
Overall: A-

 

[Mickeynerd17]

CenterCore Expo Review

This was definitely a land that I was looking forward to. There had been teases and brainstorming pitches since the game's inception for an Epcoty land somewhere in this park. CenterCore Expo fits that bill from the aesthetic design down to most of the attraction lineup. The simplicity of the design on display through the atmospheric descriptions as well as the brilliant Sketch-Up concept art provide the reader with visuals that portray the intentions of the land.

I'll also quickly address the teamwork, starting with one of the defacto leaders of this week. After coming up short but nonetheless always enthusiastic, this was @Mickeynerd17 's best week since the Minecraft infused Week 1.

You've earned your ears, facilitating the brainstorming while also encouraging others with reminded on their parts of the project throughout. It's your first time in a role like this, but I think a Tomorrowland was up your alley and a good one to try it on.

One piece of advice moving forward, if you take a leader role (and you weren't the only leader so this is also a general statement) the mission statement/synopsis of the land shouldn't be written a few hours before the due date. While the synopsis in a way makes sense, I think it could have been more cohesive than it ended up being with the Marvel infusion mixed with more classic Epcot style attractions.

In terms of the land, I really appreciate the map from Outbound, as well as even the attraction map for InnerSpace Mountain from Hulk. Beginning with New Horizons, I can best describe it as a love letter to the original. Part of what makes designing a new Horizons attraction so difficult is that you don't want to deviate too much from what made the original successful, while at the same time you don't want it to just be the same ride. I think you tried to blend the two, overall I can tell there was a lot of thought put into this though, which to me is more important than the impressiveness of a write-up or the attraction; whether there was passion behind it can stand tall, and this definitely had that in spades.

The Iron Man attraction, on its own, I enjoy it. You were able to create potential longevity out of the attraction by removing RDJ so age doesn't play a role in it feeling dated. And the concept itself sounds like a really fun attraction. However, aside from being an 'expo' in the broad sense, this attraction really sticks out to me as not fitting with the rest. This feels like a Tomorrowland or Avengers Campus attraction rather than an Epcot attraction. That being said, perhaps this land was going for the Epcot aesthetic, but without the ties to Epcot style attractions, in which case, that's fine but I'd have to go back and wonder what the message of the land is then? It would seem odd to me that both Horizons, Living with the Land, and the Peoplemover (once planned for Epcot) get new attractions here mixed with a more fantasy Marvel expo. Going back to what I was saying though, this combined with the Convention Hall I think are very well written attractions and exhibit areas.

I can't really hide my own personal preferences but InnerSpace Mountain just seems like an attraction I'd go on over and over again. Wonderfully crafted from the detail in the images showcasing where in the attraction you are, to again the great Sketch-Up, all around very neat. Sustainability I think encapsulates the edutainment vibes of Epcot the most out of any of the attractions here. As a Living with the Land fan, I appreciate the homage to the guitar riff and the overall purpose to this attraction. It's something very unique for a Magic Kingdom park but then again most of what has happened in this park stands on its own for traditional MK parks.

The dining I thought was very well designed in terms of the Menus themselves. The names and themes though I think could have used a touch-up. A Salad Bar does make sense but the name could have been a bit more creative, and the seafood restaurant to me at least feels like it fits better in Harbortown than here? Perhaps this is a transition to Harbortown sort of like Tomorrowland Terrace? Retail as always was well thought out, VendorPort was definitely a near concept.

In the end, I think this has a lot of individual high points - all-together I think it's very good, but could have been better integrated. I think there were steps in the right direction such as Mickeynerd's request for similar music played throughout, as it is a fantastic soundtrack choice, however in general I think would have also been beneficial to not combine so many classic concepts into one Expo.

Creativity: B+
Realism: B+
Detail: A+
Presentation: A+
Teamwork: A-
-------------------------
Overall: A-

Thank you so much for your kind words and review!

 

[mickeyfan5534]

Week 5
Power of Veto
Rewind and Reset

You got our critiques, now it's time to act on them. For this week's Power of Veto, you will go back to one of the five lands of Blue Sky Disneyland and pitch either an expansion or redo of that land. Now, we don't expect a full-on project to be done, we simply want a pitch on how you would have done one of these lands differently with the benefit of hindsight

This project will be due at 11:59:59 AM EST/8:59:59 AM PST on Friday, October 23

Head of Household
@NigelChanning09

Nominees for Eviction
@Brer Panther
@b-wolf95

Random Picks
@Mickeynerd17
@PerGron
@Outbound​

 

[NigelChanning]

First of all, here’s a quick explanation for my nominations:

@b-wolf95 , unfortunately due to you missing out on writing the retail section, your level of hard work didn't match up with everybody else. This is purely a game related move and not at all personal.

@Brer Panther , it was between you and one other person and I decided via random generator. I had judged the other person based on their work this round specifically but I judged you on your work in this entire game so far. Unfortunately, I don’t think that additions like the People Mover or other flat rides really add that much compared to other players’ work.

I am definitely rooting for each of you, however! Y’all got this in the bag!

 

[Pi on my Cake]

Going live at midnight Eastern/9PM Pacific.

In our defense: The original Tomorrowland was essentially an early version of epcot. With many people saying that the further Disneyland has gone from that the worse it has gotten. As much inspiration as we took from epcot: the peoplemover, space mountain, and Adventures through Inner Space were all from Tomorrowland. Plus, Horizons is just an expansion of Carousel of Progress: A Tomorrowland classic.

SustainAbility is the ONLY aspect of the land that is directly Epcot inspired without any real tie to other Tomorrowlands.

 

[Mickeynerd17]

In our defense: The original Tomorrowland was essentially an early version of epcot. With many people saying that the further Disneyland has gone from that the worse it has gotten. As much inspiration as we took from epcot: the peoplemover, space mountain, and Adventures through Inner Space were all from Tomorrowland. Plus, Horizons is just an expansion of Carousel of Progress: A Tomorrowland classic.

SustainAbility is the ONLY aspect of the land that is directly Epcot inspired without any real tie to other Tomorrowlands.

Exactly, this is my entire thought process right now.

It isn't exactly right to nail this for not being fantastical. Epcot had plenty of fantastical parts to it. Literally look at Journey into Imagination, how can someone keep a straight face while saying it doesn't have enough fantasy to it?

So, I think our ideas and choices are justified. Sometimes people can't see the forest for the trees, but it's ultimately the judges decision, not ours.

 

[Outbound]

Outbound thoughts
Have to admit... it’s uninspiring when winning the HoH basically comes down to judges’ bias on a choice the team collectively made from the start. This isn’t to bring down Nigel for making a fantastic Iron Man project, but I wish he’d have won from the merits of his project and it’s overall contribution in the grander scheme. Instead, I’m getting the impression he only won out of spite against Epcot?

It seems the park isn’t blue sky anymore... first Adventureland can’t have a backstory because it’s too much like SEA, then Fantasyland can’t be bigger than usual even if it’s only by a few rides, now Tomorrowland can’t be optimistic as per Walt’s original intention. It feels less and less blue sky and more and more like “design a 2020 Disney Park, but swap out most of the attractions, then don’t do much else”

You can see how confusing this can be. I enjoy playing and want this game to succeed, but every week I tend to walk out of reviews more confused than anything else.

 

[JokersWild]

Outbound thoughts
Have to admit... it’s uninspiring when winning the HoH basically comes down to judges’ bias on a choice the team collectively made from the start. This isn’t to bring down Nigel for making a fantastic Iron Man project, but I wish he’d have won from the merits of his project and it’s overall contribution in the grander scheme. Instead, I’m getting the impression he only won out of spite against Epcot?

It seems the park isn’t blue sky anymore... first Adventureland can’t have a backstory because it’s too much like SEA, then Fantasyland can’t be bigger than usual even if it’s only by a few rides, now Tomorrowland can’t be optimistic as per Walt’s original intention. It feels less and less blue sky and more and more like “design a 2020 Disney Park, but swap out most of the attractions, then don’t do much else”

You can see how confusing this can be. I enjoy playing and want this game to succeed, but every week I tend to walk out of reviews more confused than anything else.

Obviously I can only speak for myself, but Nigel was chosen primarily because we felt that he had the strongest, most detailed, distinct, and "complete" submission at the time that HoH had to be named. For me, the aspect of it being removed from EPCOT wasn't a reason. We had a lot of trouble pinning down an HoH this time around, mainly because the person that we all unanimously thought did the best was ineligible. That being said, I absolutely stand by our choice, and I think that Nigel more than deserves it, despite his portion not necessarily melding with the rest of the land perfectly.

In terms of the other lands, again I can only speak for myself, but for Adventure Atoll my main issue wasn't that the backstory was too long - it was that the rest of the team didn't commit to it and there were a ton of continuity errors primarily in the attractions. For Fantasyland, to speak to the size of it, your land has 15 attractions, including flat rides and the castle walkthrough. MK's Fantasyland has 10 attractions, not including meet 'n greets and the castle which is for some reason considered an attraction on Wikipedia. If we don't include flatrides, that total goes down to 7. Like I said during the Fantasyland project - even though this is Blue Sky, I still think that you guys should be addressing realism to at least some extent. Thinking on it more, I think that your Fantasyland would have been more successful had your other lands matched the scale. We went from two normal sized lands to an absolutely gigantic Fantasyland. If the whole park was on Fantasyland's scale, it probably wouldn't have been as jarring.

In terms of your Tomorrowland, I'll go further in depth when I get my review up, but my biggest issue isn't necessarily that you went with EPCOT; it's that you guys chose the most milquetoast option of what was pitched. Not to say that it wasn't done well, because it certainly was and is absolutely the peak of presentation thus far. I understand why you didn't choose certain themes, but to go from gritty alien wild west to EPCOT-but-not is really unfortunate. But for me, this is further reinforced when I see that every attraction except for Iron Man is a spiritual successor to a classic Disney attraction. They're all great, and they're all done extremely well, but at the end of the day, they're still echoes of beloved attractions.

But, at the end of the day, our feedback doesn't matter. One of you is always going to be picked for HoH. The only time my voice matters is when we're deciding on who the veto goes to. Eliminations are all run by you guys, so at the end of the day we have zero say into who goes home or stays no matter how well or poorly they performed. Like last round .



I truly hope that I don't come across as standoffish or rude, as that is not my intention. I just wanted to give you guys a bit of perspective to hopefully show where we (or at least I) were coming from in terms of our past feedback and this round's HoH. This game certainly has not been easy to judge, but I appreciate you guys sticking around. You all are doing fantastic, and I'm very excited to see how this game finishes. If anyone has any other concerns that you don't want to air publicly, by all means reach out to us in the diary room. That's what they're there for. Doug's been sending us memes for the past week and a half which for all I know could be cryptic threats, so whatever you gotta do we're here for it.

 

[mickeyfan5534]

Obviously I can only speak for myself, but Nigel was chosen primarily because we felt that he had the strongest, most detailed, distinct, and "complete" submission at the time that HoH had to be named. For me, the aspect of it being removed from EPCOT wasn't a reason. We had a lot of trouble pinning down an HoH this time around, mainly because the person that we all unanimously thought did the best was ineligible. That being said, I absolutely stand by our choice, and I think that Nigel more than deserves it, despite his portion not necessarily melding with the rest of the land perfectly.

In terms of the other lands, again I can only speak for myself, but for Adventure Atoll my main issue wasn't that the backstory was too long - it was that the rest of the team didn't commit to it and there were a ton of continuity errors primarily in the attractions. For Fantasyland, to speak to the size of it, your land has 15 attractions, including flat rides and the castle walkthrough. MK's Fantasyland has 10 attractions, not including meet 'n greets and the castle which is for some reason considered an attraction on Wikipedia. If we don't include flatrides, that total goes down to 7. Like I said during the Fantasyland project - even though this is Blue Sky, I still think that you guys should be addressing realism to at least some extent. Thinking on it more, I think that your Fantasyland would have been more successful had your other lands matched the scale. We went from two normal sized lands to an absolutely gigantic Fantasyland. If the whole park was on Fantasyland's scale, it probably wouldn't have been as jarring.

In terms of your Tomorrowland, I'll go further in depth when I get my review up, but my biggest issue isn't necessarily that you went with EPCOT; it's that you guys chose the most milquetoast option of what was pitched. Not to say that it wasn't done well, because it certainly was and is absolutely the peak of presentation thus far. I understand why you didn't choose certain themes, but to go from gritty alien wild west to EPCOT-but-not is really unfortunate. But for me, this is further reinforced when I see that every attraction except for Iron Man is a spiritual successor to a classic Disney attraction. They're all great, and they're all done extremely well, but at the end of the day, they're still echoes of beloved attractions.

But, at the end of the day, our feedback doesn't matter. One of you is always going to be picked for HoH. The only time my voice matters is when we're deciding on who the veto goes to. Eliminations are all run by you guys, so at the end of the day we have zero say into who goes home or stays no matter how well or poorly they performed. Like last round .



I truly hope that I don't come across as standoffish or rude, as that is not my intention. I just wanted to give you guys a bit of perspective to hopefully show where we (or at least I) were coming from in terms of our past feedback and this round's HoH. This game certainly has not been easy to judge, but I appreciate you guys sticking around. You all are doing fantastic, and I'm very excited to see how this game finishes. If anyone has any other concerns that you don't want to air publicly, by all means reach out to us in the diary room. That's what they're there for. Doug's been sending us memes for the past week and a half which for all I know could be cryptic threats, so whatever you gotta do we're here for it.

I think Jokers says it best here. One thing I want to add: we're always going to find something to critique and improve on. Sometimes that's nitpicks, sometimes that's more than nitpicks.

 

[goofyyukyuk]

Outbound thoughts
Have to admit... it’s uninspiring when winning the HoH basically comes down to judges’ bias on a choice the team collectively made from the start. This isn’t to bring down Nigel for making a fantastic Iron Man project, but I wish he’d have won from the merits of his project and it’s overall contribution in the grander scheme. Instead, I’m getting the impression he only won out of spite against Epcot?

It seems the park isn’t blue sky anymore... first Adventureland can’t have a backstory because it’s too much like SEA, then Fantasyland can’t be bigger than usual even if it’s only by a few rides, now Tomorrowland can’t be optimistic as per Walt’s original intention. It feels less and less blue sky and more and more like “design a 2020 Disney Park, but swap out most of the attractions, then don’t do much else”

You can see how confusing this can be. I enjoy playing and want this game to succeed, but every week I tend to walk out of reviews more confused than anything else.

I just want to echo what Jokers said on a couple different things. Nigel wasn’t chosen, in my opinion, just because he did something that wasn’t a spiritual successor to an Epcot attraction. One of the things we’ve pushed is that every round, we’ll give out HoH for different reasons so that it isn’t the person that’s best at concept art or the person that leads the brainstorming getting it every time because that gets stale and it tends to be the same people. Personally, and I’ll talk about it in my review, I thought that the Iron Man attraction was really out of place. However, Nigel did a great job with it, and then he reinforced our decision to give him HoH by making a solid retail concept after he knew he had HoH and just did it because he wanted to improve the project. I realize that, in the podcast, it sounded like Nigel was chosen to spite the Epcot theme, but that wasn’t really a factor in my mind because it was a collective theme.
As far as the issues about backstory goes... I think that you’re forgetting that blue sky doesn’t have to mean making the biggest, most complex and complicated park ever, because that’s near impossible to judge with no context. We kept saying in the podcast a couple weeks ago that Seasons of Fantasy felt like its own isolated theme park, which doesn’t make sense as a land within a larger park. I actually really agree with what Tiki said in the podcast last night: you can have a great backstory without it being the size of an essay. When you think about the backstories of most Disney lands, especially castle parks, it’s really really subtle. For example, Tomorrowland in MK: intergalactic space port. There’s more to the story, but it’s simple enough that people can understand it without much explanation. Even more complicated lands like Africa or Pandora in AK boil down to a fairly simple idea, whether it’s technology taking over a village or whatever. With Adventure Atoll, the backstory was fantastic and super detailed, but it wasn’t committed to all the way, and lots of it was unnecessarily confusing. We’ve never said there’s anything wrong with a backstory, but I’ve said it a few times now... when a backstory is really complex and is sort of required to know for your land to make any sense, that’s when it becomes too much. Like I said, this is your team’s park, and blue sky means different things to different people, but to me, it doesn’t mean making a park that’s unrealistic in terms of sheer size and complexity. I’m looking for ideas that are unrealistic as far as the basic ideas go and attractions that push the limits of what’s realistic. For example, the seasons idea was fantastic because I don’t think it would ever happen in a park, but the scope got out of control. You’ve gotta remember that when we’re trying to judge, it’s tough to not have some sort of reference point in the real world, and when it feels really out of touch with reality, it becomes less believable in my opinion.
Briefly (I know this is getting long lol), I wanted to touch on the Epcot theme. I’ll just be honest, I thought the theme itself lacked creativity and originality. I absolutely adored everything about the land, except the fact that it was supposed to be an original Tomorrowland rather than a Future Word overhaul, because if this was a Future World project, I’d be completely on board with everything here. My main issue is that there are plenty of ways to do a hopeful Tomorrowland without it being Epcot. It felt like you had some other really solid ideas, but once you guys decided Horizons was going to be the anchor point (which is a great idea), you kept sliding towards more Epcot stuff. Honestly, I was super confused about what happened to the sea theme. It seemed like you guys agreed on doing it but then never actually did anything with it because you were focused on Epcot, so that confused me some. Like I said, it’s your park, but you’ll be hearing this a lot over the next couple days lol... Epcot is fantastic, and this land is fantastic, but a remake of 1980s Epcot (even with an Iron Man attraction too) doesn’t fit Tomorrowland for me.
I hope this cleared some stuff up for you guys, and hopefully my review will as well... I promise we’re not out to get you guys on anything (I’ve played these games, I still remember what it felt like to get roasted about Yogi Bear when it was my idea lol) and it sucks, but on the bright side, if you guys disagree with us, our opinions on your projects as a whole are pretty much just our opinions without much influence on the game. Keep up the great work though! It’s so fun getting to see all this stuff come together as well as it has!

 

[spacemt354]

I'll say as a friendly neighborhood reviewer and former player in the game, I had no problem with the Epcot inspired Tomorrowland since it had been a themed land teased for this park since Week 1.

One of the early themes for Main Street was Progress City, which was ultimately shelved in hopes that it might be used in Tomorrowland. For small world, a utopia inspired land was brought up, as well as a World's Fair land, which again was not chosen and postponed till Tomorrowland.

The dynamic of the reviews to me act like feedback for an individual thread on the forum, where the writers have autonomy on the creation of the park, with a 'feedback welcome' tag at the end of the post. Where it differs is not only that the ones giving the feedback guide the direction of the park via land by land prompts, but I think offer a bit more analytical feedback compared to the encouragement you tend to get on individual threads.

Unlike the great SAT word milquetoast used in the podcast to describe the land, Blue Sky is a very subjective term with no clear cut definition.

To me, Blue Sky means you are in control and real-life restraints (budgets, location, themes) are less important. The Red Dead park from the SYWTBAI finale is an example of Blue Sky to me. Incredible concept, but insanely large, and given its niche and size, would probably never be built, but is an amazing creative exercise nonetheless.

I don't want to straddle the fence but I can also see both sides, in this is a new concept for a game combining many elements of brainstorming threads with competitive strategy, things will clash. But the most important thing to me is to be proud of what you create regardless of feedback. Walt Disney was fired from a newspaper for "lacking creativity" - feedback only goes so far.

 

[goofyyukyuk]

The dynamic of the reviews to me act like feedback for an individual thread on the forum, where the writers have autonomy on the creation of the park, with a 'feedback welcome' tag at the end of the post. Where it differs is not only that the ones giving the feedback guide the direction of the park via land by land prompts, but I think offer a bit more analytical feedback compared to the encouragement you tend to get on individual threads.

This is probably the best way to put it... we’re just here to try and help everyone improve, and in my opinion, I’ve never felt like listing all the great things and ignoring the things that could be improved was very helpful. I hope I’ve been doing a good job of acknowledging the amazing stuff done in my reviews... this land in particular had tons of amazing elements. It’s just that this is a competition, and we want to be more detailed and helpful than a “nice work!” reply on an independent project thread, if that makes sense