You can ignore my playtime. With great anticipation I followed the development/release of this game closely since it was announced, and have an intimate understanding of the games issues and successes.

With that said, the game commits a few cardinal sins which means I cannot recommend it until these issues are resolved. I will outline the major issues below. As and when Frontier resolves these issues I will scrub this review for a positive endorsement.

----------------------------------------------------

First off, I was the target audience for this sequel. I love waterpark features in Theme Park style games. During the life cycle of PC1 I hoped very much for an expansion in the vein of RCT3 Soaked. Considering that this is the studio that brought us RCT3 Soaked, it is bewildering to me some of the errors that have been made. But it doesn't end at the waterpark features. There are numerous missteps that any given videogame pedestrian could have spotted.

1. MAJOR ISSUE (Non-simulated water slides)
- Half of the fun of RCT3 Soaked was in the construction of the slides. When puzzling out their designs, having to worry about whether a rider would fly off the side of the slide on a turn, or get thrown in to the stratosphere going too fast over a bump. Having made waterparks the core selling point of this sequel and not having understood the significance of this shows a serious deficiency in the minds of the direction team at Frontier. Not to mention, that it's not just the gameplay but the visual faults of current canned-track system. It just looks awful.

2. MAJOR ISSUE (Console priority)
- If there are any genres of videogames that are intrinsically PC in pedigree they are Strategy & Management games. A powerful computer, a mouse & keyboard, and a more 'serious', i.e non-casual, kind of player were intrinsic in the formation of these genres. So the first, and embarrassing, misstep in logic is here.

- The second misstep is in base historical knowledge of videogames. I ask Frontier, how many games - specifically traditionally PC games - have failed or had their success stifled by their development team prioritising console play or for otherwise wanting to unify development between the PC and console versions? The past decade or so is an endless parade of such releases. It is a fools errand, and it is additionally foolish given the history available. What is the definition of insanity, Frontier?
The better question is the contrary, How few titles have managed success despite doing this? Skyrim? Any others?

- Essentially, Frontier, as professionals, had every opportunity to sidestep this obvious trap, and yet they walked right in to it. Limiting performance and features for PC players at the expense of console players? No, no, no. Ruining the user experience of PC players to accommodate a unified user interface? No, no, no. These things ought never have even been an issue, and that they are is what gives me the most concern about the degeneration in professional quality at Frontier. Which leads on to my final major issue

3. MAJOR ISSUE (A rushed release)
- It is quite clear to all who have paid close attention that this release was unnecessarily rushed to meet the desired, presumably pre-christmas, released date. Is this the Frontier I know? I wouldn't have thought so. To string us along their with their pre-release materials and streams. Conning us in to thinking everything is fine, when in fact the game could have done with a serious delay, and a community test period. This is quite intolerable and I suspect has struck off a good deal of goodwill Frontier has built up over the years.

Let's go back to PC1, and just how open Frontier were. The community involvement in the development. The long alpha/testing period, etc. Who is at Frontier now? Has another party bought a dominating share in Frontier publishing? Are they even a public company? It makes no sense.

There are bugs, details & expected run-of-the-mill features missing everywhere. They even pushed a build with a game-breaking bug that prevents peeps from getting on waterslides to their early access influencers. The people who are supposed to be showing off how great the game is. It's bananas, and completely unnecessary.

All this bad reputation for nothing. Just look at the Steam reviews. Is this what they wanted? Is this what they expected? I hope they were expecting it, because the team must have a screw loose otherwise. Had they just pushed back the release date to properly finish the game all of this could have been avoided and they would have had a stellar release on their hands. I just can't understand it.

- - - In Closing - - -
I really want to love this game, and it is clear that there is an amazing core ready to be utiliised. However, as it is now I have no desire to play the game, and worse-still I feel taken advantage of. This is the first pre-order I've made in over a decade, breaking my rule because I trusted in the solid reputation of Frontier based on their past conduct, and they've made a fool of me. Shame on them.

I'm writing this review because I believe in the game. I believe in Frontier. I hope that they read it. I want them to succeed and I want the game that was promised. However, until these issues are addressed, I'd rather spare myself. I'll come back and play the game as it was intended. As it was marketed. As it was sold to me. Not whatever this is.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

I had to load the game up just to leave a review. Since I had no desire to actually play the game I thought I'd just check out some other peoples creations. Good lord, was that another horrendous shock.

First off, console focused development strikes again. The Frontier workshop is a clunky nightmare to get around, and only eight blueprint boxes are shown on screen at any one time. Great if you're sat back on a sofa I presume, not so efficient on PC, though.

Secondly, if I wanted to sort the blueprints by rating: workshop crash. Scroll through the blueprint too fast: workshop crash. Select a blueprint the game wasn't happy about: workshop crash. This really is outrageous.

Thirdly, once I finally got in to someone's park I noticed some other things that had not been highlighted by others.

1. Ride attendants teleport to their stations as soon as they reach the queue-line for that ride. Is it really beyond Frontier to have the attendants walk all the way to their stations or is this another product of a slap-dash development?

2. Slide riders, when next to go, run (ice-skate) to their slide and then teleport in to the riding position. Again, I do not believe that it is beyond Frontier, in ability or will, to animate these actions properly. As they stand they're ugly, off-putting, and immersion breaking. This is supposed to be a simulation game. You can't cut corners like this, and again it just seems like another thing that had to concede to the ridiculous release schedule.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Edit: 1 - It seems like Frontier have taken onboard more or less everyone's criticisms. I think that the majority of my criticisms have been addressed and should be fixed or otherwise implemented. Time will tell but it's looking good.

[h3] ♦ Not my final review ♦ [/h3] You can ignore my playtime. With great anticipation I followed the development/release of this game closely since it was announced, and have an intimate understanding of the games issues and successes. With that said, the game commits a few cardinal sins which means I cannot recommend it until these issues are resolved. I will outline the major issues below. As and when Frontier resolves these issues I will scrub this review for a positive endorsement. ---------------------------------------------------- First off, I was the target audience for this sequel. I love waterpark features in Theme Park style games. During the life cycle of PC1 I hoped very much for an expansion in the vein of RCT3 Soaked. Considering that this is the studio that brought us RCT3 Soaked, it is bewildering to me some of the errors that have been made. But it doesn't end at the waterpark features. There are numerous missteps that any given videogame pedestrian could have spotted. [b]1. MAJOR ISSUE[/b] (Non-simulated water slides) - Half of the fun of RCT3 Soaked was in the construction of the slides. When puzzling out their designs, having to worry about whether a rider would fly off the side of the slide on a turn, or get thrown in to the stratosphere going too fast over a bump. Having made waterparks the core selling point of this sequel and not having understood the significance of this shows a serious deficiency in the minds of the direction team at Frontier. Not to mention, that it's not just the gameplay but the visual faults of current canned-track system. It just looks awful. [b]2. MAJOR ISSUE[/b] (Console priority) - If there are any genres of videogames that are intrinsically PC in pedigree they are Strategy & Management games. A powerful computer, a mouse & keyboard, and a more 'serious', i.e non-casual, kind of player were intrinsic in the formation of these genres. So the first, and embarrassing, misstep in logic is here. - The second misstep is in base historical knowledge of videogames. I ask Frontier, how many games - specifically traditionally PC games - have failed or had their success stifled by their development team prioritising console play or for otherwise wanting to unify development between the PC and console versions? The past decade or so is an endless parade of such releases. It is a fools errand, and it is additionally foolish given the history available. What is the definition of insanity, Frontier? The better question is the contrary, How few titles have managed success despite doing this? Skyrim? Any others? - Essentially, Frontier, as professionals, had every opportunity to sidestep this obvious trap, and yet they walked right in to it. Limiting performance and features for PC players at the expense of console players? No, no, no. Ruining the user experience of PC players to accommodate a unified user interface? No, no, no. These things ought never have even been an issue, and that they are is what gives me the most concern about the degeneration in professional quality at Frontier. Which leads on to my final major issue [b]3. MAJOR ISSUE[/b] (A rushed release) - It is quite clear to all who have paid close attention that this release was unnecessarily rushed to meet the desired, presumably pre-christmas, released date. Is this the Frontier I know? I wouldn't have thought so. To string us along their with their pre-release materials and streams. Conning us in to thinking everything is fine, when in fact the game could have done with a serious delay, and a community test period. This is quite intolerable and I suspect has struck off a good deal of goodwill Frontier has built up over the years. Let's go back to PC1, and just how open Frontier were. The community involvement in the development. The long alpha/testing period, etc. Who is at Frontier now? Has another party bought a dominating share in Frontier publishing? Are they even a public company? It makes no sense. There are bugs, details & expected run-of-the-mill features missing everywhere. They even pushed a build with a game-breaking bug that prevents peeps from getting on waterslides to their early access influencers. The people who are supposed to be showing off how great the game is. It's bananas, and completely unnecessary. All this bad reputation for nothing. Just look at the Steam reviews. Is this what they wanted? Is this what they expected? I hope they were expecting it, because the team must have a screw loose otherwise. Had they just pushed back the release date to properly finish the game all of this could have been avoided and they would have had a stellar release on their hands. I just can't understand it. - - - [b]In Closing[/b] - - - I really want to love this game, and it is clear that there is an amazing core ready to be utiliised. However, as it is now I have no desire to play the game, and worse-still I feel taken advantage of. This is the first pre-order I've made in over a decade, breaking my rule because I trusted in the solid reputation of Frontier based on their past conduct, and they've made a fool of me. Shame on them. I'm writing this review because I believe in the game. I believe in Frontier. I hope that they read it. I want them to succeed and I want the game that was promised. However, until these issues are addressed, I'd rather spare myself. I'll come back and play the game as it was intended. As it was marketed. As it was sold to me. Not whatever this is. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [h3][Additional notes of my 15mins of playtime][/h3] I had to load the game up just to leave a review. Since I had no desire to actually play the game I thought I'd just check out some other peoples creations. Good lord, was that another horrendous shock. First off, console focused development strikes again. The Frontier workshop is a clunky nightmare to get around, and only eight blueprint boxes are shown on screen at any one time. Great if you're sat back on a sofa I presume, not so efficient on PC, though. Secondly, if I wanted to sort the blueprints by rating: workshop crash. Scroll through the blueprint too fast: workshop crash. Select a blueprint the game wasn't happy about: workshop crash. This really is outrageous. Thirdly, once I finally got in to someone's park I noticed some other things that had not been highlighted by others. 1. Ride attendants teleport to their stations as soon as they reach the queue-line for that ride. Is it really beyond Frontier to have the attendants walk all the way to their stations or is this another product of a slap-dash development? 2. Slide riders, when next to go, run (ice-skate) to their slide and then teleport in to the riding position. Again, I do not believe that it is beyond Frontier, in ability or will, to animate these actions properly. As they stand they're ugly, off-putting, and immersion breaking. This is supposed to be a simulation game. You can't cut corners like this, and again it just seems like another thing that had to concede to the ridiculous release schedule. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [b]Edit: 1[/b] - It seems like Frontier have taken onboard more or less everyone's criticisms. I think that the majority of my criticisms have been addressed and should be fixed or otherwise implemented. Time will tell but it's looking good.