Track Review – Trinity

Written by Alcator.

  • Track: Trinity (direct download) 
  • Author:Hawk_ger
  • Type: Race
  • Environment: Stadium
  • Length: 5 min (!)
  • Mood: Stadium
  • Custom content: None

Trinity

First Impression

Will it ever end? Am I going in circles?

Track Design

As much as the track shows the author has great brain capacity and can handle dozens of intersecting roads at the same time, it also shows that quantity doesn’t equal quality. The whole track is way too long to be fun. Many people award this track (it made it into the Top 10 best of the week at TMX), but I’d say they just didn’t see any better and shorter complex tracks with intersecting roads.

A big flaw as far as design is considered is the use of standard navigation signs; as there are no “up AND left” or “down AND right” signs in the standard package, the directions given by the signs and screens are often confusing, and since this track has heavy re-use, it’s not that easily recognizable you’re going the wrong way by seeing the same road again – because it might just be OK. Also, since I’m suffering the sign-error (I see different signs than track maker placed), the confusion is even greater. Authors like HAWK_GER _should_ have his own signs/boards list and use it.

I’m only rating this track’s design with 7 out of 10 points, because the length is not filled properly with “the stuff that matters”.

Rating: 7.0

Scenery

The track itself works as part of the scenery, but there are many other objects filling the few undriven-through spots.

Rating: 10.0

Media Tracker

The intro is somewhat cheap, but OK. However, the replay is completely missing (!). In-game there are on several occasion navigational hints that are quite helpful, however, many more would be needed, as it is quite easy to omit a Checkpoint without knowing it, or jumping in the wrong direction on a jump.

Here, the author lacks a lot: 2 out of 10

Rating: 2.0

Originality

Perhaps a few innovative techy moments in this huge track, but they are easily overlooked due to the length of the track.

Rating: 2.0

Fun Factor

Replayability counts as one of the Fun factor indicators, and I’m afraid that indicator is quite low – I might try playing this once again, but no more, it’s just a too big a drain on concentration and energy, and there are too many better and shorter tech tracks. And the fact that I’m not even rewarded with a cool replay for enduring so much…?

Rating: 4.0

Summary

I’d probably use “Hyped” to summarized this track in one word: “It’s over 5 minutes! It’s gotta be something great!” people think, and just because there’s some heavy re-use and well calculated jumps in the 7 minutes of technical steering, they say “this is great”, but the good stuff in here is thin, like a butter scraped over too much bread, as Bilbo says…

Final Rating: 5.0 (average)

***

DISCUSSION:

Does the length ruin this track? Express your opinion in the comments below!

Notes:

– Ratings range from 1 (bad) to 10 (perfect). 5 is average.

Your help is always needed! If you are interested in writing track reviews for the TMU Blog, you may apply by dropping an e-mail to Jozii@pp.inet.fi.

– If you want to have your own track reviewed, you can sign your track up for a fee of 500 coppers. Simply send an in-game message to “Jozii” with the coppers and the name of the track (which must have been uploaded at the United Exchange first).

Advertisements

10 Responses to Track Review – Trinity

  1. Jozii says:

    I just have to comment this track and Alcator’s review (I usually never do that), as this track arose a lot of feelings in many ways for me.

    At first, my reaction was “oh no, five minutes?”, but then I actually drove the track, and I was positively surprised. In fact, I liked thetrack so much I wondered why Alcator didn’t give it a straight 10! I mean, the jumps are well calculated, the detailed driving (many crosings and innovative re-use parts), the mix of excellent technical driving, dirt sections, off-road and even platform, etc.

    But then I began noticing the flaws… The track is way too hard to navigate, the signs are sometimes just way off, and the scenery (which Alcator rated 10/10) has things that annoy me (like dead-end poles, flying signs, etc.).

    And then I also read Alcators review, and he opened my eyes to even more flaws! I agree a lot with what Alcator says, and I believe that if the good parts in the track would have been put together and the less good ones would have been removed, the track would have been an excellent 1 minute long track!

    But then again, in that case those innovative (yes, I find them innovative) crossings and re-use parts wouldn’t be as good…

    It’s a hard track to rate, but to be honest, I’m somewhere in between Alcator’s 5.0 and the quite highs score it seems to get at TMX… The track has its great parts, but it also has some major flaws…

  2. Jozii says:

    Oh, I forgot: I gave this track the “Challenging” tag (see the Tracks page), because surely, you’ll have a lot of trouble to get a really good time on this one, especially due to its length! In many ways that’s a plus for me, but it’s also a minus in other ways…

  3. JumperJack says:

    well, for one time, i just incredibly disagree to an opinion… 😀

    – track design is really awesome. unbeleivable how an author could make such a long track which is so flowing and so nice, it’s unbeleivable…
    – the mediatracker, well, the intro is great looking to my opinion, where the ingame MT is needed, there is something, and the outro would’ve been an immensily lot of work. but a 2.0?! that’s really low…
    – euhm, not original, this is about the most original track i’ve played these months, never haa anyone managed to make a track with so many re-use in it, and with such a length, it’s amazing…
    – well, fun factor is indeed something personal, so i won’t say anything about that, but i think that the rest is way too much underrated…

    i compare this track to the derfeineherr tracks back at nations, and that quality with less coppers packed into a five minutes track… i think it’s one of the most innovative tracks of the moment…

    that’s my opinion… 😉

    oh, and about the discussion, nope, it doesn’t ruin the track, i think it’s an amazing challenge to drive the track without any mistake, which i could’ve made when i wouldn’t have crashed in the very last minute… 😉

  4. JumperJack says:

    oh, and i’ve got troubles with the signbug too, but florent from nadeo told me that it was on the list to be fixed. further, there are reasons why authors don’t make their own signs. i made them for a duotrack, but at a certain time, even these didn’t work anymore, and the national flag of holland was shown on them… now they work again, but these signbugs are a really mystery to me… 😉

  5. Buchi says:

    Well, I tried the Track right after it was uploaded. I drove and drove and drove. Finally I found a Finish and guess what? Yes, I missed at least one CP. I tried again, again and again. Always different Routes and I always felt like going right. Never got all the CPs.
    I finally decided to download HAWKs Replay, which I normally dont do and drove with it. After 20 Seconds the Ghost was out of my View and I stopped driving the Track.
    So all in all, I think this is great for Tech Fans, but for me this is Torture, pure Torture.

    Oh, and to the Discussion: I dont think that Lenght destroyes any Tracks. As long as it has a good Flow, which this one definitly has, its OK. Sad that it is very confusing with that Sign Bug and sometimes confusing Way…

  6. TimeBreaker says:

    first of all i dont agree with the rating 😛
    i more agree wit hJJ’s opinion
    and also, i drove the wrong way in my first try too, but as i watched hawks replay , i immediately recognized where i missed a way 🙂

    i cant understand why you underrate this track :/

    i think there are many nice sections in this track, and you really think there are just some little parts? i dont think so
    if i abort my race after one minute, i wou still think its a cool tech track f or one minute, and i would do this after everry single minute, i think hawk did a great job and th track didnt end up in 10 second long staright forward passages or boring bad calculated loops. it got manby nice slide curves, different sections on the track, reuses…i really had fun in every second on this track, while i drove the right way 😛
    and yes the irritating signs are really mean 😀 thats right ^^

    the scenery is like youve said awesome
    its a perfect scenery, even if there isnt much scenery added to the normal route 🙂

    the mt work is quite average thats right, but 2,0 is maybe a bit low, and i would have made an outro too, if you want to watch the replay that hawk made, it just sucks, having many different cams that irritate you

    the originality exsts in the one point, that this track is 5 minutes long, which is really something different to 99% of all tmx tracks

    also the fun factor does exist when youve made it once clear through the track, then you got a ghost you can drive after (or use hawks ghost) , and you will have fun improving every curve 🙂

    i think this is really a cool project and i think a 5 is really too bad for this nice track 🙂

    i wouldve given it a minimum of 7 😛

  7. JumperJack says:

    oh well, i drove the wrong way the first two times too, and i downloaded HAWK’s replay, and watched it (buchi: watching replays is also a possiblitity… ^^ ) – i found the right way, learned the track by heart, and tried to drive an as fast as possible time… 😀

    and i gave this track my very first golden award… 😉

  8. Hawk says:

    Well Alcator, when you are writing a review to a track with such different opinions (ratings from 5-10) ike in this one, then you should write more objective and not that simple. Because when you are writing too much subjektive, the reader can’t find his own opinion about the track. And isn’t it the task of a review to inform the reader and to help him whether to download the track or not? In my opinion this review doesn’t really show the track in a clear light due to missing and sometimes highly subjective informations and so maybe people who would be interested in playing the track will never play it. /sad
    When you take a look at some of the awardcomments at TMX, you can see that this sort of group really exist and they obviously had fun with the track. Maybe even some of them had this “Wow”-effect that’s really rare for most of the TM players I know. And you think that these people “hyped” the track?? Naaa…
    Do you also say “hyped” for example when you don’t like Pf tracks but there’s a Pf track with 50 awards that’s totally genius but you just don’t like it?? I guess not and I think that’s a similar thing like in this track.
    And it’s a quite interesting fact that I get awards from people from whom I normally never get awards and from whom I know that they are experienced techbuilder since TMN like Arild or Vastapaavi. For these people more aspects than smooth jumps and some reuses are relevant. (You said they would just award the track because of these two aspects) And that shows that there is more than just these two things good in this map.

    Then you are saying something weird that’s not going in my mind:

    “because the length is not filled properly with “the stuff that matters””
    -after thinking about 5 minutes what exactly “the stuff that matters” is, I finally give up and ask you what it is. What exactly are you missing in this track?

    Oh and something to the rating of the originality: I think you can’t measure it like original parts/tracklength. Well at least I think you did so, otherwise I can’t see why there’s such a low rating….
    Just to plan and collect all my ideas before starting with this project took me over 2 hours, then I placed the first block! And now I’m wondering why some tracks that has always the same schema like jump-road-jump-road which I can build in some hours get a higher originality rating than this track….

  9. Jozii says:

    To be honest, I totally agree with Hawk here. Personally, i would also have rated the track a lot higher, and while many of the flaws Alcator pointed out are true, in the end the “good” strongly overrates the “bad”.

  10. alcator says:

    Review is always subjective. It’s the opinion of the reviewer, no-one else. The reviewer should have enough experience with all kinds of tracks to be able to put the track at its appropriate spot on the rating scale, somewhere between “worst” and “best” track that he knows.

    I was thinking along these lines:
    – For a tech track, this track is way too confusing and the path to take is way too hidden.
    – For a re-use track, the way in which to re-use (when to re-use etc.) is again too obscure, there’s not enough indication where to go.
    – Then I imagined the typical tech driver and thought how he would think about this track. That’s where “Will it ever end?” comes from.
    – Then I imagined the typical “maze” driver and once again thought if this track will provide him with what he wants.

    You see, your track has it all. It’s just not connected in the right way. That’s the problem I see here.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: