Discussion in 'General Discussions' started by Chase3, Jan 1, 2017.
New coasters... yep.
Anything like Hulk/Dragons... nope
I may get raked over the coals, but I feel Hulk and Dragons have lost all enjoyment for me...Odd, because all of the coasters at BGT still hold up
In other words, I'm ok with no more Hulk/Dragons types
I agree with not having Anymore BIG coasters. Hulk is not a Must do for me. I do it maybe once a year or twice.
I love Hulk and Dragons, but Universal won't be making any "bare supports" with minimal theme coasters. Universal did this because they wanted to attract a market to compete with Disney, now that they are essentially head to head with Disney, they build dark rides and more immersive experiences. As much as I want a new Hulk-esque ride, it won't be happening.
Very good point...These coasters were built at a time where Universal was still very much finding its footing as a "resort" rather than a single theme park..
Yeah, they haven't built a bare support coaster since.....2016. If what you said were true, they wouldn't have rebuilt Hulk. They'd be knee deep in a new Avengers ride right there. When the third gate gets built, I'd not be surprised at all to see an icon of the park be a big, bare support coaster.
Refurbing hulk isn't the same thing as completely building a newly designed bare coaster.
That wasn't a refurb. They completely tore the coaster down, poured new footers, bought all new supports, track, cars, and everything that goes with it. I'll bet they paid more for it than they did for the coaster originally.
But it was still the Hulk. Redoing the Hulk because it needed it, isn't the same as building something brand new with limited theming on the track.
I could see the no bare support argument if there wasn't so many bare supports next door at Volcano Bay. But it's still early days and they may get covered up yet.
If they decided to built a coaster in JP, I'd be curious if going over the lagoon would be an option. It adds a lot of extra room for creativity of design but it also leads to the bare support argument.
While I can see what you are saying, I dont know of any outdoor theme park with supported structural theming. Structural themes for water park towers and full force roller coasters aren't a far comparison of the two.
True but if Universal are calling it a theme park and putting it in the same category as their theme parks, I think it's a fair comparison.
If anything, it should be easier to theme a support in a water park.
It really depends if Universal build a coaster and if they do, how tall they go.
A lot of the supports for Volcano Bay are green so that they can blend in with the greenery once they add it. There will be lots of trees/foliage that will attempt to hide it.
Hulk was a refurbishment to fix maintenance issues, not a "new" coaster. Universal kept it because it somewhat has a "comic book" look that the rest of the land displays. On the other hand, Dragons looks displaced behind Hogsmeade.
A lot of people really make too much of the whole theme park vs amusement park, a lot of it is just because in English there are two common terms 'theme park' and 'amusement park', but they really mean the same thing, parks like Universal and Disney just have placed the bar much higher, that is really all. In different languages I think the difference is not there. I know in mu native Dutch, both 'theme park' and 'amusement park' would be called 'pretpark' (literally translates to fun park). French is parque d'attractions and German is Freizeitpark (literally -respectively- attraction park and leisure park).
As for bare coasters, I find some coasters to be highly aesthetic, especially when done the way BGT does them.
I think theme vs amusement is very much an American invention..
As far as BGT, I firmly agree with you, the colors, working with terrain, and theming elements of their coasters is bar-none
I was always under the impression the look of BGT's coasters was pretty much B&M's doing, thus why the other good looking ones like Hulk, Apollo's Chariot, Dueling Dragons are also B&M designs.
True, B&M probably has aesthetics in mind when they design their coasters, but BGT seems to implement it much better by landscaping things nicely. Seaworld's coasters don't please me as much as BGT's do.
Their sister park, BGW, does a nice job on their coasters also.
The way Kumba is cut into the terrain and wraps around the walkways is beautiful.
That cobra roll is a thing of beauty with the bridge and railway track.
Separate names with a comma.