Universal's New Park/Site B Blue Sky Thread

[Imperius]

Was Pokémon Go’s popularity sustained? I thought it was a huge fad that came and went in under a year.

Nope. Still holds a large player count and all the events they hold are packed and overflowing with people. They lost people due to the developer not changing things, but once they did people came back.

 

[Ryan]

What about the fact that SNW is opening up in Hollywood first? It’s great for them, not so great for us.

I highly doubt SNW will open at USH before park 4 considering the current timeline for that park.

 

[JungleSkip]

What about the fact that SNW is opening up in Hollywood first? It’s great for them, not so great for us.

Hogsmeade opened in UOR 6 years before it opened in USH. Doesn’t seemed to have mattered at all

 

[Sithina]

I'll give you my life savings to tell you that when this park is announced, and SNW is featured with the lineup, it'll go viral again. Again, you really are underestimating how the memory of these people work. It'll be successful, very, very successful.

Also, do not by ANY stretch of the imagination, judge the popularity of Pokemon on the popularity of its movies, even a little bit. Period. Pokemon was huge in the US (not just in Japan) long before the first movie debuted here. Its video games, its trading card game, its toys and merchandise, and its movies, continually running animated tv shows (both in Japan and here) and manga--all of it, the whole company, is an absolute juggernaut inside and outside the industry. Pikachu is immediately recognizable in almost any country in the world--it's not featured in Macys' parade just because it's got some great video games that are really popular with children. Pikachu and even the other Pokemon (especially the original starters) are known to people outside of the world of children/games/anime/tcgs/etc. These Pokemon are almost immediately known, in fact.

It's no secret I'm a huge Nintendo fan. Also no secret that I've been playing Pokemon and following it since the first games debuted here on the Gameboy--my avatar gives away just which Pokemon is my absolute favorite (and my list of favorites is quite long) within the franchise. To give you a small anecdotal story, I have a purse and a wallet that are Pokemon themed--they are actually done in a Tattoo Flash style (which is gorgeous, btw), I also have a small Pikachu key chain attached to one of the handles. I've had this purse for more than a year and I have been stopped (so many times I can't even think to count them) by people of all ages--and again, not just children, or those with children--when they notice the purse, and the characters on it. I've been stopped by women who initially thought it was a floral tattoo flash design who have said, "Oh, wait, it's those game creatures...what's the name...Pokemon? That's the yellow one." (and other variations). I've been stopped by guys who don't play the games, but do play Pokemon Go on their phones. The last time I was stopped was 4 days ago, and the woman was at least 60. She'd never played the games, never watched the shows, didn't say anything about grandchildren playing it (though she could have had them--who knows?), but she still knew it was a Pokemon purse, and she immediately recognized the yellow one, even if she didn't know its name. In my own circles, as well as amongst my friends' and family's kids, I expect this reaction. But it's continually surprised me just how much of the general public recognizes Pokemon, even if they have no idea what any of it is about. And the ones who didn't know Pokemon, or didn't recognize the Pokemon on my purse or whatever? They almost all thought they were cute/adorable/funny, etc. I'm sure some think it's juvenile, but that opinion doesn't affect my experience and I highly doubt having an area featuring Pokemon is going to affect the GP.

Pokemon prints money. In every genre or market they are in, the franchise prints money. And it's not just from children or their spend-y parents. There is an entire market of adult merchandise related to Pokemon aimed at people like me--the games came out when I was 14, some 22 years ago. What Universal has with Nintendo, what it has with Pokemon, is a guaranteed draw, a proven money maker across numerous generations and genres, and, in Pokemon, 22 years of stories, characters, worlds, games, apps, mythos, and media to draw from. There is no question they will do amazing in a theme park, as both an attraction and a merchandise draw. A Pokemon attraction might not be a typical ride, but it will be a fun, colorful, interactive one. And, again, bright, energetic, engaging, and not gender specific. Also, absolutely packed. A Pikachu Meet and Greet? There are always lines, even in your regular retail stores. And just like with the princesses, or Marvel characters, or any others, people will wait in those lines for the chance to meet and get a picture with Pikachu (and Ash).

All in all, the movies or even the cartoons/anime, aren't a good indicator of the overall popularity of Pokemon. They are a small part of an absolutely huge brand that just keeps going, in video games, in merchandise, in smartphone apps, in almost every media form out there, really. Nintendo, Game Freaks, and Creatures, Inc (the three companies that own Pokemon) had to create an entire company just for managing the Pokemon brand--and that company has divisions (some huge) in every large market in the world, not just Japan and the US. Not even Mario has that.

TL;DR - Pokemon has zero difficulty translating its popularity from one media to another, even a theme park, because it has been doing it successfully (very successfully) for over 20 years.

 

[Ryan]

I highly doubt SNW will open at USH before park 4 considering the current timeline for that park.

I'm going to sleep soon so I probably should clarify this: SNW USH and Park 4 should be opening in the same relative timeframe. At the very best (for Hollywood), it would be akin to Disneyland's Galaxy's Edge vs DHS'.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Also, do not by ANY stretch of the imagination, judge the popularity of Pokemon on the popularity of its movies, even a little bit. Period. Pokemon was huge in the US (not just in Japan) long before the first movie debuted here. Its video games, its trading card game, its toys and merchandise, and its movies, continually running animated tv shows (both in Japan and here) and manga--all of it, the whole company, is an absolute juggernaut inside and outside the industry. Pikachu is immediately recognizable in almost any country in the world--it's not featured in Macys' parade just because it's got some great video games that are really popular with children. Pikachu and even the other Pokemon (especially the original starters) are known to people outside of the world of children/games/anime/tcgs/etc. These Pokemon are almost immediately known, in fact.

It's no secret I'm a huge Nintendo fan. Also no secret that I've been playing Pokemon and following it since the first games debuted here on the Gameboy--my avatar gives away just which Pokemon is my absolute favorite (and my list of favorites is quite long) within the franchise. To give you a small anecdotal story, I have a purse and a wallet that are Pokemon themed--they are actually done in a Tattoo Flash style (which is gorgeous, btw), I also have a small Pikachu key chain attached to one of the handles. I've had this purse for more than a year and I have been stopped (so many times I can't even think to count them) by people of all ages--and again, not just children, or those with children--when they notice the purse, and the characters on it. I've been stopped by women who initially thought it was a floral tattoo flash design who have said, "Oh, wait, it's those game creatures...what's the name...Pokemon? That's the yellow one." (and other variations). I've been stopped by guys who don't play the games, but do play Pokemon Go on their phones. The last time I was stopped was 4 days ago, and the woman was at least 60. She'd never played the games, never watched the shows, didn't say anything about grandchildren playing it (though she could have had them--who knows?), but she still knew it was a Pokemon purse, and she immediately recognized the yellow one, even if she didn't know its name. In my own circles, as well as amongst my friends' and family's kids, I expect this reaction. But it's continually surprised me just how much of the general public recognizes Pokemon, even if they have no idea what any of it is about. And the ones who didn't know Pokemon, or didn't recognize the Pokemon on my purse or whatever? They almost all thought they were cute/adorable/funny, etc. I'm sure some think it's juvenile, but that opinion doesn't affect my experience and I highly doubt having an area featuring Pokemon is going to affect the GP.

Pokemon prints money. In every genre or market they are in, the franchise prints money. And it's not just from children or their spend-y parents. There is an entire market of adult merchandise related to Pokemon aimed at people like me--the games came out when I was 14, some 22 years ago. What Universal has with Nintendo, what it has with Pokemon, is a guaranteed draw, a proven money maker across numerous generations and genres, and, in Pokemon, 22 years of stories, characters, worlds, games, apps, mythos, and media to draw from. There is no question they will do amazing in a theme park, as both an attraction and a merchandise draw. A Pokemon attraction might not be a typical ride, but it will be a fun, colorful, interactive one. And, again, bright, energetic, engaging, and not gender specific. Also, absolutely packed. A Pikachu Meet and Greet? There are always lines, even in your regular retail stores. And just like with the princesses, or Marvel characters, or any others, people will wait in those lines for the chance to meet and get a picture with Pikachu (and Ash).

All in all, the movies or even the cartoons/anime, aren't a good indicator of the overall popularity of Pokemon. They are a small part of an absolutely huge brand that just keeps going, in video games, in merchandise, in smartphone apps, in almost every media form out there, really. Nintendo, Game Freaks, and Creatures, Inc (the three companies that own Pokemon) had to create an entire company just for managing the Pokemon brand--and that company has divisions (some huge) in every large market in the world, not just Japan and the US. Not even Mario has that.

If Pokémon is such an indestructible juggernaut, why didn’t the films succeed? Why didn’t the previous Pokémon theme park, despite being a traveling fair, make more than two appearances?

 

[Ryan]

Nobody really cares about the anime anymore in the states. They care about the games and franchise itself.

And please don't compare a traveling exhibit to whatever Universal will make.

 

[Sithina]

If Pokémon is such an indestructible juggernaut, why didn’t the films succeed? Why didn’t the previous Pokémon theme park, despite being a traveling fair, make more than two appearances?

Video games do not translate to movies well, and movies are the not the same as theme parks--even theme parks based on movie titles. Others have also touched on this, so I won't go into it. But I will agree with them in saying that video games can translate really well into theme parks. Players want to live in these games, even just a little. Why the push for AR/VR if this isn't the case?

And what you might have seen in a "traveling fair" is not at all like what you will see in Universal Studios' theme parks. Apples to oranges. And no one here is talking about an entire park dedicated to Pokemon, so there's really no point to that comparison. But Pokemon is huge. That's a fact. While not everything is a slam dunk (and there is no franchise that has nothing but positives anywhere in any industry, not Star Wars or Marvel, or Disney, or Nintendo, or LoTR, or Harry Potter)--and with Pokemon, their movies are probably the least successful part of their brand, though they are by no means unsuccessful to the brand--it doesn't speak at all to the continuing popularity of these characters overall. The Pokemon movies aren't going to sustain a theme park land--the Pokemon experience, however, can more than sustain a part of the land--as a ride, as a shop, in interactive experiences, merchandise, video game/app/tcg exclusives available only to park-goers, as well as a meet and greet and cutesy snack offerings.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Nobody really cares about the anime anymore in the states. They care about the games and franchise itself.

And please don't compare a traveling exhibit to whatever Universal will make.

Oh, I’m not comparing the carnival in terms of quality. I’m simply looking at the transferability of the property’s popularity.

 

[Imperius]

You can’t just brush off the huge success of the actual games and keep saying well the movies didn’t do well. Movies mean nothing for a video game franchise. It doesn’t mean the theme park adaptation will fail.

 

[Badgeking]

Two quick things:

1) The Madagascar boat ride they have built overseas looks SO good and would be an easy thing to bring over since it's already designed and works. I hope they do.

2) I wonder if Amazon's new LOTR series had anything to do with Universal not pursuing the rights to the land...or if Amazon had any say in the matter?

 

[Casper Gutman]

You can’t just brush off the huge success of the actual games and keep saying well the movies didn’t do well. Movies mean nothing for a video game franchise. It doesn’t mean the theme park adaptation will fail.

I don’t think the theme park adaptation will fail. I think it will do very well. I don’t think it is the slam dunk “WOW” some folks are making it out to be.

And the success of an IPs spin-offs in other mediums is VERY relevant if we are considering how IPs spin off into other mediums. Which is what we are doing with Pokémon.

Even as a video game, Pokémon is very very successful but NOT transcendentally succesful. Mario is, however.

 

[Imperius]

But the Mario movies and TV shows failed. Pokémon is dang near as successful as a video game franchise could ever be.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

I don’t think the theme park adaptation will fail. I think it will do very well. I don’t think it is the slam dunk “WOW” some folks are making it out to be.

And the success of an IPs spin-offs in other mediums is VERY relevant if we are considering how IPs spin off into other mediums. Which is what we are doing with Pokémon.

Even as a video game, Pokémon is very very successful but NOT transcendentally succesful. Mario is, however.

Oh?

 

[JungleSkip]

Yea I’m really confused as to how someone can say Mario has succeeded outside of gaming and Pokemon hasn’t. Pikachu is one of the most recognizable characters in the world, the games sell like hot cakes, Pokemon Go continues to be huge, it’s a huge merch seller, and the anime is still running strong.

I’d argue Pokemon is much more of a presence outside gaming than Mario is

 

[Casper Gutman]

Oh?

Again, if you’ll look back, I said early in this conversation that I have questions about ALL video game properties translating to other mediums. I specifically mentioned the consistent failure of VGs to film. So you’re reinforcing that aspect of my concerns here.

 

[Imperius]

But the concern doesn’t fit the scenario. Video games just don’t adapt to movies. Movies do not equal theme parks. Two very different mediums.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Again, if you’ll look back, I said early in this conversation that I have questions about ALL video game properties translating to other mediums. I specifically mentioned the consistent failure of VGs to film. So you’re reinforcing that aspect of my concerns here.

You said Mario was transcendently successful! Those are your words!

 

[Casper Gutman]

Yea I’m really confused as to how someone can say Mario has succeeded outside of gaming and Pokemon hasn’t. Pikachu is one of the most recognizable characters in the world, the games sell like hot cakes, Pokemon Go continues to be huge, it’s a huge merch seller, and the anime is still running strong.

I’d argue Pokemon is much more of a presence outside gaming than Mario is

Again again, I said earlier in this conversation that I think translating video games to other mediums is trickier then folks here acknowledge. That was one of my key points.

And I really think folks here oversell how succesful Pokémon is even as a VG. Please note: it is VERY VERY succesful. It has 7 of the top 50 games of all time. That is extremely impressive. BUT if we look at the top 20 of all time, Mario has 3 entries. GTA and Call of Duty both have 3. Pokémon has 1.

Let me put this as a question: What is the actual, non-anecdotal evidence that Pokémon is a pop culture juggernaut on the level of a Marvel or a Potter?

 

[zg44]

Pokemon sells more merchandise in any given year than Mario sells in a decade. Not sure why we're comparing those two franchises in that fashion.

Mario's success is 99% attributed to video games. Pokemon's TCG alone has reached around $10 billion in sales (more than 25 billion cards). Pokemon has had a long-running TV show with a lot of movies (yes they're not box office hits, but a lot of people grew up on it). Pokemon is a completely different beast.

Despite all that, Mario's probably a bit of a better fit for a theme park attraction because it combines iconic locations/scenes with its known characters. Still, I'd never write off the popularity of Pokemon.