When Does a “Theme Park” Become a True Theme Park?

[Noll_57]

So something I’ve noticed lately on various theme park podcasts and discussion groups is talk about the difference between regional “action/amusement parks” and theme parks. One notable example is a recent podcast episode I listened to that spoke about Gumbuya World’s new coasters. The hosts claimed that “Gumbuya has transcended it’s action park status and is now a proper theme park” with the addition of these two new attractions. I disagree with this statement. In my view, Gumbuya has always been a well themed park with dedicated “lands” and areas just as any legitimate theme park would and I’ve always classified it as such. I don’t think simply adding one type of ride should suddenly change the entire category the park is labeled under. Meanwhile, I’ve also seen other people claim that Gumbuya needs at least 4 or 5 more major attractions before it can be classed as a true theme park. 

So that’s got me thinking, what truly makes a “theme park” a proper theme park and at what point does a park like Gumbuya cross-over to become universally regarded as a theme park instead of a simple action park? Is it when a certain level of theming is installed? When a certain amount of rides and attractions are brought in? Does it matter what kinds of attractions the park has? Does layout have anything to do with it?

There are parks like Adventure World and Funfields which have fantastic theming and story telling in their rides and tick a lot of the “theme park” boxes for me, yet I’m sure many still see them as action/amusement parks. At the same time, there are other parks that have coasters and big attractions but are widely regarded as simple amusement parks. 

To give my opinion, I see parks like Adventure World, Adventure Park, Funfields, Gumbuya World, Aussie World, Magic Mountain and Jamberoo as a unique “Australian style” of theme park (similar to how Europe and the US have distinctive styles of theme parks) as let’s face it, it’s what the majority of our parks are like and isn’t really replicated the same way anywhere else (particularly the wide open spaces and mashup of dry rides and water rides sharing the same space).

I’m interested to hear your thoughts and opinions on this matter.  
 

 

[joz]

This comes up periodically and there's never been a cut and dry answer, and there ever will be. I think the answer is both personal and contextual. Aside from that it ultimately doesn't really matter.

 

For our purposes, there are 3 theme parks in Australia, all on the GC. After that it's either amusement parks or water parks (or combinations) and beyond that its tourist attractions. If you want to split hairs and be all 'DW was a theme park now it's an amusement park' or 'SW is a marine park with rides' or 'Luna Park Sydney is a theme park because it has seperate lands' knock yourself out, but know you're wasting your breath with me. What's the threshold to move from one categpry to another? There isn't one, stop over thinking it. 

 

I'll give you one rule though, if lots of guests bring Gazebos or similar, it's not a theme park.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

17 hours ago, joz said:

I'll give you one rule though, if lots of guests bring Gazebos or similar, it's not a theme park.

Haha! There's your cut and dry answer!