DreamWorks Land (General Discussion)

[Brian G.]

Realistically - I don't think you're ever going to get a D/E-ticket ride back here - but I think there's enough space for either a few flat rides, or a small decent dark ride if they do expand.

 

[Evan]

Seuss Lagoon is littered with flat signs as well as their marquee attraction. It's just what kids like. If I know I will get the same reaction out of a kid with a flat version of a character as I would with a high tech robotic 10000 then I am going with the cut out. This land is not going to sell tickets, it's (to me) an added value. I am shocked they are even doing this much to be honest. I personally feel this land will be a hit with kids because it hits all things kids like, play structures, water and dance parties. What kid is going to look at Shrek's house and think that the foliage is gonna blow away in a fla storm and be shrewd upon I-4 lol (sorry Jim lol lol).

Huh what? Kids like flat signs? Is there a study somewhere I missed??

Seuss Landing having flat art is in theme with the art direction of Seuss. DreamWorks creates 3D styled animation.

Why are we making excuses for Universal for clear cost cuts?

 

[Brian G.]

Huh what? Kids like flat signs? Is there a study somewhere I missed??

Seuss Landing having flat art is in theme with the art direction of Seuss. DreamWorks creates 3D styled animation.

Why are we making excuses for Universal for clear cost cuts?

I think it's worth pointing out that there are a total of 2 flat signs that we've seen - the entrance sign, with @Alicia reporting it may be updated, and an unfinished entry arch. We've seen a lot more 3D figurines in the land, especially in recent days.

 

[AustinT]

Why are we making excuses for Universal for clear cost cuts?

This. I get some lands are meant to entertain kids and not to be super immersive areas like other lands, but I don't think that means we should expect and/or excuse a world class destination to put Six Flags level effort and budget into it. That said, I think we do have to applaud the design team for doing the most with what they were given. There is an impressive amount of interactivity packed into here and it's not their fault they weren't given much to work with. The bean counters are to blame for that.

I hope there are at least a couple impressive themed elements planned for the interior of the 'Po Live' building. Maybe just a few things similar to what USB's land got?

 

[Jake S]

With the very important caveat that I do not have children: They are absolutely selling this land to the adults buying the tickets as much as to the kids who visit it.

I think it looks fine, and I’m not sure I’d make the claim that what we’ve seen indicates cost cutting or being cheap. But based on what I’ve seen it’s an improvement over what existed before, even if it isn’t turning the concept of a kids themed areas on its ear.

 

[OrlLover]

Seuss Lagoon is littered with flat signs as well as their marquee attraction. It's just what kids like. If I know I will get the same reaction out of a kid with a flat version of a character as I would with a high tech robotic 10000 then I am going with the cut out. This land is not going to sell tickets, it's (to me) an added value. I am shocked they are even doing this much to be honest. I personally feel this land will be a hit with kids because it hits all things kids like, play structures, water and dance parties. What kid is going to look at Shrek's house and think that the foliage is gonna blow away in a fla storm and be shrewd upon I-4 lol (sorry Jim lol lol).

You know everything is examined with a microscope on this board. So anything Universal does will be heavily scrutinized warranted or not.

While I don’t care for the entrance sign I’m not loosing sleep over it especially if a potential update is on the horizon.

 

[jarmor]

I just don't understand what some was expecting. really doubt this area will move the needle with attendance and that is the bottom line. It is a value-added upgrade that will have a low ROI so why spend multibillions for elaborate meet and greets and facades when it is not going to pay off in the end. I am approaching this with the notion that I bring 3 kids to the parks ranging from 7-10 and I have seen what made their faces light up and what hasn't, seen what they gravitate towards and what they don't pay attention to, what they will ride and what intimidates them. Based on what I see here, this is just fine and a good mix of theming elements and attractions and nothing too over the top or elaborate cause they tend to not even remember it but they remember the playing and all the fun they had, not how excited or not a flat sign made them feel lol or exclaim that they want to leave because the theming is cheap lol lol. Ok ok im gonna stop now lol.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

I'm gonna be honest here - I think most of it looks cool. I'm particularly excited to see how hard they steer into themed food.

 

[belloq87]

Without getting into what I think about the land again, I do quite forcefully push back on the argument that because something is "for" kids, it only has to be at a certain level of quality because they won't know any better.

I'm not saying the land is or isn't at a satisfactory level of quality, I'm just talking in a general, philosophical sense.

 

[jarmor]

To clarify, I am not saying they don't know better but more so they are geared towards a feeling of being less overwhelmed with simplicity. Would I have liked it to be something like Zootopia, yep! In a heartbeat but I understand how overwhelming that can be for kids. I don't want to get into meeting characters in the parks, that can be intimidating for some kids as well so hopefully they take a welcoming approach to that as well and focus more on comfort than anything.

 

[Brian G.]

Without getting into what I think about the land again, I do quite forcefully push back on the argument that because something is "for" kids, it only has to be at a certain level of quality because they won't know any better.

I'm not saying the land is or isn't at a satisfactory level of quality, I'm just talking in a general, philosophical sense.

Agree, in a sense. Seuss is a great example.

At the same time, we're overanalyzing 2 flat signs (one not done, and one that may be updated) as an example of what the entire project entails. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they look great either. Just more of "OK not a fan. What else ya got?" mindset.

I also think it's worth noting that this land isn't intended to be USF's "Seuss". The goal of the land is to offer up something for the little ones, which is something USF has been lacking. I don't think y'all realize how bad Barney's closure was for the park for that demo - which is why DW Destination was cobbled together during COVID.

 

[IzzyB]

I think it's worth pointing out that there are a total of 2 flat signs that we've seen - the entrance sign, with @Alicia reporting it may be updated, and an unfinished entry arch. We've seen a lot more 3D figurines in the land, especially in recent days.

I agree. We haven't seen the finished product so I am not jumping to conclusions. I agree, "just for kids" isn't an excuse, but a couple flat signs when there are frogs and other stuff in there that is pretty cool seems fine to me even as an adult. My kids do like theme, they do notice it and they do comment on stuff when it is more "in theme". But I think overall this area will be a win for my kids.

 

[Alicia]

When I was younger I loved the Fievel Playland area. It felt so huge and immersive. I could get lost in the large props.

As an adult, it was shocking to realize how small it actually was, just a small loop with a slide in the middle.

If I were a kid now, this coming ogre swamp play area would be my jam. There’s a Pinocchio figure in the house in the middle, have yall seen that yet? But slides and nets and water sprayers, yes please!

The flats around the pathways are decorations. The centers of the mini lands seem to have literal actual figures. Like the spider at Trollercoaster or aforementioned Pinocchio (if that is what I’m seeing):

This is exactly the same as the spider at former Fievel Playland and the Woody figure on the Nuthouse sign but then several Woody flats as decoration along the walkway.

Except, in addition to splash pads and play areas this new iteration has extremely well integrated character meet and greets, something Disney used to be the only game in town on, and did not exist in this area previously.

And also, there’s an indoor innovative interactive screen based game here with arguably one of DreamWorks most successful characters nowadays (the last wish was amazing and kids dug it).

AND there’s an interactive Turtle Talk real time animated Kung Fu Panda too!?

So, this land is already at best a 1 for 1 replacement for the former KidsZone, but with modern properties, and least equivalent figures and flats theming and decor—BUT ALSO with more modern versions of interactive activities and good meet and greets?

Amazing.

And did I mention the dozen frog figures that ribbit when you stomp in front of them?

 

[Jerroddragon]

I think for what it is its great but many people on here are theme park fans

When you see Fantasy Springs in Tokyo which aimed at kids/families and see the details. I'm not even talking about the rides but just the details they have happening compared to this it looks cheap

I'm not saying it is, but I understand its not for everyone.

I think it sounds like a cute land and I won't hate on it for it but....I also understand other's wanting more

 

[Brian G.]

I think for what it is its great but many people on here are theme park fans

When you see Fantasy Springs in Tokyo which aimed at kids/families and see the details. I'm not even talking about the rides but just the details they have happening compared to this it looks cheap

I'm not saying it is, but I understand its not for everyone.

I think it sounds like a cute land and I won't hate on it for it but....I also understand other's wanting more

I mean, at the end of the day it's a land for kids. I understand criticizing design choices, but this isn't for us. We cannot compare it to Fantasy Springs because they are targeting different demos.

 

[jarmor]

So, the ball pit area is no longer a ball pit area?

 

[Alicia]

I’m not gonna compare it to Fantasy Springs. Even looking at Berk down the road at Epic shows the level of theming Universal is capable of with a DreamWorks property.

But as a relatively quick stopgap to replace an aging kids area, I’m actually impressed they were able to plus it in the ways they seem to be.

I’m not comparing it to Fantasy Springs because it didn’t take several years to build and it’s not meant to headline new visitors for years to come.

I’ll compare it to KidsZone, which I feel it looks better than, flats and all.

 

[belloq87]

Again, it's not that any of this work is necessarily "bad." And it's clearly not meant to anything on the level of a Fantasy Springs, by design and intent. USF wanted to swap out KidZone for equivalent (in scale) experiences.

But I do want to see USF get a Fantasy Springs-style land expansion (read: net the park a few new significant attractions), and this could have been a place for it.

We cannot compare it to Fantasy Springs because they are targeting different demos.

I think I understand what you're getting at, but at the same time, I'm pretty confident kids are going to love Fantasy Springs.

 

[Brian G.]

But I do want to see USF get a Fantasy Springs-style land expansion (read: net the park a few new significant attractions), and this could have been a place for it.


I think I understand what you're getting at, but at the same time, I'm pretty confident kids are going to love Fantasy Springs.

Definitely! But Fantasy Springs is meant to anchor the park and took years to build. KidZone needed an update because USF lacks stuff for kids (specifically young kids) and they had to get it done quickly.

But I do want to see USF get a Fantasy Springs-style land expansion (read: net the park a few new significant attractions), and this could have been a place for it.

I hate playing the "could" game - because there's always going to be a scenario of "could". This land should be judged on what it is, not on what could've been; and the land's addition does not stop expansion elsewhere.

But depending on your definition - I don't know if USF will ever get a Spring-style land. That's what IOA and Epic are for.

 

[belloq87]

But depending on your definition - I don't know if USF will ever get a Spring-style land. That's what IOA and Epic are for.

Perhaps... but USF needs the help!

I don't really mean a land with grand and fantastical theming (though I wouldn't complain). My definition is basically a single "project" (not necessarily a single land, it could be multiple things happening in different areas simultaneously) that increases the number of significant-ish attractions in the park all at once. Basically what Super Nintendo Land would have done (though, again, not necessarily in a single land).

I again recognize that I have specific and particular desires re: USF that are not shared by everyone, and Universal can't make decisions to please just me, etc.