Jump to content

Reviews & Reactions - Scooby Doo Spooky Coaster: Next Generation


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 342
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What they should do is have a paid section to the Coaster with awesome theming and better coaster elements and a free section with alright theming and average coaster elements.

You can agree with me or not on this one. But it seems like it’s the beginning of the end for Scooby. So the ride is still no where near what was expected (especially after watching the TVC). Eve

Finally got to ride and HOLY SHITBALLS what an absolute Doggy's breakfast!! Wow seriously MW, way to go with this one! A pile of cash successfully wasted in taking the Park's best themed 'experience'

Posted Images

15 minutes ago, Santa07 said:

(p.s. - they weren’t, but at least Universal’s animations aren’t as choppy as some of the animations in that video...)

 

Well it was out of focus to be fair, but it honestly makes it look better. The monsters have no detail on them and in the mirror scene, they attack your car and morph and cut through the image of the car.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/12/2018 at 12:08 PM, pushbutton said:

Oh and the door from the queue area into the first part of the ride are once again not working. They're just automatic doors so can’t be that hard to keep them operational.

Since noone else has mentioned it - they're not 'just automatic doors' - they're an object within the ride envelope that can cause a collision with the car, or else cause the ride to fault if they aren't 100% reliable. If in doubt, leave it out.

9 hours ago, Gold Coast Amusement Force said:

Well it was out of focus to be fair, but it honestly makes it look better. The monsters have no detail on them and in the mirror scene, they attack your car and morph and cut through the image of the car.

Thanks for the POV. I know the low light environment makes it hard to film, so kudos for doing as well as you did.

FYI - (c) Parks on the coast - nothing in that video is something you can copyright - the park owns the copyright on every single part of that ride... and that applies to everything else inside the gates too - photography and videography inside the parks is for personal use only, and definitely not something you can slap your own brand and copyright over.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gold Coast Amusement Force said:

Isn’t this the same thing?

No it isn't

10 minutes ago, -nick.white.1543 said:

Do you see any (c) symbol in that picture?

Got it in one Nick, thanks.

A few things that might help:

Quote

https://themeparks.com.au/terms-conditions-policies/conditions-of-entry

Photographs or videos taken by you must be for your own personal use and enjoyment and not for any commercial purpose.

Quote

https://www.dreamworld.com.au/general/terms-and-conditions

Design and systems of Ardent Leisure Limited (The Company) are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You must not infringe those rights.

Any photographs, videos or sound recordings taken by you must be for personal use only. Any use, reuse or production for commercial purposes without our express written consent is strictly prohibited.

 

Have a read of this, and feel free to PM me if you have any questions about it.

Its important, if you're going to start stamping the copyright symbol over stuff that you have a good understanding of how copyright law works. If you assert a copyright over something that you have no right to, you can wind up in a fair bit of trouble - especially since 'public display or exhibition' these days constitutes "uploading it to the internet".

Consider this, which has been in the news a bit recently:

image.png.746cdae42aaf6c355a42c3f101685429.png

It is illegal, under copyright law, for a photographer to take the photo on the right. It is perfectly legal to take a photograph such as the one on the left. Do you know why?

Because the copyright of the building - the architectural design - is no longer in copyright as it has expired, however the lights were added to the tower later, and the designer of the lights holds that copyright, which is still current.

The safer thing to do with regard to the theme parks is to disclaim ownership (You'll no doubt have seen people disclaiming ownership of songs and such used as soundtracks to their youtube videos and so on.) To start with, stop using the park's official logos as part of the preview images and such - use your own brand, and give credit to the park if you use their images (ie: "image source: themeparks.com.au" or similar)

Another simple way to get around usage issues is to comment \ news report, rather than strictly just filming it and showing it. It comes under fair use provisions - which is why news media can show footage.

I think i've sufficiently derailed the thread - and now back to our regularly scheduled shit-show.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, AlexB said:

 definitely not something you can slap your own brand and copyright over.

 

Maybe you should re-read, and perhaps not edit my post to suit your own argument. Otherwise we end up with crap like:

54 minutes ago, Gold Coast Amusement Force said:

Yeah I understand slapping your own something which is what i copied.

*Note - i've not added anything to the above quote, just selectively deleted things to suit my own purpose

In addition - Parkz doesn't claim anything in 'in park photos' as its own - the photos are watermarked the same as a news outlet, such as channel 7 might do prior to publishing.

You'll also note if you scroll to the bottom of parkz, the following:

Quote

All content copyright ©2002-2018 Parkz and its respective copyright holder.

My original comment "brand and copyright" weren't two individual issues. brand and copyright were meant to be read together. By removing the copyright part, you remove all meaning of my reply - as its your brand WITH the copyright that is in issue here (otherwise, wouldn't I have taken issue with every other video you've ever posted for reasons of branding?)

I remember when I was in high school, and I used to steal other peoples stuff, add a little of my own stuff, put it into something else, and then slap my own little copyright mark with it, along with my name. Made me feel so awesome about how much of a pro I was. I didn't have the internet until senior high, so much of this stuff was seen by about 5 people, and hardly damaging to the actual copyright holder - arguably, it wasn't even on 'public' display.

But you put it on the internet? that's a bit different.

I get it - you wanna play big theme park media outlet in your spare time. good on you. I remember lots of kids doing that, many of whom were (and some still are) on these forums. For some, that Dream will Neva happen. They'll never find their Zen, no matter how much they try, they'll end up Defunction. For others, they'll grow-a-go-go, and mature, and develop their teenage fiddlings into a legitimate business angle-chat-live. There are several people in Our World on here who have done just that and absolutely Roached it...

Obviously, its something you're keenly interested in and I wish you all the best of luck in succeeding in that - as the saying goes - if you can find a job doing something you love, you'll never work a day in your life... but I urge you - drop the baby in the sandpit routine of 'why can't i?', and take some time to actually read for understanding. Learn from the lessons of those who have been in your shoes, or seen others who have walked in those same shoes, rather than fire back weak argumentative responses.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yaaaay, my turn to be a pedant!

3 hours ago, AlexB said:

Its important, if you're going to start stamping the copyright symbol over stuff that you have a good understanding of how copyright law works. If you assert a copyright over something that you have no right to, you can wind up in a fair bit of trouble - especially since 'public display or exhibition' these days constitutes "uploading it to the internet".

Consider this, which has been in the news a bit recently:

image.png.746cdae42aaf6c355a42c3f101685429.png

It is illegal, under copyright law, for a photographer to take the photo on the right. It is perfectly legal to take a photograph such as the one on the left. Do you know why?

You know, if you're going to school this guy on Copyright Law it would probably be best if you did not violate it whilst doing so.  After all, did you get permission to reproduce the picture on the right? :)

3 hours ago, AlexB said:

The safer thing to do with regard to the theme parks is to disclaim ownership (You'll no doubt have seen people disclaiming ownership of songs and such used as soundtracks to their youtube videos and so on.)

No. That's not how Copyright works.  Disclaiming ownership provides you with no legal protection at all - it's just one of those dumb things that people do now 'just in case' in the same way that they also participate in chain mail.  Copyright is also about more than just misrepresenting who is the owner of a work - it's also about unauthorized reproduction.

2 hours ago, AlexB said:

In addition - Parkz doesn't claim anything in 'in park photos' as its own - the photos are watermarked the same as a news outlet, such as channel 7 might do prior to publishing.

It depends on what we are talking about ownership of - ownership of the photograph, or of the subject (or contents) of that photograph.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yikes, that animation looks terrible. It looks just as bad as the Arkham Asylum VR. And the 'projection mapping' on the mirror scene looks very poorly made. For something claimed to be 'next generation' this looks like late 2000's animation.

Hopefully when I experience for myself the 'updates' arent as bad as they are seen on video...

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, XxMrYoshixX said:

Yikes, that animation looks terrible. It looks just as bad as the Arkham Asylum VR. And the 'projection mapping' on the mirror scene looks very poorly made. For something claimed to be 'next generation' this looks like late 2000's animation.

Hopefully when I experience for myself the 'updates' arent as bad as they are seen on video...

The Arkham Asylum VR is of very good quality.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Trending Topics

  • Similar Content

    • By Phoebe2978
      I am heading to Movie World in a few weeks, and I am 160cm and 130kg carrying most on my bum and thighs. I know there will be some rides I won't fit on. But does anyone know which rides have tester seats before you join to line. To save me queuing up if I'm not going to fit. 
    • By ThemeTendo
      Operating Hours at Wet'n'Wild Gold Coast

      Monday - Wednesday the park will be closed.
      Thursday operating as it has normally during off-peak (10-3)
      Friday-Sunday normal operating hours.
      I will be surprised if they keep Wet n Wild open through Winter this year. It struggles through winter on a normal year, and during those years there's always plenty of debate on why it's open, I'm sure there's plenty more support for that debate this year. All I'll say on that debate is that you're extremely lucky if you get close to 1000 people (a day) through the gates, there are many days where 10% of that is hard to reach.
      Good weather days during the holidays are exceptions to the 1000 people rule, but they don't justify months of operation.
      ---
      Opening Hours - Plan your day at Sea World Gold Coast

      Warner Bros. Movie World Gold Coast operating hours

      I'm expecting that both Sea World and Movie World will reduce weekday operating hours through winter as well. Especially noting the conservative date ranges currently shown. (and once this happens, Dreamworld will obviously follow suit; if they don't announce it first)
      ---
      Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if COVID sees our parks completely adapt their operating schedules. Weekend operation of our main parks, Seasonal operation of the water parks. There are plenty of logistical issues with that, especially with contracted and salaried workforces. So it's not super likely to happen, but I can't say I don't see them moving closer to it.
      I know most of you are going to jump to "That doesn't make any sense, plenty of people still go to the parks during this time." As enthusiasts we have to understand that what we THINK makes sense, and what actually makes sense, are in many cases very different.
      Reducing hours means that you're increasing density of guests on the hours/days you're actually open, which means you're far better justifying the minimum number of staff you're required to have there anyway. Doesn't mean it'll feel any busier, especially without international tourists being here, and it goes without saying that a large majority of locals spend far less than interstate and international tourists, which is the part everyone seems to forget when talking about operating hours.
      this is all talking about off-peak, I'm not suggesting they'll change anything during the peak September-January season.
    • By Smol bean
      I just thought of marking a place for us to share stories from Theme parks whether they’re insane, scary or happy share them here. Here’s one from theme parks me I remember going into hot wheels sidewinder just to look at the queue because I was too scared to go on it


      Don’t know what’s going on with the photos so just try your best to ignore it thanks
    • By CR4ZE
      Hi! Long term lurker, first time poster here (regular site visitor for years!). Sorry this is going to be a long-ish post, but I need to be specific about what I’m asking.
      (Admins feel free to move to off-topic if you feel it’s appropriate).
      Partly due to my sheer affinity for the park, and partly due to boredom/OCD-fuelled optimism, I’ve recently taken up the task of completely overhauling and rewriting Movie World’s Wikipedia entry (I’ve been a regular editor there for many years).
      Here’s what the article used to look like:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Warner_Bros._Movie_World&oldid=951851228
      And now:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warner_Bros._Movie_World
      As you can see, I’ve already made quite a lot of progress and spent of lot of time revitalising the page recently. What I’m mainly asking the Parkz community for is some resources on the MW’s history that would be relevant/interesting. Information MUST be supported by scholarly sources: TV/news programs, documentaries/specials, newspaper articles, interviews, web articles etc. Feedback about the article so far would of course be welcomed.
      Of particular value would be newspaper/journal articles from the 90s and 00s. Bonus points if you have the publication dates/issue numbers/etc.
      I’ve already spent countless hours scouring the internet (and Parkz.com!) for sources, using search engines and adjusting parameters etc, but I just don’t feel that my research has merited the level of information that I would like. I’d really love more insight into the early days of Movie World particularly – why/how it was built, the planning and construction process, how it performed/was received. Also relevant would be a more long-term look at the park’s performance over the years, why and how the park expanded/began adding in new rides and attractions etc.
      I know this forum has a lot of veterans who remember the good ol’ days (and I wasn’t born when MW opened), and a lot of people with the “inside scoop”, so I’d really appreciate anybody who can give me some insight.
      Why am I doing this? Well, I’m a long-term contributor to WP and, say what you want about it, but I’ve always wanted to improve the perception of WP as an online learning tool by writing high-quality, factual and reliably-sourced content. That, and I’m a long-term enthusiast and consider MW my favourite park.
      My main goal for this page is to have it reach Good Article status: it receives a formal review/check from another editor. If it’s well-written, comprehensive, backed up with sources etc, it meets the criteria and is listed as a Good Article. If possible, I would one day like it be listed as a Featured Article: the article receives a formal, highly stringent review from multiple editors. This process typically lasts for several weeks, and every aspect of the article is scrutinised. If the article passes, it is considered to be an encyclopaedic-quality.
      A big problem I can see going forward is that a lot of the article is sourced to this website. No offense to the staff, but I think it’s likely that this site would be challenged as a “reliable source” for numerous, boring reasons. This is why journals/articles from papers would be invaluable to me.
      If you have anything to contribute, please let me know below, email me or PM me. Information that you have doesn’t necessarily need to exist on the internet: newspaper columns, TV specials, interviews etc all constitute sources. But it needs to come from a source, not just from a forum post (Wikipedia’s policy).
      My email (have no problems with this being shared) for all Wikipedia-related things is:
      cr4ze.wp@gmail.com
      Thanks!
    • By A.H
      DC Rivals Hypercoaster costed $30 million AUD ($20 million USD). 
      While this is the most expensive Australian rollercoaster, the modified Blue Fire clone/Steel Taipan is also costing a similar amount at around $30 million AUD and Copperhead Strike is costing $30 million USD. 
      Rivals, Steel Taipan & Copperhead Strike are obviously different coasters and I am aware of the differences such as:         
      -DCR having limited theming (1.4km of Track)
      -Copperhead Strike having extensive theming and 2 launches. (992m of track)
       -Blue Fire being a first of it's kind, theming and having a pre-show & Steel Taipan having a swing launch. (1km of track)
      So why did it cost so little when compared to other Mack coasters?      The only reasons I can think of is Village roadshow being given a discount and launches costing more.
       
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.