I agree all your suggestions would have made Velocicoaster even better. I just happen to love the way that track looks along the shoreline and swooping above the trees.
View attachment 861581
View attachment 861582View attachment 861583
I mean, come on—This is gorgeous!

I honestly believe this is a unique case where the exposed track not only looks great, but has such a distinctive look that it has become iconic (in a good way) for IoA. And every fun-to-watch maneuver it pulls is easily viewable for spectators, adding oodles of fun energy and life to that plaza.
I’ll even go so far in saying this is the ONE time I think the otherwise-lame “It’s SUPPOSED to look like that” Chester & Hester-type backstory actually works and provides a lot of great dark humor in the queue.
I know, beauty’s in the eye of the beholder, and if you don’t care for it, I understand. Just to show that I’m not defending everything Universal does, I’ll say that as much as I love Stardust Racers at Epic, I am disappointed by the minimal theming on that ride: the look of its exposed structure clashes with just about everything else in the park (Except, amazingly, in next-door Isle of Berk where its visibility as a backdrop actually complements Berk’s steampunky Vikings-Inventing-New-Contraptions vibe.)
Here’s a thought though: Velocicoaster was designed with a definite purpose in mind: To draw in thrillseekers with one of the scariest and most intense coasters on Earth.
So, is it worth the time and expense to add show scenes to a ride that many of the park’s guests can not or will not ride? Or do you wait to put those funds into a more family-friendly project?
Again, I’m not trying to say more theming wouldn’t improve Velocicoaster, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the thrillseekers vs. nonriders balance factored into the budget planning.