Hixee said:
Ian said:
"Theme park" tends to be the term generally used to describe a place full of rides & rollercoasters.
There is a difference imo. A theme park has themed areas/rides, an amusement park has a collection of rides but no unique theme (unless you count concrete as themeing).
For example, I'd class Alton Towers and Busch Gardens as theme parks. Blackpool and Indiana Beach are amusement parks.
Pretty much nailed how I think about it. There
is a difference, but I'm never going to criticise someone who uses the 'wrong' term. It'd be pointless as most of the time everyone knows what you're talking about.
I think I agree, but then agree with Joey too :lol:
The problem is with parks like say Six Flags or Cedar Fair (particularly thinking about Kings Dominion here).
Both SF and CF are nothing more than a collection of rides, but the rides definitely have a very strong theme. Bizarro at SFNE for example has big signs outside, a "Supermanny" queue (with the queue line designed to go around in the Superman "S") and lots of Bizarro theming in the station (plus the added cardboard bits).
So when you go on a ride, it's
very clear what the ride is. However (in most cases) that theming ends at the entrance/exit. How can you look at Volcano at KD though and say that it doesn't add a theming element to the park. It's just the ride, but it's huge and dominates the park.
So are these amusement parks with theme park elements? The issue (which I think is where Joey was going) is where do you stop? Blackpool is also an amusement park with theme park elements (The Ghost Train is a prominent piece of theming for example)? Then there's how neat and landscaped things are.
KD has some awful concrete/tarmac areas that connect the themed parts. It also has some lovely wooded areas and the kids are is quite "nice". Dorney Park though is all walkways and tarmac (sorry, asphalt) but it's very neat in a way that Tir Prince could never dream of - but there are still some "natural" areas too.
Thorpe is a "Theme Park", but how often does the theme extend beyond the ride area? Why is Saw considered better themed than The Ghost Train at Blackpool? It's at the end of a bland bit of concrete walkway too. The difference is that Thorpe is well landscaped as well. There are plenty of trees, bushes and water pools around the place and it dips and rises adding interest. The themes rarely (other than Amity Cove) leave the ride area, but the way the paths interact and greenery is in place, it fools the eye into thinking the place is much better themed than it really is; that there's extension where there really isn't.
It's just Dorney Park to the next step. Blackpool is also heading this way, with a consistent "look and feel" to the park slowly creeping in.
The lines between the two phrases are becoming more and more blurred.
No matter how much fake Disney/Lazy Town imaging are stolen on rides by places like Tir Prince on individual rides, they're an "Amusement Park" and always will be.
I wonder if the difference is much more subtle, as Ian and Joey both allude to. It's not about how much concrete you have, or how much you spend on plastic IP around a ride car, it's about attitude.
An amusement park is about getting you onto a ride. It's all fur coat, no knickers, wham, bam, thank you man/mam. You experience the ride and everything else (no matter how it's tarted up) is just a cattle queue to get you onto it.
A theme park tries to extend beyond that, to make you think more about the "experience" you're in. You don't feel like a cow being led to the slaughter through the cattle pens, because it's constantly trying to distract you. It's an escort service, all tidy suit and polite table manners but still a whore at the end of the day.
--------------------
TL;DR
Personally, I believe that if at any point you have to go through a turnstyle, it's an amusement park
