Quick Review of Nov 19-29 Barcelona to Istanbul Cruise on Oceania Riviera

[ToxM]

I find O to be above Celebrity, in terms of size and ambience and certainly food. We left Celebrity because it was too busy and the food ceased to be of a tolerable quality. O was a breath of fresh air for us. 

 

It’s comfortable for me. 

 

It’s not perfect. If you believe the marketing and expect it to be of the same idyllic level as the pics you are going to be disappointed. Due diligence is your friend. 

 

Off on a Regent cruise next month, one of the smaller ships, I shall be able to get a good comparison between luxury and premium. 

 

 

[Psoque]

11 hours ago, osandomir said:

I believe if people are satisfied with Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruising experience there’s no need for them to look for call it premium or luxury features on the upscale cruise lines. They will always compare them to what they are used to and perfectly fine with and won’t see too much value for them. It’s understandable that they won’t be willing to pay more for that experience.

Just wanted to let it be clear to you, since we don’t want to mislead you and your readers of your comments by not responding to them.  We gave Oceania a try because we were NEVER QUITE HAPPY with our recent experiences with Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruises, and was hoping for something SUBSTANTIALLY and CONSISTENTLY better across ALL aspects of the onboard experience. We have some idea about how a higher end cruises should be, after doing a few on Crystal (Symphony, Serenity, Esprit, Mozart, and Debussy).  We could have booked a cruise on Crystal, but we are still waiting to see how the cruise line is going to do after their reorganization and restart of their operations about 6 months ago.  We were hoping that Oceania would be a slightly more cost effective near-alternative to Crystal in the meantime.

 

Our point was that, whatever premium extras that we saw onboard Riviera were not sufficient to convince us to think that Oceania is SUBSTANTIALLY more upscale in a CONSISTENT manner than Celebrity/HAL/Princess, looking at all aspects of our experience before boarding and onboard.  Whatever limited “premium” features we saw, they were not anywhere close to what we have experienced on cruises in the past that we were extremely impressed with.

 

Also, since our comments about the pricing on this particular itinerary is causing a bit of a confusion for some of the readers, please let us make that clear also.  We are definitely not, in this case, saying that the quality of the Oceania product is in some way reflective on what we paid for this itinerary.  Our point is somewhat of an oppositve: Since we did not really pay any more to try Oceania compared to a typical cost of a comparable (off season Mediterranean cruise in late fall…something we have done a few times in the past on various lines) Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruise, we got what we paid for and enjoyed the cruise for what it is… a slightly fancy cruise.  We got what we paid for.  However, if we were to consider Oceania again, the pricing has to be as good as what we paid for this particular itinerary, since, in our opinion, the overall product does not justify a substantially higher cost than what we have paid for Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruises in the past.

 

Finally, wewant to apologize if some of you found our comments somehow in offense to those who patronize Oceania, either frequently or exclusively.  That was not the point at all.  Also, we would like to remind everyone that, though choices in how we cruise (or for that matter how we vacation any other way) aredeeply personal and not completely scientific/rational, the choices of which cruise lines, on their own, should never define who we are.  The opposite should we true.  The cruise lines we patronize should reflect the whims and fancies of their customers.  We should, by voting with our wallets and our comments, help them do that.  And I’m assuming that Cruise Critic is one of many ways this can happen.

[ak1004]

1 hour ago, Psoque said:

Just wanted to let it be clear to you, since we don’t want to mislead you and your readers of your comments by not responding to them.  We gave Oceania a try because we were NEVER QUITE HAPPY with our recent experiences with Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruises, and was hoping for something SUBSTANTIALLY and CONSISTENTLY better across ALL aspects of the onboard experience. We have some idea about how a higher end cruises should be, after doing a few on Crystal (Symphony, Serenity, Esprit, Mozart, and Debussy).  We could have booked a cruise on Crystal, but we are still waiting to see how the cruise line is going to do after their reorganization and restart of their operations about 6 months ago.  We were hoping that Oceania would be a slightly more cost effective near-alternative to Crystal in the meantime.

 

Our point was that, whatever premium extras that we saw onboard Riviera were not sufficient to convince us to think that Oceania is SUBSTANTIALLY more upscale in a CONSISTENT manner than Celebrity/HAL/Princess, looking at all aspects of our experience before boarding and onboard.  Whatever limited “premium” features we saw, they were not anywhere close to what we have experienced on cruises in the past that we were extremely impressed with.

 

Also, since our comments about the pricing on this particular itinerary is causing a bit of a confusion for some of the readers, please let us make that clear also.  We are definitely not, in this case, saying that the quality of the Oceania product is in some way reflective on what we paid for this itinerary.  Our point is somewhat of an oppositve: Since we did not really pay any more to try Oceania compared to a typical cost of a comparable (off season Mediterranean cruise in late fall…something we have done a few times in the past on various lines) Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruise, we got what we paid for and enjoyed the cruise for what it is… a slightly fancy cruise.  We got what we paid for.  However, if we were to consider Oceania again, the pricing has to be as good as what we paid for this particular itinerary, since, in our opinion, the overall product does not justify a substantially higher cost than what we have paid for Celebrity/HAL/Princess cruises in the past.

 

Finally, wewant to apologize if some of you found our comments somehow in offense to those who patronize Oceania, either frequently or exclusively.  That was not the point at all.  Also, we would like to remind everyone that, though choices in how we cruise (or for that matter how we vacation any other way) aredeeply personal and not completely scientific/rational, the choices of which cruise lines, on their own, should never define who we are.  The opposite should we true.  The cruise lines we patronize should reflect the whims and fancies of their customers.  We should, by voting with our wallets and our comments, help them do that.  And I’m assuming that Cruise Critic is one of many ways this can happen.

 

Maybe this was the issue? No product will be better than other product across ALL aspects of the onboard experience.

 

As for the price, it is unrealistic to expect O to cost the same as Celebrity. Sometimes it might happen, most of the time it will not. Arguing that O is in the same category as Celebrity is like arguing that Mercedes is in the same category as Honda. There is really no point.  

[Psoque]

21 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

Maybe this was the issue? No product will be better than other product across ALL aspects of the onboard experience.

 

As for the price, it is unrealistic to expect O to cost the same as Celebrity. Sometimes it might happen, most of the time it will not. Arguing that O is in the same category as Celebrity is like arguing that Mercedes is in the same category as Honda. There is really no point.  

I see your point, and we, in the original post, admitted that we had slightly higher expectations for this cruise.  However, we are profoundly puzzled by the logic among the people who say "Oceania is entirely in a different (higher) class of cruise line compared to Celebrity/HAL/Princess," or say that "Oceania is a Mercedes-Benz/Four Seasons equivalent," while the same time saying the abysmally inconsistent dining service and highly chaotic buffet service, which we consider to be hallmarks of cruise lines such as RCL and NCL (in our opinion, of course) to be acceptable/expected on Oceania.  Would you accept/expect that sort of irregular/inconsistent service from Mercedes-Benz or Four Seasons?  We certainly do not.  If Oceania wants us to take them seriously to an "entirely different class" of cruise line compared to other mid-range lines like Celebrity/HAL/Princess, it should at least get the dining room service consistency right.

 

In our opinion, we still consider Oceania to be something just a hair better (in some aspects) than its mid-range competitors.  I guess for some of us, that added edge makes Oceania profoundly special to them.  To us, Oceania is just one of the variations of a solid mid-range offerings.  And that's not a terrible thing.  As we said before, as long as the price is right and the scheduling/itinerary is something we can manage/enjoy, we will consider Oceania again in the future, perhaps with more realistic expectations, and be pleasantly surprised if it exceeds that level of expectations.

[ak1004]

2 hours ago, Psoque said:

I see your point, and we, in the original post, admitted that we had slightly higher expectations for this cruise.  However, we are profoundly puzzled by the logic among the people who say "Oceania is entirely in a different (higher) class of cruise line compared to Celebrity/HAL/Princess," or say that "Oceania is a Mercedes-Benz/Four Seasons equivalent," while the same time saying the abysmally inconsistent dining service and highly chaotic buffet service, which we consider to be hallmarks of cruise lines such as RCL and NCL (in our opinion, of course) to be acceptable/expected on Oceania.  Would you accept/expect that sort of irregular/inconsistent service from Mercedes-Benz or Four Seasons?  We certainly do not.  If Oceania wants us to take them seriously to an "entirely different class" of cruise line compared to other mid-range lines like Celebrity/HAL/Princess, it should at least get the dining room service consistency right.

 

In our opinion, we still consider Oceania to be something just a hair better (in some aspects) than its mid-range competitors.  I guess for some of us, that added edge makes Oceania profoundly special to them.  To us, Oceania is just one of the variations of a solid mid-range offerings.  And that's not a terrible thing.  As we said before, as long as the price is right and the scheduling/itinerary is something we can manage/enjoy, we will consider Oceania again in the future, perhaps with more realistic expectations, and be pleasantly surprised if it exceeds that level of expectations.

 

I never said that "inconsistent  dining service and highly chaotic buffet service" are acceptable simply because we never experienced anything like it. On Celebrity we really had a problem finding a table in the buffet - was never an issue on O. The couple we travelled with were in shock how quickly the drinks and the coffee arrived in the morning. They were in shock how quickly the dirty dishes were evacuated from the table. One of the big positive surprises for them was the way they serve food in the buffet (compared to self service on C where everyone touches the food and the dishes).

 

Service in the MDR was between very good and excellent most of the time, with some very rare exceptions. But service on Celebrity MDR was also pretty good, what made the difference is the quality of the food. Huge difference. To me, it IS the best food at sea, better than SS or Crystal.

 

So our experience was very different from yours - maybe your experience was impacted by some of groups that you mentioned, not sure. 

 

That said, not everything on O is better than C or Princess. The entertainment and activities are consistently mediocre, something you can expect on most small ships (except Crystal). The excursions on O are overpriced and overcrowded (this is why we are not very happy with SM).

 

To us, O is not "profoundly special". It's just significantly better than the large ships, but so are all small ships that we sailed on (Crystal, Azamara and Silversea). They are better by definition being small ships, with no crowds, no lines, almost no children etc. I would gladly sail on any small ship in 300-1,200 passengers range and not likely to return to any of the big ships. But some people don't care, and that's fine. We are all different.

 

But then again, if O was only a hair better than its mid-range competitors, people probably wouldn't pay significant premium compared to those mid-range competitors (although C prices are now not too far behind, especially when you consider all the inclusions).

[MEFIowa]

2 hours ago, Psoque said:

... while [at] the same time saying the abysmally inconsistent dining service and highly chaotic buffet service, which we consider to be hallmarks of cruise lines such as RCL and NCL (in our opinion, of course) to be acceptable/expected on Oceania....

 

6 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

I never said that "inconsistent dining service and highly chaotic buffet service" are acceptable simply because we never experienced anything like it....

Having spent 40 nights since 12/2021 on O ships, including our recent 20 nights B2B on Riviera in the Med, I suspect some of this perception is tied to occupancy and timing issues, as well as expectations in general.

 

- We've never eaten in the GDR. We prefer the TC. We don't want to wait to be served, unless we're in one of the specialty restaurants.

- The TC is a breeze if the passenger count is low (we had only 719 on Riviera in 12/2021 but had over 1230 passengers on both legs of our B2B).

- The TC can get overloaded. We saw that in Kotor (IIRC) when the passengers had to be back at 2:30 PM for ship departure at 3 PM. Seemed like everyone suddenly returned to the ship at about 2 PM and the TC, which normally closes at 2 PM, suddenly was the primary food venue, with Waves secondary. Yes, Virginia, it was a mad house for about an hour. But O kept the TC open until nearly 4 PM.

- Our recent B2B had a significantly higher percentage of Asians. They appeared to love the TC. And the grilling station.

 

BUT no matter how overcrowded the TC got, we still found a table and were able to enjoy a fantastic meal.

 

And I get my own drinks. Not normally drinking too much, with no refill. Just my preference. I use the trip to look over the buffet and then bring back a glass of iced tea or milk to my table before going back to get food.

[ak1004]

6 minutes ago, MEFIowa said:

 

BUT no matter how overcrowded the TC got, we still found a table and were able to enjoy a fantastic meal.

 

 

TC on its worst day is still better than Celebrity buffet on its best day. And the food on C buffet varies between mediocre and inedible. 

 

Every buffet can become crowded if the ship is full and most guests return from excursions at the same time and all other venues are closed. Including buffet on Silversea and Crystal. The difference is that you usually can still find a table without doing 5 circles.

[Vineyard View]

3 hours ago, ak1004 said:

 

To us, O is not "profoundly special". It's just significantly better than the large ships, but so are all small ships that we sailed on (Crystal, Azamara and Silversea). They are better by definition being small ships, with no crowds, no lines, almost no children etc. I would gladly sail on any small ship in 300-1,200 passengers range and not likely to return to any of the big ships. But some people don't care, and that's fine. We are all different.

 

This. I totally agree. Smaller ships vs large. The service, food, cabins, treatment of customers in difficult situations, etc among the smaller ships/lines that have these up to 1200 pax ships are the comparisons for us. 
If the OP did not find the food  and service on Oceania to be of higher consistency than a large ship, then that is a valid statement from their perspective.  I would expect to experience  better when I am paying the premium to sail on a smaller ship. It apparently was a miss for them. 
I also totally agree with those who avoid self serve buffets. They do not work for us on any size ship. 

Edited December 4, 2023 by Vineyard View

[ak1004]

44 minutes ago, Vineyard View said:

This. I totally agree. Smaller ships vs large. The service, food, cabins, treatment of customers in difficult situations, etc among the smaller ships/lines that have these up to 1200 pax ships are the comparisons for us. 
If the OP did not find the food  and service on Oceania to be of higher consistency than a large ship, then that is a valid statement from their perspective.  I would expect to experience  better when I am paying the premium to sail on a smaller ship. It apparently was a miss for them. 
I also totally agree with those who avoid self serve buffets. They do not work for us on any size ship. 

 

And I'm not questioning the OP experience. I'm just saying that ours was completely different. Could be a matter of expectations, or some challenges specific to this particular sailing.

 

And whoever claims that food on small ships is no better than on large ships, consider this:

 

There is no charge for specialty restaurants on O and most other small ships (there are some exceptions). Specialty restaurants on lines like Celebrity typically cost $100-150 per couple. Now, if they serve good food in the MDR, what incentive would people have to pay for specialty restaurants? For that reason only, the MDR or buffet food on large ships can never be really good, otherwise they would cannibalize their specialty restaurants business. 

[Sthrngary]

I personally don't agree with everything the OP said either.  However, that was their experience, who am i to judge.  To challenge their experience serves no value.  Instead, we should take it under advisement, look to other for additional feed back about their specific voyages and experiences.  

 

With all reviews, mine included, we all have to look at them with a "grain of salt".  Look for trends and patterns leveraging many reviews.  When you find one, make notes and attempt to lessen to effect of what every it might be on your next cruise experience.  One example that stands out to me. 

 

After following this board for over a year, it was clear that Oceania has a habit of missing or changing ports.  I can't control that so I set the expectation with my guests that it just MIGHT happen.  It did, we lost Florence, Italy and it was replaced with another port.  Did we all want to go to Florence, yes.  Yet, we fully understood that it could and would happen.  

 

Not that it matters, we booked another cruise for 2025 which includes Florence so maybe, we will make it next time.  The bottom-line is the opinions give good, bad and indifferent can be leverage to gain a better result for all of our future cruise experience.  Just notice. 

 

Cruise well and enjoy every moment. 

[MEFIowa]

1 hour ago, Sthrngary said:

... After following this board for over a year, it was clear that Oceania has a habit of missing or changing ports.  I can't control that so I set the expectation with my guests that it just MIGHT happen.  It did, we lost Florence, Italy and it was replaced with another port.  Did we all want to go to Florence, yes.  Yet, we fully understood that it could and would happen. ...

Though technically we were diverted from Livorno, to the south of Pisa, to La Spezia, to the north of Pisa. It was possible to get from La Spezia to Florence. But more a problem for many of us as having excursions that would meet us in Livorno and take us to [insert excursion destination here]. We lost out on our private Pisa excursion.

 

La Spezia - Wikipedia

 

Livorno - Wikipedia

[Sthrngary]

2 minutes ago, MEFIowa said:

Though technically we were diverted from Livorno, to the south of Pisa, to La Spezia, to the north of Pisa. It was possible to get from La Spezia to Florence. But more a problem for many of us as having excursions that would meet us in Livorno and take us to [insert excursion destination here]. We lost out on our private Pisa excursion.

 

La Spezia - Wikipedia

 

Livorno - Wikipedia

@MEFIowa All of what you say is true.  My point was using the cancelled port as simply an example. Learn from others as I have learned some very important lesson's from you.  Your approach to wine and drink is really well thought out and has a level of sport to it that makes it even more fun.

 

Things happen one cruises and if we kind of know something could happen, we can attempt to have a plan for it.  That is half the fun of planning.  Then you have the new things you learn that are both good and bad.  Just makes your planning for controllable things that much better in the future.  I had a fun time meeting you and your lovely bride.  

 

Cruise well and enjoy every moment. 

[MEFIowa]

Trust me, I know about O and missing ports. We lost our last day at the private island in the Bahamas in 12/2021 off Riviera due to high seas. And we had a passenger medical emergency near the Dominican Republic while on Sirena 11/2022 that cost us St. Kitts, as we had to dink around for hours outside Puerto Plata getting our boat to take him to the local hospital.

 

SO...we were just so glad we did not lose an entire port. Being diverted is far better than just having a sea day added.

 

We're praying we won't lose any ports in our 22-night Baltic B2B later in 2024!

[Poulsbo Cruisers]

Anyone who has cruised multiple times has probably had a cruise or two that did not meet their expectations. This appears to be the case with the OP. We had this happen to us last year with a Viking Ocean cruise. We loved a lot of things about Viking, but didn’t feel it was worth the money it cost to sail with them. One thing Viking did for us was show us how much more enjoyable it is to cruise on a smaller ship with no or few kids. We have now booked our first Oceania cruise. We are looking forward to it, but won’t let our expectations get the better of us. Just getting close to our Viking cruise experience would be a win since Oceania costs substantially less. 

[thebsinmiss]

Interesting discussions that seem to narrow down to expectations and how they are met/not met.  Reading the original post I was surprised to hear that some of the gym equipment and the lockers were already in need of repair. Didn't the boat just come out of refit in late 2023?

 

We are on the ten day June 2024 Rome to Venice cruise and this will be our second on Oceania. We also sailed on Silver Seas the year following our first O cruise. The group we traveled with agreed that they preferred the O cruise vs Silver Seas when considering cost/expectations.   Hopefully the upcoming trip will be as enjoyable as our last (Especially Red Ginger !)

 

 

 

 

[AMHuntFerry]

17 hours ago, thebsinmiss said:

  Reading the original post I was surprised to hear that some of the gym equipment and the lockers were already in need of repair. Didn't the boat just come out of refit in late 2023?

The refit was in 2022. I don't recall the fitness/spa area being part of the "re-imagining". In their releases, O specified that the cabins, dining, and bars would be refurbished. That said, hopefully any maintenance issues are quickly dealt with; a short comment in the mid-cruise review (or earlier directly to management) might get some action.

[MEFIowa]

I would NOT worry about the passengers as you've described your concerns regarding them. On our 40 nights on 4 O cruises since 12/2021 we've met a plethora of wonderful courteous thoughtful intelligent passengers. Yes, many are in the 70s and up. Few are under 40. And not that many in between. While Americans and Canadians dominate, no shortage of wonderful others. Remember a nice German woman travelling solo and a couple of fun & funny British couples. Some Israelis, too. Met a widowed USAF doctor (Colonel), and we shared our USAF stories (I was a Captain). Hosted a Veterans meet & greet on Sirena (12/2022) and was the "MC" for both on the recent B2B.

 

BUT keep your expectations reasonable. I cannot imagine $1k pp/pd. We paid $1899 (10 nights in an A3) and $1749 (10 nights in a B3) a piece for our 20 nights on Riviera in the Med recently (10/30-11/19, 2023).

 

Do keep in mind that these are smaller ships. Even at 1230 passengers on the O-class, they aren't behemoths with thousands and thousands. But other than your cabin, there isn't much segregation. The A cabins and up get free access to the therapy spa pools. And other than that, not much else different for the lowliest G to the highest Suite.

[Cruzin Terri]

2 hours ago, fyree39 said:

We have our first O cruise next year. I can't compare it to any of our mass market line experiences, but I can compare it to our single Crystal cruise. I look at what $1k pp/pd gets me and if it doesn't compare to what Crystal gives me for $800 pp/pd then I have a hard time looking further. O offers off-ship experiences that Crystal doesn't in the pricing. It remains to be seen if the off-ship experiences are worth the money spent. 

 

One of the things turning me away from mass market lines is the passenger mix. The seat-saving, line-cutting, loud-mouthed bunch on board many of these mass market cruises is exhausting. Any cruise can be ruined by gaggles of unruly and thoughtless passengers.

 

My hope has always been that a higher priced experience won't include these gaggles of geese I'm describing, yet pool lounger saving seems to be de rigueur on O (and so many of O's passengers come directly from mass market lines with the passenger behavior those lines create. Survival of the fittest. Coincidence?). That's one gaggle of self-entitled geese I can do without. I didn't see this behavior on Crystal and I'm hoping the next time I book a Crystal cruise that remains to be the case. If O's onboard experience is just as annoying as any mass market line I'll move on to the next luxury line on the list and leave the premium lines (or whatever you're calling this class of line) for others. I can be annoyed by passenger behavior on Princess just as easily and less expensively as O and I'm afraid poor passenger behavior on O will always have me lumping that line in with any mass market line. It's that important to me. 

 

I'll try to board the Vista with an open mind, but reading through CC has me preparing for typical all-about-me passengers trying to impress everyone with how important they are. Saints preserve us.

Keep in mind that money doesn’t always buy manners.  Many think it buys entitlement.

[AMHuntFerry]

3 hours ago, fyree39 said:

My hope has always been that a higher priced experience won't include these gaggles of geese I'm describing, yet pool lounger saving seems to be de rigueur on O (and so many of O's passengers come directly from mass market lines with the passenger behavior those lines create. Survival of the fittest. Coincidence?). That's one gaggle of self-entitled geese I can do without. I didn't see this behavior on Crystal and I'm hoping the next time I book a Crystal cruise that remains to be the case. If O's onboard experience is just as annoying as any mass market line I'll move on to the next luxury line on the list and leave the premium lines (or whatever you're calling this class of line) for others. I can be annoyed by passenger behavior on Princess just as easily and less expensively as O and I'm afraid poor passenger behavior on O will always have me lumping that line in with any mass market line. It's that important to me. 

 

I'll try to board the Vista with an open mind, but reading through CC has me preparing for typical all-about-me passengers trying to impress everyone with how important they are. Saints preserve us.

I have rarely experienced any of the behavior you are worried about. Have I seen lounge saving? Probably, but I rarely use the lounges, and when I do I can find always find one...finding two together can get tricky if there is high demand. All-about-me passengers have been too subtle for me to notice (or were not memorable), although I distinctly remember eaves-dropping on a look-at-me name-dropper, but that was entertaining rather than annoying due to its novelty. There are rarely lines for anything, and when there are, people are well-behaved. A June Alaska cruise was the least enjoyable due to (maybe?) a younger, American-centric, 90% 1st time on O, multiple alumni groups crowd; least enjoyable but still enjoyable if that makes sense.

[Cruzin Terri]

Jeepers, I hope I don’t disappoint you!

[Vallesan]

On 12/3/2023 at 1:05 PM, Psoque said:

Our point was that, whatever premium extras that we saw onboard Riviera were not sufficient to convince us to think that Oceania is SUBSTANTIALLY more upscale in a CONSISTENT manner than Celebrity/HAL/Princess, looking at all aspects of our experience before boarding and onboard.  Whatever limited “premium” features we saw, they were not anywhere close to what we have experienced on cruises in the past that we were extremely impressed with.

I think the main feature for lots of us who sail Oceania! and other lines, is not necessarily an ‘Upscale’ or ‘Premium’ experience but rather the experience of being on a ‘small’ ship without constant ‘queues’ (lines) and just a generally more relaxed atmosphere.

As far as I’m concerned I don’t need to travel with 3000, 4000 or even 5000 other passengers when I can travel with 450 to 1200 depending on the ship/line. For us that is the ‘Premium’ feature that is “SUBSTANTIALLY more upscale”!

[ak1004]

7 hours ago, Vallesan said:

I think the main feature for lots of us who sail Oceania! and other lines, is not necessarily an ‘Upscale’ or ‘Premium’ experience but rather the experience of being on a ‘small’ ship without constant ‘queues’ (lines) and just a generally more relaxed atmosphere.

As far as I’m concerned I don’t need to travel with 3000, 4000 or even 5000 other passengers when I can travel with 450 to 1200 depending on the ship/line. For us that is the ‘Premium’ feature that is “SUBSTANTIALLY more upscale”!

 

I couldn't say it better.

 

But we are all different.

 

Some people don't mind being on a ship with 3,000-5,000 other passengers.

 

Some people don't mind constant lines, loud music and screaming children.

 

Some people don't mind mediocre food and service.

 

Some people don't mind paying extra for every expresso, cappuccino, soft drink or sparkling water.

 

Some people don't need or don't mind paying extra for internet and specialty restaurants.

 

And when those people don't find O premium enough, I'm happy. More O for us.

[Vallesan]

10 minutes ago, ak1004 said:

 

I couldn't say it better.

 

But we are all different.

 

Some people don't mind being on a ship with 3,000-5,000 other passengers.

 

Some people don't mind constant lines, loud music and screaming children.

 

Some people don't mind mediocre food and service.

 

Some people don't mind paying extra for every expresso, cappuccino, soft drink or sparkling water.

 

Some people don't need or don't mind paying extra for internet and specialty restaurants.

 

And when those people don't find O premium enough, I'm happy. More O for us.

I think you did just say it better!

Totally agree.

[Psoque]

Here are are our observations on the cruise we took (the topic of this thread, by the way…). Just as a frame of reference, here are our comparison to Crystal (pre-COVID…we haven’t tried the new Crystal yet) since the two ships on the line are very similar to Riviera

 

1.  The cabins (we stayed on A4….I believe that cabin space is pretty much the same as any other lower class cabins) on Riviera were much better designed and roomier than on Crystal Symphony.  There was a lot of storage, especially in the bathroom.  We really like the cabin.  More so than on (pre-COVID) Symphony.

 

2.  The dining, shore excursion, and reception staff were clearly not well-trained and lacked the emotional intelligence that we expected.  Was this because they are all new, post-COVID hires?  That’s a possibility.  They were not “bad” or “unintelligent” people, but they were absolutely not prepared for their jobs, especially when things did not go as planned.  All we know is that this type of staff behavior was commonly encountered by us (or for that matter, expected) when we took cruises on less expensive (NCL/RCL/Celebrity/HAL/Princess) lines.

 

3.  The age range and “able-bodied-ness” of the crowd was profoundly “advanced” than in our previous port-intensive Mediterranean cruises around Thanksgiving on Crystal and all other lines we have tried.  Believe us…we have done quite a few port-intensive Mediterranean cruises during Thanksgiving.  Is this typical for Oceania?  We don’t know and only Oceania has the actual data.  We have no idea if this is more of a norm these days on all cruises itineraries like this.  We don’t know.

 

4.  Even though the Riviera is a well-designed ship, there are a few areas in the ship that really needs to be maintained better.  The gym/spa area really needs  a lot of fixing.  A few work out equipment needs to be replaced/repaired.  Quite a few locker doors were missing their hinges.  There were weird stains in the ceilings by the main dining room windows.  A few (decorative??) screws were missing from the main dining room windows.  This lack of maintenance is not really acceptable for any ship of any size.

 

The biggest take-away we got from our first cruise on Oceania on Riviera was that Oceania, especially on this cruise, showed that their general approach to their product is highly inconsistent…some features are very good (and rivaling those on real luxury lines) some features are squarely appropriate for a mid-range cruise line, and some features are entirely unacceptable, even for a budget line.  Based on this one-cruise observation, we put Oceania as a solid mid-range product.  We will try Vista on a Baltic itinerary next year, giving this line a second try.

 

Also we personally think the use of the term “mass market” to describe cruise lines is somewhat comical and irrelevant.  We have heard people onboard Crystal call Oceania/Azamara a “mass market” cruise line.  And we repeatedly hear people here label Celebrity/HAL/Princess a “mass market” cruise line.  And we also heard people onboard RCL/Celebrity call Carnival/NCL a “mass market” cruise line.  Our guess is that this nomenclature is very fluid, and is used mainly by a cruise line/travel agency to reassure their customers that they paid for an excellent product.  Or perhaps some people use it as a derogatory term to indirectly judge people who take cruise that are more “budget” than others??  We have no idea.  We consider any cruise line that we can afford to be “mass market,” and we have no use for that term.  But people can use whatever term they wish to use.

[ak1004]

11 minutes ago, Psoque said:

Here are are our observations on the cruise we took (the topic of this thread, by the way…). Just as a frame of reference, here are our comparison to Crystal (pre-COVID…we haven’t tried the new Crystal yet) since the two ships on the line are very similar to Riviera

 

1.  The cabins (we stayed on A4….I believe that cabin space is pretty much the same as any other lower class cabins) on Riviera were much better designed and roomier than on Crystal Symphony.  There was a lot of storage, especially in the bathroom.  We really like the cabin.  More so than on (pre-COVID) Symphony.

 

2.  The dining, shore excursion, and reception staff were clearly not well-trained and lacked the emotional intelligence that we expected.  Was this because they are all new, post-COVID hires?  That’s a possibility.  They were not “bad” or “unintelligent” people, but they were absolutely not prepared for their jobs, especially when things did not go as planned.  All we know is that this type of staff behavior was commonly encountered by us (or for that matter, expected) when we took cruises on less expensive (NCL/RCL/Celebrity/HAL/Princess) lines.

 

3.  The age range and “able-bodied-ness” of the crowd was profoundly “advanced” than in our previous port-intensive Mediterranean cruises around Thanksgiving on Crystal and all other lines we have tried.  Believe us…we have done quite a few port-intensive Mediterranean cruises during Thanksgiving.  Is this typical for Oceania?  We don’t know and only Oceania has the actual data.  We have no idea if this is more of a norm these days on all cruises itineraries like this.  We don’t know.

 

4.  Even though the Riviera is a well-designed ship, there are a few areas in the ship that really needs to be maintained better.  The gym/spa area really needs  a lot of fixing.  A few work out equipment needs to be replaced/repaired.  Quite a few locker doors were missing their hinges.  There were weird stains in the ceilings by the main dining room windows.  A few (decorative??) screws were missing from the main dining room windows.  This lack of maintenance is not really acceptable for any ship of any size.

 

The biggest take-away we got from our first cruise on Oceania on Riviera was that Oceania, especially on this cruise, showed that their general approach to their product is highly inconsistent…some features are very good (and rivaling those on real luxury lines) some features are squarely appropriate for a mid-range cruise line, and some features are entirely unacceptable, even for a budget line.  Based on this one-cruise observation, we put Oceania as a solid mid-range product.  We will try Vista on a Baltic itinerary next year, giving this line a second try.

 

Also we personally think the use of the term “mass market” to describe cruise lines is somewhat comical and irrelevant.  We have heard people onboard Crystal call Oceania/Azamara a “mass market” cruise line.  And we repeatedly hear people here label Celebrity/HAL/Princess a “mass market” cruise line.  And we also heard people onboard RCL/Celebrity call Carnival/NCL a “mass market” cruise line.  Our guess is that this nomenclature is very fluid, and is used mainly by a cruise line/travel agency to reassure their customers that they paid for an excellent product.  Or perhaps some people use it as a derogatory term to indirectly judge people who take cruise that are more “budget” than others??  We have no idea.  We consider any cruise line that we can afford to be “mass market,” and we have no use for that term.  But people can use whatever term they wish to use.

 

The term mass market applies to large ships cruise lines like Celebrity, Princess, RCI, Norvegian etc. 

 

Small ships lines like Silversea, Crystal, Oceania, Viking, Azamara etc belong to luxury or premium segment. This separation is pretty much acceptable by the cruise industry. 

 

But the truth is it doesn't really matter. What matters to you is your experience and your opinion. If your experience was that the extra price is not worth it for you, this is the only thing that matters.