Refurbishing a crashed coaster removes its crash history from guest behavior

[CSEverett]

Operating System

Windows 7 64 bit, but with both 64 and 32 bit versions of OpenRCT2 in both program files and program files(86) folders

OpenRCT2 build

All versions used, both release and develop, since about mid 2021 or so

Describe the issue

When a coaster crashes, it always has to be closed. Since condition below 50% is required for brake failures, this makes sense as a good time to refurbish the ride. When reopened there -should- be a crash history that keeps guests off for a couple months, but if you refurbish the ride there isn't one and the guests will start riding it again right away.

This bug occurs in every release or develop version I've used, both 32 and 64 bit and in both program files and program files (x86) folders, including before the NSF, going back to early-mid 2021 or so when I first used OpenRCT2. (Up until at most a month ago though I had been out of the game since the beginning of 2022, so I skipped a few versions, but I have no doubt the bug was in those too. It also occurs every single time as well. I suspect this has been in OpenRCT2 since refurbishing rides was added for the first time.

Doing construction on the ride might gave the same results, or it might not - I haven't done that since getting back into it a month or so ago, and I remember it might have done that, but I'm not sure and it might not have. Easy enough to test.

Also occurs every single time without fail - a single test is enough to see if it occurs or not. It's actually pretty much universal in all versions for the last year, and is as reliable as a feature.

Area(s) with issue?

No response

Steps to reproduce

1. Ride crashes
2. Refurbish Ride
3. Open ride
4. Note - this happens every single time.

Attachments

No response

[jensj12]

Refurbishing a ride is like destroying and rebuilding it again, so I would say this is intended behaviour.

[CSEverett]

Refurbishing a ride is like destroying and rebuilding it again, so I would say this is intended behaviour.

I would argue this behavior is a natural result of that, but not intended, nor desired, and should be given a bit of effort to fix.

[Broxzier]

This just sounds logical to me, since the ride is new. I'm also pretty sure it is intended, especially if @jensj12, the creator of this feature, says so.

[jensj12]

Looking back at the discussion in 2018, it is indeed intended, see #3473.
Whether it is desirable is still debatable, but as it stands I'm with @Broxzier on this one.

[ocalhoun6]

Logical from the player's standpoint, yes... But really not logical from a realism standpoint.

Say, you're going to a theme park, where a ride called Big Dipper just made the news when it accidentally killed 16 people. Will it really matter to you that the park says it's "refurbished" and "new from the ground up", if the ride has the same name and looks exactly the same as the old, deadly one?

Ideally, from a realism standpoint, even if you did demolish the ride and rebuild an identical one in its place, guests would still avoid the new ride because it's so similar to the deadly one. (Of course, that would be far too much of a headache to actually code.) (And more realistically, they might avoid your entire park if a high profile accident like that happened there.)

But yeah, I think from a realistic park management standpoint, it would be very logical for peeps to still avoid a deadly ride, even though it's been refurbished.

[Broxzier]

That's more about how the game works rather than this particular feature. Building rides takes months, while in the game you can build things instantly. Refurbishing is the same. And once a ride has been refurbished, it has a new status. I find it hard to believe that a ride wouldn't be improved while refurbishing after a fatal incident, so the status shouldn't stay.

[Gymnasiast]

I think it would be better not to clear it, mostly for the reasons that @ocalhoun6 mentioned. It’s why I asked OP to create this issue in the first place.

[jensj12]

Since we're dealing with a game here, let's list the available options when a coaster crashes:

1. Reopen the ride
2. Refurbish the ride, then reopen
3. Demolish the ride, then rebuild it and open.
4. Demolish the ride, build something else.

As self-declared RCT coaster safety expert, I'm unfamiliar with what exactly happens over time in scenario 1. A detailed explanation would be very welcome to aid this discussion. For scenario 3 it's clear what happens: the offending coaster is gone and the crash is forgotten. There is technically no good way to distinguish between scenario 3 and 4, so I doubt this will ever change (the other way around is also possible, making massive edits to a crashed coaster doesn't clear the crash status, even though it is clearly a different ride). As refurbishing a ride is available as shortcut to demolish and rebuild the ride, I fail to see how it is desirable to deliberately make players take the long and tedious route in a specific circumstance.

Ideally, from a realism standpoint, even if you did demolish the ride and rebuild an identical one in its place, guests would still avoid the new ride because it's so similar to the deadly one. (Of course, that would be far too much of a headache to actually code.) (And more realistically, they might avoid your entire park if a high profile accident like that happened there.)

While I understand the reasoning of @ocalhoun6, it falls apart on this point for the reason mentioned above. If refurbishing stops clearing the crashed status, rebuilding shouldn't clear it either.

[Gymnasiast]

Scenario 1 is quite easy: all guests will start riding the coaster again after a few months, before that some will refuse it on safety grounds.

Also, I have to disagree on your rebuilding point. If a (real-life) park fixes a coaster that has had a crash, some people will remain weary. If the park tears it down and rebuilds a close copy, I would certainly expect more people to ride it.

[Broxzier]

If the park tears it down and rebuilds a close copy, I would certainly expect more people to ride it.

That's essentially the same as refurbishing a ride, but I see your point now, since the track remains unchanged, only reliability goes up which prevents brake failures from happening again.