JoshC.

That particular thing is in Calypso Quay, not Amity Cove where Tidal Wave is. Hence, it's not meant to look damaged.

Images of the actors. They look pretty darn good! Also, The Passing certificate glows in the dark! (All photos credit to TNL, of course) Though I haven't read spoiler reviews of Passing itself, the gist of what I'm seeing from scores or non-spoiler reviews is that it's "okay, but could be better"...

In short - it's the least scary maze because it's the worst. It has a nice setting, but the route doesn't lead itself to many jumps or scares. The actors do less interacting and pretend to be ghost-pirates more. (This is all my personal experience of course). So yeah, a very nice starter maze.

An incident has happened on Storm Surge today: (From Thorpe Nerd Live) This was tweeted by CF, who are also on park today: Looks like Storm Surge could be out of action for a while. Hopefully the person is 100% okay and this was a really bad accident..

The Curse is probably the least scariest, followed by Saw Alive in my opinion. Asylum is very disorientating, and has some real scares. Experiment 10 and Passing seem to be the 'more extreme' ones, and perhaps should be avoided unless you're fine with the other three. Hope that helps.

I doubt that; they're really pushing the idea a lot. I know there was writing on the tunnel, but I thought it was a lot more 'colourful' as well; blood red colours and the like? But likewise - I do hope that it doesn't end up feeling like a second-hand Hellgate.

From the park's Facebook page. This park-wide theme sounds better and better by the day. Sounds like there could be some form of 'show' / high level interactivity going on! Can't wait to go.

A Press Release from the park: Ah, I love these things at times!

I'm going to Scarefest and The Haunted Castle (Warwick Castle) for the first time this year, as well as my regular Fright Nights trip. YAY!

Well, that wasn't what I was expecting... The way I read about the hessian body bag was that it would be put on your head and you would see ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. You would then be guided around for a bit, executed and such, and then left to explore the rest of the maze without the bag, but just in small groups with practically no light. The way those pictures seem is that the body bag is on your head for much longer, though you have some ability to see through it. Interesting, as I say - not what I was expecting. I do like how your 'crime' is on your bag though, which could lead to some potential personal interaction, and it does seem you go through in very small groups. Can't wait to try this maze out.. Also, this has been posted on ScareTour's Facebook page: Basically confirmation of what we've wanted / expected - park wide theme!

With Fright Nights, Scarefest and all other things Halloween drawing ever nearer, I guess it's time for some Halloween-themed blog entries! Dead End was seemingly a one-off scare zone that hit Fright Nights in 2010, and Thorpe's first attempt at a scare zone since about 2002 / 2003, when the event first started out. Located on the pathway next to Zodiac and The Crust, it was perhaps a typical Merlin scare zone, in the sense that it wasn't technically a scare zone, but rather a set route with a very specific entrance and exit. In essence, it was basically a specific scare path, which was possibly one of the reasons for it's bad public response, but more on that later... Dead End had a rather interesting theme, revolving around a ride graveyard where a contagious virus struck, leaving the undead lurking in the shadows. For a scare zone, that in itself is rather in depth, and even when you compare it to some mazes (Asylum and Se7en, for example), the back story is a bit more detailed. Lasting only one season, it quite obviously just wasn't popular enough. The theming used was perhaps inappropriate for a scare zone, varying from an old Zodiac ride car to old Thorpe Farm signs and Miss Hippo Fungle Safari statues. There was also some other bits and bobs, such as Sun Scream theming. As anyone can tell, none of this is particularly scary - yet, it does work well with the whole 'ride graveyard' thing. However, one of the issues with this is that most of the general public probably will not appreciate this. For a guest who walks up to the scare zone's entrance, and sees a sign saying 'DEAD END TERROR ZONE', along with loads of 'keep out' signs and fake barbed wire around, they will not expect to be walking into a sort of graveyard full of old rides. This in turn means that guests may laugh at the idea itself, and when you make guests laugh at and not with an attraction, it spells trouble. Another thing was the idea of it all. This scare zone was not a scare zone; it was a scare path - much more like a very short scare maze. This is something that the UK Merlin parks (I'm unsure about other Merlin parks) seem to not understand - a scare zone should not have a set path! The word zone suggest a form of area, a plaza or extended walkway region, which you are free to explore as much as you like. However, with Dead End, it was not like this. It was very much like a scare maze, in that you get told when you could and could not go in, and there was little chance to explore - you had to follow the very restricted path and were pushed through the pathway. This idea gives mixed messages about the whole attraction. If it is meant to be a scare zone, and that's what you go in expecting, how do you feel when you get pretty much ushered through a pathway like a very short maze? Short changed is the likely answer. This in turn lead to many criticisms that the attraction was "too short". Perhaps it might be me, but surely a zone should never have a criticism of being "too short", but rather "too small"? What I'm trying to get at is that, simply put, Dead End was too much like a maze, and compared to the other mazes and how it was marketed, it never stood a chance in comparison, no matter how much or how little people enjoyed it. Yes, I except the issues with space and fitting in a chicken run and all the other logistical reasons, but Dead End seemed to not bother to try and be a zone, but instead just accept that it should try and be as much like a maze as possible. No doubt that people in general just weren't very impressed with it either. The actual given back story didn't make much sense with the actual attraction (yes, there was old stuff from 'dead' rides and attractions, but there's no virus outbreak it seems, and why would people be there anyway?). The layout itself was just like a cattlepen pretty much - walking from side to side, and turning, which perhaps left itself to be rather samey after a while, and lead to predictable scares. There was no real highlight which everything could say 'Wow, THAT bit was amazing!" after they left. Dead End was just sorta there and didn't have a defining feature which is needed by any scare attraction really. So, I've highlighted a couple of reasons why it may not have been liked, and no doubt critics of the attraction will likely agree with at least one of these points. However, I again seem to go against the general consensus and was quite a big fan of Dead End, despite being very sceptical about it. Here's my original thoughts after going in the scare zone on opening night: A highly positive review. Though perhaps I'd retract the "better than any of the mazes" bit, it was a very enjoyable experience. The attraction utilised LOADS of smoke, especially at the beginning section, making it rather difficult to see to say the least. This meant that the first scare moment was achieved more by being disorientated more than anything else, which is a great way to start any scare attraction in my mind - just look at Experiment 10 for example. There was also a lot of flashing lighting as well; again, it worked incredibly well as it helped create a sense of disorientation throughout the experience, whilst also keeping it dark - which is half the point of the thing. Perhaps it was the fact I had low expectations for this that I rate it highly, as it really did keep me entertained. Even if I wasn't scared, which some may argue should be how a scare maze is judged, but let's not go into that this entry, I did appreciate everything that happened. Also, as said in my original 'review', I had a very enthusiastic actor on both of my first goes, which always helps. The fact that she recognised me on my second go and singled me out does make me think she knew I wasn't particularly scared by any stretch of the imagination, but knew I enjoyed it, and helped make me experience better. This is what a scare zone should be about it my mind - people having freedom to explore, but actors being there to stop you / ensure you only explore certain parts. I remember being at the end of attraction for a good minute at least (perhaps longer than the entire attraction lasted!) on my second go, due to a great attraction with that specific actor, whilst she still did interact with others. Dead End, for me, had two downfalls in the end. The first is the size, meaning it wasn't able to cope with the numbers. Being a pathway, and a small-ish one at that, it wasn't meant to be enjoyed by the masses all at once. It's for a few people at a time. I do think one of my fears came true, in that when it's busy, it just wasn't as affective. Many times during the busier days, people had to wait to go in, which for a scare zone - in my mind - should just not be the case. Again, this perhaps create in people's mind the view it will be more 'maze-like' than anything else. Had it being a literal zone, when people could go in and out whenever they wanted and have been free to explore, it would have been much more preferable. Another downfall, which really disappointed me if I'm honest, was how in later days of Fright Nights, the actors wore cheap-looking monster masks. It added literally NOTHING to the theme, nothing to the story and perhaps made the actors worse - they could try and use the mask to shock people, as opposed to try and scare people. No scare attraction at Thorpe should have to resort to using cheap and tacky masks which look like they can be brought at Poundland, as it makes it feel like zero effort has been put in. Not only that, but it isn't scary, it's laughable. So, when it comes down to it, I really enjoyed Dead End. It had its flaws, yes, but doesn't everything? Perhaps from my over-cynicism before going in, I was setting myself up to be pleasantly surprised, but many others with low expectations felt that they weren't met, which I guess is the way the cookie crumbles. I just now wish that Thorpe would create another scare zone. Dead End was a very cheap attraction; I don't think that can be doubted. I just wish, however, that Thorpe would perhaps not be too scared to do another. Put in the time and effort, and they can create something which will be enjoyed by the majority, as opposed to the minority. Last season, and quite probably this season, there's roaming actors around the park, which is a great touch. Even if they don't scare most, many people enjoy them - for example, the clowns were a HUGE hit last season, and really helped create a nice atmosphere on park. Hopefully this season we can see escaped prisoners and such roaming around, causing havoc and what not. But why stop there? Why not have a dedicated zone specifically where certain prisoners and criminals are lurking around? Why not have a few 'prison cells' together, where we see prisoners get locked away, only to escape yet again? Perhaps some sort of 'base' for the actors as well, it would create a very nice zone where there's lots of interactivity and a good chance for scaring. Perhaps do it near the Lost City flats, and there's some space there which can lead to creating a zone to be explored, whilst giving enough opportunity for a chicken run or whatever else. Perhaps this specific example isn't realistic enough. However, the general idea of a scare zone with some thought in should not be. Mazes are great at a Halloween event, and roaming actors are also brilliant, but a scare zone specifically designed to be explored more in detail than the rest of the park with actors is the way forward to creating a overall, high quality Halloween event at Thorpe Park.

The park has not officially claimed that there's a world first. Hours before the official announcement, a member on here posted this: In the marketing of The Passing, there's been no mention of a world first, but just "Using cutting edge technology never before seen at Thorpe Park", so perhaps it was a case of the person on the phone got confused / said the wrong thing? EDIT: Beaten to it "

I'm completely with Benin on this. It makes me wonder at times how much enthusiasts care about parks. We always complain and comment that parks should make more of an effort in keeping things secret and building up suspense and such, yet the moment we can get a leak, most are like 'OMG let's find everything out NOW and spoil the park's hard work!!' Fair enough if you don't mind the secret being spoiled and that, but there's a difference between knowing the secret after it's been released, but at this stage where it's been leaked, it just feels like everything been a bit ruined. Much like Benin, I'd not want to completely avoid all discussion, as I enjoy following construction and speculating, but now it seems that for the sake of not spoiling the experience the park are creating, I will have to. I was fortunate enough to not find out what the secret was, and hopefully I will not find out until the park reveal so, or until I ride. Meh, rant over.

I have not read this, nor do I intend to. However, can I ask that spoiler tags are added? I am sure there are some people like myself who do not want the secret revealed, and some may not be lucky as myself as may actually read what is in the article. Many thanks. EDIT: Thanks Marc!

That's been floating around for a while now! That particular PowerPoint was posted made in 2010 I believe, when early planning for Swarm was being made. A lot has changed then, so it may or may not happen now. The park have certainly adopted a '2 year marketing strategy' it seems for major coaster - Stealth was 'upgraded' in 2007, Saw had Saw Alive in 2010, so no doubt Swarm will receive some form of attention which will help keep its marketing fresh. Whether that is a bolt on ride or something different remains unknown at this stage.

The Cabin in the Woods Okay, so I finally watched the film (with a midnight screening at a cinema - win!) yesterday / this morning. After reading many brilliant reviews, including ones such as Ryan's on the previous page, I was really looking forward to it. There's a few 'little spoilers' below, but nothing that completely ruins the film, just so people know... However, I just feel a bit disappointed with it all. The beginning was good and created a decent story line, though the idea of 5 people in the woods with zombies around is hardly original really. In general, I found many bits of the first half of the film to be predictable, expected and relying more on 'cheap' scares; loud noises more than actual tension building and such. Again, as with many horror films, there were some bits which you just think 'would someone REALLY do that?', which with the way the film was going, was really a necessity in my mind. The final part of the film is where it begins to nose dive. It is far too over the top, and turns into a gore-fest and moves away from a horror film. Some parts were unnecessarily dragged out, whilst others were obvious. In terms of how the plot plays out, I compare it to Insidious - good at the beginning, some tense moments, then goes completely over the top with monsters and all that at the end. The film was perhaps overly funny to be labelled as just a horror film as well, which in a way left me with a bit of a bitter taste in my mouth; I felt as though I wasn't given the film I thought I was going to watch. Overall, an okay film, and no doubt people will enjoy it highly, but just failed to impress me. 5.5/10

It seems that there's some support work going on with the ride. Whilst it's nice to see park-wide stories and the like, to close down a major coaster for a whole week (at least) just to advertise a maze / keep it secret is overly extreme, and would no doubt annoy many guests who visited on those days. Imagine the uproar if Alton Towers were to supposedly do that with rides in the X Sector this season due to SW7...

With thanks to Thrill Nation's Facebook, of course.. Nothing special; just simply the logo printed on some form of block. Did anyone expect less really?

SW7 could still be a world's first. After all, Th13teen was marketed as 'The Ultimate Roller Coaster'; I can't remember the world's first thing being pushed that much even. So I guess there's still a chance.. I wonder if this'll spark more rumours of 'most inversions on a coaster', with the 'world beating' motto...

http://silverdollarcity2013.com/milestone-reached-last-piece-of-track-set-in-place/# Outlaw Run at SDC has now had its track completed and there's some very nice photos on there! Hybrid, woodie, I don't particularly care what it is, it still looks like a good, fun ride!

I think that a fine line needs to be reached between people's opinions on the person and the views of their site. Many people will no doubt have judgements of Theme Park World / Confuzzled as a member (and perhaps by extension, as a person), and will expect his site to mirror such judgements. As I said in Chat last night, an increasing number of younger teenagers are having a go at these sorts of things (heck, even I had a go at one a couple of years back, which was a waste of my time really, but ah well). Being the generation brought up with technology that we are, these sorts of thing are common not only with theme park fan sites, but also in general. The trouble with some of these sites is that they go for ideas which are perhaps too broad in aim (I won't name other names, but Theme Park World for example; suggests ALL theme parks, which no doubt this member - nor anyone really - can achieve). Yet people will try and ultimately fail and be criticised harshly. Then we also have sites claiming they'll get exclusive after exclusive, high quality media and so forth - again, something which cannot be achieved by a teenager by themselves on a free-hosted site. Some sites also steal other's works without credit, don't list sources or just make stuff up, which again is something criticised largely and gives these sort of sites 'bad names', if you will. Again, I will use the example of Theme Park World's recent 'Facebook Problems' topic, which seem to more be a less-than-subtle way of trying to get his Facebook page promoted even more; a simple 'Oh, sorry guys, this link is no longer working, I don't know why, can anyone offer any help?' in this thread would have been better, but oh well, live and learn and all that. I have no problems with these such sites really, as long as they are run responsibly and to a good standard. If such a site steals others' works, spam other forums about their site, or whatever else, I will lose respect for it - which goes for all sites really; theme park orientated or not. After all, where would sites such as this one be of it didn't start off small? No doubt the people who run and make these sites enjoy doing it, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. Perhaps it's a way of showing their enthusiasm or knowledge of the park, or just 'something to do'. Personally, I'd much rather not see these dozens of sites (most of which probably won't expand beyond an okay Facebook page) and instead see more good quality conversation and discussion in the 'major sites' that we've got, with new ones that are set up growing well due to them being well thought out and have a dedicated person / peoples behind them. Of course, that is an idealistic scenario, but I think it would in general make theme park sites better in the long run. Perhaps if major sites and their communities were more welcoming to newer members and 'n00bs' (NOTE: I am not saying that everyone on every major theme park site is unwelcoming here, but there are certainly members across the majority of forums who almost go out of their way to be unnecessarily unwelcoming for no apparent reason) and gave some members a chance instead of ignoring them just because they are n00bish, some may not feel the need to create such sites, and in turn discussions such as these would not be happening. Another thing worth remembering is how everyone is of different ages, different maturity levels and so forth - every new member isn't going to be a theme park expert who knows the best way to post and such; going back to the live and learn thing I talked about earlier. Okay, I'm rambling a lot here, but I will continue nonetheless. Constructive criticism is the best way to go for these sort of sites. For example, I'm currently confused about Theme Park World - is it a Facebook only site at the moment? Is there any particular focus of the site / page; all parks, UK parks, Merlin parks? Also, I think it is perhaps over-zealous to say the site brings "the latest news before anyone else"; especially when the site has yet to achieve that. Perhaps the page could serve as some sort of 'information check point', which can round up the news for the past however many days / weeks, and has a variety of sources, complying all the news into an easy to reach point? But then you have to ensure everything is accurate, there's a variety of sources so you're not just posting what another site has using different words, etc. I do unfortunately think that this site / page will be another which fails to make it past the 'okay Facebook page' stage. However, there's no need to strike people down for it; after all, we all have a common interest and should support the like-minded as much as we can in continuing their enthusiasm. When people make mistakes, help them out. Perhaps with this specific member people may feel they have given him chances and helped him out enough and have decided that they've had enough. Whilst this opinion is more than fine, rather than making every chance to have a dig and such, help keep this particular forum as friendly and nice looking as possible, and try and keep quite. Take any issues to moderators and Private Messaging, try and get all of this sorted, and just help everyone get along. Okay, I'm pretty much finished now. I understand that this is completely off topic, perhaps a little unnecessary, and what I am saying will not agree with everyone. I was going to write a final word to moderators / admin on what I think should be done to help this issue, but as I had a fair bit to say, I've posted it in the 'Feedback' topic here: http://forum.maniahu...140#entry141340

(It might be worth checking out my post here, which may give further explanation as to why I'm positing this! Sorry if some may feel this was more appropriate to be posted in a PM) With regards to Theme Park World as a member has had an account banned previously, for reasons I do not know. This new account is in effect a constant advertisement of his site / page; perhaps a polite suggestion to him to change his username to something more suitable / related to his name, nickname or something quirky is in order. This would no doubt please members who have issues with the site (and perhaps the member) and also help the person be more inline with the rules, which I do believe state a member's username must in some way relate to their real name? Secondly, on a slightly related note to the post I made in Theme Park World's thread, forums should be welcoming and encourage people to talk about their enthusiasm. Whilst this site does do this rather well, I do think the 'Tips for New Members' thread (http://forum.maniahu...rs/page__st__20) could perhaps do with a bit of a clean out; after all, the arguments that are in the middle of the thread are hardly a good example for new members, also considering two members there have been banned, and such members there have high post counts (I'm all for freedom of speech, worth pointing out, but I do think that such topics should be kept as simple as possible). Also, is there any way of setting up an automatic Private Message for when a new member joins, welcoming them to the forums, and pointing them to important introductory threads, such as the 'Tips for New Members' and 'Introduce Yourself', and perhaps a link to the forum's rules? It would be a nice touch and help members out, help continue the growing community that is here and also help ensure that younger members and potential, so-called 'n00bs' are helped out as much as possible. Sorry for the completely random points; just something I felt I needed to get off my chest!

The Thorpe Park Annual Pass currently stand at £85 (though could go up in the new year) - source: http://www.thorpepark.com/prices/annual-passes.aspx?tabnum=2 In theory after two visits, if you pay the full £43.20 (which will no doubt go up next season), the pass has paid for itself. However, if you use BOGOF, half price vouchers or book in advance, then the price goes down, as you probably know. According to the official site, if you book online, you can get tickets from £25.92, which would mean you'd realistically have to go 4 times for the Thorpe Annual Pass to be worth it. If you also ever consider buying Bounceback (which this season are £15, £18 for Fright Nights or £6 for the next day..I think), then there's plenty of ways to save money. The benefits of having a standard Thorpe Annual Pass are that you get 20% off food, drink and shopping. There are no Early Rider Times like Alton Towers, or any other benefits. However, with the Snoozeboxes next season, it could be a case of there being ERT for 'hotel guests' and AP holders - though no one really knows about that at the moment. Another benefit would be not having to worry about when to go, booking tickets, etc. Personally, I think you'd be better of not buying a Thorpe Park Annual Pass unless you make at least 5-6 visits next season. Having it may give extra incentive, yes, but it's no guarantee. I think it's possible to book online and then use your ticket to get a Bounceback (though you may want to just check with the park beforehand just to be sure, or someone on here may know), which would mean you'd be looking at about £41 to have had 2 visits. Do that again, it becomes £82 for 4 visits and so on. It may be a bit of a hassle and require a bit more forward thinking than with an Annual Pass, though. If you're planning on possibly getting an Annual Pass in the new year and can afford one in January, it might actually be worth getting a Standard Merlin Annual Pass, surprisingly. At around that time of year, they're big on doing special offers for the Annual Passes as it's just after Christmas - the past couple of years in January time, you've been able to buy a Merlin Annual Pass for half price, so around £78! That would give you much greater freedom and choice for less money, so it would be worth keeping an eye out for those offers (like the Merlin Annual Pass page on Facebook if you have; best place to keep track of the special offers). Of course, they may not do such a thing this year, or may do it at a different time, but it never hurts to keep an eye out. Hope that helps!

Toverland's latest coaster, d'Wervelwind (translated as Whirlwind; shock horror!) is set to open to the public tomorrow; serving more as a soft opening in a way as the new area it is a part of doesn't open until next April! The Mack spinning coaster had it's media event yesterday; a few photos... The swamp themed station. Station and cars. (Sources: http://themepark.nl/...417#Post1912417 and http://themepark.nl/...518#Post1912518) The Magic Valley area will be completed for April and the area looks absolutely brilliant! Really must get myself down to this park!

You have a topic in the 'Site Adverts' subforum for your site. Why not inform us about the Facebook page for your site there? Pretty sure this topic is more a way of advertising your page as opposed to a genuine topic for Facebook issues. Take it back to the correct topic, please?