And does any of this change the fact that Simpsons land has one outdated simulator while the Pier is located along a body of water with tons of rides and kinetic energy? I can’t tell if you guys are being serious or not.
The Simpsons Ride isn't great shakes, but neither is anything in Pixar Pier, really. Most of those rides are bog standard rides that could be found at Six Flags. And the area was nicer when it was trying to be Victorian rather than Pixar-centric.
Springfield isn't amazing by any stretch, but neither is Pixar Pier.
The Paradise Gardens bandstand area > all Simpsons Land.
Literally the only good thing that came out of the Paradise Pier ==> Pixar Pier change. But it's not good enough to defeat another land solely on its own merits.
Clearly, i value atmosphere and aesthetics a lot more than the vocal USH voters in this thread. But I’m not understanding the cohesion thing. What cohesion?
While some areas of DCA have great atmosphere-BVS, CL, Grizzly Peak-I wouldn't call anything else better than USH in that regard. Does Pixar Pier really have great atmosphere compared to USH? I'd say no, unless perhaps you're talking to a young child that confuses seeing his favorite character on a sign or a food stand with great atmosphere.
I think it's bold to assume the people voting for USH don't value aesthetics and atmosphere. Basically everybody here would choose Disneyland Park over either one of these places, and aesthetics and atmosphere are big parts of the reason why. The atmosphere is definitely different between USH and Disney more generally, but that's not the same as saying that USH is less atmospheric, or has worse atmosphere.
Illumination Land
New York Street/ Paris Street
Wizarding World
Simpsons Land
A Lower Lot with a mix of IP and exposed show buildings
Super Nintendo Land
The Studio Tour
How is this more cohesive than DCA? They’re both a hodge podge of IP lands. One has the leftover Movie Studio concept with the Tram tour and one has some left over California with Grizzly Peak and BVS. So pretty much a wash there. Ride roster can be debated but I’d give it to DCA by a smidge on quality and then it has quantity too. Then DCA is much more atmospheric/ beautiful. Has a nighttime spectacular and much better food.
Neither are super cohesive, but there's one crucial difference to me. Universal doesn't sell itself on cohesion, it sells itself on being a movie studio, where a hodgepodge of unrelated things is at least understandable. Disney, on the other hand, sells itself as the company that takes a lot of time to think about the details and make sure not one thing is out of place. Yet they consistently choose to add in random things into DCA that have nothing to do with anything around it, go out of their way to disrupt things that were more cohesive, and generally doing things that only make sense if you treat the park the way Six Flags treats DC characters-"well, the characters are what people want, so it doesn't really matter where we put them or do with them as long as there are more of them than there were last year." So, you know, not the attention to detail Disney still says it adheres to. It's haphazard, sloppy, and does a lot to worsen whatever cohesion the park has (or had).
Universal doesn't publish books and issue press releases constantly saying that they adhere to that attention to detail "as Walt would have wanted", so it's less offensive to me when they don't meet that level of detail, even if there's not always a huge difference between the two parks in that regard.
It's funny how so many people do nothing but complain about WOC, unless they need to one-up some other park company or complex, whether it's WDW or Universal.
A lot of the "quantity" DCA has is filler (i.e. the aforementioned Pixar Pier flat rides).
Food is the only thing I would unquestionably give to DCA over USH.
What is the point of even having this conversation if people have already made up their minds that DCA is better just cuz it's at Disneyland?