Thanks for your reply, tampasteve. I think I know what you mean. Still, I also stay with my opinion that it isn't easy to draw the line nowadays. What makes an interactive element a theme park element or an aquarium element? When does the price for a ticket reach "theme park level" and when is it within the "aquarium level"? Don't get me wrong. I'm fine if a new top notch aquarium would complement with other marine life institutions in San Diego, but I doubt and see it more as another (unnecessary) competitor that will draw away people from the existing aquarias and marine parks.
Sea World has a roller coaster and OdySea will not.Sea World is on a large outdoor campus filled largely with performance stadiums. OdySea will be inside a building. It seems to me the distinction between the former being a theme park and the latter being an aquarium is fairly straightforward.
Sorry, Zoomaniac, but I am going to have to go with Arizona Docent on this. The difference it pretty straight forward, have you perhaps not been to the SeaWorld parks? I do agree, the lines can blur with things like ticket prices, but the actual facilities are very different and have different goals and target audiences. Generally the aquarium will be targeting locals while SW targets a much larger audience of tourists in southern California.
If roller coasters (there are more then 1 at SW San Diego) making the difference, then I can accept that point. With the other arguments I allow myself to be respectfully disagree @Arizona Docent. L'Oceanografic Valencia in Spain for example is on a large(r) outdoor campus filled with at least one performance stadium too and a 4-D-cinema but most people call it an aquarium or an oceanarium, not a theme park. New York Aquarium and Vancouver Aquarium have also large non covered areas and at least the former had (or still has?) also a performance stadium in the recent past. However, my intention was not to ignite a fight but just to point out that borders/lines between theme parks and aquariums (and zoos and safari parks etc.) can be fluently.
No reason to excuse. And I must confess that the goals and targets audiences can be different, although the money comes more and more important for municipaly/non profit institutions as well and none can survive only with local visitors. On the other hand, your guess about my experience about SeaWorld is completly wrong: I've been to all three still existing SeaWorld Parks (once in San Antonio, about 8 times in Orlando and about 6 times in San Diego - last visit there in Spring 2016). For a European I think it's not that bad... - Maybe I just see it with different eyes.
If you want the view of a European who does NOT like Sea World (neither do I btw), read Day 4 of this thread: (I Wish I Was In) California If you don't want to read the link, I will quote his opening statement about Sea World: "And I hated it. Really, truly, hated it." As for locals versus tourists, I think the downtown bayfront location means the new OdySea (and surrounding shops) will definitely be for tourists as much as for locals.
The Aquarium has been very slightly relocated to be directly adjacent to the 480 foot observation tower and expabded from 178,490 square feet to 192,050 square feet. New plans for Seaport Village unveiled
