Changes in theming style

[nadroJ]

So I've noticed that in the past few years lots of parks have cottoned on to the trend that heavily themed rides with a flowing narrative are popular and impressive to guests. Previously I've noticed that it was only really the 'big' parks that bothered with theming outside of Disney, but in 2012/2013 we've seen some really impressive attempts to go the extra mile and actually create backstory to makes rides more the whole package rather than just a generic amusement park experience. The only parks that are really still stuck in that trend are the Six Flags/Cedar Fair parks. The new/smaller parks all over Europe and the new parks popping up in Asia seem really committed to at least attempting to give the big boys a run for their money.

We've seen Chessington currently going through a massive theming upgrade plan (we hope), The Swarm was actually a really impressive effort and they keep adding to the theming on that and we're seeing some really original ideas going on with The Smiler. But what really caught my attention was the drop tower in Fantasiana, a park which was previously just a generic family style park, now using REAL BRICKS *!* in their theming and attempting to give their new ride a narrative.

I'm really impressed with these advances and it shows that parks are taking into consideration the importance of theme and how big a difference it can play in being a good and a great park.

Just wanted to know people's thoughts on this, whether you agree, disagree, any other trends you may have noticed with regards to theme, or even anything that's just impressed you =]

 

[Hyde]

Meh.

Theming isn't necessarily everything. While it can be an important element in ride/park design, it is still possible to create an equally engaging visitor experience without.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Meh.

Theming isn't necessarily everything. While it can be an important element in ride/park design, it is still possible to create an equally engaging visitor experience without.

Common then Hyde, give us an example so we can challenge that notion!

 

[nadroJ]

Yes, intriguing =]

 

[Intricks]

Cedar Point jumps to mind as well as near all massive and major theme parks where the big and badass coasters are the central thought of the park.

 

[Hyde]

Hersheypark is a great example of a non-theme amusement park. Rather than having themes be the focus for different areas (e.g. Tomorrowland and Fantasyland), emphasis is placed on ride selection and placement. Great Bear, Skyrush, Lightning Racer, and Fahrenheit all have a towering presence over the midway, and act at the focus of attention around the park. The park layout helps aid ride presence, so as to not isolate any particular ride too much.

That is one thing I am most impressed about with Hershey, is its ability to cope with space. While some parks can seemingly have too much void space coughDorneycough or too little coughKnottscough, Hershey's ride placement has a fairly even spread, allowing each roller coaster to fairly have its own presence.

Cedar Point and Six Flags Magic Mountain are other amusement parks that have minimal theming in certain areas, but place majority of focus on midway appearance and ride placement. Theming is not necessary for these parks, which opt for "wow" factor of larger roller coasters.

While heavily-themed parks such as Disney also share great ride placement, there is a more concerted effort for theming. So it begs the question - what exactly does general park theming achieve?

Theming can often times be more like icing on a cake. It is the contents of the cake that matters over the frosting. Disneyland is a good park because of it's rides - with theming acting as a complementary. Would Disneyland still be as good a park without the Jungle Cruise, Splash Mountain, or the Matterhorn? No - those rides provide a basis around which to theme.

 

[SaiyanHajime]

Hersheypark is a great example of a non-theme amusement park. Rather than having themes be the focus for different areas (e.g. Tomorrowland and Fantasyland), emphasis is placed on ride selection and placement. Great Bear, Skyrush, Lightning Racer, and Fahrenheit all have a towering presence over the midway, and act at the focus of attention around the park. The park layout helps aid ride presence, so as to not isolate any particular ride too much.

I'd say that's theming.

Hershey is a modern amusement park (in that very few classic attractions remain), yet with it's strings of lights, it's themed to a classic park. The names and stylisation of the rides is definitely theming.

Cedar Point and Six Flags Magic Mountain are other amusement parks that have minimal theming in certain areas, but place majority of focus on midway appearance and ride placement. Theming is not necessary for these parks, which opt for "wow" factor of larger roller coasters.

Cedar Point definitely has themed rides, too. Ride placement and that "amusement park" look are theming, they aren't defaults. I'd argue that with Millenium Force, especially, the thematic concept of it's size is more important than the ride experience. And TTD and family even more so - the ride experience is actually a very secondary thing compared to the "holy ****" of it's visual and psychological impact. It's placement in the park and domination over the park is important. That's theming.

While heavily-themed parks such as Disney also share great ride placement, there is a more concerted effort for theming. So it begs the question - what exactly does general park theming achieve?

Theming can often times be more like icing on a cake. It is the contents of the cake that matters over the frosting. Disneyland is a good park because of it's rides - with theming acting as a complementary. Would Disneyland still be as good a park without the Jungle Cruise, Splash Mountain, or the Matterhorn? No - those rides provide a basis around which to theme.

The problem I have with some Disney is that it takes **** hardware like... Dumbo, and dresses it up to promise more. That's not good theming... There's this idea that Disney will "suspend disbelief", but anyone suspending disbelief that Dumbo is any more than a fiberglass elephant on a pneumatic arm is an idiot. Good theming is taking a ride concept and using theming to enhance and tell that story, and part of that is choosing appropriate hardware. You can do that with anything. Hardware and the level of thematic stuff you use is dependant on audience, and personal taste. Like you say, hardware often influences a theme. That's no different to TTD.

The idea that Disney invented the theme park and thus get to decide what is and is not theming is ****. Humankind has been theming stuff since forever, Disney just made it popular.

But, if you wanna be less petty...

Do you need theming, in a conventional sense, to have a truly successful park? Well, according to attendance figures, yes. But I believe there's more to it than that. Disney, Universal and co are so popular not just because of heavy theming, but because of brands. But it's hard with the USA, as true theme parks outside of those huge brands don't really exist. But looking to Europe, we'd expect to see the likes of Europa Park and Efteling come out after Disney in attendance reports....... And they do.

Theming matters.

 

[Hyde]

It would appear then that we are both hinting at the same things, but referring to different aspects of theming.

I do not believe that ride placement nor size are theming - that is ride design.

And while I also agree that all parks and rides have theming to some extent, there is a certain cut-off point where theming efforts are really negligible to the overall experience, such as train and station only theming. e.g. Diamondback

I would also contend that certain parks make it a point to design a ride and a theme to accompany it. Other parks focus on ride design, with names and minimal theming naturally occurring afterwards.

While Disney purposefully designed a roller coaster to be themed to the Himalayas for its Asia section of the park, Cedar Point wanted to build a large wingrider at the front of their park to replace aging attractions.

Do you need theming, in a conventional sense, to have a truly successful park? Well, according to attendance figures, yes. But I believe there's more to it than that. Disney, Universal and co are so popular not just because of heavy theming, but because of brands.

You are missing a critical component of attendance figures however - geography.

Yes, the top 13 U.S. amusement parks in attendance all have themes. But they are also all open year round. Cedar Point is only open 134 days, compared to 365 days of year round parks. This means Cedar Point operates at a 36.4% capacity of Disney, Universal, etc.

Looking worldwide, many of these high attendance theme parks are also built next to cities and areas of high population density. Many seasonal parks on the other hand are built in less dense areas/areas of low tourism - remember, Florida and Southern California were still popular before the addition of theme parks. This gets to the point: location, location, location.

I don't believe attendance is a good indicator of theming, and that other external factors also have a large bearing on who visits the park.



Ultimately there are aspects of parks and rides that I do not categorize as theming, which you do Joey. Which leads me to ask, do you believe there is any major amusement park which does not have theming?

 

[SaiyanHajime]

You are missing a critical component of attendance figures however - geography.

Yes, the top 13 U.S. amusement parks in attendance all have themes. But they are also all open year round. Cedar Point is only open 134 days, compared to 365 days of year round parks. This means Cedar Point operates at a 36.4% capacity of Disney, Universal, etc.

Looking worldwide, many of these high attendance theme parks are also built next to cities and areas of high population density. Many seasonal parks on the other hand are built in less dense areas/areas of low tourism - remember, Florida and Southern California were still popular before the addition of theme parks. This gets to the point: location, location, location.

I don't believe attendance is a good indicator of theming, and that other external factors also have a large bearing on who visits the park.

If that were the case, then Thorpe Park and Chessington would have the highest attendance figures in Europe. They don't, they aren't even close.

Thorpe has somewhat more physical obvious themeing overall than a Six Flags or Cedar Fair park, but it's still that KIND of park where theming takes a backseat. So it's the perfect contendor to prove you wrong. Despite it's location, Thorpe fails to gain the attendance figures of Europa or Efteling, both parks which are significantly further from major population densities.

Chessington is a "highly themed" park on a global scale, yet it suffers attendance waaaaaay lower than Thorpe, which you could argue is evidence against my claims. But Chessington's situation is messy because the park was stagnent for many years whilst Thorpe rocketed forwards. It'll take a good 10 years of decent new additions to see if that changes. Chessington is also open year round alike Efteling and, I think, Europa.

Do you really think during peak summer months Cedar Point, or even Canada's Wonderland, gets more or even close to the visitor numbers of the top 13 US parks?

Do you think, over the peak summer months, Thorpe gets attendance figures higher than Efteling and Europa? I doubt it, but I can't prove it.

 

[Crazycoaster]

Europa Closes during the winter, it's the highest attended seasonal park. And having been to both Europa and Thorpe during peak summer, and they are nowhere near close in terms of business.

EDIT: Technically, Europa opens a section of the park for a sort of 'Winter Wonderland' Christmas event, but it's only a small section of the park and only open in December

One thing of note, any 'non' theme park that has been noted as competition have huge rides, and minimal planning restrictions.

 

[Hyde]

If that were the case, then Thorpe Park and Chessington would have the highest attendance figures in Europe. They don't, they aren't even close.

Do you really think during peak summer months Cedar Point, or even Canada's Wonderland, gets more or even close to the visitor numbers of the top 13 US parks?

Let me emphasize from my previous post, the notion of not just city centers, but sheer size of the tourism industry in the area.

Florida and Southern California are the tourist locations of the U.S., bar none. These high tourist locations are where all of the highest attendance parks are located. Even if you subtract out revenue generated by amusement parks, you will still come up with a tourism industry many many times larger than Cincinnati, OH; Sandusky, OH; or Maple, ON, Canada.

It isn't necessarily the theming that gives these parks such high attendance figures, but a combination of alternate factors including: proximity to city centers, weather/ability to operate year round, and size of tourism industry. There is also an advantage to being immediately located next to other theme parks, such as Knott's Berry Farm and Disneyland or Universal Orlando and WDW - park visitors are able to visit not just one park but many parks. And then there is the ultimate factor of Disney's label as "Happiest Place on Earth," how can someone touch that?

Getting back to operating seasonally vs. year round, we can create a mathematical estimation of what the three top attendance seasonal amusement parks (Cedar Point, Kings Island, and Canada's Wonderland) would be if they operated year round.

All three share roughly the same calendar of operation (Kings Island opens for two weekends before CP and CW), which amounts to 36.4% of the total days in a year.

Cedar Point and Kings Island saw a park attendance of 3,143,000 in 2011; Canada's Wonderland saw a park attendance of 3,481,000.

If we divide each park's attendance by 36.4%, we will be given an approximation of total park attendance if they operated year round.

Cedar Point: 3,481,000 / 36.4% = 8,634,615
Kings Island: 3,481,000 / 36.4% = 8,634,615
Canada's Wonderland: 3481000 / 36.4% = 9,563,187

These total attendance figures would place all parks at ranks 6, 7, and 8 for Top 20 U.S. Parks in 2011, right behind the Disney parks.

These attendance estimates do not take into account holidays (Thanksgiving, Christmas/New Years, Spring Break, Easter), which would arguably add more to these totals. Yet where these estimations stand, the top 3 seasonal parks only trail behind majority of the Disney parks by less than 1 million visitors.

It is impossible to say that theming has a direct correlation to park attendance figures until we can accurately account for other variables.

 

[peep]

I get the feeling that Europe and Asia parks seem to be focusing more on theming at the moment because they realise it helps improve the guest experience for their target markets. Not only that but I think (well in most cases for European parks at least) planning restrictions stop the parks from building American style parks where height and size of the attractions is seen as a better attraction/experience to say a heavily themed family coaster.

I don't think comparing gate figures says anything whatsoever because different markets and different brands have been established for each park, too many variables to say whether some (or lots of) theming is better or worse than none.

remember, Florida and Southern California were still popular before the addition of theme parks

Pretty sure I heard/read that Orlando pretty much had barely any tourism until WDW was built and people travelled there because of the brand more than anything else. The other parks built in the area were totally built to reap the benefits of being near the biggest name in the industry.


I do think that in Europe especially that theming within the park industry has really picked up, nearly every new attraction added over the last couple of years has some sort of theming. Maybe parks are finding themed attractions easier to market towards guests who are still a bit reluctant to spend money on days out due to lack of funds? I'm not sure (lets be frank about it, none of us do) but I love themed attractions over just a car park coaster so this is a winning situation for people like me

 

[nadroJ]

remember, Florida and Southern California were still popular before the addition of theme parks

Pretty sure I heard/read that Orlando pretty much had barely any tourism until WDW was built and people travelled there because of the brand more than anything else. The other parks built in the area were totally built to reap the benefits of being near the biggest name in the industry.

Yh, that bit of Orlando was pretty much just stagnant swamp land before the parks came along. Sure the beaches were popular, but I find that irrelevant seeing as they're not exactly nearby enough to be considered as being in the same place.

 

[Hyde]

I was speaking more broadly to the tourism industry of Florida, rather than Orlando in particular.

At the turn of the 20th century, Florida's hotels and golf courses were a big attraction for wealthy Americans. The invention of the automobile and creation of regularly scheduled flights made Florida even more accessible.

The largest boom for Florida tourism (and travel in the U.S. in general) however was the creation of interstate highways after WWII. President Eisenhower was impressed by Germany's Autobahn, and looked to emulate it across America. While its primary purpose was for movement of military and troops should war arise again, it also made civilian travel a more real reality with quality roads. Florida's tourism industry flourished during the 50s and 60s as a result.

http://fcit.usf.edu/florida/lessons/tou ... urism1.pdf

Disney's biggest concerns for the development of WDW were rooted in problems that Disneyland faced. There were too many competing businesses that had popped up next door to Disneyland, so Disney wanted WDW to sit on large tracts of land that eliminated competition. He also wanted to capitalize on markets east of the Mississippi (Disneyland only attracted western states), so Florida was a good, warm destination. He was also famously able to purchase 2,000+ acres of land under dummy corporations for cheap.

At any rate, yes, tourism did exist in Florida before Disney. While Disney completely revolutionized the Florida industry, the industry still existed previously.