At the turn of the decade, it felt like you couldn't move online for articles about the dream of the theme park of the future, where queueing was a thing of the past and guests could spend that time instead maximising their day with various adventures instead of being trapped inside the dreaded cattlepen. From wearable tech to digital mobile solutions and beyond, it looked like every entertainment company in the world had their eye on the same end goal, and with Epic Universe on the horizon it seemed inevitable to me that this would be the first theme park in the world to open with integrated 'queueless' technology. 

Because it made so much sense given the developments in this space up until now. The themed entertainment giant's water park Volcano Bay pioneered this tech when it opened back in 2017 with TapuTapu - a wearable wristband that is distributed to all guests free of charge when visiting the attraction. Guests scan this wristband at slides and attractions they wish to experience and return when the TapuTapu says it's time to ride, allowing them to enjoy 'ride anytime' experiences whilst they wait for major attractions, ensuring no time is lost queuing during a day out at Volcano Bay. In an article as recently as December 2024, the Orlando Informer noted that 'TapuTapu is the key behind Universal Orlando's goal of no lines' - clearly this tech was meant as some sort of demo for the main event that would be Epic Universe. 

So imagine my dismay and horror when recent photos emerged showing signage being installed for both stand-by lines and Universal Express Pass - the Resort's existing queue jumping solution, for all major attractions in the new park opening May 2025. Cementing that these existing solutions would be a part of the Epic Universe experience and crushing the fantasy of a queueless theme park all in a single photo update. Which begs the question: why? 

Themed entertainment companies and industry journals alike have been reporting for decades that time spent in queues is the number one complaint guests have about a day out at a theme park. The amount of attractions a guest can experience in one day is also intrinsically linked with perception of overall value, and if a guest thinks something is good value for money you can bet they will want to visit again. Further, for attraction operators it's also in their best interest for you to not be stuck in a queue. From a revenue perspective, parks would much prefer for you to be shopping or eating between attractions and from a guest perspective it's just more enjoyable of a day to have the freedom of time to do so. 

It's a win-win scenario for all parties, so why have we not seen this implemented for Epic Universe and theoretically for all parks built from the ground-up beyond? Firstly, I think the tech solutions just aren't there yet. My personal experience with Tapu Tapu, for example, isn't a good one. I am not a fan of having to wear anything around my wrist (I'm also a Disney MagicBand-hater), especially in a water park setting. I find it uncomfortable and distracting, something I'm constantly having to check in on to see if it is still working and, more importantly, still attached to my person. 

And in the case of Tapu Tapu, this wasn't always so - a few boistrous laps around raging water rides and the thing would fly off, never to be seen again. Meaning I'd have to trudge back to guest services to request another. Annoying. Then there's the queue times themselves. In theory, great that I don't have to physically wait in a line however when the return time is 240 minutes from now (looking at you, Krakatau), there's only so much lazy river and 'free' slides I can endure before even that gets tedious. For me, the experience is frustrating and inconvenient, and I can't imagine how stressful something similar might be in a large theme park with multiple e-ticket attractions.

Then there's the piece of the puzzle that doesn't get discussed as much. After a chat with friends recently, we agreed that sure, if we're talking a Six Flags style hell-on-earth cattlepen queueing experience with little-to-no distraction and sometimes not even any protection from the elements, of course that's something you'd look to eliminate from a park day out. But, if we're talking a Universal style themed and essential to the storytelling journey you're sending your riders on line, the queue itself becomes integral to your attraction as a whole. 

At this point, Universal have nailed the queueline experience. Imagine a Forbidden Journey that didn't begin with you exploring the corridors of Hogwarts, or a Skull Island: Reign of Kong where the mood wasn't set with a trepadatious wander through the skull-lined caverns of the island natives. As long as the throughputs are on point and you don't end up trapped in these heavily themed spaces for longer than intended, a well-executed queueline elevates a ride experience ten-fold vs. eliminating the queue entirely and having riders jump straight into a ride vehicle and sent on their merry way. 

So I get it - given the choice between slightly irritating tech that might not work for everyone, isn't quite there yet and might impede on your guests' enjoyment of the new multi-billion dollar toy you've built for them that promises to offer world-leading experiences in every other facet, and a tried-and-true approach that your guests are familiar with and understand, that your team has existing and extensive operational knowledge of and that will generate some extra revenue in the meantime, it's kind of a no-brainer. 

But does that mean the dream of a queue-less theme park is dead? For now I do think so. If anybody was going to do it, it was going to be Universal with Epic Universe, developed alongside the park as it was being built from the ground-up. Retrospectively integrating queueless tech into parks with existing queueline infrastructure would be no mean feat, nor can I imagine it being cheap, so I think that's out of the question for now. For me, the inclusion of the traditional stand-by plus Universal Express Pass lines at Epic Universe makes a statement to the industry that the optimal queuing experience is the one we already nailed decades again, and I'd be very surprised to see further developments in 'queueless' technology coming to major attractions any time soon. 

___

What do you think? Is the dream dead or are we just on the precipice of some amazing future tech developments in queueless technology? Let me know in the comments, I'd love to have a chat!

Talk later xoxo,

Here we are again, on the precipice of a fresh year of theme park trips, of new experiences and adventures that await...so why do I not feel the same excitement I usually do? Life-wise everything is a bit of a question mark for us right now - we're in the process of buying a house and as such we can't commit to many major trips as we have no idea how quickly everything is going to be sorted as that is our number one priority at the moment trip planning is taking a bit of a back seat. That and, is it just me or after what I feel was a bit of a bonanza year in 2024, there's just not tons of new stuff on our doorstep to be excited like there was last year? 

Is it just me or has there been a gradual trend towards actually good family coasters of late? Of course Disney lead the way: we had Seven Dwarfs Mine Train back in 2014, and more recently the Frozen themed Wandering Oaken's Sliding Sleighs but I've noticed other attractions are following suit. LEGOLAND Windsor Resort here in the UK just opened the actually-really-fun-for-a-kids-coaster Minifigure Speedway, Drayton Manor are opening a 'launched family thrill coaster' at some point this year and even Universal have given some TLC to their Vekoma junior coaster as part of their Dreamworks land project. 

Of course, there have always been family coasters, but of late it seems that it's no longer acceptable to just slap in a Big Apple and call it a day like parks used to. No - now there has to be theming, a storyline, some cool custom trains and maybe even a dark ride section. Simultaneous to this, I've also noticed a step away from the low budget kiddie dark ride. These days our dark rides seem to go all out, erring on a 'proper' thrill experience, leaving behind the classic Pretzel dark ride style that was a staple in many a park for years.

There's been a notable step up in the family attraction product in general, and of course that comes with innovation and tech development, but when cheaper alternatives are available it's got me wondering why we're seeing this shift. 

As a society, attention spans have decreased, especially for children, with studies suggested that this shift has been most noticeable post-covid. I also think with social media showing us everything everywhere all at once, we're much more critical and picky than we used to be: we no longer settle for something 'fine' and instead seek out the best of the best experiences because with so many products competing for our attention at all times, experiencing something that's less than perfect feels like a waste of precious time and funds that could have been spent doing something better. 

Family attractions are also competing with the ever-present iPad. When designing family attractions nowadays, creators must ask themselves the question: is this experience something they can't get anywhere else, and is this two minutes spent on my ride better than two minutes spent in front of an iPad watching CocoMelon? Arguably the formerly acceptable crappy but still fun dark ride with blacklit scenes and MDF cut outs no longer fits the bill, and the alternative eg. fully fleshed out dark rides with animatronics, SFX, narrative, theme song, etc are very costly and therefore largely reserved for the bigger spenders in the industry or as once-in-a-generation projects. 

But you know what CAN compete with CocoMelon? And can also be enjoyed as a group experience vs. parents gritting their teeth through some nightmare-fuel fairytale boat ride? Rollercoasters. 

Even if the coaster is fairly stripped back in terms of theming etc, there's no denying the thrill a coaster provides, even smaller thrills like you'd find on a family coaster, are way better than any enjoyment the family dark rides of previous generations could ever hope to deliver. And family coasters can do so much now: they launch, they spin, they go backwards, some of them even go upside down! It essentially, as most things do, boils down to simple economics: how much fun per £ can I deliver with my next investment. For a dark ride with today's short attention spans and high expectations, you're looking at spending a hell of a lot more for your investment vs. a coaster of a similar or lower price for arguably a much lower return on the fun factor. 

And then if you're Disney or Universal or are just feeling particularly flush that year, you combine the two. Dark ride scenes combined with the family coaster thrills so your riders can have their cake and eat it too. It's a win win situation for those who have the capital.

Personally, I adore a janky old dark ride with their musty smells and clumsy animatronics. But truthfully, as an enthusiast for that sort of thing I know I'm a niche audience and that sort of thing just won't fly with the families of today. So whilst it's sad we're slowly seeing the erosion of this kind of attraction in our parks, I'm more than happy with the family coaster boom we're seeing today and my excitement grows with each innovation and new investment. And of course, more creds for me. 

___

What do you think? Is there a place for classic style dark rides with today's modern family or is the trend towards family coaster investments the right way to go? Let me know in the comments, I'd love to have a chat!

Talk later xoxo,

As much as a lot of my love for theme parks is rooted in childhood nostalgia, I've personally never been one of those enthusiasts who pines for the 'good old days' whenever a park dares to remove an older attraction in favour of adding something more up to date and new. I absolutely appreciate a classic attraction, but I also understand that parks have a finite amount of space, and I'd much rather something exciting and new to enjoy rather than watching something rot into an almost unrecognisable version of its former self. 

But, despite my praise of innovation and new product development, there is something I've noticed of late. Everything feels just a little too polished and perfect. With the development of technology, theme park designers now have the ability to 'build' attractions in a virtual space using architectural progammes and such to physically see exactly what is going to come to fruition in real life. And whilst that's fantastic from a spend, efficiency and planning perspective, what it does do is remove any opportunity for happy accidents or whimsical little imperfections that add a depth of character and personality about a place. 

There's charm in weirdness. There's intrigue in animatronics whose faces slip into uncanny valley territory, whose janky movements evoke a feeling reminiscent of a more humble period of themed attraction development, where creators were more 'hands-on' and could physically pour more of their own heart, soul and passion into creating something. A step that the perfectionism that comes with tecnological advancement has largely left a lot of modern attractions devoid of. 

My number one example of this that comes to mind is Marvel Avengers Campus at the Walt Disney Studios park in Paris. The land is crisp, modern and flashy, with chrome and mirror wall details, punctuated with subtle neon lighting. It also looks like it wouldn't be out of place in a new build shopping mall, or real life college campus. It doesn't feel like magic could happen around any corner, and even when we do meet Spiderman and the Spider-bots, or see Dr. Strange open a portal, it somehow doesn't feel like we're witnessing the impossible because the setting itself is coded as real world modern architecture as opposed to something other-worldly and wonderful. It feels like we're in something created by boring old humans because it's designed to look as such. And isn't that inherently the opposite of what the point of theme parks is?

It's not all bad news though - parks where fantasy and fairytales are at the heart of their brand DNA seem to have finessed the craft of creating new attractions that take advantage of modern theme park technologies whilst maintaining a classic style that retains a lot of that nostalgic oddness we all seem to assimilate with. Of course I'm talking about Efteling, first and foremost here. The park are very protective of their specific brand style, inspired by the incredible Anton Pieck, and as such there's a vein of consistent weirdness that travels through each and everyone one of their attractions. 

At Efteling, you can see rides that are decades old next to rides that are still fairly new, and one can easily identify that these are part of the same parcel. Symbolica, for example, contains characters with bizarre and almost grotesque, contorted faces that feel classic and old-school, but the ride tech and special effects are high-tech and new (comparatively). It's the perfect example of an attraction that blends all the benefits of modern theme park design and technology without forgetting their brand essence and classic theme park magic and tricks that people fell in love with in the first place. 

And that's where I think we're starting to fall down. Theme park SHOULD be weird. They should contain things that make you go 'what the hell was that?' Because its amusing to be slightly weirded out. It's amusing when things are slightly odd and off kilter. It makes us smile because it's unusual and unexpected, and there's such joy to be found in attractions that do that. Theme parks should be full of hidden nooks and crannies for us to discover, filled with hidden characters and effects, little moments that populate the inbetween spaces with moments of wonder and opportunity, and that utilise tech to amplify that amusement as opposed to just because the tech is cool and new. 

Ultimately, I believe in order to achieve truly timeless attractions that will appeal to theme park goers decades later as those old, janky things still do for a lot of us now, we need to ensure that we're creating attractions that utilise the entire toolkit available, not just the shiny new tech. A blend of classic tried-and-true techniques combined with new tech in instances where it amplifies and enhances the product as opposed to just using it for the sake of it, combined with honouring the park's inherent brand style and DNA seems to me a sure-fire way to avoid more soulless Avengers Campus style theme park additions in the future, protecting the weirdness and whimsy of our most beloved parks for decades to come. 

___

What do you think? Do you love all things hi-tech and new or do you appreciate a crusty old animatronic that doesn't move quite right like I do? Let me know in the comments, I'd love to have a chat!

Talk later xoxo,

Having returned from yet another visit to my favourite theme park in the world, Phantasialand, I am once again reeling at the near perfection of the place. In a world where a lot of theme parks are derivative and either stacked with IP or take 'inspiration' from one another, every time I leave I am blown away at just how special and unique Phantasialand is. The place oozes originality and works to inspire awe from every facet, from immersive hotel experiences to coasters that are equal parts thrilling and themed - it really does have it all. 

Or does it? Often I am blinkered by my fangirl goggles when it comes to Phantasialand. Having visited the park consistently for coming on fifteen years now I've watched the very fabric of the landscape change and grow with investment after investment of world-beating new attractions. Which means that whilst a lot of the park is nigh on perfection, it's also had the adverse effect of really casting a spotlight on the areas that need bringing in line with the rest of the place. Here's five things I'd change about Phantasialand. 

And to caveat, this is naive, uneducated, blue sky thinking, unhindered by the realities of planning permission, aggy locals, parks budgets and timelines etc. Join me as a I dream, for just a sec. 

OK let's start off big. With eight coasters of varying size and variety, I do think that actually, the park's coaster offering is solid. It doesn't feel like it's lacking anything in that department, with everything from great family coasters to intense, excellently themed thrill coasters, it's 10/10 no notes. But the dark ride line-up is a different story. 

Don't get me wrong, I adore Maus au Chocolat and its quaint whimsy, and Geister Rikchsa's unhinged popping animatronics and non-sensical narrative, but the park is missing something we've seen very much on the rise in other parks and that is a thrill-lead dark ride. But I'm not talking something heavily screen-based like something you'd find in Universal Orlando - but something with more animatronics and gorgeous set dressing and theming. The park used to be wall-to-wall animatronic-laden dark ride and show experiences, so it's very much in their bones to be able to deliver something like that and I feel like it would round off the attraction line-up to near perfection. 

I very recently tweeted that I hope the park never touch Wuze Town, and by that I mean the essence of Wuze Town. That sensation you get just by being in there that feels like waking up from a dream you can only half remember. I have no idea how they've managed to capture that, but they have and it's special so we can leave that well alone. 

But, being in there I feel like there's things we could do to elevate it. To further perfect something that's already close to it. I'm talking closing off some of the more open areas, replacing some of the tatty and sun-washed fabrics, adding animatronics and moving parts. Something I've praised lands like Rookburgh and Klugheim for is the way the theming feels like the lands are lived in, which subsequently leaves us guests feeling like players in an RPG. Phantasialand don't tell us the story, they simply give us the landscape and let us have our own adventure. That's half-way there in Wuze Town but they really upped their game with more recent additions and I feel like some of those learnings need to be leant to bringing this liminal fantasy land in line with the rest of the park. 

I know, collectively we all agree that the main entrance of the park is wildly at odds with the thematic aesthetic of the inside of Phantasialand. I also know we all know the park are incredibly limited for space in the immediate area for parking and the like. So my suggestion is bulldoze the whole thing as it is. Rebuild the main entrance into something worthy of calling itself the gateway to the best themed park in the world rather than somewhere that feels like a teenager is going to push his mixtape on me. Create something the House of the Five Senses would be jealous of. 

And, instead of having car parks on site, have a park and ride system somewhere nearby instead. Build a big ol' ugly mega multi-story car park in the nearby area and run cool themed busses to and from this to protect that bubble of immersion. Honestly, exiting the fantastical worlds within the park gates to immediately be hit with ugly urban 70s style architecture is a jolting slap to the face and not fair to the experiences the park has to offer, especially if you're not luckly enough to extend your stay at one of the Resort hotels. 

As previously mentioned, Phantasialand has a historical love story with animatronic laden dioramas and fairytale scenes, and over the years as bigger and better ideas have come along those have now largely disappeared from the park. I know Efteling is only down the road and they're arguably the best in the business at the whole fairytale forest thing, but given Phantasialand's experience with the artform and their now serious wealth of knowledge with developing their own themed worlds and stories, I think they could give them a serious run for their money. 

As much as I adore the park, given the limited space to work with, every inch of the park is wall to wall packed with incredible theming, kinetic energy, gorgeous soundtracks and the sound of guests enjoying the whole thing. What it lacks is respite from that - somewhere to just take a beat and recover from the overwhelming awe of the place and I feel a revived Marchenwald in the modern Phantasialand style would be the perfect remedy to balance this. 

And finally, the merch. My god the merch is, for lack of a better word, appalling. As mentioned, I've been visiting the park for almost fifteen years at this point, and I kid you not they're still selling a lot of the same things they were back when I first darkened their doorway. It's just...crap. It's nonsensical. It's tat nobody in their right mind would want - obsessed with dragon characters in a way that the rest of the park doesn't seem to be. It needs a serious overhaul - gotta throw the whole Haus of Dragons away and start from scratch. As much as I love laughing at how crap it is, I would love to spend more money with the park on things I'd actually like as mementos of my visits to my favourite park in the world and I know I'm not alone in this. 

___

So, what do you think of my ideas? Anything else you'd suggest? Anything I've suggested that you disagree with? Let me know in the comments, I'd love to have a chat!

Talk later xoxo,

Another year, and a fresh horizon of brand new coasters and theme parks to get out there and explore. Usually I love January for that very reason as it's an opportunity to cosy up and get stuck into trip planning, but between going away for New Year's, getting engaged, celebrated Sam's birthday, getting my car fixed and heading to Phantasialand this weekend, I feel like I haven't had time to stop, let alone sit down and map out what the year ahead looks like. Until now, I suppose. There's also a lot on the horizon for us in 2024, so the reality is I don't know which of these trips will actually go ahead or not and as always everything is subject to *gestures widely at the universe that has a nasty habit of throwing spanners in the works of late*. 

Going into 2023 was a weird one for me. Exhausted from the intense ridiculousness that was a yeqr of epic travel across the USA & Europe in 2022, I knew I was never going to top it for variety and breadth of experience. I'd usually enter each year with a stringent plan of what I'd like to do, where I'd like to visit and what new creds I'd like to get on for the year ahead, to the point of militancy and making myself ill trying to make it happen, or worse being absolutely distraught if plans fell through. I entered 2023 with an eerie calm, a blank canvas of possible trips awaited and for once I allowed myself the freedom of just going with the flow and seeing where the year took me, and subsequently it's been an absolutely blinding mixed-bag of revisiting old favourites, sharing experiences with Sam for the first time and really getting out of my comfort zone. This is what my 2023 in theme parks looked like!

It's a theme park enthusiast discussion that's been ongoing since the dawn of time (aka the early 2000s on coaster nerd forums): park announces a new ride, releases concept art, maybe an animated visual or POV, and before the place has even had a chance to drill a support into the ground there's replies from enthusiasts complaing how it looks slow, or short, or poorly paced, or not exactly what they specifically would like to see from the park. 

And it's one that's always baffled me. Having ridden my fair share of rides, as I'm sure many of you have, I will never understand the blind confidence of an enthusiast on a message board, or indeed now on social media, boldly declaring their opinion on a ride that not only they haven't ridden, but that isn't even built yet. I wanted to dive a little deeper into this discussion today and explore why it's ultimately harmful to the eventual experience of finally getting to ride the thing to go beyond general speculation. 

So firstly, concept art and animations are meant to be, as the name might suggest, conceptual, and are never representative of the actual 100% fully signed off finished product. Especially in the very early stages of a project. So we might see different train designs, a slightly wider track, trees or rockwork where there doesn't end up being any, etc. A lot of the time, concept art is used to 'sell in' an idea as opposed to being actual, detailed blueprints of the thing. It's an idealised, top line version of what the attraction might look like and therefore you'll often find the details are foggy and vague. 

Think those wishy-washy conceptual paintngs of Epic Universe in the early days - there was pretty much no defining detail in those images but rather a generalised idea of what the park would look like. Of course this didn't stop countless YouTube channels dissecting and zooming in on every square foot of the image, speculating what might be to come, and there's nothing wrong with that at all. It's an exciting, shiny new project that we want to get hyped about after all! But what we can't do is say oh from this extremely vague concept art I determine that this ride/attraction/park is going to be rubbish and immediately start slating it because there's no fact or detail to be garnered from it. It's outrage and disappointment based on nothing at all (looking at you, Disney 'fans' slating Tiana's Bayou Adventure concept art...) 

The next point is more specifically about rollercoasters. Anybody who's ridden...any rollercoaster ever can surely agree to the fact that even the most high quality, HD, crystal clear POV cannot convey the actual forces felt on a coaster. Because sometimes, forces come completely out of nowhere and catch us off guard (and those are the best ones in my opinion!) I'm thinking SkyRush's first drop - there's insane ejector airtime on that thing that you would never be able to predict from a POV, or even the top hat on Velocicoaster. Yes, seasoned enthusiasts can watch a POV of a coaster we've never ridden and get a vague idea of what forces will happen where but it's never 100% accurate until we actually ride the thing. 

Maybe I'm alone in this, but I find it infuriating when enthusiasts say a coaster looks slow, or forceless, or has no airtime, but they've never ridden it and have only watched a POV. I know in the past I've had countless debates with people who will argue with their whole chest that they know what the experience is like from watching loads of YouTube videos, but let's be real, you cannot really have a fully formed opinion on any ride until you've ridden it yourself. You can certainly argue whether you think something looks fun or not based on your personal tastes and what you know you personally like from a ride, but to say something flat out IS bad without having ridden it yourself is crazy to me. 

And to add to that - when you watch a POV the only sense of the ride you get is visual, maybe a little aural, but I'd argue the latter depends on the quality of the video in question. Your sensory is experience of the ride is reduced to a detached visual one (eg filtered through the lens of a camera and then again through the screen of the device you're watching on). You're completely removed from the actual sensation of the ride itself, audio nuances, smells and any other sensations you'd feel in real life. ALL of these things are purposefully designed to elevate the ride experience, and to judge a ride without experiencing those things altogether in the symphony it is intended to be is reductive, and ignorant to the ride designers and their intentions for the attraction experience. 

Finally, and this is the kicker for me personally, I do not understand the idea of wanting to experience a ride for the first time having already made up your mind on what you think the experience will be. I actively will not watch POVs of rides I haven't been on for the most part, because I do not want to have any bias in my brain for how my actual enjoyment of the thing will pan out. Also spoilers! So many rides have little things that happen that come out of nowhere, and personally I do not get why anybody would want to take away from the joy of being surprised by that for the first time in real life. If you watch a POV of a coaster and decide it looks crap, then surely when you ride it yourself for the first time you're boarding the thing expecting it to be crap? I do not understand self-sabotage like that, for me I'd much rather board for the first time with a blank slate and make my mind up after the fact. And usually even then it takes a few gos to get a fully rounded opinion. 

In conclusion, don't judge before you ride! Not only is it irritating when debating with those who actually have ridden the thing, but it's non-sensical for attractions that literally haven't been built yet and also detrimental to your eventual experience of the ride itself. Imagine, discuss and speculate to your heart's content of course but leave the final judgement until after the fact. 

___

What do you think? Are you guilty of this? Do you think you can get a good idea of what a ride will be like from POVs and concept art alone? Let me know in the comments, I'd love to have a chat!

Talk later xoxo,

Last month saw the terribly sad news that the Jetline rollercoaster at Stockholm's Grona Lund amusement park derailed, resulting in the death of one rider and severe injuries for several others. It's always terrible when tragic accidents like this occur, but then I saw somebody on Twitter point out that this was the third instance of a derailing like this occurring on similar coaster types, which begs the harrowing question: could this have been avoided? 

We're very lucky, especially as roller coaster enthusiasts, to exist in a bit of a roller coaster golden age. There's never been as many operating coasters in the world as there are right now as far as I am aware, and that is showing no sign of slowing down with newer, bigger and better coasters appearing year after year. We've also gained tons of knowledge about how to look after these machines in better and safer ways than we ever have before, meaning that the first properly bold and levelled-up designs we saw emerging in the early nineties are still able to deliver thrills to riders 25+ years later. 

And that's fantastic - with the explosion of social media the small forums and message boards full of theme park nerds like us who care about this stuff expanding from a dusty tucked away corner of the internet in the early 2000s into the cold light of modern day there's now a louder cry than ever for parks to take care of what are now classed as heritage attractions, and that public pressure means parks are investing in ways to keep these attractions running for as long as possible. 

Which is of course brilliant, but as with all things like this where is the cut off point? Is it safe or necessary to keep a roller coaster running after decades of continual operation? According to a very quick Google search I just did, the average lifespan of a car is about twelve years, or 200,000 miles (300,000 if well maintained). And we all know how that goes, towards the end of your car's life things can get a little bit janky, even if you're very good at looking after it. It's just the way machines go, and so surely the same can be said of roller coasters?

So, what to do? Because theme parks are places that are so intrinsically linked with heightened emotion, childhood nostalgia and general joy, it's easy to understand why these machines mean so much to people and why so many of us grow real, personal attachments to the things. The thought of the big bad theme park taking a wrecking ball to a ride you have fond memories of really is heart breaking, and realistically no park in the world wants to take the decision to permanently remove iconic rides. In fact I'd say that often those working in the parks have an even stronger attachment!

The good news is, it seems like the parks are very much aware that we're approaching a point in the theme park timeline where a lot of big, iconic coasters are nearing the end of their lifespan, and have been showcasing lots of different ways to keep attractions alive in one way or another. 

Retrack

Something that seems to be a very popular option of late, retracking. Essentially this involved replacing most, if not all of a roller coaster's track like for like. We first saw this in a big way in 2015/2016 when Universal Islands of Adventure retracked their iconic Incredible Hulk coaster. UK enthusiasts are currently watching with mixed emotions as Alton Towers retrack the legendary Nemesis roller coaster. This is a fantastic way of giving roller coasters a new lease of life, and theoretically increasing the longevity of an attraction infinitely given the budgets are there. I like to think of this as the Trigger's broom solution - yes all the original parts might be long gone but essentially the machine is the same and delivering the same ride experience it always has. 

RMC

Kind of like a retrack but with a twist (literally). Often the choice for parks looking to keep older wooden coasters standing but with a modern update, parks have been calling in modern coaster manufacturers to update older rides to give them a new lease of life. RMC are most famous for doing this, spurning the phrase 'RMC it' or 'this needs to be RMC'd' referring to a rough wooden roller coaster in dire need of an update. Whilst this doesn't provide a like for like replacement ride experience like the aforementioned direct retrack approach, which may upset die hard fans, this is a fantastic compromise option. The original ride itself isn't completely gone, but also the park gets an exciting new, different addition to their attraction line-up. 

Replace

Sometimes it's not worth, or simply not possible, to retrack or update the attraction, in which case a park may decide to make the difficult decision to tear the whole ride down and replace entirely with something new. I know I'm not alone in thinking this approach can work, however what is replacing the attraction being removed better be infinitely better than what stood in its place previously. My brain here is drawn straight to Duelling Dragons/Hagrid's Magical Creatures Motorbike Adventure at Islands of Adventure. Duelling Dragons was an incredible attraction, however with all the issues in its latter years of operation and the need for some new Potter blood, AND the fact that Hagrid is an incredible ride, I'm completely at peace with the decision. Plus, there are little nods to Duelling Dragons in the Hagrid queueline if you know where to look, and that to me shows that the park understand what this coaster meant to people and are being respectful to those who miss it rather than just pretending it didn't exist. 

And then of course there are a couple of other options: tear the thing down and do not replace it, or just leave it standing but not operating (SBNO). Both options of which I'm sure everybody reading this will agree should only be considered as absolute last resorts. 

___

I think we're in a really interesting point in history when it comes to what we do with these big, iconic rides in the future and I'm intrigued to see how parks continue to innovate to maintain that balance between operating safely, respecting and honouring heritage and also ensuring things feel fresh and new to keep visitors coming back for years to come.

Talk later xoxo,

I love an immersive storyline when it comes to my rides as well as the next theme park enthusiast. Nothing delights me more than a fantastic narrative that sends me tumbling down the rabbit-hole, completely engulfed in whatever fantasy the designers have concocted for me. That said, I do think there are some instances where theme park designers get too in their head about the whole 'immersion' thing, leading to long pre-shows stuffed with so much exposition and contextual explanation that your brain hurts before you've even boarded the thing. And that's speaking as an enthusiast who actually likes and wants to pay attention to this stuff - god knows what this is like for non-enthusiasts! 

So I wanted to spend some time today counting down some of the worst offending tropes we see time and time again where designers are just overthinking things that in reality, are no big deal and easily forgivable as part of the 'suspension of disbelief' we all have to buy into a little when entering a theme park. And FYI, this article might feel like I'm deeping it a little too hard at times, but please know I'm being entirely tongue in cheek when writing this and being over the top for dramatic effect (for the most part) so please don't get too upset with me.

Every single time I grab a pair of 3D glasses to board an attraction I wish I had a note in my phone somewhere listing all the different reasons we're given to explain away the hardware. Bug-vision, ogre-vision, protective goggles, night vision goggles, etc, etc, etc. Do I really need a reason as to why I'm wearing the glasses? What about the screen? That is usually never explained, because we're not meant to 'see' it, so why explain the glasses? In my opinion it makes us 'see' the glasses more, if that makes sense? If we didn't draw attention to them with mad narrative-linked over-explanation I feel we'd draw less attention to them and in a way, that feels more immersive to me. Really, has anybody ever gone into an attraction that requires 3D glasses and demanded an explanation? I don't think so. 

Worst offender: Shrek-4D's 'Ogre-vision'. The Shrek franchise is the master of breaking the fourth wall, so I'd have respected it a lot more if they were just like yh, it's a theme park ride. Put on the glasses, sit down and shut up!

Look, as much as I love Optimus Prime kneeling down to my level and thanking me personally for my service, it always feels like a flimsy attempt at evoking a sense of active rider participation without actually building an active rider experience. Take an escape room, for instance. When you complete an escape room that actually warrants a thanks from whatever fantastical being you were serving in solving the puzzle, because your actual brain power and physical interaction meant something. But usually on these rides where we're thanked for our help, we're just helpless passengers at the mercy of the ride vehicle. We all get the same ride experience, having done nothing worth thanking except sitting gormlessly for a few minutes. 'Because of you the city is saved?' Is it? Is it really?

Worst offender: Sorry Transformers, but it's you. Poor EVAC, he did all the hard work and we're the ones being thanked at the end?

You've been brought here today because we're going to show you the very latest in some sort of technology! You've been brought here today because we have a secret mission! You've been brought here today because time is running out! OK? Does me knowing that really add to my experience or immersion? Is this something that could have been spelled out to me through clever theming in the queueline? Did I really need to stand in a box before the ride itself and have somebody literally spell it out for me? Something like Expedition Everest does this incredibly - the queueline itself is like a museum and oozing with details of the legend of the yeti, what the vehicle is and why we're boarding the train today, no pre-show required! 

Worst offender: It's got to be Flight of Passage. That pre-show feels like torture from start to finish, it's agonising both in length and obvious exposition. And worst of all it's not even fun, it takes itself so seriously!

This is probably my biggest bug bear. I can't remember where I saw it, but I watched a Disney Imagineering documentary a few years ago and somebody said realistically there are very few real world things that have a cart that sits on a track, like a roller coaster, that you can successfully narratively explain away. It's why mine train themes are so popular, because mine carts literally go on track so it makes sense. The minute you try to move to something a little more avant garde with an explanation, where do you draw the line? How do you narratively explain away restraints, or track if we're meant to be on a space ship? If I'm being shrunk down to be a mouse in Remy's Ratatouille Adventure, then why am I riding in a giant mouse with wheels?

Again, I think it's one of those instances where we do not need the vehicle to be explained, we can just be expected to reasonably suspend our disbelief because ultimately - we all know it's a ride even if the narrative is trying to tell us it's not.

Worst offender: Hagrid's Magical Creatures Motorbike Adventure. Admittedly looping in Arthur Weasley, who canonically has an obsession with muggle contraptions, is a stroke of IP genius, but did we really need the replication spell to explain away why the vehicle is just multiple versions of Hagrid's motorbike? It's just not needed!

___

I guess what I'm saying is I much prefer a narrative that is a lot more open to interpretation? Something like Taron, or Klugheim in general? There are clues all around the land to uncover to piece together the story of the land and what has happened, but at no point do you sit in a room and have someone waffle a load of exposition at you. Instead, you're just let loose and left to figure it out for yourself, and can take away as much or little from it as you like. That to me feels endlessly more immersive than something like Flight of Passage where I'm so bored in the pre-show I actually consider leaving before the ride itself.

What do you think - do you love a bit of exposition or do you find it exhausting like I do? Would you prefer more things to be left up to interpretation or for designers to rely a little more on suspension of disbelief? Let me know in the comments, I'd love to have a chat!

Talk later xoxo,