Universal Studios Florida: What Do We Think About It?

[DOOMBOT]

To clarify - Pokémon is a great IP for theme parks. It will do well. It is the biggest, largely untapped well for theme park content on the table. It will not be Potter.

Potter arrived at a perfect surge of popularity for the IP, and was new and exciting in a way that no park following in its' footsteps could perfectly retrace. Or in the case of certain lands like Berk, even treading your own path won't make an impact anywhere as tremendous as Potter.

---

Spoiler: Harry Potter is uniquely suited for theme parks, and hit at the perfect time.

The IP is perfectly suited to theme parks in a way that no other IP really is. An escapist fantasy with incredibly iconic and realizable locations, characters, activities. A very major part of that fantasy is the appeal of going to a really cool and exclusive(!) shopping mall and buying a bunch of fun toys. Of going to a store and having a unique bespoke experience purchasing a wand with the shopkeeper. Of sitting on a train and buying and eating a ton of fun and weird candies. Within the world of the movies and books, and inside the land, if you see someone using a wand casting magic, or wearing nice Hogwarts robes, or holding their expensive Quidditch brooms, you are urged to think of that as a cool thing and to want to be like them.

At a theme park, you buy stuff, you ride on moving vehicles, you eat nice and fun themed foods, you interact with themed entertainers. The overlap with the appeal of the Harry Potter fantasy is essentially 1:1, and its' "immersive" qualities set a standard that quite literally no other IP could match. It started that trend of "immersive" single-IP lands, even though the concept had existed way before Potter. All of IoA was essentially trying for that goal, but it took Potter for it to become the template moving forward. Potter was the industry turning point.

You don't see Luke Skywalker or Han Solo shopping for Droid parts. The heavy push for merchandise with Pandora feels weird and unappealing because Avatar isn't a movie about adopting a Banshee or eating alien burgers at a food hall. You don't jump on Goomba's or platform your way through Mario Land, you use your phone app and you take the stairs. They can still be fun and cool, but it doesn't tap into something the way that HP did.

You can try selling as many Lefou's Brews or Blue Milks as you'd like. They're all copying Butterbeer. The Power-Up Bands (and likely incoming Pokédex/Balls) will be very successful, in largely similar ways to the Wand experiences. You can make superior rides like Rise or Unchained, but it doesn't matter. It's been done before. You can only make that impact once. It was a perfect storm.

---

Spoiler: Pokémon isn't, and won't.

As mentioned before, Pokémon is a hyper-exposed IP in a way that Harry Potter was absolutely not in the late 2000s. The Pokemon Company has made a concerted effort to allow people many ways to express interest in Pokémon without even considering taking a vacation to Poképark. It's been striving very hard to become a lifestyle brand.

Catching, battling, and caring for your Pokemon are not activities that directly correspond to activities within a theme park. You won't be actually throwing anything anywhere, because that'd be pretty unsafe. I'd be surprised if there was a very deep battling mechanic anywhere. And outside of meeting a live puppet, there's really no way to do a Pokemon-Amie style caretaking experience either.

There are no iconic Pokéfoods, and no one dreams of buying Great Balls, Repels, and Escape Ropes at the Poké-Mart. That's simply a function of gameplay. People don't want to visit Pallet Town or Lumiose City like they want to visit Hogwarts Castle or Diagon Alley. Most people don't even know what those places are, and those are some of the most iconic areas in the Pokémon world.

It can still be cool, and it will still make a lot of money, but it will not change what it feels like to engage with a theme park land like Hogsmeade did, and the fantasies do not translate anywhere as cleanly either.

---

Pokémon is incredibly big. Far bigger than Potter at this point. But the world; the industry; the fandom of theme parks and Pokémon; they are simply in a far different place than they were when Hogsmeade first opened. Quote me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you see 9 hour waits for IoA park admission when Pokémon opens. And once it arrives, Pokémon will be right next door to the OG, and it'll forever be the comparison point. Potter had no real comparison.

 

[Columbo]

Potter is definitely uniquely suited for theme parks with food and merchandising. Jenny Nicholson talked about that in her video on the weirdness of Avatarland. All of that said, Potter was novel in its design when opened, and did a lot of things differently than prior in park design

If when they go to work on Pokemon the only thing they do is build it like Potter but within the Pokemon universe, it will definitely have zero chance of ever being even close to as big. That said, something I highlighted in my last comment was experiences

Pokemon has not only merchandise it could sell, but lots of items like the Pokedex or Pokeball that could be vehicles for interactivity

Moving on from my earlier mentioned concept of choosing a starter (once again, a huge fantasy for Pokemon fans that would do well with merch), we should be considering experiences like Kim Possible: WSA or Sorcerers of the Magic Kingdom. Imagine having stuff sprawled throughout the park or resort with the land itself acting as the hub

I'm not saying this idea here is the one, but there is still room to innovate in the world of theme parks. These sorts of ideas and how they interact with the building blocks of what we enjoy about themed experiences are what push this art form forward and cause massive ripples throughout the medium

I don't even even expect it to match Potter and I definitely don't think it will beat it (it certainly won't get three whole lands), but acting as if it has zero chance of similar relevancy in the long term I don't agree with either. I also do think there is an avenue for high merchandising sales on par, or at least not that far off

 

[UNIrd]

I went to a Pokemon Cafe when in Japan and trust me. There's plenty they can do with the food.

 

[DOOMBOT]

I truly think the only F&B item that could ever possibly touch Butterbeer would be...

Krabby Patty.

Hard agree. It's the only thing that comes anywhere close.

It's also a uniquely restricted item in terms of cross-promotional usage. It's not available at UKR's SpongebobLand and to my knowledge, the only time an official Patty has been sold was the Wendy's collab in 2024.

 

[TheCodeMan95]

Hard agree. It's the only thing that comes anywhere close.

It's also a uniquely restricted item in terms of cross-promotional usage. It's not available at UKR's SpongebobLand and to my knowledge, the only time an official Patty has been sold was the Wendy's collab in 2024.

Yeah, I remember a lot of discussion about it not being able at UKR.

It's unfortunate, because it would print money!

 

[AB2020]

If they find a way to sell Poke Balls that allow you to catch Pokemon, and then be able to use them in game, look out. No matter how many iterations there are everyone always wants a Charizard, Blastoice and Venusaur on their team. Ditto for other popular Gen 1s like Gengar, Mew Two, Pickachu.

I am toroughly convinced that Universal will not build a new land from scratch without some interactive (upcharge) elements. And technology exists (for example AR glasses) but it’s just too expensive currently. So ultimately I am convinced they will find a solution.

Call me crazy but I could see Universal moving to a rental system where you pay x Dollars per day to rent AR glasses that then allow you to catch Pokemon throughout the area.

 

[Magic-Man]

At least Hollywood Drift and Twisters will be objective upgrades over what they replaced, it could (and used to) be a lot worse.

 

[belloq87]

Twisters will be [an] objective upgrade over what [it] replaced

To be better than Supercharged is the absolute lowest bar to clear.

The replacement also should be good on its own terms. I would like to see real effort applied.

 

[Magic-Man]

To be better than Supercharged is the absolute lowest bar to clear.

The replacement also should be good on its own terms. I would like to see real effort applied.

We don't know what Twisters will look like yet. I'd wait to hear about the concept first before saying that it will be low effort.

 

[belloq87]

We don't know what Twisters will look like yet. I'd wait to hear about the concept first before saying that it will be low effort.

Well, I didn't say it would be low effort. I said it needs to be good!

But also... VillainCon and DreamWorks encompass the most recent track record for USF, and I would like to see Supercharged's replacement be on a higher tier of both ambition and execution.

 

[Mad Dog]

Well, I didn't say it would be low effort. I said it needs to be good!

But also... VillainCon and DreamWorks encompass the most recent track record for USF, and I would like to see Supercharged's replacement be on a higher tier of both ambition and execution.

Definitely. It makes little business sense to replace an attraction that very few rode, even though it had high capacity, with another ho hum ride that won't attract riders. So, it's incumbent on Universal to produce a fun entertaining attraction. Bottom line, that will probably entail significant special effects and physical sets, in addition to a good 360 film. Anything short of that would just result in another unpopular, little used attraction like Supercharged. There is potential for a decent attraction if UC puts some creative effort and sufficient budget into it. And, that is a big space overall, so there's plenty they can do. It's not a small space like Fallon that has size limitations.

 

[DragonSlayer]

Anyone notice how we were talking about the state of USF in the Supercharged thread and now we’re talking about Supercharged in the state of USF thread

But what I will say is that I wish they’d split the space in two. For the long-term good of the park, whatever goes here really doesn’t need to take up such an enormous building. If they were willing to get rid of the ride system you could easily fit a good Twisters attraction in one half, and something else in the other.

 

[Mad Dog]

Anyone notice how we were talking about the state of USF in the Supercharged thread and now we’re talking about Supercharged in the state of USF thread

But what I will say is that I wish they’d split the space in two. For the long-term good of the park, whatever goes here really doesn’t need to take up such an enormous building. If they were willing to get rid of the ride system you could easily fit a good Twisters attraction in one half, and something else in the other.

Probably because they're almost one and the same, intertwined issues.