Uniqueness; how important is it?

[Matt N]

Hi guys. Many parks across the world aspire for unique attractions in order to stand out from the competition; even close to home at the Merlin parks, the aspiration for uniqueness is a key pillar of the creative process. I don’t know about you, but I think Merlin are one of the most innovative companies out there. They don’t stay within the mould when designing attractions; they think outside the box, and nearly everything they build is very much outside the norm for a ride of its type.

But my question to you today is; how important is uniqueness, in your view? How important do you think it is for parks to shun cliches & norms and think outside the box? Is uniqueness absolutely vital, in your view? Or do you not think it’s important at all? Or are you somewhere in between?

Personally, I think uniqueness is somewhat important to an extent, but not super important; it’s far from the be all and end all, in my opinion.

I do think uniqueness is important to an extent. Without uniqueness, the industry would be totally stagnant, and progress would never happen! The desire for uniqueness has produced some of the industry’s most loved and revered attractions, so for that reason, I definitely think uniqueness has at least a certain degree of importance.

However, I don’t think uniqueness is necessary in every case, personally. Perhaps controversially, I don’t have an issue with more “conventional” attractions that follow a pre-existing design philosophy as long as they’re executed well. Cliched themes? I like them! Cloned rides or rides designed using a very similar philosophy (for instance, many of B&M’s models)? I like the consistency, and look forward to a proven ride experience! My point is; as much as an experience might be cookie cutter, the mould exists for a reason, and to have become the mould for that genre of attraction, a ride must be pretty good, so as long as it’s fun, I don’t personally see the issue with imitating another attraction. As they always say, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so if something has clones, or has become somewhat of a cliche, then it must be a good sign that it works! I’m a firm believer in the phrase “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”, so if the mould works, I see no real reason to deviate from it too much. As much as I do value and admire those who break the rules and think outside the box, I also think that staying inside the box can be great and valuable too; if a base concept is proven, then you can work harder on refining it to make the best version of it!

But how important do you feel uniqueness is?

 

[Wazzupnerds]

damn this is a good question

I think uniqueness is 100% needed when it comes to certain coaster types. Wooden coasters for example. You can copy Cyclone's layout a billion times, and while its a good ride, its a tired layout. Then you look at something like Rampage at Alabama Adventure. its a twister type layout, but its so different and better if you ask me. You need to be different, and can't copy everyone else.

 

[Steely Dan]

You can copy Cyclone's layout a billion times, and while its a good ride, its a tired layout.

What's interesting is that, while there was a mini-explosion of cy-"clones" back in the '90s, there are now only 3 of them left: the original at Coney Island, SFGAm's Viper, and MPG's Bandit.

I've never ridden Bandit, but I have ridden the other two.

The original is the original, what more can you say? It's one of the most important coasters still standing on the planet. It's perfect in every way for what it is.

SFGAm's Viper is also a very solid ride, and it's got a few variations from the original (mirror image, a little bit bigger, that wonderful mid course double-down) that make it different enough in my mind to make it a pretty worthy stand-alone credit and not just another "clone credit".

 

[Smithy]

Depends on the country, the target market and the brand tbh.

In the UK, there is a monumental over-reliance on uniqueness as a selling point. It's why ALL of the recent marketing from major parks is aimed around highlighting how unique something is, whether it be world firsts or tallest/biggest etc...What many people who complain about this sort of marketing don't realise that the people who take those decisions are highly paid experts in their field who know what the general public, their target audience, are interested in.

I guess an easy answer would be uniqueness in the UK is hugely important - it's a somewhat cramped market and we as a customer base seem to place a huge value on it. But globally? Less so.

 

[Matt N]

Depends on the country, the target market and the brand tbh.

In the UK, there is a monumental over-reliance on uniqueness as a selling point. It's why ALL of the recent marketing from major parks is aimed around highlighting how unique something is, whether it be world firsts or tallest/biggest etc...What many people who complain about this sort of marketing don't realise that the people who take those decisions are highly paid experts in their field who know what the general public, their target audience, are interested in.

I guess an easy answer would be uniqueness in the UK is hugely important - it's a somewhat cramped market and we as a customer base seem to place a huge value on it. But globally? Less so.

Come to think of it, I actually think that would make a lot of sense about the UK. As much as it's easy to criticise Merlin for putting a "world's first", "UK's first" or whatever tag on everything they build, I think that's simply what the UK market likes. When a ride was built without an obvious USP (Icon), it was somewhat of a flop.

However, I'm not sure it's necessarily a hard, fast rule. Wicker Man didn't really have a strongly marketed USP, and neither did Nemesis, yet both were considered successful. I guess Derren Brown didn't either, although I think the IP took care of that.

 

[Smithy]

Yeah the trade off with not using 'unique' as a selling point is to have a really strong brand. Things like Thomasland, Peppa Pig World, Nickelodeon Land all did massively well for parks without being marketed solely as 'unique' and that's because of the strength and recognition of the brand.

It's probably that it's the quickest/cheapest/most effective way to market something. well.

 

[Leon_K]

In the words of Golden Horse: "There's nothing wrong with copying if the execution is better..." uh, wait... nevermind.

 

[Nitefly]

It's not so much that 'uniqueness is always good', but: (a) 'a well trodden path lacks the excitement of the new' and (b) 'stale is bad'.

The B&M 'inversion by numbers' coasters are dated by themselves, but feel only more dated by their abundance.

 

[Hyde]

Hah, thinking more on it, I think I would've argued that uniqueness isn't important, around 10 years ago. As long as coasters are tall, fast, packed full of inversions - who cares!

But I think I've arced to preferring uniqueness in coaster design, even if it is at the cost of larger coaster stats. Or at least, as I've been reflecting on my coaster rankings for the immenently-inbound CF Top Coasters of 2021 - I have realized some coasters that have continued to slide and cede in my personal rankings to others that are slower/shorter - but give a compellingly unique experience. It's an interesting sensation for sure, as some who was raised in the Coaster Wars culture of 2000s Six Flags and Cedar Fair.

 

[SeanC]

Interesting question. I think it depends on your situation. If you rarely or never leave your home park, then it's not important. But personally, if I'm traveling to another park and can't hit up every ride, other than the kiddie coasters, the Vekoma boomerangs and 4d free spins will be the first rides I'll skip. I'd rather not skip a Batman clone since I think they're great rides, but those would probably be the second... since I can ride them in my home park.

 

[Rupert]

Another vote for “it depends”: on who’s answering, be it guests, enthusiasts, investors etc.

Does the average person/family visit a theme park outside of their local catchment area? Maybe they visit a local park and then say a bigger regional one, but as long as those offerings don’t overlap, they won’t care or know if there are clones across the country or in neighbouring countries.

From my perspective as someone who’s willing and able to travel internationally for this hobby (but not have every holiday coaster-based), uniqueness matters more - I’ll obviously choose a park with good unique coasters to visit instead of one with coasters I’ve basically already done.

But the most important thing will be what makes business sense. Lightwater Valley has one of the most unique coasters going, but that doesn’t mean it was the right decision for the park or acts to draw people there. What if they’d bought a Vekoma Boomerang or an Arrow/Vekoma loopscrew or the off-the-shelf Intamin standup layout or a wooden coaster? Chances are they would have had more business success with a solid but non-unique (and less expensive) lineup that would have allowed them to grow and build a unique coaster later down the line when it wouldn’t be such a risk. You could argue the same with Orphan Rocker.