Nintendo partnering with Universal to make attractions.

J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
Edward Jackson said:
Really a valid point. However, I must admit, I have been to Disney World over 10 times. I have never gone to Disneyland.
Click to expand...

I've been, and it was nice to see the differences and a few of the things we don't have here, but I don't think I'd go back for that reason alone. In fact, I was only in LA due to vacationing in Hawaii, as flying non-stop between Florida and Hawaii would make me want to jump out of the plane. And for anyone who's never been, LA is just a much larger Orlando with lots of hills and no sun, because it's blocked out by apocalyptic smog.

The way I see it, if you live anywhere near one of the resorts, you only visit the others as a side activity in whatever locale you're already headed to. You have to be in serious fanboy territory to go globetrotting for the sake of seeing a different park. Frankly, I don't understand why we even get European or Japanese tourists here anymore. It's not like anyone comes here to see the city itself.
 
Last edited:
J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
Corey P said:
Anything you do based on a video game is going to look tacky. Whatever you do is something that was built for a TV/computer screen and trying to make it real life can't really be done. All I care about is the rides and that experience. It's going to look fake no matter what you do.
Click to expand...

Are you referring specifically to retro video games? Because there are tons of modern video games that have realistic graphics/art direction which could be adapted into real life pretty easily. The vast majority of AAA games, really. It's only the games which continue to be more stylized, like Nintendo's, that complicate things.
 
Last edited:
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
JT3000 said:
Are you referring specifically to retro video games? Because there are tons of modern video games that have realistic graphics/art direction which could be adapted into real life pretty easily. The vast majority of AAA games, really. It's only the games which continue to be more stylized, like Nintendo's, that complicate things.
Click to expand...
With all the modern realistic cinematic games from Universal’s point of view they could just choose a popular movie property of the same genre instead for a much better potential kickback. The video game industry is massive but not many of its franchises have the same pull that film franchises have. As one example Indiana Jones likely brings in more people than Uncharted ever would.
 
J

JT3000

Well-Known Member
Mike S said:
With all the modern realistic cinematic games from Universal’s point of view they could just choose a popular movie property of the same genre instead for a much better potential kickback. The video game industry is massive but not many of its franchises have the same pull that film franchises have. As one example Indiana Jones likely brings in more people than Uncharted ever would.
Click to expand...

There are probably few games that would garner the sort of interest they're looking for, but they won't know until they try. So far we've only seen temporary attractions based on games, such as HHN houses. I think there a few other reasonable options outside of Nintendo, but Mario was the safest bet. Unfortunately, it's also one of the hardest to adapt to the real world effectively.
 
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
JT3000 said:
There are probably few games that would garner the sort of interest they're looking for, but they won't know until they try. So far we've only seen temporary attractions based on games, such as HHN houses. I think there a few other reasonable options outside of Nintendo, but Mario was the safest bet. Unfortunately, it's also one of the hardest to adapt to the real world effectively.
Click to expand...
Idk it looks like they did a bang up job to me. Looks just like the games.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Corey P said:
Anything you do based on a video game is going to look tacky. Whatever you do is something that was built for a TV/computer screen and trying to make it real life can't really be done. All I care about is the rides and that experience. It's going to look fake no matter what you do.
Click to expand...
This is not true at all. It's like arguing that Pandora should look all plastic-y because the movie was animated CGI.
 
Tom Morrow

Tom Morrow

Well-Known Member
Disneyhead'71 said:
Some people are predispositioned to hate it simply because of the company that is building it. Which I think is the case of the complaint here.
Click to expand...
I mean, I know that I am more heavily critical than some of you here, but I'm not sure how someone could see those photos and think, "this is the best possible Mario land they could have conceived". Even if you're in favor of the "blocky plastic-y surfaces to recreate the retro game look" aesthetics, it's cramped and cluttered to a ridiculous level.
 
Mike S

Mike S

Well-Known Member
Movielover said:
Sounds like the Galaxies Edge thread... ;)
Click to expand...
Actually there’s more than that and some of it is legitimate. Imagine if Universal made a land about Mario’s world with no Mario. I don’t get the impression outside of one or two people that they actively hate Galaxy’s Edge. Most, like me, would have just liked to see more of the lore incorporated than just the Sequel Trilogy. Tbh that’s kind of the reason I posted that video of the General Greivous cosplay in that thread. Imagine that walking around the land.
 
SplashJacket

SplashJacket

Well-Known Member
JT3000 said:
Who? 😐
Click to expand...
1582161122389.png
Pit.

You just proved his point though. Why use second or third tier characters when you can use the most popular and beloved characters.

Disney went with the second and third tier characters in Galaxy's Edge, disapointing many.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom