- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: My dream amusement park: Nintendoland
Posted on 5/8/15 at 10:17 am to OMLandshark
Posted on 5/8/15 at 10:17 am to OMLandshark
quote:
How is this a narrow demographic
quote:
second biggest gaming franchise in the world
For it to work the Center would have to be based on Mario, not Pokémon.. Only people I know that actually play it are the 8 toearly 20 male age group.. that's pretty small in comparison to what WDW target audience. The people actually footing the bill as opposed to who's actually going to enjoy it is where the hang up is..
quote:
If Legoland can work
I think LEGOLAND is a bit different. That park makes no bones about being gear to the 2-12 age group.. Plus Most parent with kids that age played with legos if they weren't shelter as a child.. So it give the kid and parent a sort of common ground.
While I realize Nintendo may have some of the most recognizable characters...Not every parent with the target market in house are going to make it a destination..
Because while yeah my wife and I played Mario, Zelda etc, etc... as kids.. I'd be lost on the hole Pokémon thing and many other proposed attractions making it less appealing for me to fork over gobs of money to see.
Like Universal for me and most people I know.. It's more of a one day deal and get back to WDW.
There's a real formula that goes into peaking a spenders interest and Disney can evolve quicker than any of it's competition keeping hem at the forefront..
So don't get me wrong.. I like the idea, but I feel it would be more of a niche product as opposed to the masses that it would take to fully sustain an even compete with WDW
2
Posted on 5/8/15 at 10:44 am to OMLandshark
Great idea.
This is the only thing I would change. I would like to see either Hyrule Castle or Ganon's Castle to something like Hogwarts in Universal. An interactive queue through the castle, with the ride being a motion ride like Harry Potter in Universal.
quote:
Hyrule Castle Town: Hyrule has a log flume ride Link's Legendary Log Flume, Ganon's Tower (which would freefall tower), and Zelda's Merry-Go-Round. The village also features taverns, restaurants, a shooting gallery, a fortune teller, and the Happy Mask Shop. There would also be some sort of Fire Emblem ride in there as well.
This is the only thing I would change. I would like to see either Hyrule Castle or Ganon's Castle to something like Hogwarts in Universal. An interactive queue through the castle, with the ride being a motion ride like Harry Potter in Universal.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 11:43 am to Phil A Sheo
quote:
For it to work the Center would have to be based on Mario, not Pokémon.. Only people I know that actually play it are the 8 toearly 20 male age group.. that's pretty small in comparison to what WDW target audience. The people actually footing the bill as opposed to who's actually going to enjoy it is where the hang up is..
First off, gaming is a hell of a lot bigger than you think it is. Last year the film industry made 45.3 billion as a whole. Guess how much video games made? 93 billion. This isn't a nitch. It's main stream form of entertainment.
Secondly putting Peach's Castle in the center of the park is too "Magic Kingdom" and Peach's Castle pails in comparison to Cinderella's. Having a minature glass Eiffel Tower in the middle of it would give it more identity.
Thirdly I put the Mushroom Kingdom as close to the gate as the Pokemon City. I specifically designed the park for you to start off at the Mushroom Kingdom, and then take a loop clockwise throughout the park. The Pokemon City is its own little beast that I'd want you to come back for and spend all day attempting to conquer the challenge. Also it's designed to heavily alleviate traffic, and if you get sick of waiting in line, I think it'd be cool to let off steam in a gym and I wouldn't want one to be more than a 5 minute walk away. Plus it's well designed for lots of restaurants, cafes, bars, and shops. I stand by my layout and think it's the best design.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 11:50 am to Phil A Sheo
quote:
think LEGOLAND is a bit different. That park makes no bones about being gear to the 2-12 age group.. Plus Most parent with kids that age played with legos if they weren't shelter as a child.. So it give the kid and parent a sort of common ground.
While I realize Nintendo may have some of the most recognizable characters...Not every parent with the target market in house are going to make it a destination..
What you apparently don't realize that if a parent is 40, he was born in 1975. So he was 5 when Donkey Kong came out, and 10 when Super Mario Bros came out. These parents will likely have nostalgia for Mario, Donkey Kong, and Zelda even if they don't give a damn about Pokemon. Sure grandma and grandpa won't give a shite, but parents will be nostalgic for these characters, and the nostalgia will only increase with time when this park lives on for decades.
quote:
Because while yeah my wife and I played Mario, Zelda etc, etc... as kids.. I'd be lost on the hole Pokémon thing and many other proposed attractions making it less appealing for me to fork over gobs of money to see.
Well, don't go to the Pokemon section. I don't go to the Dr Seuss part of Islands of Adventure, because it's not targeted to me. With gaming being a 93 million dollar industry, I think a park that specializes in bringing gaming to parks is a brilliant idea.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 12:11 pm to OMLandshark
Dude you're getting way to fired up about this..
#'s are slighty off , but ok... Of which Nintendo only makes up 4.6B of that # ... While That's hardly a small # it still lends itself back to a niche market ..
Further more.. Pokémon sales being on a pretty sharp decline with its aging customer base moving on from it and it's simply not being picked up by its target audience due to the amount on tablet & phone games available.
So then you'll have an entire section that is useless before its even built..
Agreed.. But the middle of the park would require a powerful and very recognizable symbol in order to anchor the entire park..
quote:
93 billion
#'s are slighty off , but ok... Of which Nintendo only makes up 4.6B of that # ... While That's hardly a small # it still lends itself back to a niche market ..
Further more.. Pokémon sales being on a pretty sharp decline with its aging customer base moving on from it and it's simply not being picked up by its target audience due to the amount on tablet & phone games available.
So then you'll have an entire section that is useless before its even built..
quote:
Secondly putting Peach's Castle in the center of the park is too "Magic Kingdom" and Peach's Castle pails in comparison to Cinderella's. Having a minature glass Eiffel Tower in the middle of it would give it more identity.
Agreed.. But the middle of the park would require a powerful and very recognizable symbol in order to anchor the entire park..
Posted on 5/8/15 at 12:20 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
What you apparently don't realize that if a parent is 40, he was born in 1975.
I'm 35.. I can count.
I think a park built around video games as whole could work.. But..And this is a big one... All forms and consoles and vehicles in which video games are played would have to represented.. And if you've been around gaming long enough you should know why that'll be a stretch ..
Also with the industry changing from hot to cold on certain gmaes and genres as quickly as it does and the amount of actual time it would take to even begin to build something of this magnitude.... You simply would be build something obsolete before even opening your doors..
This post was edited on 5/8/15 at 12:25 pm
Posted on 5/8/15 at 12:23 pm to Phil A Sheo
Don't get me wrong ..I'm not trying to totally poopoo on your concept.. I simply don't see how it works...
It certainly couldn't be a stand alone..
And offshoot inside of a larger park.. possibly..
Just not of the scale in which you're referring.
It certainly couldn't be a stand alone..
And offshoot inside of a larger park.. possibly..
Just not of the scale in which you're referring.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 1:35 pm to OMLandshark
So much gay..
Posted on 5/8/15 at 1:53 pm to CuseTiger
quote:
and the spikey shell shuts down the cart in first place for 3 seconds.
And what happens when that cart gets plowed from behind?
Posted on 5/8/15 at 1:54 pm to boxcarbarney
quote:
This is the only thing I would change. I would like to see either Hyrule Castle or Ganon's Castle to something like Hogwarts in Universal. An interactive queue through the castle, with the ride being a motion ride like Harry Potter in Universal.
Got that covered with Peach's Castle and the Galaxy Tour. Zelda environments change a ton, but Peach's Castle has been mostly the same since the N64 and is highly iconic.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 1:58 pm to Phil A Sheo
quote:
Don't get me wrong ..I'm not trying to totally poopoo on your concept.. I simply don't see how it works...
It certainly couldn't be a stand alone..
And offshoot inside of a larger park.. possibly..
Just not of the scale in which you're referring.
This kind of sounds like someone from the 40s who doubts you could make a amusement park simply based on movies. Mario is just one step below Mickey in the recognition department. He's probably the second most recognizable animated character in the world, and hell Pikachu is probably number 3 even above Bugs Bunny. I'm not saying they're going to run Disney out of business, but there is no company that has so much potential for an amusement park than Nintendo. If there are multiple Legolands, there is no reason to think Nintendoland wouldn't work.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 2:29 pm to OMLandshark
Didn't want to read at first, but sounds amazing. The ideas seem realistic and the way the rides relate to the games was cool.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 2:30 pm to OMLandshark
Would love to visit a park like this.
Posted on 5/8/15 at 3:02 pm to OMLandshark
quote:
This kind of sounds like someone from the 40s who doubts you could make a amusement park simply based on movies
Well the one glaring difference is that media evolves so much more
quote:rapidly now than it did back then..
Mario is just one step below Mickey in the recognition department. He's probably the second most recognizable animated character in the world, and hell Pikachu is probably number 3 even above Bugs Bunny
ELLL OOHHH ELLL
Please take off the video game blinders.. Pikachu wouldn't break top 10 .. Mario I could agree with.
quote:
If there are multiple Legolands,
Well considering they've been around since 1932.. And name one child who has never had legos???
And before you say it... I know Nintendo is an older company.. 1889 I believe ... But they didn't start developing Video games until the 70's
Plus.. Legos financials are in a whole helluva lot better shape than Nintendo. Allowing the freedom to take those risks..
But dollars to sense.. The ultimate decision makers spending their hard earned dollars on vacations is the ultimate hurdle here.
Parents are only going to see " Video Game" the thing they so desperately want to pry kids away from to get them out the house.
But like I've said. It could work as a hub attached to a park like Universal.. Whether or not they go through with it is TBD... It just wouldn't be viable stand alone..
Posted on 5/8/15 at 3:21 pm to OMLandshark
I think you're placing too much stock in the pokemon/pikachu angle.
Sure you can say this or that about how popular he was, but he doesn't transcend target audiences like the Mario Brothers.
Mickey Mouse at Disney is truly recognizable to every single visitor.
Same could be said for Mario Brothers- and it has much more attractive art/prop/theme opportunities than Pokemon.
You have to think that you are in fact competing with Disney for the dollar, so you have to go with your biggest hitter Mario as the absolute centerpiece. For whatever reason you're too emotionally invested in the Pokemon idea so if I was an investor I'd steer away from you.
Sure you can say this or that about how popular he was, but he doesn't transcend target audiences like the Mario Brothers.
Mickey Mouse at Disney is truly recognizable to every single visitor.
Same could be said for Mario Brothers- and it has much more attractive art/prop/theme opportunities than Pokemon.
You have to think that you are in fact competing with Disney for the dollar, so you have to go with your biggest hitter Mario as the absolute centerpiece. For whatever reason you're too emotionally invested in the Pokemon idea so if I was an investor I'd steer away from you.
This post was edited on 5/8/15 at 3:23 pm
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News