Nintendo Coming to Universal Parks | Page 179 | Inside Universal Forums

Nintendo Coming to Universal Parks

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
I still feel that a full video game theme park on the scale of a current Disney/Universal gate will never happen. I am the biggest gaming fan that I personally know (I've been goofing around on PSVR all morning) but I still know that there is a very real negative opinion that gaming still can't quite shake off as a hobby in too many people's eyes, that will likely forever delay anyone ever taking the risk on a full park. Lots of folks still view it as a solitary and anti-social habit for pale, overweight, violence obsessed youths, which as I will repeat, is absolutely not my personal opinion.
I feel that many of the elder family members who book and pay for these vacations to Florida will just not find the idea of a full day at a video game park appealing, no matter how cool the rides and experiences would be.
Nintendo would be best served by taking following Potters example and placing an individual land/area in each park. Maybe Mario World in Universal Studios, Hyrule taking over The Lost Continent at IOA and another land (maybe Pokemon?) in the new park. This encourages Nintendo/video game fans to book a multi-day vacation and also increases non-gaming fans awareness to the brand in a natural and hopefully appealing way.
I'd either switch around where you're putting Zelda and Pokémon or just put both in park 3.
 
I still feel that a full video game theme park on the scale of a current Disney/Universal gate will never happen. I am the biggest gaming fan that I personally know (I've been goofing around on PSVR all morning) but I still know that there is a very real negative opinion that gaming still can't quite shake off as a hobby in too many people's eyes, that will likely forever delay anyone ever taking the risk on a full park. Lots of folks still view it as a solitary and anti-social habit for pale, overweight, violence obsessed youths, which as I will repeat, is absolutely not my personal opinion.
I feel that many of the elder family members who book and pay for these vacations to Florida will just not find the idea of a full day at a video game park appealing, no matter how cool the rides and experiences would be.
Nintendo would be best served by following Potters example and placing an individual land/area in each park. Maybe Mario World in Universal Studios, Hyrule taking over The Lost Continent at IOA and another land (maybe Pokemon?) in the new park. This encourages Nintendo/video game fans to book a multi-day vacation and also increases non-gaming fans awareness to the brand in a natural and hopefully appealing way.

I think you're absolutely spot on. I also think that just adding a land/area would attract just as many people as a full park would.
 
One thing most people seem to forget is the size of the new plot is the entire size of the north campus already. So they have room for two parks, a water park 4 hotels and a citywalk if they chose. So a nintendo park along the size of USF or IOA is possible with tons of room leftover

The issue with a park based on an outside IP is that it does not fit into the franchise/synergy model that I think a company like Comcast would be going for. Sure, you use outside IP's to bring folks in and to help deversify, but I assume the goal would be to promote your own product since they have TV and movie distribution of their own, studios, IP they own themselves...I would just think they would want to try to develope franchise properties themselves going forward and I think future gates would keep more space for content they control from A to Z.
 
The issue with a park based on an outside IP is that it does not fit into the franchise/synergy model that I think a company like Comcast would be going for. Sure, you use outside IP's to bring folks in and to help deversify, but I assume the goal would be to promote your own product since they have TV and movie distribution of their own, studios, IP they own themselves...I would just think they would want to try to develope franchise properties themselves going forward and I think future gates would keep more space for content they control from A to Z.

Universal doesn't own Potter but they made their own synergy but obtain exclusive broadcast rights for their channels and for the upcoming 5 films and Universal is always mentioned in every article regarding Potter (Free promotion). You are also assuming Universal doesn't/wont have worldwide distribution/marketing rights outside of Japan for Nintendo's future films which would fall under synergy. They already scored Pokemon Company rights for worldwide distribution of the upcoming Detective Pikachu with Nintendo having a minor say in the matter which will lead to why Comcast would want a full fledged park. Its marketing a product they are responsible for as they receive a share of the profit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Frank Drackman
Universal doesn't own Potter but they made their own synergy but obtain exclusive broadcast rights for their channels and for the upcoming 5 films and Universal is always mentioned in every article regarding Potter (Free promotion). You are also assuming Universal doesn't/wont have worldwide distribution/marketing rights outside of Japan for Nintendo's future films which would fall under synergy. They already scored Pokemon Company rights for worldwide distribution of the upcoming Detective Pikachu with Nintendo having a minor say in the matter which will lead to why Comcast would want a full fledged park. Its marketing a product they are responsible for as they receive a share of the profit.

A whole Nintendo park is not realistic unless Nintendo themselves owns it. I can't imagine that Nintendo signed a Marvel like contract that gives Uni rights in perpetuity. So 30 years down the road, what if Nintendo decides not to extend the contract, or what if the IP isn't as popular. Do you shut a whole park down for retheming? No way. I can't see Nintendo being more than a third of the new park, and I don't even think it'll be that much.
 
A whole Nintendo park is not realistic unless Nintendo themselves owns it. I can't imagine that Nintendo signed a Marvel like contract that gives Uni rights in perpetuity. So 30 years down the road, what if Nintendo decides not to extend the contract, or what if the IP isn't as popular. Do you shut a whole park down for retheming? No way. I can't see Nintendo being more than a third of the new park, and I don't even think it'll be that much.
How does the deal with Harry Potter work? Does it "expire" at some point?
 
How does the deal with Harry Potter work? Does it "expire" at some point?

I don't buy the expiration notion for either Potter or Nintendo. The investment is just too great. The best a contract could demand is a highly maintained quality of execution and maintenance. If in the distant future Universal feels the franchise isn't working for them then they will just shut it down, end of contract. A parting of ways.
 
No one talked about the foam head? Probably the first true glimpse of something that will eventually be in the park.

CvK2zVIUAAAT8KE.jpg
 
No one talked about the foam head? Probably the first true glimpse of something that will eventually be in the park.

CvK2zVIUAAAT8KE.jpg
Those have been around for a very long time. Plus I've brought them up before as a quick thing to add and it was suggested that Uni would use different costumes. What that could mean is a mystery.
 
So, just when I was really starting to think that Nintendo might be on hold for the new park I got info from one of my sources.

Nintendo will open in 2019 at USJ, 2020 at USO (in the Kid Zone plot), and in 2021 at USH (not sure the location). Like Potter, all 3 are supposed to be nearly identical.