Has anyone considered the possibility that creating more indoor attractions simply didn't align with their creative vision? It's easy to ask for more indoor attractions, but they can't just build something that's indoors for the sake of it.
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.Has anyone considered the possibility that creating more indoor attractions simply didn't align with their creative vision? It's easy to ask for more indoor attractions, but they can't just build something that's indoors for the sake of it.
They already have 2 full stage shows -- IMO the park needs "rides!"As would a large, covered theater like the one USF has for Animal Actors
What Diagon Alley hath wroughtUni 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...
Has anyone considered the possibility that creating more indoor attractions simply didn't align with their creative vision? It's easy to ask for more indoor attractions, but they can't just build something that's indoors for the sake of it.
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.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.
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.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.
Anyone consider that indoor attractions are just flat out more expensive than outdoor attractions?
The opening day balance was not seemingly creatively driven. Nor likely operationally the preference given feedback. They ran out their budget.
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.
How did Universal not plan for Florida summers with as long as uni has been here…. Even Disney knew they had to do things differently vs Cali way back in 1971 with things like a cover for the Tea Cups and having the entire It’s a Small World boat ride indoors
WDW's Mad Tea Party opened without a roof. It was added a couple years later
The canopy over HM's queue was also added a year after opening, as was HoP's extended covered queue.
HoP has an extended queue? Is that where the market is currently?
Yes. It was built to be the queue when the line used to go out the door (really!)
I think the posts still have the hooks on them where you would link the chains to form the line
Here's what the area looked like before it was built
![]()
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.