mikejs78
Premium Member
It affects capacity, sure, but it's still a bad move because it provides less additional capacity than would otherwise exist. Even if only a few hundred people per hour were using the replaced attraction, that's still helpful compared to not having the attraction at all.
The replacements are a significant problem and poor planning -- they have plenty of room to add without replacing.
If an attraction is only handling 300 guests per hour due to low demand and they replace it with an attraction that can handle 1800 guests per hour in high demand (or, in the case of guardians, 2500) that's a huge win capacity wise for the park. Old stale attractions can't stay around forever - their cost ends up exceeding their value. Of the ones mentioned above, TSL replacing the shell of the backlot tour and Galaxy's Edge replacing LMA are obvious wins. As is Guardians replacing Energy. The only one I would quibble with is MMRR replacing GMR. That never should have happened as GMR was still popular. A better solution for that park would have been an updating of GMR and putting in MMRR somewhere else as a new build.