Universal Epic Universe (South Expansion Complex) - Now Open!

[Andrew C]

Whatever makes Disney look bad!

They do that without our help.

 

[Andrew C]

I saw that post @MisterPenguin
@DCBaker smoked you!

 

[MisterPenguin]

I saw that post @MisterPenguin
@DCBaker smoked you!

They often do.

Good on them!

 

[Tom Morrow]

I haven't been there, so take my opinions with as much of a grain of salt as you please, but my impression is that in terms of attractions Epic has a lot going for it. I think where some dissonance arrises for people who are primarily fans of Disney parks is when rollercoasters that pay a lot less attention to immersion within the park let alone a specific land are counted as headliners when if Disney built similar attractions we would all be up in arms.

In general, I do kind of agree with @Tom Morrow's point that all this comparing of the theming with TDS is perhaps overshooting the runway. During construction, all the talk was that this was going to rival TDS in terms of theming and immersion. Then it opened and people started commenting on the issues with sightlines within and outside of the park and the response was borderline mocking about those who were concerned about sightlines as that was just a Disney thing and not something Universal or its fans worried about. Now we're back to Epic being more immersive than any park other than TDS. So, which is it?

I missed this post.

Forget TDS - Epic doesn't even live up to the beauty and immersion of DAK down the road.

Whatever makes Disney look bad!

I hate to break this to you guys, but a park that is getting moderately slammed in reviews, that has every ride at 75 minute waits with only 20K in the park... is not really making Disney look bad.

 

[TalkToEthan]

Epic is when it objectively does not raise the bar for the theme park industry.

It does, domestically at least.
Epic raises bar on attention to detail in the bulk. Pound per pound, inch per inch it out themes all US parks. The strikingly terrible sight lines in 3 spots(and yes, they are woeful) does not negate the over the top theming throughout so much of the park from restaurants, to shops to fronts and ride queues.
You’re saying(by omission) those monster AA’s aren’t raising the bar??? They aren’t making noise in the industry??? They are; they are big time—— just as those 10 or 11 goblins in Diagon did back in ‘14.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It does, domestically at least.
Epic raises bar on attention to detail in the bulk. Pound per pound inch per inch it out themes all US parks. The strikingly terrible sight lines in 3 spots(and yes, they are woeful) does not negate the over the top theming throughout the park from restaurants, to shops to fronts and ride queues.

Only if theme is reduced to stuff and is not something more comprehensive and guiding.

 

[DarkMetroid567]

It does, domestically at least.
Epic raises bar on attention to detail in the bulk. Pound per pound, inch per inch it out themes all US parks. The strikingly terrible sight lines in 3 spots(and yes, they are woeful) does not negate the over the top theming throughout so much of the park from restaurants, to shops to fronts and ride queues.
You’re saying(by omission) those monster AA’s aren’t raising the bar??? They aren’t making noise in the industry??? They are; they are big time—— just as those 10 or 11 goblins in Diagon did back in ‘14.

I don’t agree with Tom that Epic does not “objectively” raise the bar but… imo Epic really doesn’t raise the bar on my standards.

I don’t think “more” is enough to be considered bar raising. Nor do I agree that Epic’s theming density is unmatched domestically or globally.

I think it’s true that the Monsters AAs are bar raising but I’d say the most bar-raising stuff at Epic is Super Nintendo World and its two novel attractions. The only issue is — that land has already been around for four years and the attractions themselves aren’t very good.

 

[TalkToEthan]

Only if theme is reduced to stuff and is not something more comprehensive

I’m not saying I disagree but was hoping you could expand a bit because I thought “stuff” —as in the corporal/tangible/3D—-is what counts when we’re talking about park details and themes

 

[wdwfan4ver]

I mean uh... isn't Isle of Berk also incredibly time sensitive.

There are 4 big differences between Galaxy's Edge and Isle of Berk despite both being time sensitive lands.

The first is Universal has no plans of adding How to Train your attractions in a different land in Epic Universe unlike what Disney did for Star Wars. That means Universal isn't doing think adding a How to Train Dragon attraction in Dark Universe portal or create a another How to Train your Dragon Portal . I am saying because Animation Courtyard at DHS as Star Wars Launch Bay despite Star Wars Launch Bay from a theme standpoint doesn't fit into Animation Courtyard. Disney did that stuff like a Darth Vader meet and greet wouldn't fit into Galaxy's Edge due to that time sensitive element. I do know about Star Wars Launch Bay is going away, but this something should've been gone when the Disneyland version of Star Wars Launch Bay was.

The 2nd difference is Galaxy's edge takes place in a time frame that really doesn't have much in popular Star Wars Characters, but that is not true in the time frame that Isle of Berk is in. The fact is the Disneyland version of Galaxy's Edge had to add Ahsoka Tano Meet & Greet in the land despite not being a sequel trilogy character speaks volumes of how popular the sequel trilogy characters were. This shows being time sensitive lands can be a flow if it is not in the right time frame.

The 3rd difference is Disney was betting on rest of the sequel trilogy to be as popular at the box office as The Force Awakens and is why they gave Galaxy's Edge the Sequel trilogy timeline. There was no betting on Isle Berk despite being time sensitive because the How to Train your Dragon Franchise was more farther around than the sequel trilogy. When Epic Universe first announce by Universal on August 1st, 2019, How to Train your Dragon 3 opened in Movie theaters in late February of 2019.

The 4th difference is DHS already had Star Wars attractions before they announced Galaxy's Edge and that meant from a cohesive standpoint, Star Tours: the Adventure continues needed to be connected to Galaxy's Edge, but Disney didn't due to higher ups.

I said higher ups because imaginers originally has Galaxy's Edge plans than included where Echo Lake, but was overruled. That decision is one of the reasons DHS is cohesive mess.

Epic Universe of the other hand only opened this year meaning there was no potential different timelines attractions already in the park. What I'm getting at with the 4th difference Timeline makes sense for a land that is in a brand new theme park at Epic Universe, but it does not for Galaxy's Edge.

 

[JT3000]

I mean just seems like they're a big fan of something and tired of seeing it be crapped on by people for some pretty shallow/stupid reasons

The irony...

I haven't been there, so take my opinions with as much of a grain of salt as you please, but my impression is that in terms of attractions Epic has a lot going for it. I think where some dissonance arrises for people who are primarily fans of Disney parks is when rollercoasters that pay a lot less attention to immersion within the park let alone a specific land are counted as headliners when if Disney built similar attractions we would all be up in arms.

In general, I do kind of agree with @Tom Morrow's point that all this comparing of the theming with TDS is perhaps overshooting the runway. During construction, all the talk was that this was going to rival TDS in terms of theming and immersion. Then it opened and people started commenting on the issues with sightlines within and outside of the park and the response was borderline mocking about those who were concerned about sightlines as that was just a Disney thing and not something Universal or its fans worried about. Now we're back to Epic being more immersive than any park other than TDS. So, which is it?

I don't think Epic is the most immersive park by any means, and it definitely has some sightline issues (among others) that need resolving, it's just that when people start responding to any praise of the park in such a way that makes you think, "Who hurt you?," you start to wonder. And frankly I've seen a lot of that in this thread.

People should be used to Universal having largely unthemed coasters as headline attractions by now. They've had Hulk since 1999.

I like the transitions of the Space-themed toys, transition with rocks/cave then you see Galaxy's Edge but I also don't mind it as much because HS is Disney's only park with actual single-IP lands...

There's zero transition between those lands. Absolutely none whatsoever. And why do you suddenly not mind it as much when it's the same dynamic as any other park with single-IP lands, just at a different resort? It's evident you hold Disney & Universal to very different standards.

Pandora COULD have fit in HS but the theming INSIDE of the land and the rides inside show it was purposeful built for the park.

Everything is purposefully built for every park. It doesn't end up there by accident.

 

[Disney Analyst]

You can enjoy the story treatment for Berk more than Galaxy's Edge, no issue there. I am hopeful Disney will start to improve Galaxy's Edge more and more in terms of characters and entertainment inside the land. They've already made some great changes in Disneyland.

But it's not subjective, Galaxy's Edge is a far better land in terms of theming and immersion over Berk, which I think was the point that user was making. If they went all the way with Berk, it could have had the immersion and theming, with a story treatment people enjoy.

In this case, it's almost there... but let down by the shortcuts.

Of course, whether that bothers you or not IS subjective.

 

[JT3000]

What I'm frustrated by is the tribalism. Making statements that are objectively not true about how "bar-raising" Epic is when it objectively does not raise the bar for the theme park industry.

The poster made the argument that everything at Epic "destroys Disney's best efforts", but in reality if we're comparing just E-tickets, only two things at Epic are up there with Disney's best E-tickets: Monsters and Ministry. Stardust Racers is a great coaster, but it's basically not themed. Mario Kart is not a great ride, etc.

There aren't any parks that have more than a handful of attractions on that level though, so I find it difficult to believe that's what they meant, even if it sounded hyperbolic. Obviously not every attraction at one park will be on par with the best of another, much less superior.

I think Epic's roster of attractions, while not perfect, is above par for a first year park. They just need to work out the current kinks while plotting future expansion.

Mario Kart is a weird case, where I think its overall quality could ultimately be decided by whether or not they're able to upgrade the AR experience over time. I feel like the technology just isn't there for what they intended, nor is the hardware comfortable. If they can't make improvements, they should consider ditching that aspect of the ride entirely. It's not like the experience is barebones without it, it just arguably isn't all that fitting for a ride themed to Mario Kart. That's a discussion that could have been avoided entirely had they just made it a mainline Mario ride instead.

 

[Andrew C]

But it's not subjective, Galaxy's Edge is a far better land in terms of theming and immersion over Berk, which I think was the point that user was making.

That is absolutely subjective. Not to mention one is really dull and the other is built on energy. You take away the energy, you take away the immersion.

 

[JT3000]

The strict timeline in Galaxy’s Edge was the result of a commitment to immersion. That they picked a lousy time doesn’t negate that.

But we should remember there's more to thematic immersion than physically creating sense of place, and I can't think of a land that better proves this point than Galaxy's Edge. Yeah, it looks convincing enough as a location in the Star Wars universe, if you ignore the fact that there's no life to it. It doesn't feel lived-in like the Wizarding World lands do, for example. It feels... like a section of a theme park designed to make money, but based on a portion of an otherwise beloved franchise that no one actually likes.

 

[Andrew C]

Yeah, it looks convincing enough as a location in the Star Wars universe, if you ignore the fact that there's no life to it.

This exactly. They built the body but forgot the heart.

 

[Disney Analyst]

This exactly. They built the body but forgot the heart.

Right, which as I stated I hope they'll address. It's an easy fix really for Galaxy's Edge.

I'm not sure Universal will fix the shortcuts they took in Berk, clearly most of you think it's good enough.

I think Berk and Galaxy's Edge both need work

 

[Andrew C]

It's an easy fix really for Galaxy's Edge.

Except it’s not.

I'm not sure Universal will fix the shortcuts they took in Berk, clearly most of you think it's good enough.

Any shortcomings, which are overstated imo, are made up for with kinetic energy from what i can tell.

 

[JT3000]

Right, which as I stated I hope they'll address. It's an easy fix really for Galaxy's Edge.

Is it? Sure, they could try adding some more walkaround characters or other, smaller details to help with kinetics, but is that going to be nearly enough? You're not actually making the land more interesting, even to the built-in fanbase it's targeting, without a major overhaul.

 

[CoastalElite64]

Interesting, but they really should do Luigi's Mansion first.

 

[Andrew C]

Interesting, but they really should do Luigi's Mansion first.

If they don’t, I’m quitting theme parks forever.