JacobSibbald

I think there is a clear marketing issue though. The fact that Dreamworld still hold "Big 9 Thrill Rides" as one of their overarching campaigns alone makes it different from theme parks who may still classify a moderate ride as thrill. Those other parks don't necessarily highlight "thrill" continuously in all of their marketing paraphernalia. Perhaps it is time for a change... Dreamworld (IMO) should move on from the "Big _" tagline and into another direction that is actually accurate.

​Um.... I don't think we'll being seeing them.

I don't think you're ever going to come to an agreement over the changes to the parks over the years, given that all opinions are subjective.

It's times like these you wish someone from VRTP was lurking in the forums...

You're talking an attraction (in regards to the Batwing) with an incredibly low footprint and low level of theming. If there is space for an attraction and show to appear next to each other, that would be awesome - but is there anywhere feasible currently?

Even though there is space throughout the park OceanGirl, there is none big enough for an attraction and a show to be built next to each other. You can't have an attraction in Maverick's area and a show in Looney Tunes or vice versa.

Considering Movie World's lack of space and budget, realistically they would only build one. In that case, I'd prefer an attraction over a show.

Por Que No Los Dos?

I honestly think people are more familiar with the original. Besides, even if an attraction were to be built under the Oz theme, which we all highly doubt, I don't think it would require too much backstory or become particularly convoluted because with all of the modern interpretations (of which Wicked is more prevalent than Oz the Great and powerful) a large proportion of people would already know it. Moving on, having just seen Fury Road, the film has solidified the point that a Mad Max attraction/show would work wonders.

Why can't an attraction be built that doesn't rely on prior knowledge?

It has a similar style to WaterWorld at Universal (albeit on land). Awesome idea!

I think you need some better examples, AlexB. However there might not be a need as we all know that Australia's safety standards are incredibly higher than other countries around the world.

Yep.

Yes that is first gen.

I was going to say.... Sounds like you had a ball.

Not sure if sarcasm or you just meant to write Giant Drop in place of ToT2.

Realistically, even though it requires a massive, massive demo and rebuild effort that isn't likely to come in the near future... Wouldn't you rather a new coaster over a reconditioned wild mouse?

Definitely the Kiss Goodnight on Cinderella Castle. An empty park with a little known experience is incredible.

It's easy to understand how it can be mistaken for laziness though. It does add to the theme but maybe you're right in that specific areas including the skull could be manicured.

Did you read his post? 193cm

Couldn't agree more, if only!

Doesn't mean they can't use the same system as Disney... Just have employees rotate within a single attraction: Greeter, Counter, seatbelt check, ride operator etc. seems to work.

Stage actors are accustomed to rapid changing lighting effects. I'd say he doesn't have photosensitive epilepsy, rather another form. I'm not a doctor though, so seek medical advice.

That's too high is it not? You can see in the last photo there is a grey piece of metal from the top of the tower to the W... Just a thought

Furthering that, the rides you have mentioned so far (Scooby, TOT2) would be because of their lighting effects I presume. Those lighting effects would be an issue if your friend suffers from Photosensitive epilepsy. You should double check