17 replies to this topic

[hidden moose]

I've seen these on every "rollercoaster or themepark" forum, so I wanted to make one here!

What do you guy think is better?

Universal/IOA or Disney World?

For me, definitley universal. People say the themeing at disney is way better than IOA, when clearley IOA is the most themed park in the world. I like the rides better in universal, and people don't constantly die (refering to mission space)... So what do you guys think? and why?

a little help: http://www.universal...omparision.html

Edited by hidden moose, 19 September 2007 - 10:18 PM.

[lazyboy97O]

Islands of Adventure has many rides. The rides themselves may be more thrilling, but they are not themed better. There is no theming to The Incredible Hulk. It is no different than what Six Flags does with coasters such as the Batmans. The queue and station have a theme, but the rest is just a coaster.

I find it hard to believe that Islands of Adventure could truely be considered a more emersive environment than Tokyo Disney Sea. The realism found at Disney's Animal Kingdom is also of the highest calibur. I don't feel that the recent messes being made of the Magic Kingdom and Disney-MGM Studios bring down the Resort as a whole.

Only two people have died on Mission: SPACE. Each person had a pre-existing condition.

Edited by lazyboy97O, 20 September 2007 - 01:06 AM.

[wabigbear]

when clearley IOA is the most themed park in the world

Sorry, but I think the fog just rolled in...You asked to compare Universal with Disney WORLD, and then proclaim IOA the "best in the world".

PARTS of IOA are exceedingly well themed...PARTS.

Other parts are not.

Disney does it better, their themeing is consistant throughout the ENTIRE park. I'd hazard a guess and say that SEVERAL parks around the world do it better than IOA as well...have you ever seen photos of other parks or even visited many others? IOA IS very good...it's just not the 'best in the world'.

[Emergo]

^ can only agree...can only agree....

Not that I have visited so many parks around the whole world, but by googling and studying the pictures....can only agree...parts of IOA may be nice, but so many others around the world do have far better and more impressive themeing by now,...and around the whole park instead of just in some areas, like Wagi said...

Does not take away from the fact that if you love a certain park and enjoy it, that's a fine thing and wish you keep enjoying it, no matter if it is the "best themed one" or not...

Emergo

[Sambo]

I guess it depends on what you call "themeing".

If themeing means lots of steel tubes and structures supporting coasters, chain-link fencing, no particular relationship between one attraction and the one right next to it - just promo flash, some plants hiding the barren areas under the coasters from walkway view, then yeah, you could make the case that IOA is better themed.

Disney World is probably NOT the best example of a Disney park to compare themeing against. But even so...are you really serious? IOA?

[tehFAO]

They're two different parks, two completely different demeanours.

Disney ultimately appeals to a younger crowd. When I had the privilege to go in 2001 (I was 15), I had nothing short of a fantastic time there. Though, I felt that much of the time I was haunted by a lingering uneasiness. Things just felt too family friendly, or too child safe. The only attraciton that I felt remotely of age without being with the family or my younger brother at the time was Alien Encounter, Rock'N Roller Coaster, and Tower of Terror. Everything else had a very childesque feel to it...

Universal Studios and Islands of Adventure are still very family friendly, but with a very different appeal and approach. Universal has it's fair share of theming, sure... Not to the extent Disney has gone, but still enough to make you go "wow" and be just as awestruck. What I like about Universal is that their attractions are very raw and very unadulterated. Disney would've never approved a simulated tornado attraction as Universal did with Twister. It's too scary, too intense. Same with Jaws, Terminator, The Mummy's Revenge, and Spiderman.

When you ask someone about Universal Studios, the number one thing they'll recall are the attractions themselves, more so over the actual theming. But when you ask about Disney, you'll 9 out of 10 times get an earfull about the sheer beauty of the park - not so much the attractions. Universal is more about bringing you experiences through their attractions, while Disney is busy submersing you into another world right out of the mind of Disney himself.

Edited by tehFAO, 24 February 2008 - 07:38 AM.

[Sambo]

Interesting since Walt Disney never set foot in Disney World... And thanks tehFAO, I'll tell my friends in AARP that you still think I'm part of the "younger" crowd.

The basic premise of the original argument is comparing two not-so-similar things. And then picking A Disney park near the bottom with a Universal park near the top. How fair is that? Still in the area of "themeing" which was the focus of the OP's choice, many disagree with his reasoning. Myself included. I think tehFAO that the age of the OP - hidden moose - is important to the argument of his answer.

To be honest, when I talk of Disneyland (the original) I speak first of the attractions and second of the beauty. I can see where in Disneyworld what you say may be true since the beauty of some of the attractions has been neutered. Perfect example is Pirates. Instead of the walk in area where the mood is set, and Lafitte's landing where you get in the boat, and then you drift past the Blue Bayou restaurant off in the distance... well in the world version - you walk into a building and get on a boat and just enter. Only one example, there are many. Having just asked my Daughter - She mentions the attractions of Disneyland before speaking of the concentrated themes. Granted she's older than 15, but the general nature of your statement may ring true for Disneyworld - it doesn't here for Disneyland.

There is one thing you allude to that does have the truth I referenced about the OP. Teens like more intense rides. Not hard to agree there. Teens also do not have a fully developed sense of coherence and themeing and detail with layers of complexity. They are just plain missed for the obvious surface features. Now I'm speaking in generalities, but in general terms - can't deny it. I think for somewhat different reasons tehFAO, I agree with a lot of what you say.

[tehFAO]

While I do think intensity has a lot to do with the interest in the attractions, thinking about it a little more I also find the content of the attractions to be an ultimate factor too.

It's like asking... what would you rather ride? MIB: Alien Attack or Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin? lol, 9 out of 10 times it's a no brainer. Alien Attack, right? MIB really offers nothing that much more intense than Lightyear's Ranger Spin, but it's the content of the attraction that I think appeals to more people. Either you're Agent J taking part in one of the 90's most famous and hip comedic sci-fi films, or you're in an elaborate spin-off from Toy Story - which in it's own right holds even more bearings in Hollywood than MIB, but still - kid flick right? :-/

[Sambo]

Agreed.

I scratch my head over Buzz Lightyear's Astro Blasters in Disneyland. It is the cartoonization of Tomorrowland - clearly should be more oriented to Fantasyland. I too would prefer MIB:Alien Attack over Buzz. Now when you talk of attractions Walt actually had a hand in, we may have some disagreements. But the current state of Disney attractions falls way short of the historic truely immersive attractions. Indiana Jones was about the last in the truely immersive lineage.

[RNRMontuX]

Islands of Adventure is better for coasters...and disney is better for anything else.