ATTRACTIONS MANAGEMENT
MET Studio’s design for the War Horse exhibit at the National Army Museum in London was shortlisted at the Museum & Heritage Awards
Lloyd Hicks Design Director, MET Studio
“T
he obvious change in the past 15 years is the growth of AV technology. 3D and 4D experiences are now common in visitor
attractions and I’ve seen a 5D experi- ence advertised. The push for CGI or Hollywood-style immersion is relentless. Subtlety is often lost because of the impatience of the Playstation generation. Sadly, it’s increasingly rare to see an experience where visitors are allowed to absorb compelling stories at a variety of paces. We’re saturated with so many multi- dimensional experiences that they all seem to blend together in the subcon- scious. And bigger budgets from fi lm studios will always set benchmarks that are nigh on impassable. The Spider-Man ride at Universal Studios
AM 3 2012 ©º 2012
While most changes are good, I miss the clunky dark ride. You could com- pletely control the visitors’ arc of vision while playing spatial games with the environment to trick and delight visi- tors. Many of the surviving dark rides technologies have been replaced with hanging pods full of AV tricks and smells. The problem is that it changes the visitor’s perspective of the scene. Dioramas were looked up at from
Hicks has been with MET Studio for 15 years
Florida is a true 4D ride. Not only is it 3D, it’s also a rollercoaster and uses every theatrical trick in the book plus live action as well (see p56). Put that up against a 4D ride that
blows a bit of smoke around your legs and squirts water at you and there’s really no contest.
a low level. Now they’re viewed from high level within hanging pods that block the onward views of the visitors travelling behind. A football match is shot at low level, as it forces the per- spective of the players and the action. If the match was shot above eye level, that dynamism would be lost. I think we’ve thrown the baby out with the bath water at some attractions. In the future, live action will become
more common so the experience can respond to visitor expectation beyond the capacity of any AV interactive.”
Read Attractions Management online
attractionsmanagement.com/digital 49
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86