wikiverse

Members
  • Content Count

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

wikiverse last won the day on July 13

wikiverse had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

232 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Park & Ride Stats

  • Park Count
    0
  • Ride Count
    123

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. wikiverse

    Steel Curtain at Kennywood - first test

    And here is the first official POV video for anyone that is interested. The ride is now officially open. World's tallest inversion (197 feet) 220 ft lift hill (are we calling this one a Hyper?) 9 inversions - the most in North America Top Speed of 75mph (120kph) S&S have purchased Vekoma. Steel Curtain and Maxx Force are the first two major custom designs they've introduced. Should an Australian park look at getting a new S&S design?
  2. Steel Curtain has just had its first test run at Kennywood. I don't care if it looks like someone's first Roller Coaster Tycoon design, it looks like a lot of fun and I can't wait to ride it.
  3. wikiverse

    Volcano Bay - Electricity Pun Olympics

    ELECTRICITY.
  4. wikiverse

    Sea World to reveal $50m spend

    I'm going to assume these renderings are fairly accurate to the layouts and models that they want to have, since they've already started land clearing. Based on these animations, the Top Spin looks to be a HUSS 'TOP SPIN SUSPENDED' model with the back-to-back seats. Which is a great choice. Based on the supports and the Timberliner train in the video, the wooden coaster will be a Gravity Group model. Any coaster nerd will tell you that means lots of ejector airtime and great transitions between turns. If you haven't ridden one of these, and you're turning your nose up at the term 'family coaster', you're in for a pleasant surprise. Gravity Group build roller coasters that are half this height and still pack a punch in terms of thrills. This will be a great addition to Sea World and is something that Dreamworld could learn from.
  5. I hope you don't mind me throwing a non-Disney/Universal curve ball, but for young kids I can recommend going to Seoul, South Korea. This is a good (cheaper) trip suggestion for everyone that isn't AlexB as well. First, the country: It's much cheaper than Japan, Singapore, or HK. Seoul is very English Friendly (subways and buses all have English announcements) Korean Air have direct flights from Brisbane, Asiana have direct flights from Sydney. Cathay have really cheap flights if you don't mind stopping in HK for a few hours. There are 3 theme parks in Seoul. Lotte World - http://adventure.lotteworld.com/eng/main/index.do The world's largest indoor amusement park. Dozens of rides, (mostly moderate thrills), but there is a lot for small kids as well as adults, and some good family attractions They do 2 Parades each day (lunch time and evening). The evening parade is pretty incredible (Disney-level good). It is literally in the middle of Seoul (Jamsil) and attached to Lotte World Mall, so there is plenty of cheap food and accommodation nearby. Discounts for Foreigners (a bit of research to find the right deal and you can get in for as cheap as $15-20) Has an Ice skating rink in the middle of it (with free skate hire for foreigners). Everland - http://www.everland.com/mobile/english/ Samsung's Theme park. About 1-2 hours just outside of Seoul Is a resort, so you can stay on-premises if you want or stay closer to Seoul and get the bus. Has a water park called Caribbean Bay Is also a zoo with safari-style attractions The park is massive with great theming and really good attractions (including T-Express an Intamin Woody) Very family friendly Beautiful scenery in the Spring/Autumn if you can go then. Tax Free shopping for tourists Seoul Land - http://eng.seoulland.co.kr/eng/index.asp A much older park (built for the Seoul Olympics) Very family friendly (really cheap food, great rides for kids and families) Only a short 15-20 min train ride from Central Seoul In the middle of Seoul Grand Park (which itself is really nice) Really cheap entry - and some websites give discounts if you enter after 12. Not as English friendly as the other two parks (really made for locals), but still easy enough to navigate. To be honest, you could take the kids to Korea when they are any age and you'd still be able to get a lot of value out of it. You could also do all three of these parks in Seoul and still have a cheaper trip than going to Japan. It's not Disney or Universal, but it's a great holiday option that a lot of people don't think about.
  6. wikiverse

    Sea World - New Ride 2020

    Wicker Man - Alton Towers.
  7. Dreamworld don't need to hit a home-run right now. They need to just hit singles and doubles. Get to first base, then to second base, until all the bases are loaded and you can start getting back to home base and get some runs on the board. Everyone here wants them to invest heavily in a major attraction - and they definitely need to do that eventually, but they need to make some smaller, significant plays to get back in the game. The trick is to buy off-the-shelf rides that fit into the family/thrill category. This means mild to wild thrills. An ABC Tourbillon to replace Wipeout, an RMC Raptor or Gravity Group Woody to replace HWSW, leading up to a falcons-fury style revamp of GD to replace TOT2/GD. (I know the tourbillon is a 'meh' ride, but the visual experience will have everyone talking about it - which is the point!) Slowly, build an aviation-themed area of the park to replace Gold Rush that highlights some of the major Queensland contributions to Aviation (Charles Kingsford Smith, Qantas, etc.), and then invest in a major new ride - the new Vekoma Flying Coaster - as the centre piece, work in the new GD rebuild, and Sky Voyager into the area, and suddenly you've got a park that is kicking some major goals, with a range of unique attractions that other GC parks don't have. They need to dream big, but act sensibly. Ardent can absolutely turn this around if they just commit to a proper vision for the park and really sweat the details. As a priority, hire a Creative Director to oversee that creative vision and do what that person advises. If they can just hold back from turning the former GoldRush site into a Caravan Park, I remain hopeful (but not optimistic).
  8. I managed to get a visit in yesterday and finally got to ride this after the re-fit. To be honest, I didn't think it was great, but I also don't think it is quite as bad as some here have made it out to be. MickeyD's review was fairly accurate, although for my ride everything seemed to be timed and synchronised as intended. The green-screen effect was technically working well, but it just missed the mark for immersion that I think they were hoping for. There was also smoke in the Disco Room with some lighting effects that put beams of light directly in front of us on the track. It looked like there was a white pole in the middle of the track we were about to hit, so that was kinda fun. (To be fair, I think it was a mis-aligned light, but I hope they keep it this way). Generally though, the ride is far too bright - both the projection and the lighting. All of the hidden dips and turns in the track are now clearly visible, so there are no surprises in the physical sensation of the ride. This means that the ride relies 100% on the effects and projections to create surprise and suspense, and for this reason the ride largely fails to deliver. One thing I will say though, is that I rode with a first-time rider. While he wasn't that impressed with the TV screens in the elevator, they did succeed in preventing him from realising that it was an elevator, which made the backward drop more of a surprise. So, there's a small consolation. The final room with the projections seemed kind of pointless, and you can see the frozen image waiting to animate before you enter. To be honest, I don't think anyone is going to understand the scrappy-doo/monsters/spooky island story enough to know what the hell this is supposed to be. I've seen the film and I don't even get it. Why introduce new story elements in the elevator with Scrappy that never get paid off at the end of the ride? Did I miss something? The queue is also kind of disappointing. The fountain was working, but the removal of the walls and gargoyle statues means there isn't much to look at. The knights no longer turn their heads (although it's been that way for a while), but it is those kinds of spooky surprises that should make this ride great. Keeping the castle walls and using projection mapping to introduce ghosts/monsters scratching at windows or climbing across the stones would have been a great addition here. Projectors work well in JL because the ride is interactive and respond to you shooting at them. The 3D glasses also dim the brightness and saturation. They don't really work well on SDSC though, and some well crafted, basic animatronics with strobe lighting would have probably been more fitting. This ride was definitely better suited to low-tech, rather than high-tech effects. I think there is room for improvement, but I'm not really convinced that VRTP will make any additional changes. Everything seemed like it was working exactly as they intended during my ride yesterday. Maybe with time, the brightness of the lights and projector bulbs will naturally dim to better level. Generally everything is just so heavy-handed and trying too hard to impress with high-tech effects. Hopefully as the current effects start to wear out, they will just replace them with some good old-fashioned practical props and mirrors. While the ride isn't a complete disaster, I do agree with the general consensus here that the ride has lost most of it's charm and mystery. Sometimes, less is more.
  9. wikiverse

    Aquaman – The Exhibition at Movie World

    @pushbutton@themagician Wh... What if they just hung a sign that said 'Entry' above the entry?
  10. wikiverse

    Before and After pictures of Dreamworld

    These aren't exactly the same angle, but they're close enough. Ardent are slowly turning Dreamworld into a soulless wasteland. These buildings wouldn't look out of place in an industrial park.
  11. Those are experiences offered by the tour company ExperienceOz, who is the sponsor of the ride. So it is possible (even likely) that they are also the flyover locations. I wouldn't be surprised if ExperienceOz has a sales representative in the store so you can book those attractions after seeing them in the ride.
  12. While I expect that Dreamworld/Brogent will have done a great job on the ride itself, in my opinion, DW have really missed the mark with the building facade and theme. Immersion is a key factor to getting people to suspend their disbelief, and it is also a key factor in getting people to open their wallet - not just for the cost of entry into the park to engage in the immersion, but also on food, drinks, souvenirs and up-charge experiences. This is one of the key rules of shop design to encourage more sales. It is why Ikea is one long path with room after room of products featured in-context, rather than endless racks of shelves. It is why Apple has tables at just the right height to angle their laptop screens in a way that invites people to touch the product. Immersion increases sales and can justify higher prices if it looks like a 'quality' product. Credit where credit is due - DW have done a great job with Dreamworks and Tiger Island and have proven that they are capable of creating immersive environments. However, they always manage to drop the ball, like the Green Prison at Tiger Island, or the Trolls attraction. Despite the iRide being one of the highest quality theatre attractions available, this building doesn't do the ride justice. I'm giving DW the benefit of the doubt that the ride itself will be great, but the building looks cheap. It breaks the immersion that did exist, and replaces it with something that can't even clearly be identified as an 'airport' terminal. Here is a comparison (photos from earlier in the thread): I've mentioned previously that I don't care if they tear down one facade and replace it, but it should be replaced with something that is consistent with a future vision for that area of the park. It should also be replaced with something better. Different is ok, but lower quality, less immersive and less aesthetically pleasing is not. I also don't think that Dreamworld have executed their design well. They tore down a classic style of architecture that could have been improved, but was at least consistent and immersive. They promised a modern, futuristic building with sweeping curves and sleek, bright entrances. But they delivered a lumpy, bulbous mess. This is just my opinion, but I don't think this building belongs in a theme park. I don't even think it is a good looking building outside of a theme park. I've mentioned before that this is a multi-million dollar tourist attraction and there is nothing about this building that is iconic or memorable, and no one is going to take a photo outside of it to share their memories or experiences on social media. For me, the most disappointing part is that Dreamworld had the opportunity to create a great historical Aviation story. Qantas was founded in Queensland, and Sir Charles Kingsford Smith was born in Brisbane and was a global pioneer in Aviation. From Wikipedia: In 1928, he made the first trans-Pacific flight from the United States to Australia. He also made the first non-stop crossing of the Australian mainland, the first flights between Australia and New Zealand, and the first eastward Pacific crossing from Australia to the United States; and, also, made a flight from Australia to London, setting a new record of 10.5 days. In my opinion, this history and unique Queensland connection would have been ideal for a story and immersive experience to wrap around a ride like this. What is more is that it would have given Dreamworld license to theme the building to something consistent with the existing Main Street - if not Victorian - then at least the simpler (and cheaper to maintain) Art Deco style of the early 1930s. I appreciate that many here won't feel the same, but I personally believe that Dreamworld has lost something good, replaced it with something bad, and completely missed an opportunity to create something great. While I am interested to experience the ride, I think Ardent need to hire a Creative Director to help build a future vision for Dreamworld. Hopefully, when they have a vision for the park and the theme of each area, they can re-theme it for a 2.0 version of the experience.
  13. @Skeeta They're referring to it as a 'terminal' and telling you to check for 'departure updates'. But even this speaks to my point about Dreamworld not being able to pick a theme and stick to it. They can't even be consistent within a single ride. They have a Stark-Trek inspired logo, A rocket-man TV commercial featuring remote Australian landscapes, a building themed to an airport terminal, all dumped into a Victorian-styled Main Street. The whole concept is a complete mess because Dreamworld have been lazy and not given it anymore thought than 'let's theme our high-tech 'flying' ride to the concept of 'flying''. When no one is providing creative direction for the park or for the individual ride, everyone involved just starts slapping their take of the 'flying' concept onto the ride. I don't care if DW want to make changes to the park's aesthetics and style, but those changes should be an improvement and be consistent - working toward a larger vision for the park. At the moment every single ride, store, attraction and show seems like an isolated 'project' implemented by different people working in silos. It is just my opinion, but I believe that DW needs to hire a creative director whose sole job it is to start overseeing this stuff. This ride is supposed to be a major, multi-million dollar tourist attraction. Ask yourself if you think people are going to want to stand outside of this building and take a photo of themselves to share their experience and memories on social media. If the answer is no, it's probably the wrong design for a theme park.
  14. This building looks terrible. It does not fit the style of Dreamworld, or have any unique theme beyond generic 'airport' or possibly 'shopping mall'. This design is going to date quickly and the glass windows housing the stairwells already look like a dated early 90s office block. Dreamworld increasingly seems to be treating their park like a shopping mall where each store has it's own unique brand and fit out and there is no continuity from one attraction to the next. While I get that there were no airplanes in the late Victorian era, to theme it to the surrounding buildings, there were ideas for flying contraptions dating back to the 1500s (DaVinci, etc). It's not difficult to come up with a concept that allows you to create a theme park attraction, instead of a generic 'flying' ride. We've all been to an airport, we know what they look like, and we don't go to Dreamworld to see a cheap copy of one. The theme of the building doesn't have to represent the concept of the ride, but the story attached to the ride and Dreamworld could have made that story anything. Even if you wanted to theme it to an airport, there are many Art Deco and historic airports from around the world that could have been used to create better theming, that would have sit closer to the rest of the main street look. Liverpool: Kallang Airport (Singapore): Newark: LaGuardia (New York City): Jacksonville Florida: Swan Island: The building could have been designed to fit the rest of the area and simply had an air traffic control tower element added, and all of the art deco designs would have suited a Sky Voyager theme much better than a modern airport. To be honest, I'm going to be disappointed with the current Dreamworld design if there are not metal detectors, x-ray machines and 40 minute security lines to get on the ride. If they're going to theme it to a modern airport, why not go all the way?
  15. wikiverse

    MIXD By You! (Coke mix ins) MovieWorld

    Actually, the apostrophe here is correct. It's possessive. The 's' is not plural. 'Your Classic's', is just a shorter way of saying 'Your classic flavour's original taste'. It's clunky but it's grammatically correct. @red dragin While it might be technically correct, it's an awkward way of phrasing it because they've truncated the sentence to make it fit. They've also used 'one of your' which makes the plurality of flavours both singular and possessive in a way that doesn't intuitively make sense. Multiple flavours would generally be plural, and 'your classics' would be the plural way of referring to the group of flavours. The addition of 'one of' and 'your' confuses whether they are referring to one 'classic' flavour or 'one of the classics'. Since there are multiple flavours the sentence, as written, would read correctly as plural rather than possessive singular - without any additional words being truncated. The truncation of those words makes the apostrophe confusing because they're referring to a singular, possessive noun, but your brain has to figure out what words are missing since the sentence would make perfect sense without any more words if it were plural. TL;DR it's just bad copy writing and they should have found a better way to make their point that isn't grammatically awkward. I hope this helps and doesn't just make you more confused.