Jump to content
KSBeastFan

Did you all see this?

Recommended Posts

Here's my take.  We get everyone together and dig a hole under the peak of Orion's lift that is 81' deep.  Now we have the tallest giga in the world at 368'.  The we take the dirt from that hole and build a 40' hill under Fury's lift, 10' under Leviathin's and the rest under Millie.  Now we have the only "giga" in north America. I mean it would cost to much to ship the dirt to Japan for steel dragon.  But hey with my plan, Orion is now the only "true giga" as well as tallest in the world by this definition. 

That is how stupid this argument is.  People are arguing this thing isn't a giga because of a stat that could change with a backhoe and 30 mins of excavation. Drop is the most important stat anyway.  I've yet to met a single person sya that the observation platform of the ET is more thrilling and exciting than the first drop of Diamondback.

  • Like 6
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, malem said:

Steel costs quite a bit more now than when Fury was being constructed. Looking at it that way, it's great we're getting ours before such large coasters become uneconomical for seasonal parks. https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/steel

Using the terrain to the ride's advantage is a win in my book.

He's entitled to his personal opinion, as wrong as it may be. That said, the author's fixation on contradicting the park on their own classification is deeply embarrassing, and this group's "editorial" staff should have helped him realize that. Publishing drivel like this reflects badly on all enthusiasts, which is why a lot of us are upset about it.

 

9 minutes ago, IndyGuy4KI said:

Just because members here were singing the authors praises in a previous article, does not mean members can not disagree with them in this article. 

If it rides close to Fury, I could not be happier we are getting this coaster at Kings Island. Does in the grand scheme of things matter what classification the park or manufactured gives it? People are making a big deal out of an adjective.

You both are absolutely correct. Of course you can agree on one article and not another. I was just showing the whole picture. I hope people read both articles. There are many sides  to everyone I was just trying show that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What KI did is unique and it doesn't matter what size the lift is the drop is 300ft down WHO CARES???? The ride will be great just wait... Just look at some of the videos of Andy and Danny on CN it shows how that channel is....

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jallie79 said:

Here's my take.  We get everyone together and dig a hole under the peak of Orion's lift that is 81' deep.  Now we have the tallest giga in the world at 368'.  The we take the dirt from that hole and build a 40' hill under Fury's lift, 10' under Leviathin's and the rest under Millie.  Now we have the only "giga" in north America. I mean it would cost to much to ship the dirt to Japan for steel dragon.  But hey with my plan, Orion is now the only "true giga" as well as tallest in the world by this definition. 

That is how stupid this argument is.  People are arguing this thing isn't a giga because of a stat that could change with a backhoe and 30 mins of excavation. Drop is the most important stat anyway.  I've yet to met a single person sya that the observation platform of the ET is more thrilling and exciting than the first drop of Diamondback.

To be fair man that won't solve anything and I know what your saying is a joke. I think the reason why people were disappointed was that we usually expect more from Cedar Fair, Since MF every Giga they built after the next has had a gradual improvement in innovation. Yes, Drop is more important than Height, I know everyone would rather have a 278 ft Lift with a 300 ft drop, then a 310 lift hill with 295 ft drop.

Though, Cedar Fair has always seemed to try to 1 up itself, We have just expected it from them at this point. I don't think people would have had this much of an issue with the height if Orion was at least 300 ft. Since I-305, CF has been slowly pushing the heights of the Giga. The height difference from 325 to 287 is somewhat shocking. Again I don't think the height is the soul issue people are having with this ride, I think people might have been caught off guard with the length. Again, Fury 325 set peoples expectations for this ride so high. I feel like even if CF added 2 more small, low to the ground elements after where the current break run is, that would have suppressed some peoples criticism towards the ride. I think people were not even expecting the hugest record-breaker, They just expected something as big or a tad bigger than Fury. 

Also, I think the overall stats of Orion are playing a big part on the hate. Stats aren't everything when it comes to a Coaster, stats can be misleading, but enthusiast LOVE stats. That's the easiest explanation of why this ride hasn't received the most positive reviews at the moment. Because stat wise this coaster undoubtedly took a step back from Fury. Think about it, the only thing people can judge this ride of is Stats, POVs and the other Gigas that are currently relatable to this ride, which are of course are Fury and Leviathan. 

The truth is that most people are looking at this ride and judging it on how statistically it isn't "as impressive" as either the rides I previously mentioned above. 
Again, nobody knows how this ride we truly come out, It could just prove us all wrong in be the Best Coaster in the world. But we can't get overly mad at some people being critical. Our first initial opinions might hold little to no weight 8 months from now...

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I get what you're saying. My point is this. Would Fury be any less of a ride experience if the ground under the lift were 30 feet higher.   Same drop and remainder of the coaster bsing the same.   I'm holding off any judgment on Orion until I ride it.

At this point I guess I'm at an "advantage" over others. I have not had the opportunity to ride Fury or Leviathan. Therefore I can only compare pov videos. Fury looks amazing and then kinda fizzles out.  Levi looks good. Orion looks like it'll be full out from drop to brakes.  That fan turn looks sick. Can't wait to ride them all.  Not comparing I305 or Millie intentionally. Going foot a straight apples to apples comparison. Those 2 look awesome as well

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m all about everyone having an option. 
 

I just think that it’s very questionable when the question is, “Is Kings Island’s coaster a giga or not?” and the conclusion is that it’s not a real giga so he wouldn’t make the effort to go there because there are REAL gigas to ride.  
 

I know I was a little harsh with my initial post, but there was a time from like 2003 until 2009 that was REALLY bad and being labeled a coaster enthusiast was a terrible thing. You’d give an inch, they take a mile; you have four loops, they wondered why you didn’t the didn’t throw in a fifth; you have an hour of ERT on The Beast and they wondered why they didn’t get an hour on The Racer too.  I was just talking to some people and we were surprised how much the community had evolved. It’s now families who enjoy the hobby together. It is both people in and out of the industry sharing in a passion, embracing friendships, and creating lasting memories. I just feel like this whole rant was just a huge step backwards. 

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I said it from the get go, I knew there would be controversy over calling this a giga. I'm not bashing the ride and I'm totally looking forward to it but I agree that since the worlds first giga was height of at least 300' and drop of at least 300' that should be the standard. 

To add to another comment from here, say a coaster started on top of a mountain and dropped over 300' but the lift hill was only 10', why wouldn't that be classified as a different type of coaster? Maybe it should be named a terrain giga? Or a drop giga? Idk I'm sure someone could come up with a better name but the point is that when you here your going to get a giga coaster and you see how every other giga coaster has been built it kinda sets it's own standard as to what is expected for it to actually be a giga. When Kings Island is coining this one as a giga it just seems like they are trying to pull one over on people and actually are taking away from the term giga in my opinion. 

FYI I'm a big fan of Kings Island and Cedar Fair ,I just feel like they dropped the ball on this one. They should have atleast coined a new term which could have made it a world record holder and could have attracted more people wanting to ride the worlds 1st. To each his own...just my opinion. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, BoddaH1994 said:

I’m all about everyone having an option. 
 

I just think that it’s very questionable when the question is, “Is Kings Island’s coaster a giga or not?” and the conclusion is that it’s not a real giga so he wouldn’t make the effort to go there because there are REAL gigas to ride.  
 

I know I was a little harsh with my initial post, but there was a time from like 2003 until 2009 that was REALLY bad and being labeled a coaster enthusiast was a terrible thing. You’d give an inch, they take a mile; you have four loops, they wondered why you didn’t the didn’t throw in a fifth; you have an hour of ERT on The Beast and they wondered why they didn’t get an hour on The Racer too.  I was just talking to some people and we were surprised how much the community had evolved. It’s now families who enjoy the hobby together. It is both people in and out of the industry sharing in a passion, embracing friendships, and creating lasting memories. I just feel like this whole rant was just a huge step backwards. 

A little harsh maybe, but you are passionate about a place you love. For the record Kings Island has special place in my heart. It was the 1st amusement/theme park I ever attended way, way back in 1977. I think Xdog42 really explained well where a lot of the criticism comes from. I for one am looking forward to next April and to see first hand how it stands up. I think enthusiasts in general get way to caught up in stats. Take Maverick for example nobody expected it to be the masterpiece that it ended up being. In my mind the most important thing for Orion to do is be the best ride in the park. Next be better then Leviathan. Last and this would be the best if it can pull it off, be better than Millennium Force.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BoddaH1994 said:

“Is Kings Island’s coaster a giga or not?” and the conclusion is that it’s not a real giga so he wouldn’t make the effort to go there because there are REAL gigas to ride.

It came off as entitled no doubt. I totally get the "coaster enthusiast"  bad image. 

I don't think he's necessarily wrong about his definition of a giga though. Wikipedia does it best with hypers over 200 in drop height but not in vertical height like Phantom's Revenge given an asterisk.

It won't matter much in the long run, but I think the park did bring this on themselves to an extent by not just building the extra 13 ft. I highly doubt they're losing any sleep over it though!

I expect this to be an excellent ride and that it will supercede DB or Banshee as the favorite steel coaster. 

Quote

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, KI Guy said:

It came off as entitled no doubt. I totally get the "coaster enthusiast"  bad image. 

I don't think he's necessarily wrong about his definition of a giga though. Wikipedia does it best with hypers over 200 in drop height but not in vertical height like Phantom's Revenge given an asterisk.

It won't matter much in the long run, but I think the park did bring this on themselves to an extent by not just building the extra 13 ft. I highly doubt they're losing any sleep over it though!

I expect this to be an excellent ride and that it will supercede DB or Banshee as the favorite steel coaster. 

Hey now, technically it’s NOT a giga anyway. B&M simply doesn’t use that classification.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly  it is a hybrid and a whole new class.  A Gyper or Hypga perhaps.  That way it can set ALL the world records to make the stats enthusiasts happy.  :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, KI Guy said:

but I think the park did bring this on themselves to an extent by not just building the extra 13 ft. I highly doubt they're losing any sleep over it though!

 

Exactly what I was thinking. I don't know how much an extra 13 ft of steel would of cost, but to be honest I don't think it would of hurt the bottom line too bad if they made it 300. Again, like you said, KI well knew the controversy that would arise with them making it 287 ft and like you said, They could care less. As long as they make their money (which they will) they could care less if this coaster is considered a Giga or a Hyper.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, BoddaH1994 said:

Hey now, technically it’s NOT a giga anyway. B&M simply doesn’t use that classification.

And if Intamin was smart back then and trademarked "giga" "giga coaster" (or maybe they did lol), then this argument would be non-existent...as BoddaH1994 says, we are back to B&M classifying Orion287 as a hyper...

Another argument is giga is 1 billion units, so unless we talk about nanometers, giga is probably the wrong term anyway for Orion287...

And aren't people glad CF didn't actually add the number to the name lol...

7 minutes ago, Xdog42 said:

Exactly what I was thinking. I don't know how much an extra 13 ft of steel would of cost, but to be honest I don't think it would of hurt the bottom line too bad if they made it 300. Again, like you said, KI well knew the controversy that would arise with them making it 287 ft and like you said, They could care less. As long as they make their money (which they will) they could care less if this coaster is considered a Giga or a Hyper.

Let's face it, at the end of the day Orion287 will probably have the longest lines at the park consistently and I think it's ridership number will be larger than Fury325.  The public will still come to ride regardless, look at Mystic and Maverick as examples of rides that got negative comments at the announcement...

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, disco2000 said:

 

Let's face it, at the end of the day Orion287 will probably have the longest lines at the park consistently and I think it's ridership number will be larger than Fury325.  The public will still come to ride regardless, look at Mystic and Maverick as examples of rides that got negative comments at the announcement...

 

oh for sure I know, I guess thats what I meant If i did emphasize my point enough. CF and KI could care less for the ride to be 300 ft because they know people will still ride it anyways. I personally think Orion is a giga, I just think its dumb that KI put themselves in a situation, because they themselves are labeling Orion as a Giga. But it seems that right now nobody even knows what a "giga" is. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Xdog42 said:

oh for sure I know, I guess thats what I meant If i did emphasize my point enough. CF and KI could care less for the ride to be 300 ft because they know people will still ride it anyways. I personally think Orion is a giga, I just think its dumb that KI put themselves in a situation, because they themselves are labeling Orion as a Giga. But it seems that right now nobody even knows what a "giga" is. 

I knew what you meant and was trying to add to it and agree with additional context...but yeah they really brought a lot of this on themselves...as I said in another thread, they should have taken some height off the other two largest hills and added height to the first one to get to 300 so that the argument on if this is a giga wouldn't exist (and it may have reduced costs or have kept in same cost).  There would still be the "it isn't a world record giga" argument but you can't please everyone...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, disco2000 said:

as I said in another thread, they should have taken some height off the other two largest hills and added height to the first one to get to 300 so that the argument on if this is a giga wouldn't exist (and it may have reduced costs or have kept in same cost).  There would still be the "it isn't a world record giga" argument but you can't please everyone...

Wow, thats actually is a super smart idea. I would of totally been down for that. Funny part is the reason they didn't make Orion 300 is unknown, but its hard for me to think it could of been actual money limitations... Would be nice if CF told as their true intentions. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Engineering the ride to "add 13 feet" just to keep enthusiasts from arguing about the definition of a giga would be pretty silly.

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who takes the time to complain about the ride is still going to ride it anyway.  I have yet to meet many "enthusiasts" who behave otherwise.

For those in the population that the park actually does care about, the most important description of the ride is probably "taller and faster than Diamondback".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, malem said:

Publishing drivel like this reflects badly on all enthusiasts, which is why a lot of us are upset about it.

Drivel like that article are the reason that I try very hard to distance myself from the term "coaster enthusiast" if I'm being totally honest.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, malem said:

Engineering the ride to "add 13 feet" just to keep enthusiasts from arguing about the definition of a giga would be pretty silly.

I get that they can't please everyone, but if their 5 year plan in 2015 called for a 300 foot tall coaster in 2020, then a 300 foot tall coaster scope item for this install should have been nonnegotiable from the very beginning.  I highly doubt the 5 year plan called it a "300 foot drop" coaster.  When B&M came back with 287 feet in a schematic design meeting, KI should have questioned that and maybe suggested lowering some other hills to make that happen within the budget.  They made it a harder sell for the marketing team.  Especially with stat sheets pointing at the obvious.

Engineering it 300 feet tall from the beginning and shaving 30 feet off the 207 foot hill and 20 feet off the 174 foot hill would have provided a better ride experience in my opinion on those two hills and would have been cheaper and would be more marketable.... We got the floater air Diamondback already, so shave off the height of some of those hills to give us a different experience.

But it is more than "just to keep enthusiasts from arguing."  Perception is everything and this is one item I believe within the budget could have been accomplished more so than lots of other complaints and not sacrificed ride or theme experience.  From a psychological standpoint, $2.99/gallon of gas seems less expensive than $3.00/gallon to most people.  One of the reasons why everything is priced just under a threshold number - businesses know that people tend to round down when looking at a number, thus a car is $24.9k instead of $25k - sounds a lot cheaper.  Same with this...

Most of us will never be privy to those discussions and most here are armchair coaster designers, but when it is that close and B&M had already successfully met a 300 foot lift hill, then why?

But most of us will agree that regardless of the height complaint, passes will still be sold and the naysayers will still come to ride anyway, so in the end it doesn't really matter...but the "is it a giga" debate will live on...and of course now for years to come people will be asking when does KI get the coaster greater than 300 feet tall.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, disco2000 said:

They made it a harder sell for the marketing team.

This is 100% false.

There is only one group of people who cares about the difference between a 300 foot height and a 300 foot drop, and that group of people is buying Platinum Passes anyway even if they build nothing at all. If neither stat was over 300, then yes, it would maybe be a harder sell. But all they have to do is mention the 300 foot drop, and as far as the general public is concerned, it's a 300 foot coaster.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, homestar92 said:

This is 100% false.

There is only one group of people who cares about the difference between a 300 foot height and a 300 foot drop, and that group of people is buying Platinum Passes anyway even if they build nothing at all.  If neither stat was over 300, then yes, it would maybe be a harder sell. But all they have to do is mention the 300 foot drop, and as far as the general public is concerned, it's a 300 foot coaster.

In the words of Terpy, 100% is an absolute and not accurate representation either.  You can tell which staff are completely sold on selling this coaster and which ones feel like they are selling something short (no pun intended lol).  Even ride op spiels are making fun of it lol...

Yes, all they have to do is mention the 300 foot drop, but almost all their marketing shows the various hill heights, which then raises the question.  Go ride Eiffel Tower and there is a stat sheet posted for Orion showing all the hill heights and that is what the people riding the tower focused on instead of the 300 foot drop.  Marketing 101 - don't give them reason to question something - so don't mention the lift hill height - leave it off!   Focus on the positive and simply say 300 foot drop in big bold letters and be done with it.  There was a reason why the announcement video didn't mention lift hill height!  The general public doesn't care about the heights of the other hills unless it was SOB where two of its hills held the record for tallest wooden hills and taller than any other wooden lift hill lol!

But as I said at the end of my post, people will still buy passes and people will still come to the park, and this ride will be a crowd pleaser with some of the longest lines in the park for years to come, so it doesn't really matter...

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, disco2000 said:

And aren't people glad CF didn't actually add the number to the name lol..

Now THAT much I am glad of. Very, very glad in fact...;)

I-305 could be the name of the highway (and maybe it is).

'Fury325' to me sounds more like an internet screenname than it does a roller coaster!

  • Like 2
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, disco2000 said:

In the words of Terpy, 100% is an absolute and not accurate representation either.  You can tell which staff are completely sold on selling this coaster and which ones feel like they are selling something short (no pun intended lol).  Even ride op spiels are making fun of it lol...

Yes, all they have to do is mention the 300 foot drop, but almost all their marketing shows the various hill heights, which then raises the question.  Go ride Eiffel Tower and there is a stat sheet posted for Orion showing all the hill heights and that is what the people riding the tower focused on instead of the 300 foot drop.  Marketing 101 - don't give them reason to question something - so don't mention the lift hill height - leave it off!   Focus on the positive and simply say 300 foot drop in big bold letters and be done with it.  There was a reason why the announcement video didn't mention lift hill height!  The general public doesn't care about the heights of the other hills unless it was SOB where two of its hills held the record for tallest wooden hills and taller than any other wooden lift hill lol!

But as I said at the end of my post, people will still buy passes and people will still come to the park, and this ride will be a crowd pleaser with some of the longest lines in the park for years to come, so it doesn't really matter...

wAAACH5BAEKAAAALAAAAAABAAEAAAICRAEAOw==

I heard the operator at the Zephyr say loudly into the microphone, “Enjoy the rest of your day at Kings Island, the home of the world’s shortest giga coaster!” In any other company that person would be looking for a new job by the end of the day. Companies typically don’t take kindly to their own employees shaming their new products publicly while on company time.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, BeastForever said:

Now THAT much I am glad of. Very, very glad in fact...;)

I-305 could be the name of the highway (and maybe it is).

'Fury325' to me sounds more like an internet screenname than it does a roller coaster!

I hope they don’t push the whole Orion, The ride thing a lot. I don’t see why that’s necessary. Kind of like Volcano, the blast coaster.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Sometimes, less is more...

And I would say this is certainly one of those cases. Its for this reason why I had preferred Orion to Polaris this whole time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, disco2000 said:

From a psychological standpoint, $2.99/gallon of gas seems less expensive than $3.00/gallon to most people. 

It should to everyone, because $2.99 IS less expensive than $3.00...psychological or otherwise. :rolleyes:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, standbyme said:

It should to everyone, because $2.99 IS less expensive than $3.00...psychological or otherwise. :rolleyes:

And gas isn’t sold that way anyway.  It is $2.999 which is still less expensive.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, King Ding Dong said:

And gas isn’t sold that way anyway.  It is $2.999 which is still less expensive. 

True lol and further validating my point that if you purchase 10 gallons you will pay the same whether it is $2.999 or $3.000 per gallon as our money does not go to three decimal points lol, yet most will seek out the $2.999...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, disco2000 said:

True lol and further validating my point that if you purchase 10 gallons you will pay the same whether it is $2.999 or $3.000 per gallon as our money does not go to three decimal points lol, yet most will seek out the $2.999...

Maths is hard in the morning but that only applies if you bought less than 10 gallons.  A full 10 gallons would cost $29.99 which is cheaper.  :D

  • Like 1

Share this post


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.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...