The_Jobu
Well-Known Member
Why are you comparing a ride to lands?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Wizards give smackdown to droids
- Thread starter Damon7777
- Start date
Why are you comparing a ride to lands?
flynnibus
Premium Member
Detail does not equal effective though.
While this ..
and
Are way more 'immersive' and detailed...
They still aren't better than than the placemaking done in examples like ...
and
When you focus on the TOOLS used instead of the result... you're usually just someone trying to copy someone else's work.
The fascination on a 1 second scene while riding backwards is comical.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
I'm not sure what you mean to be honest. All of the examples here look good.
I used the tree mural wall as an example because the OP is claiming that Hagrid's is "beyond phenomenal" and is a game changer for the industry, yet it doesn't live up to the immersion set by the WWoHP itself. The mural is just one of several examples from Hagrid's that feel budget-cut-y. These things don't break the experience for me by any means but its hard to argue that it wouldn't have been even better if they were addressed. Hagrid's is probably the most fun attraction at Universal. It just definitely is not a game changer nor has it set any sort of new industry standard.
Last edited:
Incomudro
Well-Known Member
I don't get the downside at all.
Don't want to go until both rides are operational? (I'm waiting)
Don't go.
Want to get in there, see the land and ride the Falcon?
Go.
Looks more like a quick lesson in cherry picking.
The new standard of what? Wizarding World is still far more immersive. Disney didn't even go to the same lengths as they did with Pandora to make Galaxy's Edge look and feel like an actual alien world. It literally just looks like a Star Wars theme park on Earth. It's nicely themed, but it's not raising any bars.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Show me an example from Cars Land, Pandora, or SWGE where you can blatantly see the budget cuts.
Have you actually been to SWGE?
PolynesianPrincess
Well-Known Member
And Diagon Alley literally just looks like a Harry Potter theme park on Earth. Same with Hogwarts. And unless you have actually been to GE, you really can't compare based off what you might have seen online or heard from someone else.
Navi River Journey. The entire thing.
Have you?
Well, yes, if you make no effort to suspend disbelief. But where did you think these places were located? Batuu?
Why not? Are the obvious weak points in the land's immersion & sense of authenticity going to be fixed by the time everyone else gets there to see them in person?
PolynesianPrincess
Well-Known Member
Because you cant predict how immersed you're going to feel based on a photo or video on the internet. People told me I would be blown away by Hogsmead and I waited to see it in person before I decided how great or not great it was. I wasn't that impressed. Never seen Potter before. I also waited to judge for myself how immersive Pandora would be. I thought it was incredible. Despite not seeing Avatar, I thought it was great and better done than Hogsmead. Potter was based on actual places in the movies. Batuu is not in any of the SW movies. It's a brand new place. Potter had familiar shops and sights where as GE doesn't.
I think trying to compare WWOHP as it is now to GE now, as it opens, is ridiculous. You have to compare Hogsmead as it was when it opened to really be fair. I've seen lots of videos and photos of GE but I'm going to wait to pass judgment until I see it in person.
The_Jobu
Well-Known Member
Harry Potter World will always have one advantage, it’s all ripped from the books and films, bringing things and places fans dreamed of to life. Plus all their favourite characters are there. Star Wars Land is putting uphill unless they want to add some original trilogy locations and characters.
Two immersive lands, but very different in some ways.
Two immersive lands, but very different in some ways.
PolynesianPrincess
Well-Known Member
That's how I see it as well. GE is a completely new place. The best comparison I can think of that Disney did a great job replicating the land from the movie is Cars Land. I was in awe stepping into Cars Land for the first time because it was as if I stepped into the movie. I know Cars is nowhere as big as Potter, but to me, a sucker for great themed lands, this one hit the nail on the head. However, had they made a new "place" for Cars Land to be located (a different city not seen in the movie versus Radiator Springs) I probably wouldn't feel the same way.
Batuu is a brand new place that looks all too familiar, a not insignificant flaw that can be easily seen through photos & videos.
And while I can certainly understand the need to wait until Galaxy's Edge is fully open to compare the two, I don't see what good comes of comparing it to Hogsmeade when it first opened. That Hogsmeade no longer exists. Why not compare Hogsmeade to the portion of Frontierland that Galaxy's Edge replaced at DL, or the backlot & stunt show it's replacing at DHS? That would be equally productive.
If it's because you think Galaxy's Edge will be expanded anytime soon, I have some bad news for you.
PolynesianPrincess
Well-Known Member
Never said that. But comparing a section of a park that has expanded SEVERAL times over the years to a portion of a park that is just opening and has not experienced any expansions of any sorts is laughable. That would be like comparing MK as it is now to IOA when it first opened, One park just out of the gates and one that has been around 50 years through numerous additions and changes. You just can't compare things like that.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
I love that Batuu is a new location, it avoids comparisons to the locations in the films, expands the universe, and invites you to explore a new world with lots of world building. It allows elements from all the films to come together and is equally accessible to an avid Star Wars fan as it is to someone who's never seen the films. Unlike HP which has most of the series taking place in the same locations, choosing ONE planet from Star Wars would not have worked.
Na'vi River Journey is not a very good ride, but show me signs of blatant budget cuts, something you can see and instantly stands out as "yes, that is cheap." It also has the most fluid animatronic ever made (for now), and although it's the only one in the ride, we're comparing it to Hagrid's animatronics which are merely passable. It also was always meant to be an afterthought C or D ticket to compliment the land's E ticket attraction. Hagrid's is an E-ticket and marketed as "the most immersive coaster ever made."
No, so I'm not going to make claims that it isn't immersive without seeing it. Every reaction I've seen from people who have been, even cynical haters of Pandora, etc., have said that it's absolute top notch for immersion and detail, whether it raises the bar or not. Whether or not you want to accept it, you won't find any views of backstage, infrastructure, or glaring budget cuts in SWGE.
Where have we seen it before? Star Tours?
But you're claiming it raises the bar and sets a new standard without seeing it (in person.) You say tomato, I say tomato.
No, I'm saying they put zero effort into the landscaping and making it feel like you've actually stepped onto an alien planet. It isn't just a Star Wars land at Disneyland, it looks like a Star Wars land at Disneyland, at least until you get deep into the bowels of the land. Although I'd argue that some of the theming around the perimeter would be more at home at DHS, which is of course fitting, but that park's current standard for theming is far lower than Disneyland's. Will it be the best themed area in DHS? Of course, but DisneySea material this is not.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It was meant to highlight two things
1- visuals alone don’t define how well theming is executed
2- not one lement in isolation grades how effective the theming or immersion really is
New fantasyland is beautiful and detailed... but it’s pretty soulless and isn’t as good as the 1983 fantasyland examples shown in having character and pulling you in.
Or to take another example... space mountain does not rely on realism or extensive detail (like NFL) yet is legendary in establishing an environment and tone. It goes to highlight that measuring success is not going down a checklist of things that need to be present, or done like another has been done. Those are tools... effectiveness has to be evaluated as a whole... not by checklist,
I think it breaks ground in terms of how they have made a high intensity rollercoaster that is so easy on the body... making it approachable to so many more people. Plus, normally the more intense coasters have been weak on the whole package of immersion plus ride experience.
Compare to something like hulk... hagrids is even more fun (imo) while being approachable by more... and better immersion.
Compare to something like RNRC... same as above
Something like btmrr... btmrr is better integrated to its environment... but hagrids is more intense, subjectively as fun or more... and just as approachable.
That’s an incredibly hard intersection to find.... balancing intensity, uniqueness, FUN, and a great story experience.
That’s where I think it’s setting a new bar.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Listen, we can argue all day about whether or not it raises the bar or meets the standard of DisneySea, but is Batuu more immersive and detailed than a giant box with trees painted on it, yes or no? Keeping in mind t that we're only discussing detail and immersion and never once did I say Hagrid's is a bad ride or that it isn't super fun.
Tom Morrow
Well-Known Member
Thank you. This is a good explanation.
I definitely agree about NFL. It is beautiful, but soulless. For the record, I don't feel that Pandora is soulless. It might be relatively "empty" for a theme park land, but is very effective in conveying an alien landscape.
Amidala
Well-Known Member
But again, if we’re judging the success of each land based on the ride experiences, where do the repurposed, sparingly themed Dragon Challenge & Flight of the Hippogriff factor into this discussion? I would argue FoP is vastly superior to FJ (not sure if this is controversial, but as fun as FJ is it completely fails to immerse me; I‘m very aware I’m watching a screen, whereas imo FoP took the needed steps to make guests feel like active participants in the experience) and I would take Navi over both opening day WWOHP coasters, and this coming from someone who has no interest whatsoever in Avatar and grew up eating, sleeping & breathing HP.
And to clarify, I agree NRJ was the result of a budget cut and expected much more from it (as many people did), but WWOHP isn’t above reproach in this respect either. It took Universal practically a decade to gut the rethemed Dueling Dragons and add a second original ride to WWOHP at IOA. If lack of attractions is the main concern, the land still has plenty of time to grow.