Universal Orlando Resort (USO, IOA) Discussion Thread

[manakin]

one thing I noticed in the video....the boarding system seems fast...

[disneyfan1313]

Finally got to watch that horrible POV. I feel bad forming an opinion just off of that - but I am *shocked* how similar to spiderman it looks. Instead of a car on a motion simulator base looking at large scale projections you are on a kuka arm on a base looking at large scale projections. They could have pulled that off a bit more if it was at the studios but putting it so close to the original might seem a bit odd!

[Josh Linn]

I think the place looks sick and can't wait to go, but I do question the staying power of it, mainly because the author released all 7 books with no intention to write any more and 6 of the 7 movies are out. I'm curious to see how they're going to keep it fresh and interesting years after the popularity of Harry Potter dies down.

[JohanR91]

As Far as I've read in some reviews your not watching the screen all the time. You switch between screen and animatronics. Of course, this is impossible to see in such a bad onride. I think you guys need to wait a bit and get a way better look before forming an opinion......

[robbalvey]

I think you guys need to wait a bit and get a way better look before forming an opinion......

First of all, I'm not forming an opinion. I'm forming my expectations, which is very different. In every one of my posts I've made sure to say "From what I've seen so far..." which should be the clue that tells you I'm not actually forming a real opinion until I've visited for myself.

 

Secondly, my thoughts are not based solely on a single video. It's from the multiple videos I've seen, quite extensive photo reports, text reports, and direct reports from people I trust quite a bit and understand my expectations of the theme park business.

 

So before you go thinking that everyone is basing their opinions on one crappy video, they aren't.

 

--Robb

Edited May 31, 2010 by robbalvey

[beyondthepalace]

Reading through countless page after page, I still think Robb's post about comparing WWoHP to the Star Trek Experience is the best comparison for us non-Potter fans (Muggles, whatever). I went to WWoHP and experienced everything except the ride portion of FJ. I think it was pretty good but obviously there is a lot more that will be enjoyed if you are a fan of the franchise. My experience with Star Trek was the same. Ok I get some of the things but NOT everything. Does WWoHP make me want to watch all the movies and/or read the books? Not a chance. But I will still visit this area and enjoy it for what it is...even though I don't get everything.

[Wes]

^ Same. I enjoyed the Star Trek Experience even with no knowledge of the franchise. I know a little more about Harry Potter, but still not enough to be considered anything close to knowledgeable. I'm still interested in how the land turns out, and I know I will enjoy seeing the level of detail Universal put into the area, even without being able to fully appreciate the minor details.

[digimax]

Like what most of us are saying here: I feel that there's a lot of nice detail put into WWoHP that wouldn't make any sense to non-fans of the HP universe. E.g: All the displays with the "magic" quill, Ollivanders', Quidditch things and Gilderoy Lockhart items, they are all cool, but only made sense to me because I read the books. If I am were to bring someone new to the series to WWoHP, I'll end up spending the whole day explaining everything to them.

[Vigil]

People need to be able to enjoy the land as only a land in a theme park. They need to be able to enjoy it with no previous knowledge, or else, it won't be enjoyable.

[Jew]

Finally got to watch that horrible POV. I feel bad forming an opinion just off of that - but I am *shocked* how similar to spiderman it looks. Instead of a car on a motion simulator base looking at large scale projections you are on a kuka arm on a base looking at large scale projections. They could have pulled that off a bit more if it was at the studios but putting it so close to the original might seem a bit odd!

 

To be fair, it's hard to tell if that will make a huge difference. Afterall, Soarin' is just BTTF/Simpsons with no floor, but the ride experience comes off as totally different.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Jew

[Gav]

^Agreed. The same could be said in the way the various types of coaster are able to offer completely different experiences despite sharing the same basic set of principles.

 

I mean, yeah, it is projections + a moving ride vehicle so it has the same roots as Spiderman.

 

But the style of movement is very different. I think too the degree of movement would be harder to gauge without riding; The circular, enveloping nature of the screens means they can do tricks like rotating the image in sync with the screen etc*, and these sorts of things are impossible to perceive in a pov.

*Eg on Soarin', turns in that ride are simulated by rotating the image and heaving the seats up slightly, not by tilting the seats, but when you are actually riding it is difficult to perceive that this is the case.

It even has the same basic plot ("travel along with your favorite character in special vehicles as things go awry")

I suppose a lot rides like this follow the same format...Star Tours, BTTF, Sea Odyssey, Indy. wouldn't be a major dark ride without "something going terribly wrong" at some point

Edited June 1, 2010 by Gav

[Imagineer22]

I am curious why people think this is not the next generation thrill/dark ride. There truly isn't anything original or new in our world these days, just reworked ideas utilizing new ways of getting the same basic result. In this case the same basic result is an immersive dark ride. The new technology being utilized are the ride vehicles that have full range of motion never before seen on a track. Yes there are large screens similar to simulators but these screens are a few feet from the vehicle and rotate on carousels to keep the ride moving while allowing multiple ride vehicles to view the 'same' scene at slightly different times to keep the experience intimate to the individual ride vehicle. I do wonder if 3D would have helped make the film more convincing (it can be difficult to tell where the film starts and scenery ends in spiderman to the average park goer).

 

I have not ridden the ride but I do think it is the next gen theme park experience and could be an amazing experience. I also think Universal could have possibly missed some opportunities with the technology but I will save that response for after I have ridden the ride. I love Indiana Jones at DL more than Spiderman because it is all 'real' and no movies. But with flying scenes a domed imax screen a few feet from your ride vehicle is probably very convincing to be the real thing, especially since the ride vehicle is 'floating' (think Sorin 1st row experience versus Sorin 3rd row experience). It should be interesting to see what happens when this technology is used by other theme parks that increase the vehicles movement (ie upside down motions). I truly belive this is only the beginning of this technology.

 

By the way. I am not a huge Harry Potter fan but I do understand its appeal and believe it will be popular for years to come. And yes, Universal seems to have missed an opportunity to 'teach' the wizarding world to those who have no idea what Harry Potter is all about. Either way, Forbidden Journey will be popular because it is so detailed and an over the top experience.

 

What does everyone think a true 'game changer' ride would be if it is not Forbidden Journey?

[Yamez]

If they didn't have "something going horribly wrong" then they could only do so many fun things! Then again, I wouldn't mind a ride being based on the concept of flying broomsticks. We almost even have the technology for it! Now if only we can figure out how to combine motocoaster and kuka arms....

[robbalvey]

See, I'm one of those people who find Soarin' and The Simpsons to be pretty much the same kind of ride. You're sitting in front of a big screen watching a movie. One of them bounces you, one of them makes the room smelly. But as a ride concept, I don't think they are *that* much different.

 

And if both of them were in the same park I think I'd probably ride one of them, and then *maybe* ride the other but only if I had time or if the line was really short.

 

For example, it's pretty rare that I would go to DCA and watch both Muppet Vision and Tough to be a Bug. Or go to Universal Orlando and ride both Shrek 4D and Jimmy Neutron. I don't think I've been on Maliboomer since Tower of Terror opened. If the Magic Kingdom Fantasyland dark rides had more than a 5 minute wait, you won't find me doing many of them either because they are just too similar. Heck, I very rarely even ride both Fire and Ice in one visit anymore! (and from what I understand your average GP doesn't usually ride both either.) Same thing with Buzz Lightyear and Toy Story Mania. Even though they are in different parks, they are close enough that riding just one of them during a visit fills my "Toy Story Themed Shooting Dark Ride" quota. Seriously, ever since Toy Story Mania opened, I couldn't even tell you the last time I rode Buzz Lightyear at either Disneyland or Magic Kingdom!

 

I mean, I'm all for parks having multiple high tech dark rides, but if Spider Man and DarKastle were both in the same park, and they both had an hour long line, would you queue an hour for each one during your visit? Or ride one and skip the other? And I guess that's really not a fair comparison unless people really feel that Spiderman and FJ are that similar. But so far I've not heard that (then again, I've heard almost no reports on the ride at all!)

 

--Robb

[noticias24]

^ Maybe I could understand that some people may ride both of them if they-re in the park for the first time and such, but yeah, I also think that most of the people in the park may just choose to ride one of them and then spend the time anywhere else instead of riding sometime very similar.

[robbalvey]

Great post! Let me give you my thoughts based only on what I've seen and heard so far, which might totally change once I ride...

 

I am curious why people think this is not the next generation thrill/dark ride. ... The new technology being utilized are the ride vehicles that have full range of motion never before seen on a track. Yes there are large screens similar to simulators but these screens are a few feet from the vehicle and rotate on carousels to keep the ride moving while allowing multiple ride vehicles to view the 'same' scene at slightly different times to keep the experience intimate to the individual ride vehicle.

See to me, that sounds pretty much like Spiderman, DarKastle, and the concepts I've seen for Transformers. The only difference here is a different manufacturer for the ride vehicle. And the ride isn't in 3D, which, all things being equal, is kind of a step back from those other rides.

 

I also think Universal could have possibly missed some opportunities with the technology

I would agree. I will tell you that my expectation, especially going with Kuka technology was that the ride was going to have some kind of selectable ride options. Like Rip Ride Rockit or the other Kuka based rides. I was fully expecting you'd get in, and you'd at least be able to select between a "mild" or "wild" option (majority rules, just like on old Horizons) and the difference would be that based on what you choose your ride might do something slightly different, maybe even go upside down. Just like all the other Kuka arm based rides.

 

And THAT to me would have been the differentiating factor of this ride to make me go "WOW!" over the other current high-tech dark rides out there.

 

I love Indiana Jones at DL more than Spiderman because it is all 'real' and no movies.

Agreed, IMO, Indy is still the most high tech dark ride I've been on (especially the one in Tokyo)

 

But with flying scenes a domed imax screen a few feet from your ride vehicle is probably very convincing to be the real thing

But let's be honest here...Horizons did this in 1982. And VERY convincing! I still know people who thought the DNA strand turned them upside down! And Soarin' has been doing this for 10 years now..and your ride vehicle is also 'floating'.

 

I truly belive this is only the beginning of this technology.

I agree. I was just really hoping this initial effort would "wow" me a little bit more, like Spider Man did when it first opened.

 

What does everyone think a true 'game changer' ride would be if it is not Forbidden Journey?

A ride that does something very different that you've never seen done on any other ride. With the amount of time and money that has gone into this project, that is my expectations. Hundreds of millions of dollars and 3 years in development and I expect the next "Tower of Terror", "Indiana Jones", or "Spider-Man." And from what I've seen/read/heard so far, this ride doesn't seem to do anything new, other than have a new type of vehicle that carries the passengers through the show. And to me, that's not "new and groundbreaking" that's just "the same, but different." Why have they used this brand new technology that in theory can do so much more than Spider-Man, but it's doing the same thing as Spider-Man?

 

But like I said, my thoughts on this can totally change after I ride. But these are my thoughts going into it.

 

--Robb

Edited June 1, 2010 by robbalvey

[Jew]

I agree that if two rides offer similar ride experiences, people will always pick the better one.

 

However, I don't think people will compare Spiderman to Forbidden Journey. Even though the basic concept is the same (projections mixed with physical effects), I think most people will walk away thinking it is a completely different experience because of how much of a different perspective can be given when you have no floor and the range of motion the Kuka arms offer.

 

That's why I compared BTTF to Soarin': BTTF is clearly a simulator. No one is going to think that they are NOT watching a movie, and it doesn't feel immersive at all. However, when you add in that extra element of being 60ft in the air with your feet dangling...it drastically changes the perspective and experience, even though it is still just an Omnimax movie.

 

Of course, ultimately it is impossible to judge without riding. I really think this could go either way: be a complete dud, or take dark ride storytelling to a new level if they can successfully incorporate the new possibilities the kuka arms make possible.

Edited June 1, 2010 by Jew

[robbalvey]

^ Yeah, see to me, Soarin' and BTTF are pretty much the same ride. You're in a ride vehicle suspended in the air watching a movie and the vehicle moves. I don't think feet dangling make a difference. I think what DOES make a difference is that Soarin' is by far a much better and smoother ride system and the movie isn't as "silly" or "bouncy". But really, think about it, Intamin made both of those ride systems and if anything Soarin' is most likely just an evolution of BTTF. I wouldn't even be shocked if some of the same technology was used!

 

--Robb

Edited June 1, 2010 by robbalvey

[nitrofan]

I was told by someone last night that they are going to the Harry Potter World theme park this summer. I told them it was just a themed section in IOA, but they refused to believe me and I eventually just dropped the argument. I hope a lot of people aren't too disappointed. What Universal did build looks amazing to me, but it may not be the scale everyone is expecting.

[Jew]

^^I wouldn't doubt they borrowed some ideas from BTTF when designing Soarin', but I disagree with the notion that makes the ride any less "revolutionary". It completely changed the way WDI could tell their "we're watching a movie while pretending to fly" story, giving guests a completely different experience while not actually using new film projection methods. I would guess that if they were to do a survey asking guests what they thought of Soarin', very few would answer "It's just like BTTF/Simpsons!" That's my whole point.

 

If you really think about it, it seems like the industry has really hit a wall in terms of true innovation like Spiderman, Indy, and Tower. How old are those rides now? Since riding those rides the first time, only three other things have impressed me(only one of which is unique): the crazy Parque Espana dark ride system, Lotte World's Indy ripoff, and Journey!

 

So for me personally, the idea that the kuka arms could be used to add a new dimension to film-based dark ride storytelling (much the same way Journey took test track to the next level or the Lotte World Indy ripoff borrowed Indy to create an AWESOME ride) is exciting. However, I also agree that it could totally bomb and make you think "that's it?" if it turns out to not do anything special.

[Gav]

See to me, that sounds pretty much like Spiderman, DarKastle, and the concepts I've seen for Transformers. The only difference here is a different manufacturer for the ride vehicle. And the ride isn't in 3D, which, all things being equal, is kind of a step back from those other rides.

But surely the differences are a bit deeper than being made by a different manufacturer?

 

On Spiderman and DarKastle you're basically trundling on the floor, you can spin around, and tilt a few degrees.

 

With this you're off ground level, a completely free range of movement, and because you are on the end of an arm actual g forces can be generated.

 

I mean, the 'static alternative to Spiderman/Darkastle is a regular simulator pod (Eg Star Tours), the 'static' alternative to Forbbidden Journey is a robocoaster (Eg Legolands) You couldn't say that both offer the same sensations right?

[robbalvey]

^ But see, I can't make that determination...and neither can you. Because neither of us have ridden it yet. I can only speculate. And yes, there will be a difference between the two for the reasons you mention. But what I'm seeing so far is the difference between Peter Pan and Mr. Toad's Wild Ride. Two very similar types of dark rides, but the ride vehicle is different.

 

But not different enough to make me go "This is the next Pooh's Hunny Hunt, the next Tower of Terror, the next Journey to the Center of the Earth."

 

And I won't know for sure until I get on the ride for myself. And that being said, the reports I've seen so far, the videos I've looked at, and my lack of interest in the property isn't making me go out of my way to visit. And keep in mind, I can and will book a trip to Orlando pretty much any time I desire. I have an Annual Pass to Islands of Adventure, but you don't see me rushing out to ride it. Had this ride been something that peaked my interested 12 months ago, we would be there right now for the resort guest preview days. But it can wait until November when I'm out there for IAAPA.

 

Does it look cool? Sure. But not cool enough for me to go out of my way and book a trip there now.

 

--Robb

[hobbit]

LINK IS THE VIDEO FROM THE NEW QUELINE FROM THE DUELING DRAGONS

[live2tell75]

Inside the Magic has posted a pretty good video of the queue through the castle. It's a little dark, but I have heard the castle is pretty dark. To me the queue looks like it is a major part of this attraction. The detailing looks very cool. I look forward to checking this all out on opening weekend.

.

[Richard]

I'm sorry but THAT LOOKS INCREDIBLE!