I’m writing an extended Jungle Cruise that’s as big as The Rivers Of America. It travels the same rivers in this order: Amazon, Mekong, Congo, Nile. It also has new scenes featuring a Masai and Xhosa influenced tribe of hunters in between the Mekong and Congo, a tribe of fishermen on The Congo, The Pak Ou Cave, a Lao cave on the Mekong lined with buddha statues left by pilgrims, an endangered type of River dolphin on the Mekong, leaf cutting ants on The Amazon, a swimming anaconda, an attack by Nile Crocodiles, Egyptian ruins on The Nile, and a thrilling conclusion featuring The Rapids Of Tutankhamen. The ride encircles an island where most of the scenes are set up. The island has a volcano that smokes periodically in the center. The narration mixes fact with comedy. Fake Wax Palm (Amazon Only), Banana, Orchid, Papaya, Pineapple, Aloe, Sausage Tree (In Africa Only), Kapok (On The Amazon Only), Durian ( On The Mekong Only), Rosewood, Mahogany, and Eucalyptus plants cover up the rainforest. Fog machines bellow throughout the jungles, adding a sense of mystery. The new lost expedition story isn’t used in favor of a simple plot concerning a voyage across the jungle rivers of the world.
Nice ideas there! I like how it manages to be more inclusive and at the same time more epic.
Also, everyone here should keep these 5 things in mind:
1. Critiquing only the absolute worst examples, rather than mere mediocrity, will get you nowhere and ignores the deeper problems going on by focusing on the superficial, for the worst examples of park design have few to no decent qualities to appraise or contrast with the bad parts, unlike mediocre ones. In other words, please stop hooting at the chaff.
2. Mono-IP lands are a poison on creativity and eyesight, and lead to… monotony in the eyes of the guests. The examples of well-done mono-IP lands are a rarity (Cars Land, Pandora, some Universal examples as well), while mediocre (Galaxy’s Edge, most Universal examples, basically any Six Flags attempt whatsoever…) to horrendous (Pixar Pier, Paris!Avengers Campus) ones are legion. Themes around a broader brand/label/company are only marginally better, and still often provide failures. Broad, general themes are the way to go to allow for the maximum amount of atmosphere and worldbuilding the staff can pull off. However, themes that are too abstract result in a lot of un-themed attractions that degrade the thematic integrity of your park as a whole and make it seem like another amusement park instead (Knott’s is a good example), just as much as mono-IP lands do.
3. If the attraction is good enough, nobody (except the people on top of the operation, eventually) will care about the source material, if any. (Mr. Toad, Splash Mountain, Secret Life of Pets, Flight of Passage, etc on one end with WEB SLINGERS, Ariel, and dozens of Six Flags examples on the other)
4. Rides are not the be-all-end-all of a park experience. Especially not E-Tickets. Shops, shows, walkthroughs, restaurants, meetables, streetmosphere, and even mere scenery are all also equally important to conveying something and giving depth. People from the film industry would really help with this matter. Even with rides, E-Tickets are not the be-all-end-all; simpler dark rides are much appreciated, simpler coasters can be fun in moderation, and flat rides add plenty of kinetic energy even if you stick to 1 or 2 types.
5. Balance all qualities of the park. Failing to heed this on one end leaves you with lands that have no rides whatsoever, on the other you get congestions of off-the-shelf rides that add nothing. This also applies to individual attractions. Not balancing things in attraction design leads to that Ariel ride, which is so monomaniacally fixated on musical numbers the most grandiose and ride-worthy sequences were unfairly left out.
