Skull Island: Reign of Kong - General Discussion

[youhow2]

Probably a good time to remind everyone that it was also explained why the vehicles don’t go outside either…

Must've missed that particular portion of the thread... We are getting up there in pages these days, and to be fair I did skim through a fair bit.

I am 100% certain glasses were cut as a cost saving measure. It’s not even speculation.

If there were other reasons that involved safety, all rides would remove 3D. Much like how all coasters that pass over guest areas now have metal detectors and not just some of them.

I'd disagree with the idea that all rides would remove 3D. If "X" is true for one singular attraction, it must be true for every other related attraction I would say is demonstrably false. Plenty of examples of some attractions with essentially the same components able to operate better than their sister or twin attractions.

For me "glasses were cut as a cost saving measure" , and it making its way through every check and balance across operations to be an okay thing to do for a triple A+ attraction operator is quite frankly, concerning. There has to be other things they aren't doing that make more sense, and "WHY?" for me is the biggest question, Why this cost saving measure? I just don't buy "It cost so much", I don't buy, "Epic Universe is over budget so they are finding any and all additional monies for XYZ"... If I'm thinking as Comcast, I'm not going to smack the Parks and Resorts team on the wrist so hard for going over budget on a new park build that they start cutting integral parts of certain attractions to shore up money. There has to be more to the story, unless that is the story... Is that a fair statement and speculative logic?

I'm willing to at least go down the rabbit hole of thinking about "why" to understand the logic behind the idea. I can't believe for a second that the root of a major operational change which downgrades operational quality of an attraction is merely to cut cost. I know operating 3D is expensive, but they had to have an idea of just how much this would be, They had all the numbers before they built the thing and they designed each of the scenes with 3D in mind... They knew the operating life of each of those projectors and their bulbs, and they've operated 3D attractions before... So where is the outlier that makes cutting it for this particular attraction seemingly viable to someone or someone(s) that is responsible for operations budgets or oversight, or has the authority to command such a major decision? I hope, whatever room this was decided in, there was at least one person who was willing to engage in a discussion about exactly why this shouldn't happen and offer other ideas up, instead of gutting this attraction.

That said, If it is dire enough that there is no secondary motive or other shenanigan's centered around this decision, if really there's nothing more than "they need to do this to cut cost", then I hope one day we get to hear the full story of what exactly went down to drive them to this.


Anyways, Hopefully this is only temporary, or they have the ability to overhaul the attraction somewhere in the future and make some amendments to accommodate a lack of 3D(and are willing to do so) if this ends up being long term or permanent. I can't see the first few scenes working at all, but I can see a scenario with the 360 scene working.

 

[tielo]

There is a continues outroll of removing 3D glasses going on. Some are great like the replacement of T23D and put Jason Borne in there, a new show that doesn't need 3D glasses. I like that. If they would replace the screens at Kong with detailed sets and AA's I would be very excited. Sure the "tunnel" wouldn't work anymore and some rewriting is needed but I'm sure it could be done. Fact is they won't. Investment in expension in themed entertainment is on a high so something has to give to reduce costs and rise profit to pay for all that investment and this is the path they have chosen. Only ride we can be sure of that 3D stays is Spider-Man as Disney wouldn't want them to change anything if that would make it less expensive to run and that is fine by me as it's the best use of 3D in any ride I know.
Due to all this cost management we see Epic has zero 3D glasses rides and that is a positive although the augmented reality glasses are extreemly expensive but Nintendo is ruling that land so it'll stay.

 

[Mad Dog]

I can't be the only one who's noticed a slight dip in Kongs queue times... even during the busy spring break season.

Yes, but by quite a bit overall if you go back to the closing of the outside section. That's what I've been looking at. Like Disney does, you can rig survey results by the way you phrase a question, but significantly reduced guest traffic at an attraction gives a truer picture. It started with the closure of the outside section and has accelerated with the 3D debacle. Numbers after Easter week will give a clearer picture. Right now it's all park 10's and 9 levels for the heavy Spring Vacation season, so everything gets decent numbers....,,DM lines, though still long due to small capacity, went down, and stayed lower after the loss of 3D, even before Villains opened.. It too, being on a small screen at Orlando, isn't as good as the 3D version. And last year they inwardly tested removing the 3D glasses on the very popular Gringotts, though they backed off, probably because of poor results. So it's kind of obvious the entire 3D changes are to alleviate costs. The attractions are just not as good without 3D, since that's what they were built for.

 

[Jake S]

Using Thrill-Data numbers (with all the usual caveats):

I put together the annual average wait times for the major attractions at Islands of Adventure. Then, I used the last full year of data (2023) and compared it to both 2019 and 2021 (both full, normal-ish years in Orlando). I've attached a screenshot below, but at this point you can't make a compelling argument (imo) that Kong's wait times has suffered more than the rest of the park.

Obviously, 2024 will be the real test but we're going to either need a lot more data ... or someone is going to have to do more work than I'm willing to and compare Jan-March of the last four years with what we're seeing this year.

 

[Mad Dog]

Using Thrill-Data numbers (with all the usual caveats):

I put together the annual average wait times for the major attractions at Islands of Adventure. Then, I used the last full year of data (2023) and compared it to both 2019 and 2021 (both full, normal-ish years in Orlando). I've attached a screenshot below, but at this point you can't make a compelling argument (imo) that Kong's wait times has suffered more than the rest of the park.

Obviously, 2024 will be the real test but we're going to either need a lot more data ... or someone is going to have to do more work than I'm willing to and compare Jan-March of the last four years with what we're seeing this year. View attachment 21138

I've always preferred to use Touring Plans numbers where they have people reporting 'actual' line times each day, plus the 'posted' wait times. Usually there's significant disparities. Example: At WDW the actual wait times generally are about 60 to 65% of the posted wait tines. Universal's are more random per attraction, but they are generally much less than the posted wait times. What I've been seeing before, and I wanted to see more numbers after this typical Spring heavy attendance weeks, is that the 'actual' times decreased by a good bit after the outside was closed for a few months. It took a couple months until the effect started taking effect. It's still too hard to compare on the 3D since the Spring season is different this year because Easter is so early. But it has dropped again even though these were some really heavy attendance days in a compressed Spring Season due to very early Easter timing. Anyway, bottom line, the 'actual' numbers after Easter week should offer a better picture. I really pay little attention to 'posted' numbers since they're off almost all the time, for various reasons.............................Myself, I'm wedded to, and trust Touring Plans 'actual' weight times, since I use them myself on my vacations, and they're pretty damn accurate and make vacation touring really easy.

 

[Jake S]

I’d want to see the sample size for Touring Plans’ “actual” wait times before I put much credence in them. As far as I know they’re based on user submissions? That doesn’t seem much more reliable than Universal’s posted wait times (which while inflated, I believe are posted with reasonably good faith).

Of course, if TP is getting hundreds of submissions per attraction per day, or are getting their actual wait times another way, I might feel differently.

 

[Mad Dog]

I’d want to see the sample size for Touring Plans’ “actual” wait times before I put much credence in them. As far as I know they’re based on user submissions? That doesn’t seem much more reliable than Universal’s posted wait times (which while inflated, I believe are posted with reasonably good faith).

Of course, if TP is getting hundreds of submissions per attraction per day, or are getting their actual wait times another way, I might feel differently.

I use their 'actual' waits on every vacation. They're pretty much right on and far distanced from the 'posted' waits at both WDW and Universal. Trust me, I trust their numbers. 'Posted' waits are rarely accurate. There's a number of reasons for that, but the most obvious is that park's would rather have their guests happy that a line was shorter than posted rather than higher than posted.....Not only does TP use their user submissions, but they also have their staff members test lines as a back up number to what they get from their users.

 

[Brian G.]

You can find flaws in either system - it doesn’t discount the other. Both are fine uses for data.

 

[HandsomePete]

For me "glasses were cut as a cost saving measure" , and it making its way through every check and balance across operations to be an okay thing to do for a triple A+ attraction operator is quite frankly, concerning.

Happens all the time. “Every check and balance” is literally just a workload change request and a forecast adjustment.

There has to be other things they aren't doing that make more sense, and "WHY?" for me is the biggest question, Why this cost saving measure? I just don't buy "It cost so much", I don't buy, "Epic Universe is over budget so they are finding any and all additional monies for XYZ"... If I'm thinking as Comcast, I'm not going to smack the Parks and Resorts team on the wrist so hard for going over budget on a new park build that they start cutting integral parts of certain attractions to shore up money. There has to be more to the story, unless that is the story... Is that a fair statement and speculative logic?

It’s actually quite difficult to find savings when you need to save even just a few million dollars because easy, unnoticeable cuts suggest you were being inefficient before. The easiest is cutting park hours, which (without researching to comp to prior years) is pretty obvious has happened - or at least been looked at, and we don’t know what budgeted park hours were for the year. Second easiest is trying to cover an entire day’s operation with a single shift of workers (so something like opening the back half of the Studios park later than park opening time) because hours 9, 10, 11ish of operation are disproportionally expensive since it creates an overlap of starting/ending shifts. Then there’s having to offset things that cost more than you were expecting at budget time or compared to last year - so all those Minion popsicles and popcorn and fancy menu items have a drawback in that (speculating here) they’re probably spending a lot more on labor to run all that when people are eating the same amount of meals as they did before (stomach size is finite).

You also have to figure they have survey data from before/after they removed 3D from Minions. But then you have to understand that individual ride scores have a substantially diluted impact on overall park experience scores (not going down math that road here), which are the ones most correlated with intent to return and other macro-level drivers. So a 3-5ppt hit to Kong’s score isn’t going to register much beyond that. Same as trying to plus up an attraction to get another 3-5ppt, usually it just isn’t worth it unless it’s done to hide the age of the ride (think Spider-Man to HD or 4K or whatever they did with that compared to the original screens).

Then, a lot of rides just can’t have people cut from positions for operational or safety reasons. Nor are people easy to cut from F&B locations either. The number of shifts managing 3D glasses at Kong probably equates to the number of shifts manning the fryer at Fast Food Blvd - so are you going to cut 3D from Kong or tell everyone that Krusty Burgers no longer come with fries?

What you have to realize is that the majority of people critiquing this change are the sommeliers of theme park rides (well, it makes the analogy work) when 99% of wine drinkers do it just to get drunk. Most people go to theme parks to spend time with their family or get out of the house. Not defending the change per se, but it actually makes a ton of sense *if* they have a huge deficit to cover this fiscal year. The larger picture is whether or not this is a “this year” thing or bigger than that. Not to be a doomsdayer but… putting bricks in the ground for a theme park is the easy part, running a theme park is the hard part. Epic will absolutely not be allowed to suck, but SeaWorld-quality ops, understaffing, and cost cuts at the existing parks is within the realm of possibility.

 

[Mad Dog]

Happens all the time. “Every check and balance” is literally just a workload change request and a forecast adjustment.


It’s actually quite difficult to find savings when you need to save even just a few million dollars because easy, unnoticeable cuts suggest you were being inefficient before. The easiest is cutting park hours, which (without researching to comp to prior years) is pretty obvious has happened - or at least been looked at, and we don’t know what budgeted park hours were for the year. Second easiest is trying to cover an entire day’s operation with a single shift of workers (so something like opening the back half of the Studios park later than park opening time) because hours 9, 10, 11ish of operation are disproportionally expensive since it creates an overlap of starting/ending shifts. Then there’s having to offset things that cost more than you were expecting at budget time or compared to last year - so all those Minion popsicles and popcorn and fancy menu items have a drawback in that (speculating here) they’re probably spending a lot more on labor to run all that when people are eating the same amount of meals as they did before (stomach size is finite).

You also have to figure they have survey data from before/after they removed 3D from Minions. But then you have to understand that individual ride scores have a substantially diluted impact on overall park experience scores (not going down math that road here), which are the ones most correlated with intent to return and other macro-level drivers. So a 3-5ppt hit to Kong’s score isn’t going to register much beyond that. Same as trying to plus up an attraction to get another 3-5ppt, usually it just isn’t worth it unless it’s done to hide the age of the ride (think Spider-Man to HD or 4K or whatever they did with that compared to the original screens).

Then, a lot of rides just can’t have people cut from positions for operational or safety reasons. Nor are people easy to cut from F&B locations either. The number of shifts managing 3D glasses at Kong probably equates to the number of shifts manning the fryer at Fast Food Blvd - so are you going to cut 3D from Kong or tell everyone that Krusty Burgers no longer come with fries?

What you have to realize is that the majority of people critiquing this change are the sommeliers of theme park rides (well, it makes the analogy work) when 99% of wine drinkers do it just to get drunk. Most people go to theme parks to spend time with their family or get out of the house. Not defending the change per se, but it actually makes a ton of sense *if* they have a huge deficit to cover this fiscal year. The larger picture is whether or not this is a “this year” thing or bigger than that. Not to be a doomsdayer but… putting bricks in the ground for a theme park is the easy part, running a theme park is the hard part. Epic will absolutely not be allowed to suck, but SeaWorld-quality ops, understaffing, and cost cuts at the existing parks is within the realm of possibility.

Unfortunately for us hard core fans, most of what you say is what the financial reality is. Most everything negative that has happened points to budget issues. A new theme park (Epic) is a great thing in and of itself. But I'd guess it's also an overall negative, at this point in time, for operations at the existing parks. Hopefully Epic ends up being even more successful than the high expectations Universal has, and the other parks get back to a less 'budget pressured' existence. But I'm dubious about that happening. I'm also concerned/leery, that with the realities of Orlando's labor market, that Universal will be able to find, hire and adequately train enough competent employees to staff all four parks in a manner that they should be staffed.

 

[Ken96]

Just experienced 2D Kong for the first time….

It was absolutely dreadful, not only because of the lack of 3D, but the ride had some weird glitch where the vehicle BARELY moving during the tunnel sequence. I started to think I was going crazy, because there was no way the 3D influenced the simulator movements lol. Pardon my language, but the first thing I said was: That was ride was pure ASS. I couldn’t help but feel bad for the people who experienced it for the first time.

I tried it again yesterday and everything worked as it should. Honestly, the ride wasn’t dramatically different. And it goes to show that the attention to detail they put in this ride elevates it far beyond Supercharged. Of course I prefer it in 3D, but losing it doesn’t kill the entire experience, like I assumed it would.

I couldn’t help riding other stuff and wondering what it would be like without 3D. (I really hope nothing else loses it)

 

[OLSinFLA]

I don’t know what type of projection it uses, but if it’s two-projector method, switching to 2D cuts down on replacement bulbs by half as well.

Its Dolby 3D which uses a shift in frequency of the film - can either be done with 1 or 2 projectors depending on the setup. It provides a brighter, sharper picture with less crosstalk than polarized 3D. The drawback is the glasses aren't cheap. Here's a good article:

Dolby 3D - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[belloq87]

Not to be a doomsdayer but… putting bricks in the ground for a theme park is the easy part, running a theme park is the hard part. Epic will absolutely not be allowed to suck, but SeaWorld-quality ops, understaffing, and cost cuts at the existing parks is within the realm of possibility.

This should concern everybody here.

 

[Brian G.]

This should concern everybody here.

Let’s just put it in the back pocket for now because we’re getting way ahead of ourselves.

 

[Skold]

What you have to realize is that the majority of people critiquing this change are the sommeliers of theme park rides (well, it makes the analogy work) when 99% of wine drinkers do it just to get drunk.

I now have a new status message

 

[youhow2]

Happens all the time. “Every check and balance” is literally just a workload change request and a forecast adjustment....

Great post. My opinion remains unchanged however, atleast in terms of operating as a top tier resort/park operator... You shouldn't be resorting to these level of cuts.

The 3D component shouldn't be looked at as "optional" for operating the attraction, or any number of attractions for that matter, the cost is the cost. You shouldn't revise these things as "optional" years later because the wallet gets tight. Find the money elsewhere. And I know it's easier said than done. I know.

But, if you're cutting parts of attractions that enhance the attractions, that they were designed around to save a buck, your model is broken elsewhere.

I like the Sommelier comparison, but I would perhaps suggest maybe a food analogy. If you're going to grab some steaks to put on the grill, there's a difference between a well prepared USDA select T-bone, and a well prepared Prime Angus New York strip.

People come to the parks because they want to get away and spend time with friends and family, they want a more premium experience. They want to go to Harry Potter land. They want to post the picture on instagram with a wand and butterbeer. They want the diagon alley dragon photo to show off. They have a specific attachment to a particular IP. The kids are getting a little too old for Disney. The reasons go on.


They know their regional parks are typically Choice grade experiences at best, and select grade experiences and below at worse. They're both still steaks, everything is still edible and enjoyable to some degree, but you pay more for those Prime Angus cuts because they are typically more enjoyable cuts of meat, and it shows in the quality of those steaks by every available metric. Some people, regardless of those cuts will not care at all, they will have them well done with ketchup all day long. Some will prefer the T-bone... This is fine... But when you're claiming to serve high end, high quality meats and you start getting lazy with the preparation, presentation and the quality of the steaks you're serving, you are lowering your standard of service. Most won't be able to tell the difference between the well prepared choice steak and a similar prepared Prime grade steak, but some will, and not every one of them need to be "sommelier" level consumers to notice the difference. Especially the ones who are doing the stop in at Universal and going to Disney as well... As much as I dislike parts of the mouse, and think their current mode of operating is terrible on some level at the very least, their problems are mostly because of their own success in operating the worlds premiere theme park attraction. I honestly can't say I could see them cutting effects that alter a whole ride experience to save money.

Even you compared this to Sea-World level operations. We're talking about a regional park operator and a world-class resort building a third park in Orlando, who are competing on some level with the mouse. These kinds of things will always keep them playing second chair in most folks minds. Guest with no particular affinity for either attraction will notice and compare between the two, who does "xyz" better, and use the comparison to decide where they spend their money. If it's a rides to rides comparison that makes the spending decision, this is the kind of thing they will lose on, even if wait times are immensely more tolerable at Universal than Disney.

 

[Rhian]

Great post. My opinion remains unchanged however, atleast in terms of operating as a top tier resort/park operator... You shouldn't be resorting to these level of cuts.

The 3D component shouldn't be looked at as "optional" for operating the attraction, or any number of attractions for that matter, the cost is the cost. You shouldn't revise these things as "optional" years later because the wallet gets tight. Find the money elsewhere. And I know it's easier said than done. I know.

But, if you're cutting parts of attractions that enhance the attractions, that they were designed around to save a buck, your model is broken elsewhere.

I like the Sommelier comparison, but I would perhaps suggest maybe a food analogy. If you're going to grab some steaks to put on the grill, there's a difference between a well prepared USDA select T-bone, and a well prepared Prime Angus New York strip.

People come to the parks because they want to get away and spend time with friends and family, they want a more premium experience. They want to go to Harry Potter land. They want to post the picture on instagram with a wand and butterbeer. They want the diagon alley dragon photo to show off. They have a specific attachment to a particular IP. The kids are getting a little too old for Disney. The reasons go on.


They know their regional parks are typically Choice grade experiences at best, and select grade experiences and below at worse. They're both still steaks, everything is still edible and enjoyable to some degree, but you pay more for those Prime Angus cuts because they are typically more enjoyable cuts of meat, and it shows in the quality of those steaks by every available metric. Some people, regardless of those cuts will not care at all, they will have them well done with ketchup all day long. Some will prefer the T-bone... This is fine... But when you're claiming to serve high end, high quality meats and you start getting lazy with the preparation, presentation and the quality of the steaks you're serving, you are lowering your standard of service. Most won't be able to tell the difference between the well prepared choice steak and a similar prepared Prime grade steak, but some will, and not every one of them need to be "sommelier" level consumers to notice the difference. Especially the ones who are doing the stop in at Universal and going to Disney as well... As much as I dislike parts of the mouse, and think their current mode of operating is terrible on some level at the very least, their problems are mostly because of their own success in operating the worlds premiere theme park attraction. I honestly can't say I could see them cutting effects that alter a whole ride experience to save money.

Even you compared this to Sea-World level operations. We're talking about a regional park operator and a world-class resort building a third park in Orlando, who are competing on some level with the mouse. These kinds of things will always keep them playing second chair in most folks minds. Guest with no particular affinity for either attraction will notice and compare between the two, who does "xyz" better, and use the comparison to decide where they spend their money. If it's a rides to rides comparison that makes the spending decision, this is the kind of thing they will lose on, even if wait times are immensely more tolerable at Universal than Disney.

A few of your fundamental points are valid. It's no secret Universal has been doing very well post-Potter and the effort in the new theme park (and beyond) is proof of confidence they will get their investment back and then some. So that combined with the fact it's owned by Comcast makes budget cuts in guest-facing areas of all places strange, particularly because some parts of the parent company (ISP side of things as an example) could be considered monopolistic, so there's always money coming in and they often increase prices.

It makes sense to ponder why Universal is buying land and building all these new experiences if they can't maintain a minimum level of service at their current resorts; cutting back on ops because of the new theme park says the opposite of doing well. I understand the oversimplification of these topics but the end result is the same at the end of the day.

Not to dissuade you from the discussion itself because personally I think it's a good one, but perhaps it should be shifted to another thread so we don't flood this one; the items you bring up extend beyond the ride (and you know it's good when people start whipping out spreadsheets lol). I don't know if there's an existing thread where this would fit however, or if a new one is necessary.

It was absolutely dreadful, not only because of the lack of 3D, but the ride had some weird glitch where the vehicle BARELY moving during the tunnel sequence. I started to think I was going crazy, because there was no way the 3D influenced the simulator movements lol. Pardon my language, but the first thing I said was: That was ride was pure ASS. I couldn’t help but feel bad for the people who experienced it for the first time.

I experienced something like this myself during my last ride a couple of years ago and had the same feeling! I didn't notice it first because of the rumbling of the audio and the wind effects but same as you, I realized we weren't rocking around like usual. It was interesting for sure.

 

[Wesker69]

Okay... I now understand how everyone felt when I'd make super long ranting posts back in the day.

Karma.. also TLDR.. -Squirrel!!!

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I don't know if there's an existing thread where this would fit however, or if a new one is necessary.

I think it's time for a dedicated space to discuss Universal's "challenges"

 

[Brian G.]

I think it's time for a dedicated space to discuss Universal's "challenges"

We have already provided links, including @Nico most recently, where you can discuss those "challenges" based on each case. It does not need another "catch-all" thread.