Animaniac93-98
Well-Known Member
Bourne is a hit, not sure of your line of thinking there,
It was OK, but is a one and done for me, personally.
Don't really have any interest in seeing it again soon.
Bourne is a hit, not sure of your line of thinking there,
The biggest difference between Universal and Disney is that Universal, even with Epic in construction, has massive plans for its current parks, and USF will receive the bulk of that. Disney tends to invest and leave the parks untouched for a while.
They may have plans. They're considering having plans. They're exploring the possibility of having plans. They're researching & imagining having plans.Do you mean if Disney was building a park they wouldn’t have plans, or Disney has no plans? The latter is not actually true. They may in fact have more plans than Universal post-Epic.
They may have plans. They're considering having plans. They're exploring the possibility of having plans. They're researching & imagining having plans.
They have no plans.
Because one company tells us they're doing exactly what they were rumored to be doing, while the other company quite literally says they're "considering" doing this or that and presents it all as merely "blue sky." The wording used in my previous post wasn't random, I was actually paraphrasing their last D23 presentation. Doesn't sound very committed, does it? Oh, and they cancel or downscale projects they've already announced. I wouldn't exactly call those commitments either.I don’t doubt either companies future, but why is a rumor out of Universal somehow more valid than public commitments by Disney? Everything is taken at face value as a done deal with Universal, despite also having the same track record for changing things along the stream.
It’s like Alicia Stella has more credibility than Bob Iger (she does, ironically!) - but certainly not more control.
Because one company tells us they're doing exactly what they were rumored to be doing, while the other company quite literally says they're "considering" doing this or that and presents it all as merely "blue sky." Oh, and they cancel or downscale projects they've already announced. I wouldn't exactly call those commitments.
Also, this board has many more Disney insiders than it has for Universal. It is, after all, a WDW board. If they had anything exciting to tell us, I'm sure they would.
Also, this board has many more Disney insiders than it has for Universal. It is, after all, a WDW board. If they had anything exciting to tell us, I'm sure they would.
Recency has nothing to do with it. Which does Universal announce, rumor or reality? The answer is they wait until everying is finalized to tell us what they're doing, at a time when we likely already know many of the details, whether they've changed at some point or not. Meanwhile, Disney has grown fond of sharing half-baked concepts that have a good chance of never even coming to fruition at all. This is how you lose people's trust. You talk of Disney's "public commitments," but these simply don't exist. They've currently committed to nothing beyond this year (and those projects are underwhelming to say the least.) That's the problem.This is pure recency bias. Things change all the time from what we are rumoured to receive at Universal and what ends up being reality.
Because why would they?Besides, the company hasn't even announced anything beyond 2025.
Super Nintendo World was announced for USF 8 years ago. The first time I heard about Pokemon? Late 2013, when Universal was prepping the deal. Let's not even get into how many half aborted closures of Kid Zone we have (and we are getting a half baked replacement for it ironically).
At least Dinoland has operating rides.
Super Nintendo World is currently open in two locations, with a third on the way. The KidZone redo hasn't gone smoothly, but it's going. If we're using these things as a barometer for Pokemon or Zelda, then I guess we should assume it's all happening eventually. Me? I'm treating them as rumors, because that's all they are for now, but they're rumors that I certainly put more stock in than whatever "beyond Thunder Mountain" nonsense Disney has already spoken about publicly.
Like Primeval Whirl?
Both lands need a lot of work, and both are rumored to be replaced outright. We will see who actually follows through and who needs more time blue skying.
If it were up to me, they would start working on Zelda yesterday. And I'm not even a fan of Zelda, it's simply a matter of what needs replacing most. But with them currently working on a whole new park, I know that unfortunately can't happen on an optimal timeline. We also can't discount Pokemon's popularity, as that is a train they should have jumped on a long time ago, or the (supposed) fact that they want to offload the Simpsons, so it's actually understandable if that has moved higher on their list of priorities. The key difference here is that regardless of how this all plays out, Universal isn't blowing smoke up my butt the whole time. This makes me more willing to be patient and see. I don't agree on these being their only options though, they are merely some of the more obvious choices given their partnership with Nintendo. They could still surprise us. Or at least the insiders will, because you know Universal won't say anything.I had edited out my post to simplify the argument to recency, but it is recency and as you mention a strong refusal to share things early. Which makes their rumours seem more real, but they are just as wobbly. Disney does have financial commitments of course. So does Universal, but the only things budgeted are currently Luigi's and Great Hall.
Currently I believe Disney has more budgeted future projects, but that requires one to discount Universal of Epic, which isn't really fair to them.
Josh did a whirlwind on people's trust by letting them 'peak behind the scenes'. Though I think Universal has less risk simply because they have less to work with. So I am very confident Pokemon and Zelda will come eventually, because what else is there? Both in terms of space and IP. Even if those projects shuffle around just as much as Encanto, it somehow doesn't seem outwardly the same. Just as Super Nintendo World and Ministry of Magic technically have.
Well... and Dinosaur. But I agree that it's not a good attraction either or worthy of your recall.
Quizzically Animal Kingdom also fell out of sequence, so your guess is also as good as mine. I wouldn't place a bet either way right now. Which is a shame as both are probably the projects I'd pick first.
This is the one project I find the most interesting as Universal knocked it out of the park with Dead Man's Pier during HHN a few years back now. If they can figure out a way to take the house's tone into a year round boat ride... I'll never leave.the 7 and 21 acre expansions are intriguing. the 3 acre in monsters was supposed to be a creature from black lagoon water ride i thought. I hoe they do that ride still. Imagine soemthing like pirates but CftBL....thatd be so cool.
This is the one project I find the most interesting as Universal knocked it out of the park with Dead Man's Pier during HHN a few years back now. If they can figure out a way to take the house's tone into a year round boat ride... I'll never leave.
I think a solid, traditional-ish, boat ride from Universal is the last thing they need to really let people know that Universal can produce high-quality attractions that focus on scenic design.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.