Are theme park enthusiasts too picky?

[Matt N]

Hi guys. On Saturday, Paultons Park announced their heavily hyped-up Vikings area after months of speculation. The new land generated a lot of excitement... but the choice of a Gerstlauer Euro-Fighter, Drakon, for the area's headline coaster has heavily divided opinion, to say the least. Some (myself included) have been fairly critical of the choice, while others are excited and think it will be a brilliant fit for the park. One common thread I noticed among those who are happy with the addition is that they seem to infer that those who aren't are being overly picky and overly critical. There's a lot of talk along the lines of things like "cut them some slack", "can't people be positive for once" and "let's not criticise Paultons when they're trying their best". With this in mind, it got me thinking; are theme park enthusiasts too picky? Do we pick at the minute flaws a bit too much and fail to see the wood for the trees a little when it comes to reviewing things?

Personally... I'm going to be awkward and say yes and no. A few years ago, I would have emphatically said yes, but I think my stance has changed somewhat on this as I've grown older and experienced more.

On one hand, I would say yes, I think theme park enthusiasts can have a somewhat pessimistic, picky side to them at times. On these forums, I do sometimes think that some of the issues and critiques raised with regard to certain parks are exaggerated at times. Things that I would personally argue are minor flaws or points for improvement are sometimes made out to be major park-ruining issues, and I do sometimes think things can be blown out of proportion. At times, I do also think it's very easy to criticise parks when you are not in a position of power and don't have access to their wide range of data and KPIs. It's all too easy to play armchair critic or armchair theme park manager when you're in no position of power to change anything, and while some decisions made by parks may look ludicrous to enthusiast eyes, many of these decisions may well have an explainable rationale behind them that we as guests aren't privy to.

At the same time, however, I would say no... because I think enthusiast critiques are very often more than simply picking at flaws for the sake of a good moan. In many cases, enthusiasts pick flaws because we care so deeply; we want these parks to do well and have some level of investment in them doing well. When you care about something, you are bound to have stronger opinions on it, for better or worse. Also, many people around these parts have accumulated a vast wealth of park visiting and coaster riding experience, which will naturally give us our own personal idea of what works and what doesn't. Sometimes, people might criticise a new addition or park decision because their wide breadth of experience has shown them that there are better options out there.

But I'd be interested to know; do you think theme park enthusiasts are too picky? Do we as a community pick at the flaws of these rides and parks too much and fail to see how good we actually have it?

 

[Graeme]

Similarly, I think "yes and no". Enthusiasts can get so caught up in what the "best" equipment is, it's all too easy to overlook the fact that each park is doing what's right for them. Imagine if you owned a park and you spent months choosing between rides and manufacturers. There would be solid reasons you arrived at whatever choice you made, so much so that it would end up seeming to you like the only choice.

On the other hand, we are entitled to an opinion. If someone is not keen on a particular ride type, for example, it will usually be based on experience. I used to criticise the most major parks getting low-capacity rides like mice, because, well, they do get big queues, don't they? And if they get a ride with cramped legroom, as opposed to one with lots of legroom, you're going to feel it when you get on the ride. We're all coming at it from our own angle, so it's not for others to say one criticism is more valid than any other (or not valid at all).

But at the end of the day, it's up to the parks, so I feel the best approach is to be honest-but-positive, and then move on. Personally, if something doesn't appeal to me, I tend to say to myself "It's not for me and I might not book a trip to ride it, but I still feel positive about seeing it get built" etc.

 

[spicy]

In many cases, enthusiasts pick flaws because we care so deeply; we want these parks to do well and have some level of investment in them doing well. When you care about something, you are bound to have stronger opinions on it, for better or worse. Also, many people around these parts have accumulated a vast wealth of park visiting and coaster riding experience, which will naturally give us our own personal idea of what works and what doesn't. Sometimes, people might criticise a new addition or park decision because their wide breadth of experience has shown them that there are better options out there.

This.

Enthusiasts can definately be overly critical but enthusiasts have experienced more parks and more coasters than the average Joe so therefore will have a wider knowledge of what coaster types would be a great fit for that park.
It also comes with the name "enthusiast" meaning way more "enthusiastic" and care about what parks are investing in than the average person does too, therefore have a stronger opinion on it.

In the particular case of Paultons, Eurofighters have never really been recieved very well, even when they were a new coaster type. Thorpe Park got a similar negative reaction when Saw was announced.
What makes the chosen coaster type even more disappointing in Paultons case is that Eurofighters are old hat now, Rage has been at Southend for 18 years, technology has moved on alot since then, something like Formula at Energylandia could have been a much better choice but that's my opinion.

I don't think it would actually do a park like Paultons much harm in consulting a few enthusiasts when choosing a coaster type, the market research has been done for them by people travelling all over the world riding all different coaster types, I would guess they wouldn't have landed on Eurofighter if they did that.

 

[JoshC.]

Yes.

But that's the same for so many hobbies I think, especially ones which have a huge layer of subjective opinion about them.

I'll give an anecdotal example. In recent months, I've slightly gotten back into watching wrestling (WWE). I watched it as a kid, and since it was added to Netflix, I've watched bits here and there. In that time, I've also seen social media discourse from what I guess you would call "wrestling enthusiasts". They nitpick tiny things, moan non-stop and all have an opinion on what things should look like. From a casual outsider, it ranges from things where my reaction was "who cares", "I never even would have noticed that" to "omg just shut up and enjoy what's in front of you". I'd imagine there would be similar reactions if there was a role reversal.

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with being picky; if you have a passion which you sink a lot of time into, you will naturally come to have likes and dislikes within that. It's how you handle yourself which is important. If you're someone who acknowledges you are picky and have narrow preferences, but can appreciate the wider circumstances and reasons, even if you don't necessarily agree with them, that's fine. If you're picky and feel like your opinion has to be right, then you need to do some introspection and reflection.

 

[MannekenPis]

Yes but, as someone just returning to reading this forum after a long hiatus, it's very easy to get the impression that roller coaster enthusiasts aren't at all enthusiastic about roller coasters.