Jump to content


Black Tag
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by RobertDavid

  1. Really?! Another gray metal warehouse? The Jersey Devil lives in a gray metal warehouse?
  2. The interior looks good. The exterior is awful. It doesn't match the interior at all. A safari lodge exterior would be much more appropriate.
  3. God PLEASE, do not let Six Flags get their hands on Busch Gardens. The last thing they need is to become "Superhero Land" with all the trees cut down and falling into disrepair. The current owners are not the greatest and have made some horrible decisions and budget cuts, but they are at least keeping the theming in tact and keeping what they do have in decent shape. I so miss the days of Anheuser-Busch.
  4. I would like to see them get rid of IPs altogether and have an actual theme park, instead of a generic park with characters slapped on the side of rides.
  5. 5. Conestoga Wagon 4. Super Teepee 3. Swings 2. Shows ( Ski Show, Dolphins, live shows in Showcase Theatre ) 1. THE TREES
  6. No one expects the park to be the same as it was when it opened. No one wants it to be. But it is not unrealistic to expect it to have a decent atmosphere. It was built in a forest and had plenty of land to expand without cutting down every tree in the park and building in the parking lot. The idea that seeing the whole park from the parking lot "draws people in" is ridiculous. They're in the parking lot. THEY'RE ALREADY ON THEIR WAY IN! Do you think they would just sit in their cars in the parking lot if they don't have roller coasters in their face? They have no idea there are coasters in the park unless they can see them all from the parking lot? You can make the same silly argument that they have no reason to go into the park because they have already seen it all from the parking lot. If they are in the parking lot they are going in the park. You do not need to "draw them in". What you may think "draws people in" to the park actually scares a large number of people away. The overpowering in-your-face atmosphere is unpleasant to the majority of the general public. Only coaster enthusiasts find it exciting, and even a lot of them would rather ride coasters that have creative theming that are in the woods instead of a coaster in the parking lot with a plywood cutout of a superhero slapped on the side of it. Yes the park is a business, however the in-your-face atmosphere does not appeal to enough people to sustain the business. You need to have a well-rounded park that appeals to all demographics in order to be successful. You can have exciting roller coasters that fit the park theming and blend with their surroundings. The park atmosphere itself can be appealing to adults while still having the coasters and thrill rides that appeal to thrill seekers. The park's main mistake is believing they can sustain the business on coaster enthusiasts alone and that all coaster enthusiasts don't care about environment or theming. They need to combine a pleasant atmosphere, entertainment, unique dining options, AND thrill rides in order to attract all demographics and be a successful business.
  7. The park probably has not considered ALL options, and this is probably just the cheapest one. Just because MOST parking lots do not have trees you believe Great Adventure should not? That is probably the thought process that goes on in Six Flags board rooms. If you just want to build a park on a slab of cement you buy an empty lot, not a forest. They chose the forest for a reason, and it wasn't because they needed firewood.
  8. I did not say that ALL the roller coasters at Great Adventure are in the parking lot. I pointed out how other coasters were built in the back of the park, which showed that it was unnecessary to build in the parking lot. I have been to, and worked at, many theme parks in the country, and most of them are better than Six Flags. Pointing out that other Six Flags parks are worse than GA does not help your argument. All Six Flags parks are tacky. The company does not know how to operate a theme park. I do not expect GA to be a small, quaint park. It is not a small park. The fact that it is so huge, however, all the more makes people expect something better than a bunch of rides thrown on a slab of cement. Very few parks have had the luxury of being built in a forest with lots of room for expansion like Great Adventure. Six Flags has wasted that advantage and ruined the greatest asset they had which was the forest it was built in.
  9. I did not say that coasters ruin the theming. I said that building rides in the parking lot and cutting down every tree so you can see through the whole park from the parking lot ruins the theming. If the coasters were "poking out of the trees" it would be great. That is not what is happening at Great Adventure. The trees have been cut down and the coasters have been built in the parking lot. You do not pull into the parking lot and see coasters "poking out of the trees". You pull into the parking lot and park right next to coasters. There are no trees for them to poke out of, they have all been cut down, and it was not necessary. Coasters were built in the parking lot before Nitro was built. Nitro was built in the woods in the back of the park, so obviously the parking lot was not the only land left to build in. Great Adventure does not have a good skyline. It looks like Wally World from National Lampoons Vacation. They made Wally World as an exaggerated, tacky, joke of a theme park and Six Flags seems to think it was a goal to try to achieve. Seeing every ride in the park from the parking lot does not make a great skyline, it makes a tacky one. It ruins the theming when they all blend together into one massive mess. It is not a carnival, it is a theme park, or at least it should be.
  10. I have no idea how big the current parking lot is, or exactly where the forest they are planning to use for the solar farm is in relation to the park, but if it were possible I think it would be a much better use of the forest to create a parking lot under the trees. They could remove only half the trees, leaving enough to both shade the cars and create an amazing atmosphere where people would park in a forest instead of on a giant slab of cement. Then the could use the current parking lot for the solar farm. The land is already cleared and they would not have the expense of raising the panels for the cars to park under.
  11. They have always had a lot of land, they just did not use it wisely. Just because some of the public does not realize the land the rides are on used to be the parking lot does not change the fact that they are in the parking lot. There is no difference between being in the parking lot and being in the park itself. They destroyed the forest, destroying the atmosphere of the park. If you are standing in the parking lot looking at rides in the Golden Kingdom, The Boardwalk, Adventure Alley and Movie Town all at the same time it ruins the whole point of having theming at all. Do you really think it "draws people in" to see them from the parking lot? They do not see them unless they are already on their way in. It's not like they see them from the Turnpike and say "Hey look at that cool roller coaster, let's go ride it". I do not believe it is "unrealistic" for the park to have a pleasant atmosphere. It was built in a huge forest for a reason, to use that forest for a unique and amazing atmosphere. There was plenty of forest to expand the park while maintaining that atmosphere, but Six Flags made very poor choices and permanently destroyed the park's atmosphere.
  12. If they have old safari land that is not being used, why couldn't they use that for parking and use the current parking lot to expand the park. That would separate the parking lot from the park again.
  13. I think you confuse "the most" with "the best". There is a difference between having a lot of coasters and having the best coasters. I do not believe the park has regressed by getting rid of 3 coasters that were not very good. I think the company would benefit greatly in the future by adding fewer coasters and making what they do add really worth it. Spend time and money creating a unique, quality attraction, giving it an appropriate theme with themed elements, and creating an immersive atmosphere instead of just throwing some mass-produced piece of crap on a slab of cement and slapping a plywood cutout of a superhero on it.
  14. As far as park expansion is concerned, I still think they should expand into the parking lot since it is already cleared land and already has roller coasters in it. Then they should build a new parking lot in the woods under trees.
  15. Actually I have a very good idea what goes into these things. It was my job at Disney, and we didn't take 2 weeks to do it. We got it all out of the park and into a backstage area overnight, then took our time repacking it and putting it away out of sight of the guests. It just requires proper planning and execution.
  16. Have they mentioned why the parking lot was not an option? I've always wanted them to build a new parking lot in the woods and utilize the current one for park expansion, since they keep expanding into it anyway. If they do not want to expand the park, then why not use it for solar panels?
  17. Maybe I'm a little too critical, but I don't really think 95% in 2 weeks is something to brag about. The people who come to the park during those 2 weeks have a diminished experience. Remember for some people this will be their only visit to the park. They do not have annual passes and come frequently to see the "progress" that has been made over 2 weeks.
  18. Does anyone know exactly where the land is that they are going to use for the solar farm? How about they use the current parking lot instead and use the forest for parking, taking out only a few trees. This would allow guests to park in a forest under the shade of trees, eliminate the destruction of more forest, and use the space that has already been cleared for solar panels.
  19. Being first may get people to the park once, but being better will keep them coming back. This is a lesson I believe Six Flags may never learn.
  20. I'm glad they're gone and wish the rides would change from super hero themes to park-appropriate themes, but I guess most of the park would have to actually be given "themes".
  21. It would probably be difficult to stay open later because all the Fright Fest stuff would need to come down, and knowing them they would take forever to do it, so you would have Halloween decorations up through November. I used to love Fall at the park before Fright Fest. Cool, crisp weather with small crowds.
  22. Not very excited about either, but namtab has to be more exciting.
  23. I cannot imagine there is no better way of going about this than plowing down 90 of the last few remaining acres of forest on the property. Apparently it is just the cheapest way of doing it. As far as planting 25,000 trees in exchange; I'll believe it when I see it. Where are they going to plant them? If there's room to plant 25,000 trees, why don't they use that space for the solar panels. It just kills me that they are so intent on destroying forests when the forest was the reason that spot was chosen for the park. The forest was the greatest asset the park had, until it was destroyed. Why can they not learn to use the forest to create an amazing atmosphere instead of destroying it.
  • Create New...