Personally, I'd make the distinction between "this ride will exist as a marketing tool" and "this ride will only exist as a marketing tool."
Though I have a handful of rides in mind from various parks, which IMO do fall into that second bucket.
It gets tricky when you meet that odd individual who claims to love the ride you feel is SO CLEARLY in that "only" bucket. Who could possibly like that heap of trash? Oh god, does this mean there are possibly a ton of people who somehow genuinely enjoy it as an attraction? Are they going to have the park convinced to do more of the same? A perpetual future lineage of gimmicky engineered nonsense? Is this the exact moment I'll look back at years from now as the delineation between a world with at least some great new rides and a world in which Every 👏 New 👏 Major 👏 Ride 👏 Installation 👏 is a lame two-season cash grab novelty with little to no staying power for people like me who know what it feels like to experience the offerings of an eternally damned-good attraction? They're gonna give up on the high road and aim for this guy over here instead? Sonofa... does this simpleton vote? I hope not. I really hope not.
🖐👱
🎤
Those rides aren't only marketing tools after all, I suppose: they are also delivery vessels for intensely depressing existential angst. Should some parks drop the specific term "amusement" and call themselves emotion parks?
It is a blessing that I don't have more free time.