Do we really think Indy would be better if stripped of its IP and made to be generic?
I’ll answer for you, it wouldn’t be.
That isn't a fair comparison. If you went in to IJA, ripped out all of the IP and called it a day, then of course it wouldn't be better. Multiple scenes on the ride rely on call backs to the original films and cameos from Indy himself. Without the IP, none of those elements would work. The Indiana Jones IP is integral to IJA as it currently exists.
HOWEVER, if one were to go design an original attraction with the same premise as Indiana Jones Adventure, and replace the cameos and call backs with original scenes, then it could ABSOLUTELY be just as good as IJA, if not even better. The IJ IP isn't even
part of the reason IJA is good. It's good because it's a well designed attraction. They didn't need the IP to do that at all
You’re right that IP does not inherently improve the quality of an attraction, and that’s not what I’m talking about.
You said that any original attraction based on dinosaurs would just be a Jurassic Park imitator. No matter how good it is, and no matter how many people liked it. You also said that Shanghai Pirates would be worse if it were an original attraction. And of course, you also said that if you have an idea for an original attraction, and it's possible to add an IP that "fits," then you should add an IP to said attraction.
All of these statements are predicated on the idea that attractions are inherently better with IP, all else being equal. Which is why I disagree.
The issue isn’t IP, the issue is shoehorned IP where it doesn’t belong.
There are a lot of issues with the IP mandate. It isn't just "shoehorned IP where it doesn't belong."