Dreamworld's New Look Train

[New display name]

1 hour ago, StingRay said:

While a standard fence like this ain't super pretty or look great for the semi-professional photographer, it's great for one category. 

The small kids, they can now see the train through the fence. 

It will be some form of requirement for the fence also based on the safety and speed of the train. 

So, even tho this ain't pretty. I hope the kids enjoy it. 

You must be Walt Disney reincarnated.  Finally, somebody considering other people’s point of view.   Why would a kid want to walk down a tunnel of fences that they can’t see over or have an obstructed view on what’s on the other side?

 

1 hour ago, Naazon said:

I think a horizontal wooden fence would probably be nicer though and still has the gaps between the planks to see through.

You just created a nice looking ladder that isn't a fence.

[Slick]

I really don't get the effort people are going through to justify an ugly fence.

It's a theme park, it should be presented way, way better because, and I can't stress this enough, it's a theme park. And look I get safety, and that should be a consideration in picking something appropriate, not the justification for picking something inappropriate.

At present we've got one thread on the site where the community is going deep on minor details being missed (and rightfully so) and in another thread huge sweeping passes are being made for mediocrity.

 

[New display name]

42 minutes ago, Slick said:

I really don't get the effort people are going through to justify an ugly fence.

 

 @Slick If you were running DW you would send it broke in a week. 

Sometimes sacrifices must be made and a wire fence at the back of a park is one of them.  I had no problem if SW went with a shed because of budget restraints but I had an issue with the colour smacking you in the face.

Edited March 29, 2022 by New display name

[Rivals]

59 minutes ago, Slick said:

I really don't get the effort people are going through to justify an ugly fence.

It's a theme park, it should be presented way, way better because, and I can't stress this enough, it's a theme park. And look I get safety, and that should be a consideration in picking something appropriate, not the justification for picking something inappropriate.

At present we've got one thread on the site where the community is going deep on minor details being missed (and rightfully so) and in another thread huge sweeping passes are being made for mediocrity.

 

i think the park down the road having half the rides down, the ones opened (scooby and JL) effects not even working and the park being presented horribly is a bigger issue then a fence at the back of a theme park no one is really going to pay attention to but hard core theme park fans.

[Guest 239]

1 hour ago, Slick said:

It's a theme park, it should be presented way, way better because, and I can't stress this enough, it's a theme park. And look I get safety, and that should be a consideration in picking something appropriate, not the justification for picking something inappropriate.

Big ugly fences are just as much of an Australian staple as big ugly sheds. Bonus points for if they have the 'you will die a painful death jumping over this fence' sign posted on them.

 

And my favourite; the entrance to our theme parks premier resort!

 

 

Edited March 29, 2022 by Dom

[joz]

Coooooool more village verses ardent shit.

[New display name]

@Domnow do Disney.

 

 

[Guest 239]

3 minutes ago, New display name said:

@Domnow do Disney.

Oooh, a challenge! It's a little harder, but I found some!

22 minutes ago, joz said:

Coooooool more village verses ardent shit.

1 hour ago, Slick said:

At present we've got one thread on the site where the community is going deep on minor details being missed (and rightfully so) and in another thread huge sweeping passes are being made for mediocrity.

[Gazza]

This one always stuck out to me:

 

FWIW I dont really have a problem with black chainlink depending on the context. It really depends if you want to make the fence a feature, or make it "go away"

[New display name]

1 minute ago, Gazza said:

FWIW I dont really have a problem with black chainlink depending on the context. It really depends if you want to make the fence a feature, or make it "go away"

You hit the nail on the head.

[Guest 239]

3 minutes ago, Gazza said:

FWIW I dont really have a problem with black chainlink depending on the context. It really depends if you want to make the fence a feature, or make it "go away"

Thank you! This was never about theme park vs theme park, it was about the absurdity of questioning the validity of a theme park based off their choice of fence. The industry as a whole has decided that if its practical and affordable then it's a-okay, but if you want to add some extra flair then that's cool too, but at the end of the day I doubt it's what Aunty Sue is going to write about in her post-park criticisms on Yelp.

[Slick]

1 hour ago, New display name said:

@Domnow do Disney.

 

 

Yeah cheers - I was hoping someone would bring these fences up and inevitably lead me to the point everyone missed because they were too busy playing into the Village vs Dreamworld trope that's been done to death.

Disneyland had crappy fences at the front when it first opened. Over time they've improved it and this is what they look like now:

This is what that area looked like when it first opened:

This is what it looks like now:

You don't arrive from the first picture to the last picture in either scenario by one massive leap overnight. It's usually additive over time or subtractive over time (also known as death by a thousand cuts). Consider then that the fence is symbolically and literally another stake in the ground where the park has lost a just a tidbit of charm.

Initially it's the retirement of one of the steam trains. "It's okay Slick, they've got another, don't be so hard on them."

Then it's retirement of the steam trains altogether. "Slick don't be so petty by hyper-focussing!"

Then Dreamworld pulls out the waterfall and lets the stations and their gardens fall into disarray. "Look it's just one bit here and there, don't worry about it."

Then the next year a station gets removed. "Nothing was there anyway, who cares."

Then the train line gets shortened, then there's gravel instead of grass, then ugly fences go up. "Bloody hell Slick, give them a break, Village put up an ugly fence once so why can't Dreamworld?"

Do this a few more times and one day you'll find guests and enthusiasts alike walk around the park going "jeese, there's no charm left, I wonder what happened." 

And it won't be immediately obvious because it's not just one thing that makes the difference, it's a thousand things over many years, one of which is the chain-link fence.

Reading my opinion and thinking i'm hyper-focussing on the fence in order to nit-pick and then pointing out a competitor's fence is just missing the point completely and doubling down in the aforementioned trope. Consider the bigger picture, is this an additive step or a subtractive step? Given what once was, it's a subtractive step.

Granted, wider context, Village should also be held to the same standard. And thanks to Dreamworld, theme parks in Australia are a litigious nightmare and fences are a necessary evil. But c'mon, you've got rocks in your head if you think this looks good in isolation.

[New display name]

Taken when kids were the parents responsibility.

 

Taken when it's your fault I wasn't watching my kids.

 

 

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

3 minutes ago, New display name said:

Taken when it's your fault I wasn't watching my kids.

Legit. A woman on Reddit the other day asked who was to blame for a toddler getting bitten by a dog who was tied up to a pole by a playground - the dog owner or the parent of the toddler. She obscured which role she had in her question. 

Most folks answered honestly that the parent should have been watching her kid - at which point she revealed she was the parent, and had another child to look after and couldn't possibly have looked after two, and the toddler was very quick and that mean nasty dog owner (its a chihuahua) should have taken the dog to the dog park a block away instead of the children's park where the dog owner's own child was also currently playing. 

She also doubled down to excuse her behaviour because she was stoned at the time, but its ok because it's not like she was drunk. 

If I remember correctly, the last iteration of 'keep your kids away from my train line' fence that they had was themed 'rusty' corrugated sheets, bordered with old slabs of timber. This is a perfectly acceptable, themed fence (albeit blocking the view of little johnny), but since then we've re-aligned the rail line, and paved a new path at ground level to offer an alternative to spaghetti junction, and new fencing was needed.

I see this as 'we need a fence, and for now it needs to be cheap and functional.' This is exactly what they built.

They've come back from a bad place and right now they're achieving minimum safe levels on a shoestring. When the alternative is 'don't open it because it isn't safe', it's better for them to trade out looking below standard but safe, than closed because they can't afford gold plated wrought iron gates. 

The big test will be if they upgrade the fence to something nicer when they can afford to, or whether it will just be left as 'adequate' until it isn't anymore before they do anything. Their gardens look nice though.

[franky]

5 minutes ago, DaptoFunlandGuy said:

I see this as 'we need a fence, and for now it needs to be cheap and functional.' This is exactly what they built.

I'd argue that this is already a step above cheap. It's painted black. Cheapest I'd expect to see is plain galvanised metal.

[themagician]

31 minutes ago, Slick said:

This is what that area looked like when it first opened:

This is what it looks like now:

geez that is so sad to see when you look at what that area once was. The removal of all those trees has not helped, but just the simplicity of having some grass, simple gardens and timber fencing makes such a difference. 

[New display name]

 

John Longhurst thought it was fine to build a roller coaster with minimal theming and chain wire fences, why can't @Slicksee sometimes it's ok?😬

 

 

[Guest 239]

1 hour ago, Slick said:

Yeah cheers - I was hoping someone would bring these fences up and inevitably lead me to the point everyone missed because they were too busy playing into the Village vs Dreamworld trope that's been done to death.

You're coming to your own conclusions about my argument that were never made. I showed other theme parks on the Gold Coast in direct comparison to Dreamworld. If you believe that is Village vs Dreamworld then that's your own conclusion, but it's not mine.

The initial argument you made was 'It's a theme park, it should be presented way, way better because, and I can't stress this enough, it's a theme park.' and my response was showing the standard set by the rest of the industry on finalized, public-facing activations. I even gave some of Disney theme parks which last I checked weren't operated by Village Road Show Theme Parks (but they're edging closer with Chapek).

You're more than welcome to come to your conclusion about the fence as there's no right or wrong to opinions, but when you mock the communities critical discussion regarding the value and quality of the Gold Coast's #1 theme park as 'going deep on minor details being missed' and conclude that anybody who accepts the fence is making huge sweeping passes on mediocrity, then you're opening yourself to criticism. 

I know that you'll continually argue that you're just concerned about Dreamworld's falling down the route of death by a thousand cuts, but it's hard to take that seriously when at seemingly every given moment you're waiting on the side of the road ready to throw it's still kicking body into the funeral wagon just for the opportunity to turn around to those grieving the loss and say "I told you so".

52 minutes ago, New display name said:

This is stunning and I wish our parks could go back to this, but rebuilding something like this won't drive gate which has been the argument behind criticism towards many of Dreamworld's recent efforts beyond Steel Taipan. It's part of the reason I get so confused because @Slick has said in the past that similar endeavors would be a of waste money and embrace nostalgia for nostalgia sake. 

On 16/01/2022 at 2:23 PM, Slick said:

 ... when the park can barely get enough people in the door to watch the light version of the bush-ranger show out the front of the train station [rebuilding the paddlesteamer] would be wasteful spending at best, and at worst, nostalgia for nostalgic sake.

So it's hard to come to conclusions about what the park should do. Should it spend its scarce money on themed fencing to embrace the old vibe of the park and prevent aesthetic decay, or build quick and affordable fencing to save money for critical projects that drive gate? 

Edited March 29, 2022 by Dom

[joz]

@Dom Are you really confused between the difference of spending millions on a paddle steamer that thematically doesn't fit the park it's going into and putting in even a little bit of effort to make an area look nice? It's not about making it look like what it used to, it's saying 'Hey this area can look really nice'

[Slick]

@Dom there's a level of irony tucked inside the cognitive dissonance in that last post, because in the first paragraph you've criticised my post for having drawn conclusions, and then in the last paragraph you've drawn conclusions about my stance about Dreamworld.

Furthermore, I'm not mocking anyone specifically nor the community at large, you're adding that connotation. Mocking, by definition, would imply i'm making fun of you or someone in a cruel way. That's just not the case, but if you chose to use that word because you've felt yourself get hot under the collar about having your opinion challenged about theme park fences, well, you're in for a treat when you discover Twitter. Whew-boy, that's a toxic joint if ever there were one.

Parkz is about robust conversation, welcome. Get amongst it. Don't take it too seriously.

With that in mind, and not to diverge too far away from the topic, but when it comes to theme parks, most of my opinions are founded on a pretty basic fundamental guiding star (a guiding star that's mentioned in dozens of posts and is something i've said to you in person) and it's this:

If a park replaces something, it should be better than the thing it replaced.

My opinions of Dreamworld are shaped from this perspective because the fundamental reality is the park was once good and now it's not. It's such a truism that there's Facebook pages (albeit run by incredibly toxic individuals) that are founded on Dreamworld's formative years because it was that much better. Put it another way, a lot of the things they've replaced haven't been better than the things that were there before, and this has been going on for close to two decades, well before you were into theme parks. 

Perhaps the greatest error you've made in your post though was that you implied I wanted to see Dreamworld die. Mate, I literally changed my entire life so I could study an MBA so I can get into the industry and support businesses like Dreamworld to thrive. And to be clear, I want Dreamworld to thrive and that's why i'm so openly critical of the joint. You simply don't find success by blowing smoke up people's arses, and i'm not about to alter a perfectly reasonable opinion founded on good, sound reasoning because it might mean a business might not invite me to their pressers. And god forbid if a business is that insecure about industry opinions - if that's the case they've got bigger issues to solve anyway.

 

 

[New display name]

19 minutes ago, joz said:

If you have to be critical of something to justify why you like what you like, then what you like sucks.

I don't know anybody said they liked the fence, the importance of the fence to be part of the theming every time is under question.   (my take)

DW have installed the fence to serve one purpose.  No different to seeing a fire EXIT sign when you are on a dark ride, it’s to keep people safe because people are stupid.

If people weren’t stupid there would be no fence.

[Slick]

1 hour ago, Dom said:

This is stunning and I wish our parks could go back to this, but rebuilding something like this won't drive gate which has been the argument behind criticism towards many of Dreamworld's recent efforts beyond Steel Taipan. It's part of the reason I get so confused because @Slick has said in the past that similar endeavors would be a of waste money and embrace nostalgia for nostalgia sake. 

On 16/1/2022 at 1:23 PM, Slick said:

 ... when the park can barely get enough people in the door to watch the light version of the bush-ranger show out the front of the train station [rebuilding the paddlesteamer] would be wasteful spending at best, and at worst, nostalgia for nostalgic sake.

So it's hard to come to conclusions about what the park should do. Should it spend its scarce money on themed fencing to embrace the old vibe of the park and prevent aesthetic decay, or build quick and affordable fencing to save money for critical projects that drive gate? 

 

42 minutes ago, joz said:

@Dom Are you really confused between the difference of spending millions on a paddle steamer that thematically doesn't fit the park it's going into and putting in even a little bit of effort to make an area look nice? It's not about making it look like what it used to, it's saying 'Hey this area can look really nice'

Basically, this. There's a lot of whataboutism and false equivalencies going on there which i'll try and break down.

They should absolutely look after what they have and maintain a standard throughout the park. They should also not waste millions rebuilding nostalgic rides for nostalgia sake, especially when the intent is for those rides to drive gate (which they absolutely won't). They're also two different things and shouldn't be confused. Take the repainting of the main station. That doesn't drive gate, and I'd criticise any theme park exec who think it would. What you don't want though is for guests to finally return after five years to Dreamworld on the back of Steel Taiapan's opening, only to find that the park is awfully run down, ruining what little brand trust they had left and have folks vow never to return.

FYI, I think what they're doing with the main station is bloody great. It's not going to save the park, but do enough of that everywhere, combined with adding in proper, modern replacements for the rides they've closed, and in a few years you've got a great park again.

In short, you don't win the hearts, minds and wallets of the market (which is what Dreamworld need to do at this point just to survive) when you do the bare minimum, especially when there was a time (as I showed in the photos) where the bar was placed far higher and the paying public are aware of that bar. This ugly fence (and the area that surrounds it) is a pretty clear representation of that bar being dropped, and if the argument in turn is "they don't have the money to do anything better" then i'd argue that perhaps another owner should take the reins.

[DaptoFunlandGuy]

3 minutes ago, Slick said:

FYI, I think what they're doing with the main station is bloody great. It's not going to save the park, but do enough of that everywhere, combined with adding in replacements for the rides they've closed, and in a few years you've got a great park again.

Its the sort of thing you can do in times of Austerity though. If you've got a painter on staff, you can add little spruce-ups to various things (like the train station) and that doesn't really up your costs beyond a few tins of paint at bunnings.

But in times of Austerity, spending what little money you have on something elaborate, when something simple would do is foolish. 

I agree with your mantra of 'replacement should be better than what it replaced' and in the scheme of things - and its pretty easily argued that Taipan is better than a murderous death trap that should never have been built in the first place.

But does this rule extend to the surrounding environment and everything else that is impacted by it? Remember - the train wasn't realigned and required a new fence because they decided to change the train. The train had to move to accommodate the coaster. Much the same as they had to move vintage cars to install MDMC, and the 'new' set up doesn't quite have the 'charm' of the old setup. 

 

 

Why wasn't Vintage cars rebuilt with the same love and care and attention as when John built it? 
Because John wasn't there anymore.

[Cactus_Matt]

It used to be a theme park, now it's an amusement park. I may hate how modern Dreamworld looks, would love for them to have properly themed areas and rides and have every fence, bench and footpath appropriate to said theme but that's not how this park is anymore. But at the end of the day if it's a binary choice between 'Dreamworld the amusement park' or no Dreamworld at all I know which is my preference.

Edited March 29, 2022 by Cactus_Matt
fixed typo

[joz]

6 minutes ago, New display name said:

the importance of the fence to be part of the theming every time is under question.

I agree that this is an actual point. There's a few degrees to this though. I think there is a case to be made for unthemed industrial fences around something like a roller coaster. A coaster fence should not only be a barrier to stop you accidentally getting in, it should be difficult to cross as well as mentally visible. A pretty fence that doesnt look like it means business is more tempting for someone to try and cross. A fence along a mini train line isn't the same as what's needed around a coaster though. A train is something you try and integrate to the scenery of the park.

 

I don't think you can have the sort of fence as indicatedain the postcard above, but I think there is a spot where you can say 'functional fence above and beyond what's needed' and 'looks nice'. The chain link between the train and MDMC I don't have an issue with. Particualy if you were to put some plants in front of it. The train line though surely doesn't need much more than a waist high fence that you can't easily climb and some gardens in front of it. It's a long walk past not much to the back of the park, make it vaugely pleasant.