Universal's Epic Universe Wish List & Speculation

[TommyJK]

When it comes to the IP discussion in parks, for me a lot of it is what is that IP generally based on. If the IP is itself based on something "generic" then it can be great and evergreen regardless of the IPs popularity itself.

You could never have seen a single Potter movie, or have read any of the books but you still know "witches and wizards" and it can make for great themed lands and attractions. You could have never seen a single "How to Train your Dragon" movie but still know "Vikings and Dragons" and have a gloriously beautiful land and themed attractions. Monsters while technically an IP have been around for ages and have become timeless as well.

My first visit to Hogsmeade, all I knew about Harry Potter was "Oh that's those kids books and movies about witches and wizards". It blew me away and actually got me interested in exploring the specific IP itself (books, movies, etc).

So for me a land based on witches and wizards vs. a land based on specific witches and wizards doesn't make much of a difference.

 

[therock]

I don't talk much on here. I mainly just listen. But I wanted to put my 2 cents in and then go back to listening. If the rumors are true I don't get having an entire land (and also the biggest chunk of land) devoted to How to Train Your Dragon. Its an "okay" property, but I would put Shrek and Kung Fu Panda above it easily, and probably Madagascar as well. Also the ride rumors themselves seem a little "off" compared to what Universal and Disney usually do. They seem like Carnival type rides and things that you can already see at your local theme park at home. And if its for kids, I worry about the height requirement for some of these rides. That twisty thing looks intense and not something that kids would be able to ride. Maybe I'm just looking at it wrong? And the most baffling thing for me is the ride that looks like all you do is stand in a boat and shoot water at people? I don't get it? Is there something more to it than just that? :shrug:

I wish they would do an entire Dreamworks land instead and make it have a lot of things that kids and their grandparents can ride together, like some dark rides or indoor boat rides.

Also, why can't they make Nintendo the biggest land and space it out more? It seems like its just a copy/paste from the original plans. If you have a whole new theme park of land to work with, why don't you give the biggest chunk of land to the biggest draw?

All that being said, I can wait to go myself one day and I"m a huge Universal fan and can't wait to see how it all turns out.

 

[tielo]

Everyone here wants Spongebob......


If sponge replaced HTTYD, what are people’s thoughts about the park lineup? I only hear complaints about the IPs themselces since Islands of Adventure is already an IP land driven park so that argument to me just doesn’t make any sense

I'm not everyone as I hate Spongebob and love the best animated trilogy animated movie series ever made.

 

[Legacy]

I'm not everyone as I hate Spongebob and love the best animated trilogy animated movie series ever made.

Ice Age is quality.

 

[Magic-Man]

If these two small changes would make it an outstanding park, then maybe, just maybe, it already is an outstanding park?

It's a great park needing more rides. I wouldn't count the VR attraction as a ride, more an experience, and it kinda feels like cheap filler. Also, the park needs a major water ride (the Splash Battle is pretty small) and I'm assuming that's what Black Lagoon will be.

 

[Mad Dog]

Generally you don't see a ton of attractions in a new park (see Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong etc.) Epic, as we know it now, seems to have about the same as Shanghai & Beijing.
More can be added as the park's attendance rises. See expansion pads. Sounds like a sound business practice to me.

 

[JungleSkip]

Generally you don't see a ton of attractions in a new park (see Shanghai, Beijing, Hong Kong etc.) Epic, as we know it now, seems to have about the same as Shanghai & Beijing.
More can be added as the park's attendance rises. See expansion pads. Sounds like a sound business practice to me.

The problem is theme park fans tend to want the best of both worlds. The #immersion everyone always clamors for is expensive. Making rides like Hagrid, Mario Kart, and Rise costs a lot of money. So you either get a 5 rides like that to headline a new park, or you get 2 of them and then a bunch of other stuff that doesn’t live up to your #theming preferences.

Also, why can't they make Nintendo the biggest land and space it out more? It seems like its just a copy/paste from the original plans. If you have a whole new theme park of land to work with, why don't you give the biggest chunk of land to the biggest draw?

It just makes sense cost wise to duplicate efforts. Plus, if @Alicia is right, they’ve already pegged one of the expansion plots for more Nintendo

 

[belloq87]

If these two small changes would make it an outstanding park, then maybe, just maybe, it already is an outstanding park?

I think we need to keep making sure to draw a distinction between our own preferences and something closer to an objective examination.

Objectively, on paper, does the park's attraction lineup look very good and cover lots of bases for lots of people? Yes.

Subjectively, do I feel like there's a lot there "for me" to enjoy? Not especially. That doesn't make it not an outstanding park, but it does mean there are some things (like adding in the rumored Creature expansion and changing the concept for the VR ride, if that's what it is) that would make it a more intriguing park for me. On paper, sight-unseen.

 

[Alicia]

As I've gotten older I appreciate well-themed lands with food I actually want to eat. You give me that, and I'll spend all day there. If the land's ride has the re-ridability factor, even better. I don't even care what it's based on, just looking for a nice place to escape into and a decent meal I can look forward to.

 

[Cup_Of_Coffee]

As I've gotten older I appreciate well-themed lands with food I actually want to eat. You give me that, and I'll spend all day there. If the land's ride has the re-ridability factor, even better. I don't even care what it's based on, just looking for a nice place to escape into and a decent meal I can look forward to.

I mean in my early 20s and want this so, not a “getting older” thing necessarily! This is why I’m so excited for this park though, Wizarding World seems like the only one that’s not super walk around-able. French food sounds lovely however.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I think we need to keep making sure to draw a distinction between our own preferences and something closer to an objective examination.

Objectively, on paper, does the park's attraction lineup look very good and cover lots of bases for lots of people? Yes.

Subjectively, do I feel like there's a lot there "for me" to enjoy? Not especially. That doesn't make it not an outstanding park, but it does mean there are some things (like adding in the rumored Creature expansion and changing the concept for the VR ride, if that's what it is) that would make it a more intriguing park for me. On paper, sight-unseen.

That's fair, but I want to remind everyone we're already writing off attractions on a park that has not yet gone vertical with info based on third-hand reporting. I trust Alicia but if one said Diagon Alley would have "shops, a roller coaster, and a train" prior to Jaws shutting down that undersells the complete experience.

Maybe the park needs more, maybe not. But seeing people go "VR doesn't count" without knowing the full experience or scope isn't doing anyone justice.

 

[belloq87]

But seeing people go "VR doesn't count" without knowing the full experience or scope isn't doing anyone justice.

Maybe, but it would also be dishonest of me to pretend that I don't have a bit of a bias against VR. That doesn't mean I think it's going to be a "bad" attraction, only that the technology is not of particular interest to me in a theme park.

 

[Magic-Man]

That's fair, but I want to remind everyone we're already writing off attractions on a park that has not yet gone vertical with info based on third-hand reporting. I trust Alicia but if one said Diagon Alley would have "shops, a roller coaster, and a train" prior to Jaws shutting down that undersells the complete experience.

Maybe the park needs more, maybe not. But seeing people go "VR doesn't count" without knowing the full experience or scope isn't doing anyone justice.

I've done VR. I've had both Oculus Quests. They're great, but I don't go to a park to do that. I'd much rather have other experiences.

 

[Legacy]

I've done VR. I've had both Oculus Quests. They're great, but I don't go to a park to do that. I'd much rather have other experiences.

And parks have other experiences.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I've done VR. I've had both Oculus Quests. They're great, but I don't go to a park to do that. I'd much rather have other experiences.

I played Toy Story Midway Mania at home and it's nothing like the theme park ride. I believe comparing at home VR to theme park VR will be similar.

 

[OhHaiInternet95]

Still...waiting...on...Ministry...info...grrrrr

 

[Magic-Man]

Still...waiting...on...Ministry...info...grrrrr

If I remember correctly, it's rumored to be a trackless ride system, involve multiple Ministries, and use projection mapping for the FLOW teleportation.

 

[Disneyhead]

I've done VR. I've had both Oculus Quests. They're great, but I don't go to a park to do that. I'd much rather have other experiences.

Pair your Oculus with an interactive ride system and then you'll be close.

 

[JungleSkip]

As I've gotten older I appreciate well-themed lands with food I actually want to eat. You give me that, and I'll spend all day there. If the land's ride has the re-ridability factor, even better. I don't even care what it's based on, just looking for a nice place to escape into and a decent meal I can look forward to.

Nah. Gimme more rides. I can get good meals at home, but I can’t ride a roller coaster there.
Lol

 

[Magic-Man]

Pair your Oculus with an interactive ride system and then you'll be close.

Kinda hoping it's not Oculus lol. If we're gonna do VR, it better be the best headset out there. Oculus, for all it's advantages, ain't it.

I mean, this could be really cool if it's done correctly. I just think that's more something that should be limited to a side attraction in a land full of rides instead of one of the main events. I want something more special for that.