Originally posted by DigitalDisney
Well, that's because they decided to do it right the first time. They wanted to create a park that didn't look cheap, so people would visit it. Do you think people have a higher opinion of DCA or IOA, both of which are new parks, and both of which have the same approximate attraction count?
I've been to IOA 20 times or more since it opened, and I've never seen it empty. I've seen waits of over an hour for every attraction, most of which exceeding 2 hours.
How one-sided of you. If people came to Orlando for "business or for disney", then why do we have one Sea World park, a massive Sea World resort, and the Universal resort complex, which currently consists of two major theme parks, three resorts, and a nighttime entertainment district.
If your statement was true, then International Drive wouldn't really exist, would it?
i hate to break it to you, but I've made trips to Orlando just for Universal (no Disney).
You've never been to IOA, and it shows. Unless, of course, you can tell me how Spiderman, Hulk, Dudley Doright, Popeye and Bluto, Jurassic Park River Adventure, Triceratops Encounter, Dueling Dragons, Sindbad, Poseidon's Fury, Caroseussel, and Cat In The Hat (among others) are generic and unthemed.
Not to say that Kyle's statements were a little biased but yours don't seem a lot better. I had an annual pass to Universal last year an only one time out of the dozen or so that I went was it not pretty much a walk on for almost everything. Most of the time in IOA, the only attraction that wasn't a walk-on was Spiderman and it usually had no more than a 30 minute wait (not that I'm complaining about not having to wait but I can't help but wonder how they could afford to operate with such low attendance)
I would agree with what Kyle said in regards to people coming to Orlando mostly for Disney or business. I mean, Seaworld, all of International Drive and Universal all sprung up as a direct attempt to leach business off DIsney. I don't see most of that area attracting international tourism without Disney in the picture. All of what Universal has to offer in regards to the parks can be seen in two days (or one with as slow as it's been) That doesn't exactly make it the ideal tourist destination.
Universal's nighttime entertainment district isn't exactly bustling with happy crowds, either. Actually, the busiest I've ever seen that are is during a park closing and that's mostly just people who have to walk through it to get to their cars. I'm not saying that there is anything wrong with this area but it seems to have trouble keeping some shops and doesn't seem to be working in spite of Universals aggressive approach at shoving it down the public's throat by making you walk through it to get to a park... I really don't know what the problem with it is - maybe it's because it's tied in too closely to the parks like it is - maybe people don't want to park in a garage half a mile away and walk to go see a movie or go to a club, I don't know but I doubt that this problem is totally unfixable.
As for I-Drive, there is a reason that they want a direct connection to Disney property with the new proposed high speed rails going through Florida and it's the same reason that Disney doesn't want the direct connection. That area built up around Disney over the years starting back to when it was just one theme park and a couple resorts. Since that time Disney has grown to something much larger that can provide enough entertainment of it's own to keep a family going for a week or more without setting foot off Disney property. If WDW had opened with the size that it is today, I'm sure I-Drive would be a much smaller affair. As it stands, the amount of people coming to the area has obviously grown enough to support both the development of Disney and the other tourist attractions in the area but Disney still manages to maintain a higher occupancy level year round in its resorts than the rest of the Orlando area which is impressive when you consider that Disney's resorts are also some of the highest priced within their markets (value, moderate, deluxe)
I've made trips to Orlando just to go to Universal, too.. Of course I only live about an hour away so it's hardly that big of a deal for me. What part of the country/world did you say that you originate from?
I can honestly say the only attraction that I was really all that impressed with was Spiderman and as cool as this attraction is the first few times you ride it, once you've ridden it several times it seems a lot less spectacular. The ending is greatly diminished once you understand how they do the "drop". You only have to look up (which doesn't seem like such a strange thing to do when your car is supposedly turned sideways) to see the unthemed ceiling to have the whole thing spoiled.
As for the other attractions: By Hulk, what do you consider the theme elements? The green and purple track?.. With the exception of the front of it, most of Dudly Doright is like an e-ticket attraction themed like an original fantasyland one. Popeye and Bluto isn't all that bad and aside from some cheap looking animatronics (especially the t-rex in the end with what looks like a plastic tarp for a neck) neither is the Jurassic Park Rive Adventure - although if you can do without the building and the crapy animatronics, you get the same thing at Bush Gardens FL. Triceratops Encounter is cute for kids but I was mad as hell after waiting 45 minutes (the first time I was there and the only time I've been there when the park was actually busy) to go in and stand there and watch an animatronic move around and ______ (granted this is for kids) Dueling Dragons has a wonderfully themed line area... Once you're on the ride though, it's pretty much the same as the Hulk in regards to theme but at least with the hulk you get a good view. The retention pond that you see from the Dragons has a little to be desired.I don't know what to say about Sinbad. I thought that the set and that theater as a whole was very very well done, I just wish that I could say the same for the show. It is full of senseless violence, with little point and the humor... Lets just say I think the people who would put this on their top ten list, are probably the same people who thought Fox's celebrity Boxing was quality television. Poseidon's furry is a mixed bag for me. The outside is obviously well done (seems awfully large for what the inside actually consists of, though) Personally, I prefer the new guide in it over the old one with the very, very fake looking beard (nothing like a 20 year old guy trying to act like he's 100 years old) but I think that the newer story and reverse use of effects, is a step backwards in regards to quality. Caroseussel? It's a carousel. There isn't much more in the way of work that went into this than you would find in a typical carousel somewhere else. Sure, the poles are curvy but there is actually less detail to be found in the animals that you ride on this one than you would find in the horses of most that you would find in other large parks... For what it is, I would say that they did a pretty good job of Cat in the Hat. I don't like the fact that they have clouds in the line area that sit just below the visible rafters and a/c ducts and I think they could have smoothed it out a little so that younger kids and older people didn't get jostled around so much but other than that it's not a bad ride.
My biggest problem with Universal (and this covers both parks) is with the upkeep. It's quite obvious that Universal in day to day maintenance, places far less importance on theme than Disney does. Visible rust stains on some of the characters on the Popeye show a definite lack of maintenance. The last time I went, in the final scene just before the drop, Popeye's neck was broken (with the head dangling against his chest) which to me at least shows that they don't consider the theme to be an important enough of a thing to maintain. I've never been able to get a pair of glasses on any of the 3-D attractions (spiderman included) that weren't either very scratched or dented (from what looked like people trying to poke holes through the lenses). Overall, their parks seem dirtier to me which is surprising since Animal Kingdom (Disney's lowest performer in WDW) draws more attendance each year than either IOA or US...
Something I found interesting was your statement about them doing it right the first time. It take a lot more than that to make and keep a good park. Just look at US. While it's easy to say that they most certainly did not do this one right the first time (based on all the breakdowns and poor line conditions that they had when they first opened) they haven't changed an awful lot since they opened. They have opened up a handful of new things ( I don't include Jaws in this list since it was meant to open with the original park) and have left everything else to deteriorate.
I don't consider IOA to be bad but I think it would be better suited for a six flags type of location. If Universal wants to take Disney head on, this isn't the park to do it with. They came out of the gait with a strong start (comparing US to MGM when they were both new) but to me, IOA seems like a step in the wrong direction if domination of the tourist dollar is what Universal is looking for. The thing I sort of ask myself is if this park were to be exactly like it is but owned by Disney, would I like it more? The truth is that I'd probably like it less. I think I'd have probably thought more of Journey Into Your Imagination if it had opened at Universal but with Disney, I expect more. Am I a little biased? Well, of course! What do you expect when you come to a WDW forum? Of course, I understand why Universal fans find themselves posting to the Universal sections of sites devoted to WDW: It's a lot harder to come across good quality websites and forums devoted to Universal Florida. Why do you suppose that is?