DisneyHead123
Well-Known Member
I also noticed that Nintendo World in CA doesn’t seem to be getting rave reviews (I actually didn’t realize Universal had another Nintendo World in the US so just read the reviews yesterday.)Disney is not gonna rapidly loose market share once Epic opens as some have claimed on here.
They are an entrenched well know brand with a huge following despite their blunders.
I think a lot of us forget that Universal being this competitive is still a relatively new phenomenon.
Maybe in the last decade or so since Potter opened has there been talk of a response to that land. Galaxy’s Edge was the answer but it wasn’t as successful imo.
Comcast has decided to go all in on their parks division lately so now here we are with the current discussions.
The sense that I’m getting is that the “mini lands” or whatever you want to call them are actually surprisingly hard to pull off, across the board. Individual rides will get rave reviews, as will whole parks, but “lands” seem to get a mixed reception at best (The exception being Pandora but, I’m sorry, at this point can we just say that James Cameron is clearly a sorcerer or Jedi or something? How does every one of his films that is elebenty billion dollars over budget still become a wild success? Clearly witchcraft. So Pandora doesn’t count.) They seem to hit the inverse of a sweet spot - not big enough to feel fully immersive, too big to be given the benefit of the doubt as a fun attraction and not much more.
Anyway, my point is, there’s a lot of assumption that Universal is going to absolutely school Disney in the theme park realm because they “did the right thing”, in fan’s eyes, by spending a lot and building a lot. And maybe EU will indeed blow people’s minds. But also possible that all the complaints people generally have about theme park lands will apply to EU as well.