It surprises me how many people are upset by the lack of pool on the Star Cruiser.
I'm plenty critical of the job Disney has done on this project, but not having a pool doesn't even register with me as one of the problems. It seems really clear to me that Disney isn't aiming for the kind of traditional hotel experience that would have one. They're trying to do something far more out there (even if promo material suggests they are falling WAAAY short). I feel like not including one is actually pretty well justified.
When trying to create an illusion (or a themed experience) you have to be really discerning what elements you choose to include, since the physical reality of those elements will either support or hinder the illusion you're trying to create. A Hotel that's meant to give the illusion of a Not-Hotel is tricky, because it techically is a hotel in that people will be staying there, but that's not the impression guests are intended to walk away with. Since you HAVE to provide the accomodations that are necessary for guests to be able to stay overnight, you then have to remove anything that will feed into those and accidentally suggest that where they're staying is a "normal" hotel instead of the illusory place you're trying to make. Practically every criticism I've seen over not having a pool falls back on the argument that people "expect a hotel to have a pool". Which means people identify Having a Pool with the idea of Staying at a Hotel. Well, Disney doesn't WANT you to feel like you ARE at a hotel . . . so, scratch the pool.
You already have to make the huge leap of convincing guests that the building they're in is floating in space and not grounded on earth - that's a BIIIG leap. Putting projection domes outside the windows isn't enough, the programming has to support that. The more hotel-like amenities you have, the less likely it is to feel like you're NOT at a hotel. I'm already dubious of the "weather-controlled" area the "ship" has that "replicates the climate of the destination planet" . . . unfortunately, I think most guests will see a much shorter distance between "we're obviously still on Earth and just went outside" than the convoluted story they created . . . but that's one of the liabilities you HAVE to offer as a place where people are staying overnight. You've literally got to give them space to breathe, even if it goes against your illusion. Which is all the more reason to cut anything else that works against that illusion.
Now, the REAL kicker here is that you have to offer some sort of experience that is at least as satisfying to guests, so that they don't look and say "It was fine, but I would have liked it better with a pool". You have to give them a fantastical, Star-Warsy alternative that makes them look at their next hotel pool and say "man, what they had on the Star Cruiser was WAY better than THIS old thing". But so far we haven't seen any evidence that they've done that. So, for me, THAT'S where MY criticism lies, rather than "where's the pool?"
You can skip building a pool, but for $6,000 you had better give us something better.
