It's time for another "Hot Take Debate" on Theme Park Insider. Inspired by a response from Russell Meyer to my review of Universal's new DreamWorks Land, our proposal this week is this: Resolved, theme parks should distribute their children's attractions throughout the park, rather than concentrating them into a single land.
By distributing kiddie rides throughout the park, designers can help facilitate keeping families together as they explore. As Russell wrote, "Relegating the kids rides and playgrounds to a corner of the park... makes the little ones and their supervisors feel like second class citizens in the park and feel like they're being put into 'baby jail' while everyone else is having fun on the big kid attractions."
For split families - ones with kids that fall above and below the height limits for thrill rides - a more even distribution of rides allows the family to maintain a sense of fair balance throughout their day. We do one ride for the younger kids and then another for the older (with a child switch). Putting all the children's attractions into one land throws off that balance. Instead, the little kids will get to enjoy one block of time in "their" land while they remain on the sidelines in child swap zones for the rest of the day.
Who wants that?
Yes, one solution is to create a park without height limitations that will appeal to all ages. But that remains an ideal that no major park has been able to deliver into practice. Even the world's most popular theme parks for families with kids - Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom and California'a Disneyland - offer attractions with a range of height restrictions. And while the Legoland parks are consistently great for elementary-age children, older kids and young adults will struggle to find a full day of thrills there.
So why not mix it up and allow little kids and their older siblings (and parents) to enjoy attractions throughout the park?
Okay, here's the flip side. Concentrating attractions in a dedicated kids' land - such as DreamWorks Land or Camp Snoopy or Sesame Street - allows designers to apply their skills in creating immersive worlds to younger audiences. Dedicated kids' lands also allow parks to open up the design of active play areas, so that they do not feel as isolated from their surroundings as they logistically need to be when placed among "big kid" attractions elsewhere in the park.
If Poppy's Playground, for example, were built next to Villain-Con Minion Blast, it would need a large protective wall around it, making it less appealing and attractive to toddlers than it is in DreamWorks Land, where the soft-play area can be presented without obstacle, since parties without little kids are highly unlikely to be walking through that area of the park.
Ultimately, good design beats bad design, whether a children's attraction is grouped with others or placed among "regular" attractions in a park. But we would love to hear what design philosophy you would prefer. Should parks design kids' lands or spread those attractions around the park? Please tell us your thoughts in the comments.
* * *
To keep up to date with more theme park news, please sign up for Theme Park Insider's weekly newsletter.
And to help support Theme Park Insider while saving money on discounted theme park tickets, please visit our international and U.S. attraction ticket partners.
I think Busch Gardens Tampa does it best. You have the wonderful Sesame Street Safari of Fun which contains tons of attractions for little ones. Regardless of how one looks at Elmo, the furry red monster always gets a big response from little ones whenever he shows up on stage at the theater. And then there’s the multiple flat rides and playgrounds for kids to burn off their energy.
And when smaller guests are ready to move onto the rest of the park, there are other attractions situated by the major headliners to keep them busy while waiting for their big siblings to get off.
Part of the original ethos for Disneyland was kids and adults playing together, so yes, I would have to agree.
Are there going to be certain ride styles and IP where it doesn’t work, sure… but just look at Jurassic park at IOW. You have an IP that will be attractive long after the movies are forgotten (Dinosaurs are forever), you’ve got thrill rides for the big, the small, playgrounds for the smallest, and a thrill ride for most of the family. Is this the world’s best theme park land? Possibly.
I do think a kiddie section works bunched in one area but a few bits here and there like small play areas near the busier rides for the little ones while grown-ups/teens hit the coasters. The small bits can be best.
The answer to this is yes, theme parks should have a dedicated kids area, but no, that should not be where all the kid-friendly activities are located.
The biggest advantage of a dedicated kids area is that it can be designed exclusively with kids in mind, so it's perfectly fine to go for an IP strongly aimed at that demographic and select attractions which will be particularly enjoyable to youngsters without needing to compensate for older guests. Additionally, a designated kids area allows for a place where parents can keep the kiddos occupied without burning tons of energy themselves dragging them all across the park. Lastly, since the area is not for the demographic (and may not even allow them in some places), there's a bit of a buffer between elementary schoolers and the older, more obnoxious middle and high schoolers, which is a good thing for all parties involved.
However, theme parks are meant to be group experiences, so relegating a portion of a party to a small section of the park for an extended period of time just isn't right. Every area of the park should have at least one attraction of some sort that can accommodate all the way down to an average 1st grader, which means no more than a 42" height restriction and a tame enough ride experience to not scare them off. In addition, there should be one or two small non-ride offerings (play areas, interactive elements, characters, and/or streetmosphere) in the vicinity of each headliner that those too small or too timid to experience the big rides can enjoy while the rest of the party performs a child swap. It is neither feasible nor advisable to restrict the design process of every element of the park to only features that can accommodate every single guest, but as long as everyone can be entertained by something without creating a massive inconvenience to mixed groups, I'd consider it a satisfactory design.
both...have a dedicated kiddie land that is designed mainly for them and some place they can look forward to and get excited about visiting and then sprinkle other family friendly attractions that little ones can also ride throughout the park. best of both worlds.
This article has been archived and is no longer accepting comments.
While I agree with Russell, I think if there is a kiddie land, it should be towards the dead center of the park. That way it will be equidistant from each ride and facilitate the swapping in/out of parties.
I think most parks should be built under an Epcot-style pavilion model, specifically to minimize issues with the Florida heat. I think all theme parks should have a centralized area with child-friendly diversions (be that rides, meet and greets, or interactive experiences) with chargers, lounge seating etc. Sort of like a hybrid between Communicore Hall and traditional kiddie land.