4 hours ago, themagician said:

Personally, I haven't done been on a VR coaster yet, but my thoughts on it are it is a bit pointless. 

It's incredible to me how many people seem to be willing to argue against a technology they've not experienced for themselves. This seems to be a running theme on enthusiast forums, and it's really quite silly.

I've ridden the up-charge VR at Europa Park, and it's seriously impressive technology that turns an understated powered coaster into a brilliant ride. Capacity is a major issue of course, but I suspect that will be solved in time.

^The Europa Park VR is the one I'm most keen to try, as the ride video was developed by their in-house media team (Mack Media). I suspect that like a lot of attractions, the quality of the VR experience is going to vary widely between parks.

I think enhancing a lackluster rise might be alright. 

But I mean a motion base and some fans could achieve pretty much the same result. I like the optional enhancement but for me personally I want to ride restored revolution in all its historical glory, not strap a phone to my head. 

I don't like the idea of it being compulsory. 

The thing I'd add to that last line, is even if it isn't compulsory, it is blowing the queues out.  I'm slightly more open to the idea, I hate VR and it makes me feel sick, and I think that's partly because the g-forces and what you're seeing don't match up no matter how good the simulator is, so this seems like something that might fix that issue and I wouldn't mind giving it a go.  But putting it on a big new coaster seems like it'd be potentially redundant to me.

6 hours ago, Noxegon said:

It's incredible to me how many people seem to be willing to argue against a technology they've not experienced for themselves. This seems to be a running theme on enthusiast forums, and it's really quite silly.

I've ridden the up-charge VR at Europa Park, and it's seriously impressive technology that turns an understated powered coaster into a brilliant ride. Capacity is a major issue of course, but I suspect that will be solved in time.

I know I've judged it, and I haven't ridden one before, but it was just the idea of it to me. But I'd happily be proven wrong, and I would probably ride one if I got the chance. And by your impressions of it, it does seem better than what I expect. But the issue of capacity and boarding the ride aspect, would be something that would take time to figure out. I assume it's because of people having to adjust straps on the VR so it fits and is tight so it doesn't fall off.

5 hours ago, djrappa said:

But I mean a motion base and some fans could achieve pretty much the same result.

I disagree. I've ridden a fair few simulators showing coaster videos with fans blowing in my face. The experience is completely and utterly different.

^Yes I've heard it doesn't make you sick like a simulator. I know I struggle with some simulators. Funnily I really had to fight the barf doing an aerobatic flight last year, it felt like a simulator lol just with serious g forces.

I agree with djrappa that they are putting this on some really good coasters rather than lacklustre rides is a shame. I mean Superman at Six Flags New England has it, which is disappointing because it's an awesome coaster already and based on the anecdotal evidence so far, lines will be scary.

On Friday, April 08, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Luke said:

It has been rumored that Mack rides are involved with the new Movieworld coaster.

With the original rumour coming from a guy in England, I have to wonder whether he got his wires crossed with Movie Park Germany's 2017 Mack coaster: http://rcdb.com/13796.htm

I do wonder though if a motion base used the VR headsets rather than a big screen and 3D glasses how that would compare. 

 

I think until it's mature tech that is reliable and quick to load guests with it needs to stay out of parks. 

I honestly give these things MONTHS in a six flags park before they are broken and mothballed. 

3 minutes ago, djrappa said:

I think until it's mature tech that is reliable and quick to load guests with it needs to stay out of parks. 

Do you know that they're not though?

I haven't read through the whole thread so I don't know if you've tried it first hand sorry. 

I was thinking maybe with Samsung sponsoring and making the headsets they're using that it might be decent enough? Although it is Samsung and they're known to be laggy and crap. 

14 minutes ago, djrappa said:

I do wonder though if a motion base used the VR headsets rather than a big screen and 3D glasses how that would compare. 

I think something like this would work amazingly well with Microsoft's Hololens. You can still have big screens, but the device can create other images that appear in front of the screen or elsewhere. There'd also be less of a need for physical props in the ride because they can just be project by the device.

When I say mature I mean not a phone cobbled into a headset cabled tied together and retrofitted onto a coaster...

 

I mean a fully fleshed out, reliable and robust tech integrated to the train. 

How would you propose they build it in, or integrate it? 

At this stage I don't. But I'm not a ride engineer. If you'd said 20 years ago onboard audio would be commonplace it would have sounded crazy. But now it is. 

Give this tech time and it will get a lot more refined. 

True, I just can't see a way for it to work other than how it is. It's not exactly like they can strap your head in. Still, I guess we've got to start somewhere. 

There was this VR coaster done about 10 years ago:

http://rcdb.com/1901.htm

I'd say Alton probably have it closest in terms of integrating it properly, and are probably at a bit of an advantage because the ride has dual stations (Which act as a bit of a buffer to slow loading because trains don't have to stack)

 

I'm honestly most surprised that more parks didn't trial it as an upcharge.

But SF have really gone all out, and I think its a case of someone from Samsung realizing they can expose a lot of people to the tech.

4 hours ago, Gazza said:

There was this VR coaster done about 10 years ago:

http://rcdb.com/1901.htm

To me that's more of an advanced motion simulator. I think the way SF have done it is way more immersive. I also note though that 10 years ago this ride would have been somewhat groundbreaking technology. 

Also what happened after the 10 months? Did they remove the VR bit or remove the whole ride? 

edit - Ah, wasn't a popular destination so the whole place closed down. 

Edited April 10, 20169 yr by reanimated35

I was just on the Movie World Wikipedia page seeing if Doomsday had been put on there attractions list and I saw this.

My assumption is that someone has modified MW's wiki page!  

I would love to see them add a Giga Coaster. One like Millennium Force and hopefully they can go for a height that will beat TOTII (115m/377feet). However the cost of MF is 25million USD in 2000. Add inflation 37.661millionUSD in 2015. Add our great exchange rate at the moment and this will equal 51.82 Million AUD. However a great Giga coaster would look great on the sky line at MW and would be an impressive new ride to try and claim as the tallest full circuit roller coaster in Australia for the 2018 Commonwealth games. Intamin did a great job on flying ace and would be great to finally see a good new roller coaster being built on the Gold Coast again. It would make sense for them to go with Intamin as they are working on DDD at the moment.

I think that would be a great coaster for the park, and would provide a coaster experience that the GC hasn't got.

Hmmmm sounds to good to be true they can't afford that

The question is, if we were to get a gigacoaster, what sort would you want?
- One like MF? Airtime hills and overbanked turns?
- One like I305? Full of twists and turns?
- One like Fury 325? That B&M we've been waiting for?

A gigacoaster is probably too hopeful though... and I'd be just as satisfied with a great hyper or even just airtime machine like Bizarro, Skyrush, or Expedition Ge-Force.

Edited May 16, 20169 yr by Santa07

pretty much anyone can edit a wiki page. i'll wait for some concrete evidence thank you.

Edited May 16, 20169 yr by bladex

Yep. I could go on their now and provide an edit to say they are building a Kingda Ka clone with 18 inversions and it would get published 

Yeah, that's wrong.