Skull Island: Reign of Kong - General Discussion
- Thread starter Drew
- Start date
-
Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Remember the #ThanksShanghai days? Should we start #ThanksEpicUniverse?
As of 2/26, Kong had a 4.4 rating on Google Maps. Let's see what happens over the next week or so
As of 2/26, Kong had a 4.4 rating on Google Maps. Let's see what happens over the next week or so
No 3D. The 360 scene is… fine … - But the first two scenes don’t work.
- Feb 28, 2016
- 684
- 1,491
At least what's causing these cuts isn't being built on the other side of the world.
- Dec 28, 2009
- 315
- 671
It's always fun to think oh what happened now? when coming back to a thread and seeing multiple new pages. 
This test is a little extensive too. Not only redoing the scenes for non-3D, they also edited the dialogue for each of the drivers to remove the mention of goggles. If they did this before for Gringott's and it didn't work, why would they think it would work here?
General question if anyone knows: Creative's involved in decisions like this right? Like could ride designers challenge these changes if they were brought up in meetings?
This test is a little extensive too. Not only redoing the scenes for non-3D, they also edited the dialogue for each of the drivers to remove the mention of goggles. If they did this before for Gringott's and it didn't work, why would they think it would work here?
General question if anyone knows: Creative's involved in decisions like this right? Like could ride designers challenge these changes if they were brought up in meetings?
I'm thinking it might have to do with how far you are from the screen as the RV moves up to it? From that distance it seems harder to pull off convincingly without the 3D.
I'd imagine someone in a corporate position is pushing hard to find cost savings anywhere they can find it no matter what the impact on the guest experience is.
Once they hand over the attraction, they pretty much have no control over anything. They can argue about upkeep and everything, but ultimately the final decision is on management.
Somewhat tied to this forum, but once DreamWorks opens and more "child-friendly" attractions reopen... is there any need to keep F&F open? That's a significant cost-cutting opportunity that nobody would care for.
If Supercharged can operate, it should operate. The fix for it being a "bad" attraction isn't to close it and let it sit empty, the fix is to replace it. If it's so bad that you don't even want to open it, then it's bad enough that you should replace it immediately.
This idea that Universal needs to close attractions, or run them in a compromised state, in order to save money is totally unacceptable.
I agree, it would be unacceptable, but if we're seeing cuts throughout the rest of the resort at some of the better attractions... it can be justified.
If we see cuts to special effects like fire on Mummy, or in this case the removal of 3D on Kong, I'm all for cutting the worst rated attraction at the park to "save" the better ones. No reason to keep F&F open if we see the quality of other attractions decline.
How do I answer this without actually saying anything? Yes.
- Apr 30, 2017
- 737
- 2,039
Cutting the existing parks to the bone right before opening a new park on a separate campus really ensures the new park will HEAVILY cannibalize crowds from the existing parks when the new one opens. That will cause execs to panic and make dumber cuts.
As I’ve shown here before, traditionally when Disney and Uni open a new park they ALSO counter by quickly (within a year or year and a half at most) adding big new content to existing parks. What Uni is doing here is pretty new and seems deeply unwise.
At this point, I’d strongly consider giving up EU if it meant we could have the parks run as they were pre-pandemic, with interesting yearly additions.
As I’ve shown here before, traditionally when Disney and Uni open a new park they ALSO counter by quickly (within a year or year and a half at most) adding big new content to existing parks. What Uni is doing here is pretty new and seems deeply unwise.
At this point, I’d strongly consider giving up EU if it meant we could have the parks run as they were pre-pandemic, with interesting yearly additions.
- Dec 28, 2009
- 315
- 671
There really shouldn't be cuts like that since the entire reason to go to these parks are these special effects and experiences; the rides should operate as closely as intentionally designed. That's why we go.
The opposite side of this is that when EU opens and if it holds up close to expectations, it'll make the other parks on the resort look cheap by comparison. Even though it's overused the goggles/3D at least added something extra to the ride (and in Kong relies on it for certain visual effects). Removing that entirely really makes everything look way too screen-heavy.
Looking forward, which opening day rides at EU will be the first to get cut back so the new expansion can get more resources? If it doesn't change that same thinking is going to creep into EU eventually. (I know not directly on topic but I think it's a fair question to bring up at this point, even if we can't necessarily discuss it in this thead.)
- Jan 30, 2013
- 1,960
- 4,742
I believe we are living in different realities.
I agree that this specific cost cutting is bogus. I also think it’s a dumb way to respond to feedback prior to EU. “Less 3-D/Screens” meaning “get rid of the glasses” is wild. If that’s what this is.
However, this post makes it seem like you only live in the world of cuts.
In my world, I also see the constant fixing up of the resort. Food upgrades across the resort, aesthetic updates, attempts at creativity and listening to fans’ desire for nostalgia. Things have opened yearly since covid. We’ve had Velocicoaster, Minions Land, and soon to be Dreamworks. Plus new parade and nighttime show.
This is the same argument we always have. It’s just two different realities.
- Feb 15, 2012
- 17,141
- 47,078
Also the fact that Universal has openly said it is a “test” gives a glimmer of hope. My guess is that it was never intended to be a test (publicly at least), but after the feedback they decided to announce it was a test as damage control.
- Apr 30, 2017
- 737
- 2,039
Yes, there will always be cuts, additions, and changes occurring broadly simultaneously. This is almost always true of theme parks - it was even true of the distinguished competition during its darkest period. It’s a balancing act we all weigh differently, not “different realities.” I feel, for instance, that recent additions like Minion Blast have been blatantly cost-cut disappointments.
People who seem to know in this and other threads seem to be indicating that costs are being cut at the resort as part of an “efficiency” push. Is this untrue?
Quick replies after catching up.
It was always a test.
Supercharged is safe now that it has a sponsor.
It’s not so much blame Epic right now as it is blame Potter wand upgrades, but that’s my interpretation.
It was always a test.
Supercharged is safe now that it has a sponsor.
It’s not so much blame Epic right now as it is blame Potter wand upgrades, but that’s my interpretation.
- Feb 28, 2016
- 684
- 1,491
I don't see how the addition of a new attraction is cost-cutting the parks to the bones. I don't think minion blast was as cheap as you probably think it was either.
Skull Island: Reign of Kong….
3D presented by Inside Universal?
