LukeS7
Well-Known Member
If (more than likely when) they expand Nintendo Land to include additional properties (Zelda, Pokemon), that no longer would be the case though.If you really look at what they are doing, the idea is going into each of these IP "universes" and therefore if IP don't exist in the same universe then they don't belong in the same land in this park. For instance, people will point to Mario and Donkey Kong and Yoshi being different properties in the Nintendo catalogue, but in fact in the Nintendo "lore" all three exist in the same world/universe and therefore can share the land in this new theme park. The whole "reimagining" is taking the idea of these walled off lands like Daigon Alley, Hogsmeade, and even Toy story land and Galaxy's edge and making a whole park about that idea. The hub is your gateway to enter each of these IP universes. It might not be to everyones liking but if you look at the park through that lense you will understand their selections.
I also think that it would be reasonably feasible to create a Dreamworks land using Madagascar, Shrek, Kung Fu Panda, and HTTYD as mini-lands. Looking at the concept, it makes little sense to have the least expansive franchise (HTTYD) be the most expansive land. With proper transitions, you could easily transition from the jungle environments of Madagascar and Kung Fu Panda to the forest and medieval/Norse environments of Shrek and HTTYD.
EDIT: Wanted to add, don't take me calling HTTYD the "least expansive franchise" as a knock against it. I loved the films, but in comparison to part of the Potter-verse, all of Nintendo's IP possibilities, and the Universal Monsters, it really does seem to offer the least amount of possibilities.
Last edited: