Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe because those buildings in the Chicago pix don't exist yet... and even if it did it doesn't beat NYC historic skyline.
Yea Chicago has more bigger building but they look like they were built for a contest. NYC's have a lot more building's overall and they look a lot better by its architect.
My thread isn't NYC vs. Chicago. It's why do people think NYC is better thatn Chicago. There is clearly a differance
In that thread you will get a TON of answers on why people think NYC's skyline is better than Chicago's and vice versa. There really isn't a difference at all between what you are asking and what is being and has been discussed in that thread.
You can only get ONE good angle of the Chicago skyline, and that's looking northwest from the Shedd Aquarium. Tell me, how come most times you see the Chicago skyline in films/tv/websites, it's always from that exact spot?
Whereas with NYC, there isn't just one sweet spot. You can get a good angle anywhere.
New York has the advantage in sheer quantity, design, placement, and view.
I'd put Chicago at the top of the second tier, which consists of Chicago-Miami-Seattle-San Francisco-Philadelphia. (New York is in its own tier.) Then the third tier, with Los Angeles-Houston-Boston-Dallas
Manhattan's skyline is more utilitarian, it was built out of necessity. Conversely, the Loop's skyline is like a living work of art, it was built for status. I like Chicago's skyline much better, but strictly from an aesthetic point of view.
What I was trying to say was, so what if Brooklyn Bridge is 125 Years old. It's beautiful either way. And I posted the new buildings because in a couple of years, these buildings will be the face of these cities
Because for people who like history it is important. Las Vegas (and even Tokyo) has a mini version of New York - is it the same as the real thing? LOL, when they moved London Bridge to Arizonia - does it still have the same meaning?
Because for people who like history it is important. Las Vegas (and even Tokyo) has a mini version of New York - is it the same as the real thing? LOL, when they moved London Bridge to Arizonia - does it still have the same meaning?
But It's not the same thing. that is just for publicity.
Maybe because those buildings in the Chicago pix don't exist yet... and even if it did it doesn't beat NYC historic skyline.
Yea Chicago has more bigger building but they look like they were built for a contest. NYC's have a lot more building's overall and they look a lot better by its architect.
Even w/o those buildings you still have a skyline better than NYC
Even w/o those buildings you still have a skyline better than NYC
In the other thread, futuristic skylines i gave you a link of new buildings. Here it is again. New buildings - SkyscraperCity
Also i have a question.
Have you experienced the NYC skyline yourself?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
