X7123M3-256

What @Broxzier said is correct, you can't make an unpowered vehicle powered. But I believe that @Spacek found that the mini helicopter trains contain an invisible powered car. You could add that powered car to your coaster train, and it wouldn't look any different because the additional car is invisible (you might have to make sure the powered car is at the front of the train for this to work - I have not tried it yet so YMMV)

The RCT2 object database went offline sometime last year. Given the low traffic to the site and the large size of their collection I doubt anybody but the creator has a complete archive of the contents.

The pieces have definitely not been removed - I just updated to the latest develop and I can still load this park. You do now need the arbitrary ride type cheat to build with them, whereas you didn't when I built this, but they're still there. I assume this was changed because the default trains don't have appropriate sprites.

AE's Tilted Whirler, and most other flat rides, do not have individual vehicles. The ride is all one sprite. You can have up to three colorable regions per sprite, but no more than that. For rides that do have individual vehicles, you can already paint them seperately. Even if support for more remap colors was added (which would require a new file format), you couldn't add enough to support what you suggest, because there's not enough room in the palette. To paint 9 seats with 2 colors each you'd need 18 remap colors. One remap color requires 12 palette slots and there are 256 available (some of which are special and can't be used as remap colors). And even then it could only be used with new rides - you can't easily change the paint scheme of an existing object like AE's without remaking the whole thing, since we don't have the original models to render new sprites from (unless you want to go through every frame of animation and change the colors by hand, which is definitely possible but very tedious.). The only way around it would be to redesign the ride so that it does consist of seperate vehicles. But right now, flat ride behaviour is all hardcoded. You'd have to either add a new hardcoded ride type or implement a new object format to support it.

What do you mean "blueprints"?

Try copying the files from into your OpenRCT2 scenario folder manually (it should happen automatically, but if it isn't then manually copying them across could act as a workaround).

That's strange - I'm able to copy and paste the list just fine. But failing that, you can copy down the names manually. It's tedious if there's a lot of objects missing, but if you have a lot of missing objects then downloading them all is going to be tedious anyway. It's a good idea to make sure "export plug in objects with saved games" is selected, so you avoid this problem in future. It causes all custom objects to be included with the savegame, which inflates the filesize but it ensures you'll always be able to load it.

If you have the launcher, it will automatically update to the latest version every time you start the game. Are you sure it isn't the server that is behind?

Certain fence objects have these sloped sprites so that they can be built on sloped terrain. The easiest way to place sloped fence pieces not on sloped ground is to use the tile inspector, which allows you to directly adjust the slope of objects that support it. The old way of doing it was to raise the ground to the point you wanted to build the fence, place the fence on the sloped ground, and then lower the ground with zero clearance enabled.

I have no idea how you're charging $300+ for park entry because I've never seen a scenario where the guests spawn with that much. The park has a certain capacity, and once it is maxed out, the only way to get guests in is to have existing guests leave or to expand the park. Both strategies are viable, but you don't get as much income as you would in a pay-per-ride park. Pay per entry parks are challenging - the game is not "broken", these scenarios are just harder. Plenty of people have completed them nonetheless. You can use the cheat to switch to pay-per-ride if you want to make them easier. If you want to make changes that the devs don't want to merge, you're free to make your own fork of the game and implement whatever you want. I have one for experimenting with custom track styles.

Depends on the scenario and peep intensity preferences. Peeps never use transport rides for transport, but peeps preferring gentle rides will ride them anyway. Also, covered rides are popular in the rain. The steam trains and monorail can carry far more than 16 passengers (the monorail has the highest per-train capacity in the base game), and those don't run almost empty because of it. I don't know what you're trying to achieve by switching the car to the tram cars - IMO that would look worse than the elevator in this situation. But in answer to the question, if you switch the car type using the in-game cheat, then you also change the capacity. The cheat doesn't let you set them independently. If you modify the vehicle structures directly, you can specify whatever capacity you like (no idea what happens if you set a higher capacity than the train has sprites for, but the trams don't show sprites for peeps anyway so you should be OK).

This is the sort of thing where I would prefer to use a custom ride, but then I tend to use those quite heavily. I think the elevator car looks a bit big to be a chairlift car. You could try a middle monorail car, but I'm not sure that's much better. Change the track type to crooked house. This will make the entire track invisible.

This is a multiplayer server? What makes you think it's a bug - are you sure there's not another player renaming peeps to Emma Garrell?

Look closely at the path in front of the entrance ... it's not connected to the entrance path. Clicking on it with the path tool should fix that.

Could be it this one? This was the first shoestring coaster I posted (and I've only posted two). It's a bit of an unusual example because I made the splitting and recombining part of the ride, instead of hiding it underground as you would normally do. It's probably the most unrealistic ride I've ever made. If the train is all in one piece it's not a shoestring, just a merge. You split the train, but usually you only have one part of the train visible - you'd hide the other, and use the second track to place track pieces that can't be placed on the main track, like the diagonal station and brake run in the Silberpfiel above.

If disabling clearance checks is not allowed, you're going to have a difficult time setting up the shoestring. The usual way to do it is with a track merge, which requires ZC. In principle, you could do it without - but it would be a lot of work, and the end result would be identical to using ZC and then deleting the merge after the fact.

This seems like a strange rule for a contest involving shoestring coasters, unless you mean only that the visible track should be built above ground. Placing the other track underground is the easiest way to hide it - you could use cheats to hide the track, but to make a ride vehicle invisible with hacks is much more difficult (but still possible, I guess). You could also use scenery to hide the track, but doing this well would also be challenging (unless, of course making it challenging was your intention). Was it this one?

They may not be, but if that is the case then there will always be a way to convert the old files to whatever new format is introduced. The developers have stated that there will always be the option to use original assets, and to load vanilla saves. Renaming a file should not corrupt it. If it does, that's an issue with your filesystem rather than OpenRCT2. It might cause OpenRCT2 not to recognize it as an object file - but I really don't know why you want a different extension in the first place. No, I'm talking about things that can't be done at all. Like right now, you can't have custom track styles, because those graphics reside in g1.dat and not in object files. But if we had a new object format, we could eliminate those restrictions, and allow many more possibilities. I have heard @Gymnasiast talk about putting terrain sprites in object files for example, so that we could have custom ground textures. This is something that cannot be done at the moment, and could not be implemented without introducing a new object file format. Yes. The OpenRCT2 developers have repeatedly stated that if/when a new file format is introduced, there will always be a way to import vanilla files.

RCT2 object files always have the .DAT extension so why is this a problem? Also, you can rename the file at any point, if you really want it to have a different extension. You'll be able to do that, I'm sure. But I'm hoping that there will also have a new object format that would allow us to make custom objects that can't be done in vanilla. If that were the case, you'd miss out on the new functionality if you made an object for vanilla and then imported it. Bear in mind that basically nothing has been decided about the new file format, other than the fact that you will always be able to import parks from vanilla, and the object limits will be removed. The developers haven't said much about the details and no work on this has been done, so it's impossible to say exactly what will and won't be supported.

That's because nobody uses it. It exists, but it's just the desktop version compiled for Android - it still has the same UI which is very hard to use without a mouse. I'm not aware of anyone actually playing it - all I've seen of it is from the developers who ported it. Also, why do you split your replies into three consecutive posts?

OpenRCT2 sometimes crashes my computer too, but even after several occurrences I have no idea why, nor can I reliably reproduce it. Usually it happens if the game has been left idling on another tab for a while.

Because he might be away from his desktop? Not really true - OpenRCT2 does work on mobile, it's just that nobody plays it on mobile because it's very hard to use without a mouse. The mobile port of vanilla RCT2 (RCTC) is very popular though (it has a redesigned interface that's better for touchscreens). Why not just make one now? It only takes 5 minutes. Having all the bug reports in one place makes them easier to keep track of.

OP should export the park - that way the user doesn't have to manually install the objects.

How would that be any better than the existing cut away view?

Well, I just tested it, and I do see them (this is on the latest develop binary build, not my fork with all the extra track pieces). It was merged some time ago so it should be in stable as well - is your game up to date? To be clear, I am referring to track sprites - the cars still lack appropriate sprites for inversions, and probably will do until such time as we have replacement graphics. That's why they're not shown in the ride construction window. But it doesn't make sense not to add them in at all for that reason, since people will merge them in anyway, and people who don't hack will never see the extra pieces.