I don’t know if anyone is rooting for Epic failure…. I know I am not…being critical is not the same as complete failure…. I have been and enjoy much of Universals offerings and I look forward to checking out Epic one day….but there are things the creatives could have done differently… they did not have to build the yoshi ride as it is else where…. The could of added some sort of shaded covering or how about an indoor Curse of the Werewolf coaster… it may have been better received in the moonlit dark with the occasional Werewolf popping out at you
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Universal Epic Universe (South Expansion Complex) - Now Open!
- Thread starter Bob Harlem
- Start date
wdwfan4ver
Well-Known Member
Doesn't seem that way. All known right is new wall, new Special event building, Italian eating place and Mexican eating placing for Epic Universe.
wdwfan4ver
Well-Known Member
I agree with you that shade is going to take a bit to build up, but I don't think that is true for Super Nintendo World.
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
There are literally three indoor rides for an entire theme park… in Florida. And a covered carousel…
That’s not acceptable in my eyes, especially for a new theme park built in 2025, when extreme weather events are on the rise, let alone in Florida. They know better. We know better. We don’t need to settle.
Epic is a gorgeous park, but it has flaws.
Disney Analyst
Well-Known Member
Sure. It may not align with what the creatives for Universal want. Or perhaps the budgets the executives give them.
But it’s certainly not winning them points in their opening summer, and feels like an aggressively anti-guest mindset to have, if true.
And I think all anyone would hope for is more balance. A better balance, to ensure the park runs smoother regardless of the weather.
Uni seems to have put themselves in a bind in that the park is built around portals to fully immersive lands.
This means they're not going to plop down a few flat rides or one-off walk-throughs. That would break the pattern.
The large expansion pads are for the really big one-IP land. And it'll take 2-3 years to build one.
The one grace they have is the ride cut from the Potter portal. They could perhaps put up a second Potter ride there a little bit faster because the theming of the portal is already done.
It might be the end of 2027 at the earliest for a new ride. 2028 for a new portal.
Meanwhile, IoA and USF remain underbuilt...
This means they're not going to plop down a few flat rides or one-off walk-throughs. That would break the pattern.
The large expansion pads are for the really big one-IP land. And it'll take 2-3 years to build one.
The one grace they have is the ride cut from the Potter portal. They could perhaps put up a second Potter ride there a little bit faster because the theming of the portal is already done.
It might be the end of 2027 at the earliest for a new ride. 2028 for a new portal.
Meanwhile, IoA and USF remain underbuilt...
Last edited:
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
It would suggest some serious problems at Universal Creative if they are disregarding basic operational issues when designing their theme parks in order to more properly fulfil their creative vision. There is always a give and take between the two things, but if they're basically saying the guests can put up with attraction closures and long waits because they find designing outdoor rollercoasters more creatively fulfilling that suggests a cultural problem.
I don't think that's the issue here, though, any more than, say, the lack of shade and seating in Toy Story Land was due to those things not aligning with the creative vision of the Imagineers.
rd805
Well-Known Member
They already have 2 full stage shows -- IMO the park needs "rides!"
**Anything would help though, yes.
Andrew25
Well-Known Member
After a few visits to Epic Universe, I have a somewhat general grasp on what the park needs to prioritize:
These are general ideas of what the park could benefit from.
There are three top priorities for Epic Universe (in my opinion):
I think the park can go a decade without touching the larger expansion pads as long as they "plus" existing portals and areas first.
These are general ideas of what the park could benefit from.
There are three top priorities for Epic Universe (in my opinion):
- Shade Structures, specifically at SNW and Celestial Park. From my understanding, SNW will need approval from Nintendo to install actual shade structures (not just umbrellas), so this might take a while. But Celestial Park can easily be updated to add shade structures throughout. Way too much open space with very little shade, even when the trees do grow shade will be limited.
- There are a few areas I've identified (marked 3 on map) that can features covered arcades/structures to provide relief to guests. They already did this at the front of the park, can't see why it will be an issue elsewhere.
- Additional Family Experiences, I think the park could benefit from more reliable ride system thats cater to the entire family. An actual high-capacity Omnimover ride system (not like Yoshi) would benefit this park tremendously. I'd put this in the smaller expansion pad across Atlantic to tie to Celestial Park. If not, prioritize a family-friendly Potter ride to provide relief for Ministry.
- Dark Universe Expansion, what is there is great, but it's the smallest of the 4 portals. We all know about the expansion pad, and the sooner it's used the better. However, there is a smaller pad behind the stores (mentioned above) that can house a smaller interactive experience (whether it's a walktrhough of some sort or additional shops). Ideally, this would be an indoor Knockturn Alley style walkthrough with a shop or two.
I think the park can go a decade without touching the larger expansion pads as long as they "plus" existing portals and areas first.
Purduevian
Well-Known Member
The also could "leak" Celestial park into one of the expansion pads and plop down some covered space themed flat rides. Think the area between stardust and Harry potter. You could expand a little bit while still leaving the large plot for another portal.
I also think they could use part of the plot and make a fully indoor "super silly fun land" with lots of flats and a jr coaster.
I also think they could use part of the plot and make a fully indoor "super silly fun land" with lots of flats and a jr coaster.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
What Diagon Alley hath wrought
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
Probably not. The two known big cuts were another indoor attraction and covered show. Replaced by one coaster. That likely would have achieved the better balance everyone is suggesting.
Two indoor rides were canceled along with the show. I think the canceled rides fall outside the scope of my question though, since they have no bearing on what's actually there, and if anything does get built on those plots in the future they could still be indoors. My point was that the large number of outdoor attractions were always meant to be outdoors, except for Werewolf, which replaced a completely different type of attraction late in the process (and you can tell.) The park was always going to have the same weather issues as IOA, even if the canceled rides had made the cut. For better or worse, they don't seem to care too much about this sort of thing, and while it might be inconvenient at times, I personally wouldn't want them rushing something out just to fill a quota of indoor attractions.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I’m not sure I understand your question. My interpretation of what you asked was - was it is a creative decision to have so few indoor rides. The answer to that given what was cut is no. They had creatively intended for several more in the opening day lineup.
Was it a creative decision to have outdoor rides as well, yes. If that was what you meant to ask.
The opening day balance was not seemingly creatively driven. Nor likely operationally the preference given feedback. They ran out their budget.
Purduevian
Well-Known Member
Anyone consider that indoor attractions are just flat out more expensive than outdoor attractions?
I have no idea how budgets are divided when building a new park... but would you rather have.
A)what we have now
B) No CotWW, Hiccups, or DK, but add in a creature from the black lagoon indoor boat ride?
I have no idea how budgets are divided when building a new park... but would you rather have.
A)what we have now
B) No CotWW, Hiccups, or DK, but add in a creature from the black lagoon indoor boat ride?
It was a purely creative decision to cut at least one of those attractions, because the concept was deemed unworthy to include in the finished product. And if the attraction truly wasn't going to be up to par, it's likely for the best, even if you're left with less indoor options for the time being.
BrianLo
Well-Known Member
I maybe sneak edited my final thoughts as you both posted, but yes totally that was one of the problems that occurred here.
Fair enough, but that wasn’t the creative goal to under-design the opening day park for the weather. It’s where it landed. If it actually was the goal, that’s the role of executives to bring the creatives down to reality.
I’m just not sure they wanted the park to be poorly built for Florida summers is a useful line of discussion. It is coming off as an excuse and that’s just going to make people more critical. It’s a flaw and hopefully they correct it.