whats better rct rct2 or rct3

What one is better? i wana buy 2 or 3

Obviously RCT2 was Coaster Tycoon at its greatest. the only major flaw with it was the dated graphics engine used... but the whole thing of physics, attention to detail, decent senarios, and overall fun-factor was best found in RCT2 before its so-called expansion packs.

RCT3, with its latest expansion pack, I highly enjoy... despite the criticism from nearly 90% of the coaster community here. The graphics are great, the selection of rides is immense, and gameplay can be fun. If you use sandbox, you may chug as your park grows just because the more detail you invest in your park, the more processing power it'll take & therefore slow down your frame-rate. I haven't experienced this with the senarios, however... probably because I don't add so much scenery as I would when I have unlimited funds.

The main difference between the two... system reccomendiations:
RCT1 & RCT2 = P233 and you can run it ok w/ 64mb RAM. I've done it in the past on crash computers w/out issues.
RCT3 = P 2.0ghz or so.

RCT3 for me! I find it hard to pick up RCT's 1 and 2 after I got into 3. What did it for me? The Tornado, Masterblaster, the customizable extended coaster, the laser shows, the water effects, realism. . . . .and a host of other things. I feel like I am immersed into a real park other than just playing a game.

I would have to say RCT2. RCT3 lost something that Chris Sawyer was originally going for, realism. Riding rides is fun, and cool, but the game has turned to a "Sim Theme Park" type graphic. RCT2 is my game. Always will be.

I didn't like RCT 2. I loved RCT 2. I didn't waste my money on any of the RCT 2 expansion packs but the Amazing Earls expansions (which he is still producing) and UCES filled in every hole that RCT 2 left behind. I wish I had my RCT 2 still installed on my PC.

Now I play with RCT 3+Soaked+Wild and it runs like crap on my high end PC.

I'll think I'll nod RCT 2 on this vote.
*** Edited 12/28/2005 5:47:24 PM UTC by Sawblade5***

Never ever ever ever compare RCT3 to Sim Theme Park.. that's just blasphemy!!

The cartoony look had to be given to the peeps because of the amount of polygons used for literally 1000's of peeps on display at once... a more realistic appearance would have meant sprites, less peeps, really bogged down system, or ugly lookin' peeps.

Not to mention that Sim Theme Park (and Sim Coaster) was more about park management & the rides were like a 2nd thought... they were clunky and very cartoony. Designing a coaster was a joke where it'll ALWAYS make it through & physics were non-existant!

RCT3 at least keeps physics real & the coasters & rides themselves are very realistic looking with decent design elements (the Extended Coaster, of course, being the best one by far & beyond with all elements possible except a watersplash)...

Even they may have a similar look... I challenge you to go back & play Sim Themepark or Sim Coaster again & try to really find similarities... even between the peeps (of which I think they used sprite peeps)... big difference!

The physics are anything but realistic or playable in RCT3. Try making a coaster that has a stretch of level track our of the station or lift, and guess what? It'll stop dead in its tracks. While this might account for real-life physics, they fail to realize that since players aren't permitted to create gently sloping straight portions of track as found on real coasters, they need to program the physics engine to account for it accordingly. Chris Sawyer did this wonderfully--the trains won't stop on level areas of track, and yet still navigate the course realistically. Why the designers at Frontier didn't adopt his method is beyond me.