Register or Login to Hide This Ad for Free!
I know this is in the unpopular opinion area, but I don't like the term "Ka replacement", because it creates some unnatural, unclerable hurdle for people to consider it "good".

My dream project is a traditional giga coaster. And if I could go back in time, I'd have preferred that than ever having Ka.
 
I don't like the term "Ka replacement", because it creates some unnatural, unclerable hurdle for people to consider it "good".
I, personally, disagree with this take.

Although I there are certain things I don’t like about this comparatively, Ka was a (al be it really good at it) one trick coaster. It accelerated fast. But there was really no other redeeming qualities than height and speed. This is going to have so much more going for it IMO that the only part missing is the insane acceleration. But I partially think TT2 took care of some of that expectation of the loss of that.
 
I, personally, disagree with this take.

Although I there are certain things I don’t like about this comparatively, Ka was a (al be it really good at it) one trick coaster. It accelerated fast. But there was really no other redeeming qualities than height and speed. This is going to have so much more going for it IMO that the only part missing is the insane acceleration. But I partially think TT2 took care of some of that expectation of the loss of that.
Oh, I don't think Ka had much going for it either. 21 years ago when it opened I saw the commercials for it and I was like "it goes up, down, and that's it?"

I was saying I feel like the term "Ka replacement" puts Ka on some type of special pedestal that the new ride has to live up to.

I think Scream Machine, Rolling Thunder, and even Chiller had more character and were bigger losses than Ka.

I don't like the term "Ka replacement" because I don't think it needs "replacing". You could put 2 well themed family coasters, a traditional woodie, or even something else there and I think they'd be better than having Ka there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sharpr1
just to note they would have to work around that area of trees on the right of ka in the pic because thats considered wetlands and Six Flags can’t touch it according to Coliwood
Coliwood is not always correct in his understanding of things. Yes, there would be extra hurdles to take down those trees if they wanted to. But it's not verboten. They're not in the same category as the protected lake and forests south of the park. There were only a few trees in that area in the 1980s and 1990s. They cut some down when they took Rolling Thunder out and put El Toro in.
 
Last edited:
To elaborate more on my post yesterday, I believe this recent trademarked has actually strengthened the case for Phantom Spire rather than weakened it (basically, why I think Gargantuan Vertical Vengeance is a red herring). The biggest thing some are overlooking is that the teasers may be leading us in the direction of the theme of the ride, not necessarily the name of the ride. My main takeaways:

Creating a world rather than just a name: Now that we have these dangerous sea creature clues, I've seen a lot of people assume that the ride's eventual name has to directly relate to the creature. Those can be two different things. Especially with this new direction of Cedar Fair-quality theming, I would expect this ride, like many others, to be built around a broader story where the ride name is just one component. In that scenario, all of the recent teasers make perfect sense without needing the ride's name to be Kraken, Leviathan, Behemoth, or something creature-related. That's why I'm not convinced that the creature clues are necessarily intended to point us toward the ride's name. I think they're intended to establish a basis for some world-building around this attraction.

Subtleties can go a long way: What strengthens the case for Phantom Spire is that it sounds like a place, a legend, or a landmark. It doesn't sound like a monster. It sounds like something people would talk about as some kind of myth or legend. Also, it's very subtle, but the inclusion of those cargo ships in the distance of the "It's Rising" poster gives this more of a maritime edge rather than just a sea monster theme. That was definitely intentional, and had it been just an empty ocean landscape, I think we would have more reason than not to believe otherwise.

Throwing targets off the scent: The teasers have gotten everyone focused on some kind of creature itself, while less attention has now been given to the structure that is at the center of all of this. Yet the one trademark we've known about since January is Phantom Spire. If the recent teasers are meant to establish the broader story, then it's entirely possible that the sea creature is only one piece of that story; an accessory to the centerpiece. If that is the case, then the recent sea creature-focused teasers are accomplishing exactly what they're intended to do: getting everyone focused on the threat in front of them, the mystery, and the story while drawing attention away from the actual centerpiece. Throwing their targets off the scent. It has certainly shifted discussion away from Phantom Spire and toward creature-related names, which is why I don't think the apparent disconnect between the trademarks and the teasers is as significant as some are making it out to be. Everything is intentional.

Another thing worth noting is timing: Phantom Spire was trademarked long before most of the public storytelling campaign began. To me, that suggests the park may have already settled on the ride name while still developing the lore and marketing narrative supporting it. Also, people caught wind of the Gargantuan Vertical Vengeance trademark the same day Shoreline Pier soft opened and we got our first look at a wave of new sea creature-themed teasers... feels just a little too perfect of timing doesn't it?

Could this new trademark be the actual name? Sure, it could. But right now, one or some combination of three things is happening:
  1. Phantom Spire is the real name and the recent teasers are about the ride's theme, not its name
  2. Gargantuan Vertical Vengeance was filed as an alternate option or even simply to protect multiple naming possibilities while things are still being finalized. Or, again, to throw people off the scent.
  3. There's still a third trademark we haven't seen yet (very much possible, especially if the name is so niche that they're pretty certain nobody is going to trademark it in the meantime)
The recent teasers have made me more interested in the story they're building, but GVV showing up late and unannounced doesn't have me convinced that the Phantom Spire trademark is suddenly irrelevant. I'm not saying anybody is wrong, this is all just fun speculation that will all be settled in the next month or two. But I think some people may be trying to use the teasers to answer the wrong question.
 
Unfortunately with Tormenta Rampaging Run setting the precedent I bet Gargantuan Vertical Vengeance is the final name. Both of those suck and I’m mad people are actually calling the former units full name instead of just Tormenta. The subtitle gimmick with roller coasters sucks.

For a company that has nailed smaller scale theming in the past and honestly has nailed a lot of this transition, that name is laughably bad. Thoosies, please insult the name on every social media post so they MAYBE might change it. It worked with BGW.
 
I know the name has already been aggressively ripped apart by pretty much everyone, but how does a blunder like this even manage to pass by? Who's the idiot that propped up 'Vertical Vengeance'? Gargantuan alone just seems.. awkward. No way in hell they'll actually go with that.

I know a good chunk of people are still salty about Ka's desecrated closure and removal, so what vengeance is invoked on the plot of a former unpopular standup-coaster and a bunch of asphalt? I get it's the 'spiritual successor' to Kingda Ka but wouldn't that even be more stupid when your replacing it, not only shorter, less faster, and knowing your park suffered from a staunch decline in the past year because of your mistakes? Granted, we're in a better spot now, and I'm optimistic about the care and longevity of the park, but this is the worst roller coaster name I've ever heard.

I was actually starting to warm up to Phantom Spire, that evokes a sense of mystique and mysteriousness associated with the darkened colors, huge scale of the tower cementing itself into the air and ominous 'It's Rising' poster. I'm sure such would've been more fleshed out and hyped when announced.
 
Gargantuan vertical vengeance is such an awful name that the only way to make any sense of it is to think that it was a last minute change made as an overreaction to phantom spire being leaked way back when

Like what does that name even stand for? Atleast tormenta has a clear theme to it, this name is no better than “tall spike coaster”
 
I'm late to the game on this but I too echo the hate for this new name.
I pray they do not choose a name like that. Just when they have won the public over with this announced coaster, choosing a garbage name like that seems a bit like a step back.

Given how Tormenta's Trademarking went, I do think this is going to be the name. I prefer the Phantom's Spire trademark tbh. Does that name fit with the boardwalk? Nope, but neither does the purple track and dark supports.

I'd prefer the name if they renamed it but kept the word Vengeance in the title.
 
  • Like
Reactions: greyarrival
Cannot wait to see the ai generated logo that accompanies this symphony of a name. Phantom Spire sucked too. Honestly, Project Purple is probably the strongest, but it shouldn’t be this difficult to name a 300+ foot spinning freak coaster.

It’s right next to Superman, it’s purple, the prospective trademarked names that were conjured up by chatgpt suck, it’s pretty much just a fancier S:TE that also won’t come close to touching 400’- it should just be Bizarro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: telamark
I really don't understand the hate for Phantom Spire. With the idea that it would have been themed to a decrepit, deserted, supposedly-haunted lighthouse looming off in the distance but visible from the pier, I think it's gold. And as a standalone name with zero theme context at all, I think it's still really strong.

I'm impartial between the teased sea monster theme vs the rumored haunted lighthouse theme, but I think Phantom Spire is a great name and I think Gargantuan Vertical Vengeance is easily one of the worst coaster names ever proposed.
 
Last edited:
One issue is that Phantom Spire is just spooky tower. Generic theme and generic name

Another issue is that the spire part is metareferential in a way that "insists upon itself" as peter griffin would say. as I'm thinking about it, it seems pretty rare to hear the structure itself referenced in a coaster name. I guess mystic/shivering timbers count, the towers of terror, vertical velocity as a tagline maybe. but a coaster name usually is something. some kind of journey, maybe a flight, or an animal, or a spooky creature. a spire is just an inanimate thing, and not one that has a ton of identifiable qualities to link with a theme. like yeah it's spooky tower but it's also bad ramp
 
Last edited:
One issue is that Phantom Spire is just spooky tower. Generic theme and generic name

Another issue is that the spire part is metareferential in a way that "insists upon itself" as peter griffin would say. as I'm thinking about it, it seems pretty rare to hear the structure itself referenced in a coaster name. I guess mystic/shivering timbers count, the towers of terror, vertical velocity as a tagline maybe. but a coaster name usually is something. some kind of journey, maybe a flight, or an animal, or a spooky creature. a spire is just an inanimate thing, and not one that has a ton of identifiable qualities to link with a theme. like yeah it's spooky tower but it's also bad ramp
Phantom Spire still sounds way cooler than Gargantuan vertical whatever the fuck.
 
Consider Donating to Hide This Ad