Super Nintendo World (Osaka)

[JungleSkip]

From ride experience reactions alone? RotR, Hagrid’s, and FoP. I’d say all are considered part of the pantheon of great theme park rides. I don’t see the kind of blown away reviews for MK as I saw for those once they opened.

ROTR needs a lottery to ride it, Hagrid's didn't work for a year and a half, and Flight of Passage sucks (yes this is my opinion).

I will be shocked if most people, and the vast majority of the general public, doesn't view MK in the same league as these rides

 

[Mad Dog]

On fan reviews....I recall when Gringotts opened it received very negative reviews from the internet fan base, irrespective of it's opening tech issues. One Example; Back then Orland Informer had a Forum, and a ton of reviews came in, most of which rated it a 1 or 2 on a scale of 5. That was just plain idiocy. Gringotts was, and is, a pretty good ride. But some people had 'fantasy' versions in their internet fan dream imaginations, which no attractions ever live up to. This discussion kind of reminds me of those old Gringott's reviews.

 

[Jerroddragon]

I hope normal people are like some of you...I will enjoy the crap out of MK in Hollywood...you all can go ride Transformers of Mummy and tell me its a "better ride" and I'll just laugh

To each their own but besides the fact that yes I'd like a fast section the ride is impress as hell with out AR. But I like how some "speed" makes an E ticket...like some one here would argue Incedicoaster or Space Mountain is more impressive than this ride....I'd take this slow detailed ride over just a coaster anyday.

Also yeah this is 100% on Universal, I'm sure Nintendo would have let them make the ride longer but no no we have to do a smallfoot print becaue we want this to be the same ride in Hollywood and don't have much space so the ride must be a little worst for it. Its the same company who saw fit to make Predators cove have NOTHING to look at and call it day.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Ultimately though, he’s the only person who’s ridden it and that makes the opinion hold more weight.

I appreciate BatCom’s review (even if it wasn’t necessarily great news) and hope he continues contributing to the site, especially given he has visited/can provide perspective on the Japan park.

Yes it’s why I’m listening to him more than others who are basing it off of on ride vids (like me even!) But my comments are specifically about people raising questions and comments about his review and him going “don’t care”. If I posted a review of something where i missed a component (due to attraction design or my fault) then I’d listen.

But anyway, back on topic.

 

[brianlo]

People are allowed to have differing opinions folks. It does not take away from your perceived excitement and support of the ride. A take from a forum poster who has experienced the ride has been overdue.

As far as mismatched opinions go, I think there is an argument where a certain ride system and ride aren't inherently bad, but fail to really capture the concept they are going for. I don't think MK is a bad ride, it just would have been better suited for a different concept like Luigi's Mansion. Same with Gringott's or Fast and Furious. Neither really do justice to a core conceit of a Mine train or a Car Chase.

Interactivity I do appreciate, but even this instance is just somewhat off with the branding. You don't endlessly spam shells in the games.

I don't think they should have built a totally different ride - although a Test Track system, Indy or a Spiderman style system probably would have been more on brand with Mario Kart - just used a different franchise concept. It's a cool ride system with an odd first choice of application. But, it's what they built!

 

[JawsVictim]

People are allowed to have differing opinions folks. It does not take away from your perceived excitement and support of the ride. A take from a forum poster who has experienced the ride has been overdue.

As far as mismatched opinions go, I think there is an argument where a certain ride system and ride aren't inherently bad, but fail to really capture the concept they are going for. I don't think MK is a bad ride, it just would have been better suited for a different concept like Luigi's Mansion. Same with Gringott's or Fast and Furious. Neither really do justice to a core conceit of a Mine train or a Car Chase.

Interactivity I do appreciate, but even this instance is just somewhat off with the branding. You don't endlessly spam shells in the games.

I don't think they should have built a totally different ride - although a Test Track system, Indy or a Spiderman style system probably would have been more on brand with Mario Kart - just used a different franchise concept. It's a cool ride system with an odd first choice of application. But, it's what they built!

Hadn’t thought of them using this ride system for Luigi’s Mansion. That would have been awesome!

 

[OrlandoGuy]

I will say, it is a little ironic that fans have been asking for a slow-moving dark ride at Universal for a while only to be completely split on it when a high quality one finally gets built lol.

But jumping down the throat of the one poster who’s been kind enough to share his thoughts (another thing people have been asking for) is really not the best way to attract more of these kind of thoughts that’ll tide us over until the ride opens stateside (which I would like to see more of).

 

[Brian G.]

But jumping down the throat of the one poster who’s been kind enough to share his thoughts (another thing people have been asking for) is really not the best way to attract more of these kind of thoughts that’ll tide us over until the ride opens stateside (which I would like to see more of).

I don't see that happening? I thought the discussion was fine, outside of the difference of opinion...

 

[Brer Oswald]

Gonna be more specific about my issues with MK. I don’t think they’re anything any of y’all haven’t heard already though:

- It’s not fast or thrilling (very first thing you think of when you imagine Mario Kart is a car going fast)
- AR is gimmicky and will be outdated in a few years
- Lack of physical sets/props/AAs in favor of AR
- The “game” is not truly interactive nor replayable

I get there are counter arguments to these things, some of which are rational and well thought out. I don’t really care. The ride is not “bad” by any means but it fails to live up to the general expectation of what a ride based on that specific property should be.

I have a few counters.

1) The first thing most think of when it comes to Mario Kart are the characters and the items. Mario Kart without the items lacks a lot of the appeal, and at that point, it would be better to make a ride based on one of the main series platformers instead.

2) Until holographic technology becomes practical and convincing, AR is here to stay. It is currently the best way of “creating” computer generated life that interacts with our real surroundings. Better than 3D. It offers a level of interactivity animatronic cars just couldn’t.

3) This I agree with. I’ve been saying that a “giant” Bowser animatronic in place of the screen Bowser golem would have been better. It would have made a show stopping set piece. Many on here have refuted it, but one of the major appeals of this land should be getting to see these digital characters in the physical sense for the first time. You can do that for most of the Mario characters aside from the biggest villain in gaming history?

4) It is interactive. If you collect enough coins, you win. If you don’t, you lose. Whether or not it’s replayable depends on whether or not you enjoy it.

 

[Tbad556]

I just genuinely don't think there's a way for a Mario Kart-based ride to appease everyone.

One side will always want a speed-based ride. One side will always want a video game/interaction-based ride. As previously discussed, the interactive elements simply can't work with the speed. I think they chose the side that will appease the targeted audience better, but I understand the disappointment as well. It's an "it is what is is" kinda situation in my eyes.

For what they were aiming for & advertising, however, everything I've seen and read makes it seem like a grand slam. They've incorporated game-changing AR technology, interactivity, etc. while delivering several iconic courses both physically and virtually.

 

[Paulio]

I mean, it's no surprise Nintendo wants to make the area entirely for families, not teens or adults, so it's not like Universal has a say in this. AR tech is new and might not work well with speed, so it's not exactly going to be like a Test Track-inspired attraction. MK ride may be disappointing for some, but the area is a bit too small to have a fast-like attraction, especially since Universal has other plans for the area such as Donkey Kong or maybe Zelda, so corners have to be cut.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

I just genuinely don't think there's a way for a Mario Kart-based ride to appease everyone.

One side will always want a speed-based ride. One side will always want a video game/interaction-based ride. As previously discussed, the interactive elements simply can't work with the speed. I think they chose the side that will appease the targeted audience better, but I understand the disappointment as well. It's an "it is what is is" kinda situation in my eyes.

For what they were aiming for & advertising, however, everything I've seen and read makes it seem like a grand slam. They've incorporated game-changing AR technology, interactivity, etc. while delivering several iconic courses both physically and virtually.

Took the words right out of my mouth!

 

[JungleSkip]

I just genuinely don't think there's a way for a Mario Kart-based ride to appease everyone.

One side will always want a speed-based ride. One side will always want a video game/interaction-based ride. As previously discussed, the interactive elements simply can't work with the speed. I think they chose the side that will appease the targeted audience better, but I understand the disappointment as well. It's an "it is what is is" kinda situation in my eyes.

For what they were aiming for & advertising, however, everything I've seen and read makes it seem like a grand slam. They've incorporated game-changing AR technology, interactivity, etc. while delivering several iconic courses both physically and virtually.

Honestly, the response so far *really* reminds me of the furor around the release of The Legend of Zelda: Wind Waker back in the day. Nintendo had shown off a Ocarina of Time-like tech demo for the GameCube, and everyone instantly wanted that and nothing else. So when Wind Waker was revealed everyone lost their minds and complained for years that it was too cartoony and kiddie, and all they wanted was the game shown off in the Spaceworld demo.

Weirdly, now all those same people rank Wind Waker as a classic and one of the best Zelda games ever made.

I foresee a lot of similarities

 

[Jerroddragon]

I will say, it is a little ironic that fans have been asking for a slow-moving dark ride at Universal for a while only to be completely split on it when a high quality one finally gets built lol.

But jumping down the throat of the one poster who’s been kind enough to share his thoughts (another thing people have been asking for) is really not the best way to attract more of these kind of thoughts that’ll tide us over until the ride opens stateside (which I would like to see more of).

If people want speed go to Six Flags...not everything needs to be a Thrill ride to be good people Love HM and Pirates and anyone can ride those.

I get people want less screens but sure most people upset still ride Transformers which is 90% screens while MK is much more a hybrid and I love it for at least being a good ride without the glasses.
I think some people really like thrill rides and for me as i get older i'm just fine with anything as long as its a good ride or show.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

If people want speed go to Six Flags...not everything needs to be a Thrill ride to be good people Love HM and Pirates and anyone can ride those.

I get people want less screens but sure most people upset still ride Transformers which is 90% screens while MK is much more a hybrid and I love it for at least being a good ride without the glasses.
I think some people really like thrill rides and for me as i get older i'm just fine with anything as long as its a good ride or show.

I certainly don't like Transformers because I don't want Spidey feeling any less special. But obviously that just applies to Florida.

And once again, I've always been frustrated at how rare parks that have both dark rides and *big* roller coasters are. Islands is the closest thing in the US I can think of to embodying that...though some parks in Europe appear to. I think my dream lineup would be an old school, '90s style B&M invert with a batwing, an RMC (so basically Montu and IG), and a couple of world class dark rides!

 

[Evan]

People are allowed to have differing opinions folks. It does not take away from your perceived excitement and support of the ride. A take from a forum poster who has experienced the ride has been overdue.

As far as mismatched opinions go, I think there is an argument where a certain ride system and ride aren't inherently bad, but fail to really capture the concept they are going for. I don't think MK is a bad ride, it just would have been better suited for a different concept like Luigi's Mansion. Same with Gringott's or Fast and Furious. Neither really do justice to a core conceit of a Mine train or a Car Chase.

Interactivity I do appreciate, but even this instance is just somewhat off with the branding. You don't endlessly spam shells in the games.

I don't think they should have built a totally different ride - although a Test Track system, Indy or a Spiderman style system probably would have been more on brand with Mario Kart - just used a different franchise concept. It's a cool ride system with an odd first choice of application. But, it's what they built!

I tried to touch on this long ago, but you said it better then I did at the time.

I firmly believe if they had made the attraction a Luigi’s Mansion adventure (as you suggested), or a Mario Adventure, the system, the AR, and the interactivity would have made it all a slam dunk.

The issue is the franchise concept chosen, with the ride system they are using.

And I think this is compounded in the online community by what happened with F&F.

And I don’t see this as an unworthy argument to make.

I know it will be fun, I can’t wait to ride it, but I don’t know if the right choices were made for this attraction.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

I tried to touch on this long ago, but you said it better then I did at the time.

I firmly believe if they had made the attraction a Luigi’s Mansion adventure (as you suggested), or a Mario Adventure, the system, the AR, and the interactivity would have made it all a slam dunk.

The issue is the franchise concept chosen, with the ride system they are using.

And I think this is compounded in the online community by what happened with F&F.

And I don’t see this as an unworthy argument to make.

I know it will be fun, I can’t wait to ride it, but I don’t know if the right choices were made for this attraction.

Yeah Mario Kart itself may not have been the best choice here thanks to the inevitable tradeoff of speed and interactivity. Thanks likely in part to not having much of an attachment to the property itself I still think it looks pretty cool mind you. I'm just speaking from the perspective of those reacting negatively.

 

[Jerroddragon]

I certainly don't like Transformers because I don't want Spidey feeling any less special. But obviously that just applies to Florida.

And once again, I've always been frustrated at how rare parks that have both dark rides and *big* roller coasters are. Islands is the closest thing in the US I can think of to embodying that...though some parks in Europe appear to. I think my dream lineup would be an old school, '90s style B&M invert with a batwing, an RMC (so basically Montu and IG), and a couple of world class dark rides!

I get that it is the worst ride but also...I mean Disney has tons of dark rides that are all in a car and move through sets. Its not like Transformers is a bad ride...its just a second version of Spiderman.

I'm just saying I'd take a MK ride over the Raptor Coaster or another Transformer kinda ride. To me its a good blend of screens and props and its a video game so even more just works....honestly if Pokemon or Zelda get a ride its going to be the "same" screens but mostly physical sets

 

[JungleSkip]

I tried to touch on this long ago, but you said it better then I did at the time.

I firmly believe if they had made the attraction a Luigi’s Mansion adventure (as you suggested), or a Mario Adventure, the system, the AR, and the interactivity would have made it all a slam dunk.

The issue is the franchise concept chosen, with the ride system they are using.

And I think this is compounded in the online community by what happened with F&F.

And I don’t see this as an unworthy argument to make.

I know it will be fun, I can’t wait to ride it, but I don’t know if the right choices were made for this attraction.

Here’s my issue with this argument:

If it’s fun...who cares?

F&F’s problem isn’t “it’s not fast”, it’s that it flat out sucks.

EDIT: This is a *very* meta argument imo. 99% of guests aren’t going into a ride wondering whether the ride system is the right fit for the IP or if it goes fast enough. They’re going in to have fun. If they have fun, they will never consider whether the ride is “right” for the IP.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

I get that it is the worst ride but also...I mean Disney has tons of dark rides that are all in a car and move through sets. Its not like Transformers is a bad ride...its just a second version of Spiderman.

I'm just saying I'd take a MK ride over the Raptor Coaster or another Transformer kinda ride. To me its a good blend of screens and props and its a video game so even more just works....honestly if Pokemon or Zelda get a ride its going to be the "same" screens but mostly physical sets

I've heard people on "that other site" say that the Transformer/Spidey system would've been better for MK. To which I say, AW HAIL NAW.