Does Universal Have Too Many Thrill Rides?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- Universal is known for its more thrilling attraction line-up and that's fine, but is it advantageous to them as a business? I think that for a park to be successful, it should be well balanced, providing a number of different attraction types that can be experienced by a variety of demographics. Today, I would like to speak about Universal's lack of accessibility and how it benefits all parks guests to add calmer dark rides, sit down shows and other, more accessible attractions.
Logo Background Source: / @freestuff-motiongraphics
Various Media Sources: pastebin.com/U...
Many of the music tracks found in my videos can be located on Epidemic Sound: www.epidemicso...
As always if you enjoy the content, please give the video a like. You can also hit the subscribe button and bell notification to know when new videos are released.
Follow me on 🐤 Twitter: / poseidonentmt
Follow me on ▶️Facebook: / poseidon-entertainment...
Follow me on 📷 Instagram: / poseidonentertainmentyt
i think one of the main reasons universal anchors in on the “thrill rides” is because disney doesn’t. before the Chapeck downfall (and probably after a decent time period after he’s gone), i might would guess universal thought the child/family audience would be harder to target with disney as their competition. on the other hand, disney fails, especially lately, to target teens/non disney adults so universal might see that as free game
Agreed my friend, disney fans are way too……soft? As far as I know, it’s simple math. Universal has better quality, a better community, and is nowhere near as overrated as disney. Universal>Disney
I have always felt that Universal believed it was not going to win over the little kids so they targeted their older siblings. That could change in the coming years...we have not been to Orlando since 2019. Disney unfortunately has made planning a trip very stressful with MyDisneyExperience. I loved the original paper FastPass and was not thrilled with the FastPass+ replacement. Now its successors are disliked. It doesn't help that food quality has gone down. A few places at EPCOT that we loved are now ignored. I can forgive most restaurants an occasional bad meal but when the check comes for a party of 4 (2015ish) for $400 and the steak meal you were waiting all year for is not enjoyable...that is remembered. I LOVED Tutto Italia but the last meal there was so-so. We did have FastPass+ for Slinky Dog and although the ride was pretty good, its duration seemed like the same as the Goofy Coaster. I could not imagine waiting in standby for that. The removal of Magical Express, checking your bags in at the resort when leaving, paying for resort parking & I am sure other things removed things that made Disney standout.
"Avatar Flight of Passage" is awesome and when Galaxy's Edge was being made, I had hoped they would have created an assault on the Death Star ride using "Avatar Flight of Passage" technology.
Right. Universal clearly has no desire to attract families with kids under 5-6. If they did you would see them refreshing areas like Suess Landing. Instead you see them building large coasters and things like HHN while Disney has a Halloween even that is clearly marketed as “not scary”. Universal knows that families aren’t going to be bringing their 2 year olds to HHN and let’s Disney have that crowd. That market only exists for those first 6 years of a child’s life. Contrast that to Universal parks which have rides that appeal to all ages over 6
Well said
@@billcame6991 We waited for almost 2 hours for Slinky when the estimated wait was only 50 minutes. It was awful. Disney execs have talked about 'unfavorable guests' in recent interviews and it's clear that means guests who don't shell out extra money for lightning lane and then spend all day shopping.
I think Universal not having a lot for small toddler and under children is one of the best things about it. Having been to universal and disney with both infants and not I still enjoyed my day at universal better as did the 3 year old toddler with me.
Universal has a far superior child swap system. Having you go through the line as a family and wait in an area at the load/unload area until after the family rides unlike disney where you can not stay together. This also allowed the toddler with us (who at 3 could ride everything but Hulk) could ride something twice in a row without waiting.
At Disney she became very upset at the constant lines and having to constantly wait for everything. She also didn't like the dark ride as much as more "thrilling" rides.
As a guest without children, I can say I did not miss having small children and babies everywhere running around
Literally. Not having screaming kids every where I turn is one of the things I enjoy most about universal. And I think MANY people feel that way
Universal could certainly add more dark rides and family rides. Bringing Secret Life of Pets and making rides with the Dreamworks properties could remedy this, as well as updating areas like Kid Zone and Suess Landing. One thing is for sure tho… Universal has got thrills mastered at this point. Certainly more than Disney. However, if they really wanna take the mouse down, gotta beat them at their own game…
They could make a spongebob attraction too could be a charming dark ride that could please kids and adults
@@luma4902 paramount owns nick/spongebob, not universal
@@johnnystang41 To be fair, WB owns Harry Potter, yet Universal has the theme park rights for it. They could do the same with SpongeBob
@@luma4902 there were plans for a SpongeBob land in Universal Beijing. The video’s on Theme Park Stop’s channel. I think it would be cool to have a SpongeBob ride
@@johnnystang41 didn’t stop them with Harry Potter. Or Marvel. Or Simpsons. Or Nintendo.
To be perfectly honest, I don't want to see every Orlando park doing the same thing. There should be one family resort, one park with thrill rides, maybe one that does both? I wouldn't want all the Orlando parks turning themselves into family-based attractions. You do make some good points, though, my parents who don't love thrill rides could only ride so many things
I think the problem is far more acute at USO than at IOA. ET shouldn’t be the only charming calm dark ride in the park.
Et isnt reallt calm that ride caught me off gaurd
@@NickyD lol what? That ride is super calm.
The fact that the Minions ride has a section for people who don't want to shaken around is great but it is only one out of many.
As someone who lives closer to Universal Studios Hollywood, I'm always jealous about how Universal Studios Orlando has so many better thrill rides than over here in Hollywood. However, I do appreciate seeing this perspective and how there is a need for a more balanced and accessible park at Universal Studios Orlando.
As someone who visited Orlando a few times, and went to Hollywood once I understand your jealousy! Even Mummy was downgraded.. I hope you visit Orlando some day! It’s easily one of my favorite theme parks.
@@IofSheikah I like to think of it as Universal Hollywood being more on the “Hollywood” side of things and universal Orlando is the more Florida, theme park and roller coaster experience. Like when tourists go to Hollywood they’re most likely looking for the more movies and tv oriented experience. But when a tourist goes to Florida they’re probably looking to go to a legitimate theme park.
Overall, Universal seem to be getting it right. I think you have exposed a crack in their armour with the demographic argument, but their vision of quality over profit will win over.
The Disney corporate empire mentality of, rip off the guests and reward the shareholders will fail.
30 years ago, Disney had a cheap rip off reputation. If something was described as "Mickey Mouse" it meant a cheap tacky rip off with poor quality. A return to type, perhaps?
I love your videos, and the intelligent analysis. Keep up the good work and thankyou 🙂
Ah yes the good old Mickey Mouse fix haha
I'm going to be extremely selfish here and admit that the more you listed things families with small children couldn't do together, the more I wanted to visit Universal Studios. Every time I visit a Disney park, one of the many things I notice is that families with small children very rarely care or think about anyone else around them. I've had kids bump into me, but the parents were too busy looking at their phones to notice. I've had a stroller attack my ankles one too many times. I've encountered an attraction I love while listening to a screaming young child. The last time I was at Disney, I noticed they were selling these stupid electric bubble makers and NONE of the parents that bought them seemed to care that all those bubbles were bugging the hell out of me, popping in my face and being generally annoying.
So as you listed attractions young children can't go on at Islands of Adventure and Universal Studios, I was making a list of attractions I could enjoy and not have them ruined by young children and their inattentive parents. And a trip to Universal seemed more and more awesome! I think it's okay for Universal to cater to an older crowd (though perhaps not the elderly, as you pointed out) and I honestly think they'd still do okay. But Disney is, naturally, quickly doing their best to price out all but the filthy rich families, so it will be more and more difficult for families with young children to find a theme park to take them. But when I see the weary, tired, parents who are obviously SO done with visiting the park, I have to wonder....is it even a good idea to take very young children to a theme park at all?
I'm hoping more and more families with small children say "NO, that sounds terrible" and decide to wait until their kids are older....or somehow figure out how to finance a Disney park vacation, seeing as the likelihood of being being able to afford to go to a Disney park is getting less and less every day. But as I admitted at the beginning of this comment: I'm being very selfish here HAHAHA
Oh, for sure, if you want a theme park without many kids, Universal is the way to go. I'm *sure* I must have seen kids at some point, especially around the carousel, but in my four trips there, I honestly can't remember many kids under the age of about 10 or so, and most guests are teens or adults.
Nah, you're not being selfish. I definitely feel the same way. Part of the issue is the demographics that WDW attracts though. When I visit Disneyland, I find that there's a dramatic difference in the culture of the park crowds. I don't know if I shared this story with you previously (I've posted it a lot), but a few months ago, I was waiting for my order in Chicken Guy and I saw a toddler standing on a table screaming while all of the adults in the party were ignoring her, looking down at their phones. I thought to myself that nothing like this would happen in Disneyland. It's certainly not perfect, but the crowds are far better behaved to a noticeable degree.
Sometimes I wonder if I'm a judgmental elitist, but no, many people just are so unpleasant to be around. Also, I absolutely hate the bubble wands as well, as in, I despise them to my core. I was having a great lunch at the outdoor lounge at the Brown Derby and wasn't a fan of bubbles blowing into my food.
You're not being selfish at all - it THOSE parents who are being selfish!
So i've been to Disney a lot as a guest as well as worked there for a bit. I've seen someone fall on top of their baby. Another time, a parent lost control of their stroller and we had to catch it. We also had to keep kids from getting into water because the mom was busy running after another kid. That and the young kids feeling pressured to go on rides with their parents even though they're clearly afraid. I honestly think it's best to wait a bit before bringing kids to theme parks.
I agree with the waiting for them to be older part. I know people who have celebrated their baby's first birthday by taking them to Disney. What tf is a one year old supposed to be doing at a theme park except for pooping, crying, and making the parents miserable? If I were a parent, I'd wait until they're about 10-12, so they can enjoy everything and at least be of proper height for rides.
My parents don't ride thrill rides. At Disney they have parades, dark rides, fireworks shows, singing/dancing shows, and great restaurants. They can plan a full vacation at Disney. Universal doesn't currently offer that.
Edit: also at Disney in summer the heat never bothered me cuz every every hour or so we were indoors for a dark ride, show, or food.
Go to Disney then. I think its great that there is a park that caters to older kids, teens and adults. Considering the park is packed year round, there is no reason to water down the thrills
@@90sshuffle exactly, my parents aren’t huge roller coaster people ( high blood pressure ) but universal rides give them the thrills they used to love in a much safer experience. Plus, my parents aren’t into their self described “ kiddie “ stuff like parades or shows anymore, and i think the rides are a large appeal to older guests who maybe arent into the thrills at parks like six flags but don’t want the more child oriented offerings at disney
I enjoy the thrill rides. As others have already stated, its Universals way of competing with Disneyland. I just don't enjoy bland motion simulators or 3D. Would kill for Hagrid's motorbike or a velocicoaster in Hollywood.
yeah, we just need anything for Hollywood imo. there’s like 8 noticeable rides and half of them are dark rides and motion simulators. only good rides are mummy (I didn’t go on it, just heard it’s good) hp and forbidden journey and Jurassic
Honestly I love Universal's identity and think that some calmer dark rides and more shows would help compliment it. I like going to Universal but I really think they can do more than just thrilling, especially at Islands of Adventure. I had never had an interest in the Bourne series, didn't even know about the stunt show till I went last year, and was completely blown away by it. The Florida parks could definitely use more more shows certainly since I get the feeling from people that they think it's using up space for another thrill ride.
I'm surprised that the Sinbad theater is sitting empty. I've seen it, but don't recall much. Consensus seemed to be that it was pretty mediocre though. I would really like to see them rework it into something else.
@@PoseidonEntertainment I imagine they’ll end up filling both of those theaters in 2024 or 2026 to help spread out the Epic Universe crowds. They don’t really NEED the Lost Continent to have attractions after adding Hagrid’s and VelociCoaster to that side of the park. At least not yet.
I’m hoping for the rumored Legend of Zelda land to replace The Lost Continent.
I hate that family friendly is almost always code for “toddler rides.” Pirates of the Caribbean is a great example of a family friendly ride that appeals to every demographic. Imagine The Mummy or Indiana Jones without all of the speed and throwing you around. That would appeal to everyone as well. We need more of those along with the intense thrill rides and the rides designed for small children.
Went to Epcot when I was younger with my wheelchair bound grandmother, took her on test track because I didn’t know what it was, and she had the most unwantingly thrilling rides of her life at 82 lmfao
Omg 😂
My question is, how could you possibly miss the track passing above your head at the entrance?!
@@Eudomac99 my aunt only realised it when i pointed it out too, so i albsolutely can believe people miss it lol
I 100% agree they need more dark rides. I enjoy Velosicoaster and Hagrids but the screen rides make me sick. It’s nice to do thrill, chill out on some dark rides and then go back to thrill.
I was shocked when I heard the yoshi ride had a height requirement. I would think that the purpose of that ride would have been the only one in Super Nintendo World not to have height requirements. There is rumors of shows coming to How to Train Your Dragon land and the new Wizarding World land at Epic Universe, excited for those.
36" doesn't eliminate many people. 2 or 3 year olds are very commonly at or above that height.
I feel that average Universal stans would expect thrill rides at this point, I feel that there would be many dissapointed in Universal announcing more family rides. Even in nintendo world, there've been many guests dissapointed in the lack of thrill rides despite nintendo land looking amazing.
I grew up going to Disney as a kid but my husband didn’t. We went to Disney World for the first time together in February this year and he was a little less than impressed lol. He prefers thrill rides so we’re going to Universal this weekend. I think he’ll have a much better time! 😊
universal coulddd add more family attractions but i kinda feel like part of universals main draw and why it’s so appealing is that people of more mature ages can enjoy the whole park. i think they should still stick with a higher thrill to family ratio if they do add more calm attractions
Personal I think universal has it spot-on when it comes to rides. When they say family rides I think they talk about ones with older family’s 10/11 years plus as this age off children would think a lot off the rides at Disney are babyish. Yes I know adults lot Disney but that because it takes us back to our childhood and the cartoons and films we use to watch. I personally can’t think off any attraction at universal that takes me back to my childhood. PS I would like to see more shows at universal
@Matthew Polsgrove The Cat I. The Hat is good for all ages, I even like that ride and last time I went (labor day weekend) it felt like it spun just a but faster than when I went November 2021. I honestly still enjoy that ride and I'm 13.
While i love them, my entire family (and 18 year old, a 16 year old, and 2 45 year olds) ended up having to skip some of our most anticipated rides because the nausea was unbearable in all the screen rides, but only at universal? I dont know what it is about their screens in particular that reall turns our stomachs but it was BRUTAL! And none of us are know to get motion sickness
I'm very prone to motion sickness. Very prone. A 1 hour car ride is enough to make me ill. All I have to do is take some non drowsy Dramamine before the day starts, and I'm fine. Never been sick from any ride at universal, with the exception of the hulk once when I was like 12. I made the mistake of eating a piece of pizza in the que.
You hit it right on the nail with the fact that Universal in the past actually has made accessible slow moving dark-rides (such as Jaws and Kongfrontation) very thrilling for most audiences. I hope they will continue to expand with that into Epic Universe. My family has seniors who would have loved to experience Jaws when it existed. However, nearly all in our family can't tolerate intense coasters. Jaws wasn't jarring, but was fun and thrilling. I hope they can eventually look at maybe moving with building a thrilling boat dark ride attraction based on the Creature from the Black Lagoon. Universal needs an answer to "Pirates". Also, there is so much more parks in general can do with trackless technology or maybe a trackless all-terrain jeep adventure. Add to that, enhancing physical sets, pyrotechnics, and animatronics to take slower moving attractions and dark rides to even more immersive levels.
More sit down shows will be important once more guests start coming. They are great capacity sinks as the time a large number of people are in them, less are in line for the other attractions.
it's really nice to see someone cover accessibility in the theme parks + go into depth on this balance- as someone who prefers thrills myself i sometimes forget to sit down and think about this stuff
Coming from someone who does get motion sickness fairly easy, most of the rides at universal are not only very sickening but also very jerky. That’s why I’ll always prefer something like passage of flight, yes there’s a lot of motion on that ride but I still enjoy it due to how smooth the overall experience is (AKA, not feeling like I’m being thrown around in a metal cart)
I always imagined Universal as the park trying to nab the older demographic Eisner wanted around the end of his tenure at Disney. I do agree that balancing the park would not only add more appeal for families, but potentially even spread out crowds in the parks. The Secret Life of Pets ride in the other park would be something that should be brought over to the Florida park, if they want to appeal to more children, which they clearly do if they’re building another minion’s ride. Personally, I don’t know what IP would fit a ‘fun for all ages’ ride greater than the minions or nintendo, but I imagine Universal has the rights to so many properties, they could find a perfect fit.
We took our youngest to Disney World for the first time when he was one week old. I’ll never forget the huge smile on his face when we sped out of the Tomorrowland People Mover station. He’s always been a thrill seeker and being tall for his age he’s always been able to ride whatever is age appropriate. Now he’s 10 and he loves Universal, Busch Gardens, and Cedar Point.
There’s nothing wrong with filling a specific niche. Different parks appeal to different age groups, different people, and different stages of life. That’s fine.
I’d like to see Universal diversify their lineup a bit but without sacrificing thrill rides. I think Epic Universe is a step in that direction.
I am a coaster fiend and i hate kids, but I will say, Twister used to be my favorite universal ride before I finally hit the height requirement. I love that universal is not flooded with kids (even though teens can be almost as annoying 😅) but those experience based rides they had in the '00s were genuinely thrilling enough to leave out kids in strollers but still include the elderly and those with disabilities. It would be really nice to see more rides based on special effects like when they first started.
This is such a fascinating topic. Here's another accessibility issue - WATER. At Disney, almost every ride is set up in a vehicle that allows me to bring my backpack on with me, including my sunscreen and water bottle. When I went for a Universal day in 2019, I packed the same backpack I brought to Disney World and found that not only was I not permitted to bring it with me into the queue, it was too big for the free lockers, leaving me to pay a dollar every time I wanted to ride a ride, and sometimes stand outside without access to the things that keep me safe. This is the number one thing keeping me hesitant about going back to Universal, even though I do want to experience more of the coasters that Disney doesn't give me... that and Hagrid's not being able to support a person of my size (if any fictional character's ride should be able to....)
I suppose I didn't touch on it, but I agree as well. I understand why bags can't go on attractions with the metal detectors, but otherwise the lockers are just annoying. I appreciate their commitment to safety, but it's also nice to not deal with the hassle.
@@PoseidonEntertainment Like, I don't see any reason my bag couldn't sit on the floor of the ride vehicle at my feet on something like Minions, but if I remember right they had me store it. Same with Mummy, which doesn't invert. Meanwhile on Rock n Rollercoaster I loop my bag's strap around my ankle and away I go, inversions and all.
I appreciate the thought provoking content. Great vid as always. I agree, more balance is good for a park. I also think they are trying to appeal to a different demographic than Disney and that could be a winning business decision or maybe not. Only time will tell. As for me, I'd rather go to Universal and can't wait for Universal Monsters
I actually thought that this script was quite sloppy, but I still appreciate the support lol.
Universal could definitely use a few slow moving omni-mover or boat rides, as well as a few shows at Epic Universe and Islands of Adventure. I wonder whether they are overlooking this or if they have consciously decided to focus more towards older audiences and thrills.
The abundance of thrill rides is what always kinda shied me away from Universal. While I'm able-bodied and don't mind getting shaken up and a mild coaster, I am in fact, a wuss and don't like the scarier/more intense rides. They're like my horror movies. Damn I wish I could go on a legit coaster because people talk about them like religious experiences. I find the stomach drop sensation entirely too repellent tho. I'm sure I could have a good time as it stands. Likely, I'd go on the Spider-Man ride a few times because it looks like a lot of fun, but I'd have a better time at the Magic Kingdom alone due to how many more rides appeal to my tender sensibilities. Now I think it's more important that Universal diversify for the sake of younger children, people prone to motion sickness, and the like, but I think it'd help to catch the interest of the much more common wuss, too.
I used to be afraid of coasters...universal is what made me not afraid. Between the hulk and the mummy they cured my fear and made me a coaster lover instead.
I absolutely love the direction universal Orlando is going. Been going since I was a child and recently went with my brothers and girlfriend (I'm about to be 30). Loved the park and the detail they put into it. Disney seems to be going downhill and Universal its on it's way up. Def will be going back soon
Some would say "Universal is for teens, adults and families with older children, it makes no sense to have rides for small kids. That's what Disneyland is for". But that right there is the problem - there's a reason *millions* of families go to Disneyland Florida & Anaheim every year, because they have families of small children and those parks have so much to do for them. By not having anywhere near as many attractions for them, Universal are needlessly sacrificing market share away to Disney, when they could be attracting the very guests that Disneyland banks on for its attendance.
Honestly for me and my family, we honestly love Universal having more of a focus on thrill rides. It does suck some people can’t ride stuff but we just prefer the thrills of Universal than the more “general audience” approach Disney goes for
personally, the lack of screaming toddlers and babies and abundance of actual rides beyond the thrill of a golf cart is some of what makes universal one of my favourite parks. if you like a calmer experience or have young children or elders in your party, just go to disney! although also i think the whole motion sickness thing is a bit overplayed, as both my disabled dad and very motion sick uncle had a blast. i do agree that more good shows and more and better rides in general are always good
Totally agree. I like visiting the park with my grown children who enjoy the roller coasters but would love to see more rides for someone with back issues so they don't want as jarring an experience. The same could be said for the Sea World/Busch Parks. Lots of new coasters but less for me to do.
I think Universal just needs more slow moving dark rides overall, especially seeing how fantastic Secret Life of Pets: Off the Leash is. I think however, having a height requirement at all on these rides by them is ridiculous. Can the restraint systems on rides like SLOP, Yoshi, and Cat in the Hat not simply be seatbelts? Like I've always preferred Universal but Disney uses mostly seatbelts on their dark rides because that's really all they need.
This is the biggest issue by far, in my opinion. I don’t know what’s holding them back from having more rides without height limits.
I don't really understand that either. If seatbelts on the Tower of Terror can work, then why not on the SLOP or Yoshi attractions?
I was so scared of expedition Everest when I was a kid that I didn’t go on it when the first two times I went to Disney. I only finally rode it when I went again many years later.
There's something magical whenever I see a new Poseidon doing Universal vid. Thanks as always for the hard work my friend.
I think they should continue to add these thrill rides. This is what sets them a part from Disney. If you want non-thrilling, family dark rides for young kids, go to Disney. If you want more thrilling rides for older kids/teens/adults, go to Universal. Even when I was a kid, probably around 7/8 I started to prefer Universal because of the more thrilling experiences. Rides like Fast and Furious and Fallon are so hated on because they try to cater to those seeking non-thrills and aren't executed that well.
Good analysis of many issues with kid, elderly, differently abled attractions. My sister in law still remembers when I said: you'll be fine on MIB... oops, she gets motion sick. Also, some have lowered access due to narrowness, tighter turns, uneven or sloping ground.
A possible data input on bigger shows: a manager for Fear Factor was interviewed on Unofficial Univ Podcast, and quoted 100 people to fully staff FF (~8 million/yr roughly for personnel)
That's a crazy number that I would have never assumed for a show that small. I have to wonder what something like Bourne might cost.
@@PoseidonEntertainment On the podcast, the employee number grows due to 7days x 10 hrs, specialization of the safety and stunt people (can't just slide in a TM from another ride), and unseen folks to process and manage the 6 volunteers. Another fun story was how they sometimes used TM from another ride to be the "volunteer" - to have enough early in the day or low crowds
I think Universal could add more dark indoor themed rides and shows, but other than that I think they're doing a fantastic job. There is stuff for kids and adults to do there, and Citywalk even has nightclubs and bars for when the kiddies go to sleep at the hotel, so a great balance. I love it way more than Disney these days, and I so want a season pass next year to go with my family more often.
Well I guess I'll find out soon enough what their attraction intensity distribution is. I've been to WDW about a decade ago, but I'm visiting both Universal Orlando parks for the first time this October. As both a coaster enthusiast and someone from the west coast, I'm definitely going to ride everything I can.
I know a lot of people (especially teens and young adults) gravitate toward parks with more thrills, and if a park wants to focus on a specific demographic, I'm fine with that. However, I agree with this video - a well-balanced mix certainly benefits the park as it widens their clientele. Also, I (a person who loves thrill rides) would be more likely to go to a park with more to offer, especially if traveling with others. Going to Disneyland with my senior citizen parents was a fantastic experience since we could do so much together, which was the whole point of the vacation in the first place. Even going to Disneyland alone, there were times I just wanted to cool off and take a break on something quieter before hitting the more thrilling offers, making the Disney parks rather exceptional in that area. I've never been to Universal, but if they want to stay highly competitive, they need to consider everyone's needs.
Cat In The Hat really needs that height requirement. Last time I was there, I was shocked by the lateral gees we were pulling as we were rattled around on that track.
It also spins a lot less than it used to. I at least understand the height requirement there.
People complained for years that it was all dark rides and screen rides so they built all these new thrill rides and now the park is balanced in my opinion
The problem with the term family coaster is that it's just too broad. You can make a good argument that FireChaser Express at Dollywood, Cheetah Hunt at Busch Gardens Tampa, and Mako at SeaWorld Orlando are all family coasters.
It's odd to me that people consider Cheetah Hunt a family coaster with the inversion. You make a good point.
@@PoseidonEntertainment The reason Cheetah Hunt would still be a family coaster is because the whole ride isn’t super thrilling despite the launches and inversion.
One advantage Disney has is that even their more “intense” rides (Splash Mountain, Big Thunder, Space Mountain, and to a lesser extent due to leg room, Mine Train) are accessible to big people. All of the thrill rides and even less thrilling rides like any HP ride besides Flight of the Hippogriff are size prohibitive. That said, the reason for this is due to safety so it makes sense. You want to make sure that the ride can contain the rider safely as well as handle the physics of the train balance properly. Disney rides are less affected by that.
GOD I WISH WE HAD THOSE THRILL RIDES at Hollywood it’s only family coasters (besides the mummy) I hope they bring more coaster here
I watched this right after your video about why Dinosaurs is better than Indiana Jones (which is a couple years old by now) and what a change in tone between tough if your kids thinks it’s scary and how can Universal better serve kids and the elderly. I appreciated the difference. Your tales are always interesting, even if I don’t always agree. I appreciate that you are not in the business of helping people plan trips to Disney parks, and it allows a bit more objective perspective on how Disney is failing it’s customers these days than you can find on channels that have more invested interest in you going there (I’m thinking channels like Disney Food Blog, although they are great for what they are trying to do).
*your videos
I was really surprised at the number of family rides for 'young kids' that had the height requirement. But I'm also considering the point you made about some OD rides not having the restrictions and I'm wondering if ride safety standards evolving has anything to do with it. I can't imagine an attraction like the OG Kong wouldn't have a 36" restriction if built today. I'd be curious to see what the regulations were like. Love the channel!
I've seen a lot of complaints about the restraints for The Secret Life of Pets and Yoshi's Adventure. It's definitely on the manufacturer side of things, but I have no idea to what degree regulation plays in this. Disney still seems able to skirt these restraints by using seatbelts.
I enjoy your videos and agree with your point on increasing attraction balance. I’m currently planning a trip with my older sister. She is a big fan of the wizarding world but because of her general health and motion sickness problems, I anticipate we’ll pass on multiple rides; only taking in the queue for Hogwarts Castle and Gringotts.
Are you aware of the tours they do? I've been told it depends on staffing, but I've occasionally gotten lucky and they'll have an extra team member who can escort you through the queue and tell you cool facts about the attraction.
100% agree. Too many of their non coaster rides are simulator/screen based & the addition of shows or slower experience rides would help regulate the lines & wait times (which are ridiculous on most days) The necessity to always put items in a locker is also a problem. Families with younger children have to purchase a larger locker even if they are ride swapping to accommodate a diaper bag or backpack.
Here's the thing: Why are you bringing a 2 year old to a theme park? theyre not gonna remember it, and whether its you or you and your partner, its unlikely youll be going on anything together.
@4:49
I would simply argue that Universal has forfieted that younger audience and gone for the preteen/teen crowd as this is a crowd that Disney neglects. Does that make sense?
This was a very informative and great view of Universals Orlando Parks. I do agree that Universal could use more high quality dark rides and shows.
I'm 61 now and I recently went to Silver Dollar City and went on several coasters. It was still a lot of fun, but I'm very aware that I don't know how much longer I'm going to be able to keep going on these rides. I think it would be good for universal to be getting more non-thrill ride experiences. It's amazing to me that a Seuss themed area would have any restrictions on age - sounds like very poor ride planning.
I don’t remember height limits at universal studios. I was able to go on all the rides even when I first started going there in 1990/ 1991 when I was one and two years old.
You were able to go on the hulk (or do you mean hollywood)😊
Very great points, definitely lacking in the theaters, plus they’re people eaters. The empty theater in Toonland is absurd, they could put anything there!
I think Universal has done an excellent job of providing a high-end theme park experience for older guests, and they don't really need to change. This may sound cold, but if some guests have a problem with height requirements or the intensity of the rides, that's on them. They should've done their research before they went to the park. Plus, Disney World is not far; they could just go there if they want a more family-oriented experience.
Side-note: I do think there should be more family-oriented theme parks, and it's kind of weird that Disney has cornered the market in that regard. The only other parks I can think of that are good for little kids are Legoland and that new Peppa Pig theme park that recently opened. 😆
This is seriously the BEST thing about Universal.
I hope they build more dark ride, not that super childish one. My heart beat so fast and I can’t breath on thrill rides (I’d try before and I feel like passing away in any second). I’m 18, it’s difficult for me to visit there with my friends and family because I can’t always wait for them outside for the whole day.
While Disneyland is great, there’s an amount of dark rides I can go on. Also, those dark ride is suitable for any ages. And I still love the themes in Universal Studio. So it’s not like “Just go to Disneyland then” I can’t see Harry Potter in Disneyland.
I would never take my infant or even toddler to any theme park. My parents took me to Disney World when I was both 3 and 7, while I went on my own at 18. I do not recall anything I did at Disney World the first time around, the second time I still remember some things well, and the third time I definitely remember. That's what's kind of stupid about taking a very young child or especially an infant to any theme park: they'll forget everything that happened there and the family memory is lost. Universal knows its target demo is older than Disney's, and adding these sorts of rides to cater to those 5 and under would likely ostracize their main demos, while these new rides help them stand out from Disney and make me, someone now in his mid-20s, have an itch to get back to Universal, where I haven't been since I was 16.
So many people go to Universal for this reason, rides that are more fun than the boring Disney rides.
I would be curious if you did a reaction video to Disneys D23 expo
I am 100% on board with this. I'm not much of a thrill type of person, my 1st visit to Universal, Twister and Disaster were some of my favorite experiences in the park.
Going now, I don't really get the same feeling. I know there are a ton of people who are not thrill seekers and are prone to motion sickness, these seems like a big market they are missing
I think it works fine for Universal to offer a lot of thrill type rides that Disney doesn't have a lot of. I'm always down for more dark rides though so I wouldn't be against them adding a few more tamer rides either.
From personal experience it has always felt like universal focuses a lot more on accessibility than Disney recently. I’ve attended a handful of industry safety conferences and universals presence is a lot louder that the Disney one. I also have a friend who is disabled and goes to both parks. She has told me universal always feels way more understanding and happy to accommodate. These are obviously all anecdotal and don’t say much to the experience of very small children but it’s something I’ve noticed. I also think by means of IP, Universal naturally targets an older crowd that Disney and that forms how they develop their rides
I’d also like to add that normally the height requirements are based on who properly fits in their restraint system. To simplify it, they calculate Gs experienced on a ride then pick an appropriate restraint and if an average person under 3 feet cannot properly fit in the restraint then it’s a safety concern. So while maybe a small child could ride cat in the hat, it’s considered a hazard if they can exit the vehicle and Universal doesn’t want the liability
Last week I returned from my first trip to WDW and Universal in Florida. Whilst Universal had better thrill rides, and the best themed area in The Wizarding World, it had little else that made me want to stay there. I think what Disney are better at isn't a balance of rides, but a more consistent level of theming in the areas. Universal Studios definitely feels like a studio backlot but to its detriment, only Simpsons and Diagon Alley felt properly themed. Attractions bounce from Despicable Me to Bourne to Transformers with little change in thematic design. I guess you could argue this does reflect the cacophany of typical film studios, but for a theme park its quite disorienting.
I feel like they do that to not be directly compared to the dark rides and family rides of Disney. But I do wish they had more like that
Ironically enough, I think Universal Studios Japan has the opposite problem in not having enough thrill rides, but specifically flat rides: You've got your 2 big coasters in Flying Dinosaur & Hollywood Dream, Jurassic Park & Jaws for water rides, dark/indoor attractions like Spiderman, Minions, Mario Kart and Harry Potter Forbidden Journey, and spectacle shows with Waterworld & the Universal Monsters Musical, but there aren't any flat rides like a launched freefall tower, giant frisbee, star-flyer or inverted ship. It's an odd omission when you consider the park has plenty of space for relatively small installations that can thrill guests.
I think universal isn’t trying to compete with Disney. The parks seem more adult oriented and it’s worked so far. The big eye opener is Halloween Horror nights and how much of a draw it it’s.
I only made it half way through the video... Yes you are correct. I am a Coaster Enthusiast and a Universal Stan. I want more coasters, I want them longer, taller, faster, but that won't draw in more families like they NEED. They need a lot more kids rides and shows to compete with Disney. Epic is a step in the right direction but even then, it's probably only Yoshi in the entire park for really young kids. They need classic Disney style dark rides for the young ones. Just done better than Disney. Bring in the masses and we will get other big attractions. Have to pay the bills some how.
And I agree with the thoughts on what Universal focuses compared to Disney. It's even worse when you look at the west coast side of things. I would find it hard to bring my kids to Universal over DL. Growing up myself with younger siblings and going to the parks, I did enjoy Universals parent swap option more than Disney's. Getting to essentially ride twice back to back with each parent was amazing.
I think that's part of why SNW is opening there. I agree though, Disneyland is the easy choice over USH.
@@PoseidonEntertainment It'll be exciting to see that open here soon at the original park first in the states. A good trial run so to speak for the US crowd. I do hope that even with the confined space and only one attraction, it's a success there. It definitely is drawing me in to actually go visit that park in Hollywood.
Universal is great the way it is! Our albeit very tall and disney coaster veteran rode all but velocicoaster, rockit, and hulk at 6yo. By 8yo loves it all.
While I agree to an extent, I don't see why on earth parents would bring a child under 5, let alone a 2 year old, to a theme park like Universal or Disney. They're not even going to remember anything, and nothing beyond the most gentle of rides is suitable for a borderline infant. I went to Disneyland once in my life around the age of maybe 8 and I still barely had any memories of it as a teenager. If families are going to spend that much money on a vacation, they should wait until they can actually get some bang for their buck
I think it's all in the preparation as parents or the severely elderly unable to handle whatever rides the parks offer. The other part of the experiences like stores, hotel, walking and food also are key in deciding where to go.
We just went to Universal for the 1st time a month ago. As a family of 4 with two children aged 7 & 9. Before we booked I looked on their website and measured both of their heights so they both could get on any ride at the parks. That insured everyone could get on the rides together. You need to read and watch people like yourself before you go which I did. We waited for the kids to be old enough (5 & 7) to go to Disney because we wanted them to enjoy, enjoy ourselves and not deal with screaming kids disturbing others all day in the scorching heat. We are not bringing our 2 year old to a park. To us its bad parenting to put that on others to have to endure. In doing a lot of homework just to navigate a "Modern Disney" you better know what's involved before just showing up as is Universal in that way. All these elements make up the total experience. That starts at what hotel you choose and why.
We stayed Lowes Pacific which included Express pass. We did so just for that reason, something Disney doesn't offer regardless of the room you book. Having arrived early in the AM to get to the park before it opened we checked the bags in no time, was throughly explained how it all works and off to the park standing in line before it opened within 45 minutes at the front of the entrance. We stopped to buy some lanyards so we had our Express passes handy and wouldn't get lost at a Universal store vs. having to buy the DIS watch for over $100.
We went on every ride and some multiple times without issue except the kiddie rides. We had no line, we were able to go more then once if time permitted and wanted to, very few screaming babies/toddlers, people generally more respectable about your personal space, less crowded, polite and the staff seemed far happier to assist if needed. We all had a great time and have already booked another trip. The entire park has a different feel and you don't feel rushed or constantly looking at your iPhone trying to navigate where to go next with the convoluted system.
Out of all the rides ET was the only one we all didn't like that was boring, a waste of time and old. There was no line in either one so even so it was still only 15 minutes. Watching Spielberg clearly 35 years younger or so really hammered it home. We also didn't understand Transformers but was at least interesting since we're former NYer's. The food at the park was far, far better quality at a lesser price and better run. We were amazed by how they replicated the Simpson's and enjoyed that ride a lot. Men in Black was also a lot of fun. Harry Potter was nothing short of one of the best rides (3 X's in row in the morning) ever. The village was outstanding. The couple of items we bought in the morning were delivered to our room so we didn't;t have to walk around with them all day.
We got to ride the Rip N Roller coaster during the day and last ride at night which is completely different unexpected exciting experience. A coaster at night when you can't see where and what's happening next at a high rate of speed. Sign us up for more of those! This is part of the reason we went was for these types of rides Disney just has too far and few of and you can't even buy a true fast pass. We're just not going to buy Genie+ and then another $15 per person per ride. Epcot which I used to love for instance has 1 ride we all loved. The food which used to be the best was disgusting and incredibly overpriced like the rest of DIS. IF you're looking for slow and oriented towards all age inclusive there's your park. Just be prepared to sit or stand and wait forever. Rude crowds galore with shows to keep you off the rides.
I can see your point about more rides for dark, slow rides but we don't personally need it to change but just continue expanding as they are planning. We'd love to see ET transformed into Space ride like the trip to Mars in Epcot. Another thrill seeking, dark ride not for kiddie. To me, I don't see why Universal would change it's course.
Learn before you go. Universal is catering to people like us, kids of the right height, younger and older adults. That's a very large demographic. It's not for a 1 yr old or a 82 yr old with a heart condition. Then again neither is Disney if you think about the lines, crowds, heat during several months, food and the constant waiting just for a bus. If it rains? Forget it. It's going to take an hour to just leave especially if you're unfortunate enough to be in Magic Kingdom.
We would actually like more coasters and wild indoor one's like the Simpsons, Mummy, Fallon or Minion's. None of us or our friends had any issue. If you do just skip that one or maybe it's not the right place for you. Universal is building a bridge with the multi generational. Disney is figuring out how to extract the most money from the wallet while spending as least as possible on painted, themed characters made of plywood. Star Wars? Boring. If that were in Universal it would be jaw dropping most likely. The new exclusive Star wars hotel? Boring and WAY overpriced.
The kids have zero interest in going back to Disney which is why we already booked Universal for 5 days. They are the present and future guests. They don't even want to go to Disney even though they like the movies and characters as do we. The rides to them are boring and they definitely don't want to stand in line for 20 minutes which we would be lucky to do for a slow, dark ride. I love it's a small world, wife hates it and the kids don't want to stand in line forever event though they love it too just for that. If Universal had something similar we would use the Express pass and do it once regardless of no wait time wanting to instead spend that time on more thill rides. It's the wrong place overall for their parks in my opinion. They want a different crowd and it's who it's been built for to come back time and again without getting boring. If you think about it that's what they have done since it opened. It's only been improved. That formula works for the most part so why would they change?
If they were to do what you're proposing then you now have an overcrowded park trying to cater to every age. Now the entire experience for everyone is ruined not enhanced. They are warning people upfront, hey look this isn't for all and all rides aren't for everyone. That's what they do and do it exceptionally well. Well run business's find their niche, cater to it and listen to their customers.
Then there is the matter of value for your money. Universal is 1/3rd the price even with staying in their overpriced room. The annual pass at Universal for a family of 4 is about $1,600. They don't even offer and annual option for the Express pass. That you have to buy daily which is done purposely since that for 1 day when we went was almost $1,000. Insane yes and if they are smart should change it so you can buy both at a reasonable price. If they take away the included one with the hotel we probably don't go back. Hopefully they don't follow the DIS model since that builds long term trust and relationships. They should also offer an all inclusive package with the park tickets too.
For the cost of Disney we could take a pretty much 1st class vacation to Europe, the Caribbean or elsewhere. Because Universal offers what it does and makes it clear is why we are going back within 9 months time and spending more. If you put your idea into action we might not.
I think that your basic assumption is wrong. They aren’t necessarily competing with Disney on Disney‘s terms, they are competing with Disney on universal’s terms. Apparently Universal correctly feels that the underserved market in Orlando isn’t the child unable to ride a 36 inch height requirement ride but perhaps they’re older brothers, sisters and parents that like a little more thrill. I also believe that universal knows exactly what they are doing and they are building thrill rides because their guests want Thrill rides.
Part of my thinking behind this was their new park and all of the hotels that will come with it. It seems that they're trying to appear as a worthy multi-day resort comparable to Disney and so it made sense to me to include some more accessible attractions. Perhaps not more than a few, but I think that it would expand their reach with what consumers they would attract.
I have severe motion sickness, despite loving them parks. When I went to Universal in Florida back in 2014 I rode two rides that both made me vomit profusely before giving up and not going on anymore rides. I don't plan on ever going back because I cannot get my money's worth so to speak. If universal actually implements the changes that you suggest, I would definitely go back and I think it's really nice that I'm not the only one who thinks Universal should expand the kinds of rides and attractions that they offer. Thank you for the video!
when I went to Universal Florida back in 1994, it was completely flipped, 3/4ths of the attractions were shows, half in doors and only a small number of "thrill rides". With plenty of attractions for young children that was age apropriate. Who the heck brings there 4 year old to see a Bourne stunt ride? That's about a quarter turn away from a freak'n Friday the 13th Slasher ride. They need more kid friendly attractions for sure.
Great comprehensive video! It helps bring light to the fact that accessibility is indeed an issue - and how many don't care, as most coaster enthusiasts are in their teens or twenties, abled, and generally able to experience it all without restrictions.
Agreed on a lot of these points. Definitely to balance the experience and better compete with Disney, slower dark rides are the way to go. However, I wouldn't want to see Universal swing too far towards family rides at the risk of jeopardizing what they've truly mastered, which is the art of the themed thrill ride. No park can compare to what they are doing there (thinking of recent examples like Hagrid's and Velocicoaster)
My argument in the video wasn't really clear, but I definitely don't think that they should step away from thrill rides. I would like to see more family oriented, accessible attractions in general, but more lightly sprinkled in to the current and future offerings. It's the balance of attraction experiences that matter I think.
@@PoseidonEntertainment Yes totally agreed there - a better balance could be achieved. I wish there would be some additional investment in Seuss Landing, as I feel that land has so much untapped potential, particularly for families
@@justinkerley1407 Definitely agreed. As much as I would like to see the Grinch coaster, I think that another family dark ride would actually make more sense for the area.
@@PoseidonEntertainment Our family just visited Seuss Landing for the first time, and, despite some areas of neglect, I was blown away by the theming, storytelling, and overall experience. It makes me wonder "what if" they just invested more...
As someone with severe motion sickness I can still enjoy the rides as long as I take pills throughout the day. But I understand the outlook bc even with them I still feel queasy after certain rides. Also there is nothing my elderly father would be able to go on and It's sad. Slow moving dark rides are also my favorite
I appreciate you bringing up this topic because I went to universal when I was 11 and found it difficult to find rides I could go on. I was a bit of a wimp with coasters and thrill rides and I only remember going on men in black, Shrek 4D and twister at the studios park.
I agree with everything you said here, it’s understandable why Universal didn’t choose to go for the younger market while Disney had that on lock. but now that Disney is messing up and getting their fans mad, and Universal continues to grow, I think epic universe is a good chance to explore this market.
The biggest problem with this is the supposition that the toddler crowd is a worthwhile audience for Universal. Disney parents take their toddlers to Disney parks because THEY like Disney parks. Toddlers can sit in a wading pool and be about as excited as they would be at the Magic Kingdom. But look around at the Disney-based websites and almost none of them recommend taking a 3-year-old, and only a tiny percentage even suggest 4-year-olds. Most say the 5-7 age group, and these are the websites that treat Disney like heroin! And with prices over $100 a day for a 3-year-old, many Disney fans are starting to agree with these websites.
But that doesn't even matter because the vast majority of 4-year-olds are over 36" (they average 40"). There are only 4 rides at USF that a 40" kid couldn't ride. Unfortunately there are still 8 at IOA that would be off-limits, but we are still talking about a 4-year old. Add 3" when they are 5 and we're down to 6 rides, with one of them just requiring one-inch heels (not that I would suggest this!!). But that still doesn't really matter because what lands make them the most money? What lands have driven attendance at both parks higher than California Adventure (since 2016) and less than a million away from both the Studios and Epcot? The Wizarding Worlds which, as you said, have very little for small children yet they've juiced attendance from 2009 - before Hogsmeade - to 2019 by more than 5 million for each park. The only Disney park that can even get close to claiming that is Animal Kingdom, which managed just over 4M. And it's not just Potter. Almost everything else they've added in this timeframe - more Springfield, Jimmy Fallon, Fast & Furious, Despicable Me, Bourne Stuntacular, Transformers, Skull Island, VelociCoaster - has been aimed at older kids and adults, except for Kang & Kodos. Universal seems to know EXACTLY what it's doing.
Even so, Epic Universe is clearly planning on being Universal Orlando's "Magic Kingdom". While not aimed at that useless toddler bracket, it's certainly keeping the thrills to a minimum. Five coasters and not one of them will rival VelociCoaster or Incredible Hulk. There will be kiddie magnets in Super Nintendo World and How to Train Your Dragon, but Wizarding World 3 will be aimed at the same older-kid-to-adult crowd that has Universal swimming in butterbeer money. As will the Classic Monsters land, which clearly was chosen due to all the adults who have made Halloween Horror Nights the premier Halloween event on both coasts. But the other two play to this crowd as well. How to Train Your Dragon is clearly the most-beloved DreamWorks property for adults (Universal went after Shrek for this exact reason). And Super Nintendo World is probably the only IP they have that will make adults wet their pants with Disney-like nostalgia, something Harry Potter isn't old enough for yet.
Epic Universe is going to change so much for Universal. Having a "less-exciting" park means guests won't have to go to IOA if they don't like the thrills, just like people can skip Hollywood Studios if they don't want to do thrills or cheap theming or Epcot if they don't want to be bored by the same exact things that have been there since the park opened! With park-hopping amongst three parks, there will be plenty to do for a week! Would I like more "family-friendly" attractions (if we're going to consider "families" as those only having toddlers in them)? No. I love me some Seuss Landing, but I am rarely entertained by what a toddler finds exciting. If I want to go see a billion slow dark rides, I know where to go. Universal is NOT Disney and shouldn't try to be. They've proven they can compete by focusing on a clientele that thinks Everest and Seven Dwarfs are sorry excuses for roller coasters. That said, I do agree whole-heartedly with them needing more shows. Sadly, it seems they're not focusing on them in Epic Universe, probably because they realized people won't want to walk all the way across that massive hub to get to a show. Hopefully they will make shows easy to get to when they do get them going. And fingers crossed they get going on that long-rumored Zelda show for IOA!!
I'm not sure if I agree that Epic is meant to be their version of Magic Kingdom. SNW and HtTYD are certainly more appealing for that family audience, but USF seems to be going all in on attracting much younger children. Minions and Dreamworks seems to be their next pivot. I think that overall, they're trying to spread out family offerings across all three parks, but USF is intended to be their flagship in terms of attendance.
I’d actually like the take the unpopular opinion and reject the premise of the question. I’d actually put forth that Disney and Universal don’t actually compete with each other. In the 2000s Universal did view Disney as a competitor and made some really poor decisions trying to keep up with Disney. When Universal realized that they didn’t need to compete for the same demographic (families with young children) they could go all in on a target demographic of families with older kids. This is when they started to actually began to forge their current identity, and I think it’s a good thing. Why go after families with young children when Disney will win every time with that demographic? Sure, times have changed with Disney doing some missteps, but I don’t think Universal needs to ‘balance’ the park experience. It’s doing what it needs to. I do however agree that Universal needs more shows.
I can’t imagine taking a child under 5 to any theme park tbh, once the kid hits grade level they’re gonna be able to fulfill most of Disney’s height requirements.
I'm not necessarily the biggest Universal fan, but from my point of view, I actually think with the line up they have for Epic Universe, they're kind of moving there focus away from thrill rides and 4d attractions (something another company is doing opposite of). I can't necessarily see them passing Disney in the next decade of time, but they are definitely catching up.
I have a 21 month year old and just finished a Disney trip. It’s not only the rides but also how close the resorts are to the magic kingdom. It will be years before I can go to Universal with my son.
A major barrier for a number (me included in the past) are a lot of the more thrilling rides have pretty rigid requirements for body dimensions. Larger/thicker/heavier people simply cannot ride a lot of these attractions, whereas just about any ride aside from flight of passage and seven dwarves mine train(super narrow/tiny seats) are accessible to ride for all shapes/bodies. I understand, safety first, but more rides that fit just about all shapes/sizes would help them close that gap to Disney
I think UO and Disney have kind of a symbiotic thing going on and I don't think it's an accident. I feel like they've both staked out their territory and somewhat respect each others' positions. Disney seems to cater to and attract the "people with kids 0-10 (maybe 0-12)" demographic, and Universal caters to adults and people with older kids. I know more than one family that's had annual passes to Disney until their kids were in middle school, then switched to UO, and I'm sure both companies see this in their data. Now, could Universal create awesome family rides that would rival the quality of Disney? Absolutely. Would it draw enough families with really young kids away from Disney to make the investment worth their while? Probably not.
Great video, but to answer the question does Universal Have Too Many Thrill Rides? Yes for someone like me mainly because I am 55+ years old, have Scoliosis and have had 6 spinal cord surgeries (one in 1986 to correct the curve in my spine and five surgeries in 2010 one to correct spinal stenosis and 4 to correct problems I had following the surgery). I also have high blood pressure so on my last trip to Disneyland was in 2014 and my family and I managed to go on Pirates of the Caribbean and The Haunted Mansion then we just walked around Disneyland and California Adventure. So thrill rides as much as would love to go on them are out of the question and I am unable to ride them. That being said thrills ride are great for those who are able to ride them so Universal and Disney should continue to build them. But I wish Universal would do more accessible dark rides and I hope Disney would take a cue from Tokyo Disney Resort and not totally get away from dark rides and bring more rides like Hong Kong Disneyland's Mystic Manor and Tokyo Disney's Enchanted Tale of Beauty and the Beast ride.
With those height requirements it's almost like they are trying to avoid having small children in their park. It seems deliberate to me. Maybe they're doubling down on being the anti disney
Their obsession with Minions makes me think otherwise though. Even if I didn't like the Superstar Parade, it still felt very much intended for really young children.
By my count Disney has 13 of what I'd consider "thrill rides" spread out across four parks. Universal has 11 across two gates (12 if you include Volcano Bay as a gate, which lol no). It also looks like Epic Universe is going to be more kid-friendly than the two existing parks, so that should pull the numbers back down comparable to Disney.
Now, is five thrill rides per park excessive? Maybe for a Theme park. But relative to an amusement park like Six Flags? No, absolutely not.
Oh wow seriously? If you don’t mind could you list them right quick? I didn’t realize WDW had thaaaaat many thrill rides…
@@NinthShinigami Sure: Rock n' Roller Coaster, Expedition Everest, Tower of Terror, Space Mountain, Guardians of the Galaxy, Big Thunder Mountain, Test Track, Dinosaur, Splash Mountain, Slinky Dog Dash, Mission: SPACE, Seven Dwarfs Mine Train, TRON
We'd like more, tbh. My kids are now teens though and we all love thrill rides, especially rollercoasters.
Well this was really interesting, the video and the comments. One thing -- you can be sure they think of this in terms of thrill rides, slow rides, and restaurants and gift shops. Maybe those last two are figuring in more heavily than we know causing them not to provide as many other places to rest and cool down. When I was a kid in the 1970s, the rumor was that McDonald's intentionally made their furniture to be uncomfortable b/c they didn't want people to stay too long.
After going to Universal 2 weeks ago for 2 days, I would have enjoyed more indoor rides/shows, but I came for and loved the thrill rides. I then went to the beach instead of going to Disney World to relax.
I also really disliked the ET ride even though it was nice to be out of the sun.
@@cloud_sky7227 That's downright blasphemy
A big issue I have with universal is that I am a very large man 6’5” and 400 lbs, I can’t do any rides at universal because I don’t fit. I can only ride Spider-Man, cat in the hat, and river adventure at islands. Doesn’t make for a very fun trip. At Disney the only ride I can’t do is Flight of Passage. If universal wants to compete they need to make rides more physically accessible. Great video as always, keep up the great work
It's hard to engineer for extreme cases such as yourself.