chauncey

Google didn't create that, it was somebody who took advantage of the Google system (not very hard to do at all), to boost it's placement in the search engine. We could do the same thing to place Theme Park Review as the #1 site for anything! Maybe "credit whore" (it's already #2!).

Numbers are nothing special, even big ones!

I'd say that they are. While all of their coasters seem fun, they also seem pointless, generic, or simply "nothing special" compared to similar rides. Some of them barely qualify as coasters at all!

I heard they retrack it every year, just a bad coaster, i guess. Intamin makes wooden coasters idea for the likes of Cedar Fair. They could replace MS with one of those. Well if they retrack it every year, and it still beats you up, then it should probably be scrapped! The support structure seems far too dense, which is the likely culprit, and seems to be a major problem with Dinn Corporation rides in general. It's too bad, as the layout is awesome! While an Intamin wooden rollercoaster is a great option for larger parks, if a park is willing to continuously retrack a coaster, it isn't nessecary.

Big Thunder Mountain railroad! Fun, as always, but nothing spectacular, as always, except for that one turn off the second lift, as always. I also rode Rock 'n' Rollercoaster for the first time! It was a fun experience, with some nice inversions, good laterals, and plenty of changes in direction! Although, there was very little airtime, no positive gees, and the launch had the same "first drop without a first drop" feeling as Hulk. The trains were pretty bad, but not as bad as I had feared, and I somehow managed to get my hands up, although it took a lot of work, and much inconvenience to the man sitting next to me! Sorry about that, if you're reading this. Before that, though, was Primeval Whirl. This coaster is simply awful! The worst designed ride ever, in every possible way, and the spinning, well, let's not talk about the spinning! I'm not even sure if it qualifies for my definition of a coaster, which demands a rollercoaster-like experience, which this doesn't really provide. It was awful! I'm glad I got it over with early.

Most painful? Gwazi. Most fun? Gwazi. I mean it! Although for best overall I'd say Dueling Dragons: Ice, with worst overall being Primeval Whirl just yesterday (I hate spinning rides!). There is more to a good experience than fun, and more to a bad experience than pain (like spinning!)

Well, I'd just recommend a nice retracking, and maybe some new trains, based upon the complaints I've heard! If it would have to be replaced, let GG, GCI, or S&S, build a new wooden coaster! If it would have to be replaced by a steel coaster, then they should get something that delivers a truly unique ride experience. Maybe a flyer? Although, considering that they don't have a "sitdown" B&M, a floorless might be a good option, so long as it's actually forceful and more than just a bunch of loops, with a few turns at the end to get it back in the station!

What? I've heard Mean Streak tracks poorly, but assuming it's about as bad as Gwazi, with a layout as awesome as that, it's almost certainly a great coaster regardless! Certainly better than that erect penis ride! Besides, judging from what few rides I've been on, inversion are overrated, and floorless coasters even more so!

A LOG FLUME! I would really hate to see a flume taken out for a flatride, although it seems like that's what we're going to get. Flatrides are the only kind of ride I never enjoy, while flumes are the only kind of ride I always enjoy! I'd settle for a great water coaster, though, if I had to.

My recommendation: Biergarten Restaurant at Epcot. It's an all-you-can-eat buffet with tons of menu options, which are constantly rotated, so every time you can back for more, there are some new options to choose from! Also, if anyone in your group is of age, I've also heard they have the best beer selection (although I also believe those are the only drinks without refills!). Best of all, though, is nobody ever goes! I think the Polka scares them off.

I hope it is a dark-ride, as I love dark-rides! I think it's the only thing Hersheypark doesn't have that I'd like to see (the 'factory' tour doesn't count!). However, I wouldn't like to see a Spiderman-esque darkride. I haven't been on Darkcastle, but Spiderman was terrible, I thought. The 3D glasses made everything blurry and hard to see, the "story" elements took away from the ride experience (they always do), and there really isn't anything else to it! I much prefer "old fashioned" darkrides, were you just ride through scenes which are scary / interesting / beautiful / whatever, and maybe throw in a few drops, or sharp corners, and perhaps a bit of fire, and that's that. "Shooter" darkrides can be fun, too.

No, if anything goes wrong on Rollercoasters, which are designed to scare you, of course, everyone panics, except those who know about rollercoasters. This is especially true of the media. The same thing happened on Splash Mountain yesterday when I was on it! Only they just had to restart all the blocks one-by-one. We were the last block though, so it took the longest, and everyone got scared. I tried to calm them down, explain what was happening, explain all the messages being sent down to us over the speaker system, etc, but they wouldn't listen, until, of course, it all proceeded as I explained it would. Oh, well...

Then your game is wierd. There's even a scenario where you pretty much have to build 10+ intensity rides (and you can build a scenario with that same requirement by selecting "guests prefer intense rides" in the scenario editor), and nobody except you has have had a problem with 10+ excitement ratings! Wierd.

Well, the only snacks I can't pass up are those chocolate-chip cookie ice-cream sandwiches you find everywhere, and those soft-serve "Super Waffle Cone Sundaes" at Busch Gardens (and other Busch parks?). The rest, though, is easy to pass up, although I do enjoy a good sausage/bun combination, if I'm forced to eat more typical "amusement park" food.

What do you mean? It's incredibly easy to keep nausea under 6. Also, why limit excitement? A 10+ excitement ride would be a good thing!

1. The game has no limit on any of the ratings for what peeps will ride. As in real-life, every guest is different. Some would never dare ride anything with intensity less than 10! If you were to put limits, though, I'd say: Maximum: Excitement: none. Intensity: 10 Nausea: 6 Minimum: Excitement: 6 Intensity: 4 Nausea: none. 2. I would say "no" to custom scenery, personally. The rest I have no information, or opinion, on.

I think it has more than 0-gees! When I rode it last I was standing up (I'm serious), and this is with the restraint locked very tightly on me! It was unbelievable. However, most of the time I ride it isn't that amazing. Definetly a solid ride, but not mind blowing. I probably just ride it too much, though. Nice update though! It's interesting to see your homepark through the eyes of somebody visiting from somewhere else.

The worst I've ever seen is, and I hate to say this, Busch Gardens Tampa. I'm not a particularly well traveled enthusiast, however, Busch Gardens is constantly filled with people who simply don't seem very interested in being there. I never see this at Disney, Universal, or even Sea World. Of course, these are the people who always skip in lines, bounce basketballs, and generally act like idiots. It's quite sad really.

Yes, and we should do everything we can to keep those out of the hands of criminals, too.

This guy will make a terrible Bond. He doesn't look like a dashing secretagent, he looks like a ruggedly handsome crimelord, or something. And blonde? Besides, none of this stuff sounds very exciting. "Less gadgets..." "You'll learn about his martini mix..." What? "You'll learn how he mixes his martini" Doesn't he "shake it" rather than "stir it"? Is it really more complicated than that? If so, does it matter? "No Q, or Moneypenny" Huh? This is going to be the worst Bond movie ever! I love the original, true, Casino Royal though. "Peter Sellers was the best Bond!"

The difference is that a gun can do a lot more damage, quicker, and easier. This means that violent crime committed with a gun causes greater injury, and death, than violent crime committed with other weapons. You can look to the UK as proof of that, too.

I don't think it's unrealistic. As I said, in the United Kingdom, they have more violent crime than we do, but it's mostly minor, and mostly goes unreported, because it mostly doesn't involve guns. Why? Because they don't have the same access to them! If you were to take all the guns from US criminals, and give them to UK criminals, the gun crime rates in the UK will soar, while the gun crime rates in the US will stay about the same, because the criminals will just get more! That's the problem. Clearly other countries have it solved, so why don't we? I guess that's the question the thread is meant to pose, and I don't have the answer, but I know there must be an answer! You, on the other hand, don't think there's an answer, which is not only clearly wrong, but probably helps make the problem worse. Maybe that's the answer! The United States has simply given up trying to find the answer.

But, did the "Shooters" buy the guns? taken from: http://www.cato.org/dailys/01-10-00.html Bowling for Columbine Lies Revealed: http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html I wasn't basing my assumptions on Bowling for Columbine. I've only seen the movie once, and I remember very little about it, and what I do remember, I disagree with. I was just using that as an example because I remember that was an issue being brought up a lot when Columbine was happening. Okay, so that was a bad example, but I still say that my point (that we need to get the guns out of the hands of criminals, somehow) stands.

Nobody here has disagree with what you're saying. Noboday has said, as far as I can tell, the we need to increase regulation on guns. What we have said is that you need to decrease the availability of guns. This means making sure that outlaws don't have guns, which, of course, has less to do with gun control laws, and more to do with the proper enforcement of gun control laws. For instance, the Columbine killers bought their guns illegally, but from a "legal" source! They didn't get these things off the black market, they got them from gun shows, gun shops, etc, and yet, if those shows, and shops, had been following the law, they never should have given them those guns! The blame for that lies clearly not in the laws, but in the enforcement of those laws! That's the point.

Actually, the cable isn't the redundant failsafe, it's the main brake. There's another redundant failsafe, forgot what it was, but it truly is fail-safe.