First impressions of our first Oceania cruise

[AMHuntFerry]

4 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

Not at all! And thanks, I wasn't trying to the bash the line.

I hope it was clear that I meant a genuine "thanks", not a sarcastic "thanks". I do appreciate constructive criticism and I think you will have valuable insights for people who may not be pleased with the Oceania experience.
As someone who claimed that I would never be caught dead on a cruise ship unless there was a darn good reason (e.g., a family reunion), I was a little shocked how much I liked hanging out on an O ship (we only meant for it to be a "moving hotel" to get us to the ports). So, it's almost always a good choice to go outside your comfort zone, try new things, and occasionally be pleasantly surprised by the unexpected. 🙂 I look forward to your review and hope you have some fun future travels!

[babysteps]

9 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

...The lack of common items like salt/pepper, sugar, and rolled silverware on the tables at the Terrace Cafe was a major disappointment... 

Thanks @DCGuy64for sharing your experience! 

 

Your description of lack of salt/pepper/set-ups at Terrace reminds me of some noro containment protocols we have experienced. Or a staff shortage. Bummer you had to deal with it, not the standard that O aims for. 

 

@Charles4515I hear you - and yet good friends of ours who are extremely well travelled are taking a Windstar cruise in Japan this fall. Plenty of people do stuff I wouldn't do and yet have a great time - I guess I'll learn someday lol. 

[pamps2801]

15 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

My wife and I returned late Saturday from our first cruise with Oceania, on the Nautica. I plan to write a more comprehensive review later, but our first impressions are that Oceania is a great line for older folks, but maybe not for us (we're somewhat younger than the apparent demographic, at 59 and 47). Most of our fellow passengers seemed to be 70s and 80s mostly, although there were definitely some younger than that. We loved the ship, it's quite beautiful. Loved the rolled cotton towels in the bathrooms. The bed was super comfortable, and probably our favorite thing about the cabin. Free internet was nice, too. But there are definitely aspects that were less pleasant. Dinner is served extremely slowly, usually around 2 hours. That wouldn't be so bad except that it could take a long time just to order a drink, much less get it. The lack of common items like salt/pepper, sugar, and rolled silverware on the tables at the Terrace Cafe was a major disappointment. Same with ordering drinks there. Overall the staff was superb, friendly and cheerful. But some of them seemed sullen and disinterested. My steak at the Polo Grill was served way overcooked, so I had to send it back. There is no actual thermal spa at the spa, only a salon and a place to pay for (overpriced, IMO) spa treatments. That one shocked me. And having to pay for drinks at the bar when you're shelling out $5,000 and up for a cabin seems ridiculous. All in all, I'd say we will be sticking with NCLH's "junior" member, NCL, from now on. We're not quite ready for Oceania.

Try Azamara. Same product if not better than Oceania, and liquor is included. 

Edited April 25, 2023 by pamps2801

[Harters]

16 hours ago, DCGuy64 said:

Dinner is served extremely slowly, usually around 2 hours. That wouldn't be so bad except that it could take a long time just to order a drink, much less get it.

We have an upcoming cruise on Nautica, so I was interested to read the OP. This will be our second O cruise (previous was on Marina in 2017). What has drawn us to O is the "finest cuisine at sea" claim. Dinner is an important part of our lives, whether at home or on holiday. And, certainly, I don't want to rush it when I'm on holiday. But two hours does seem quite a long time for what I assume would have been three or four course meals, perhaps followed by coffee. That must involve quite a lot of waiting time between courses and would surely detract from my enjoyment of a meal. I don't recall that on our Marina cruise so wonder if there's been specific issues on Nautica. I suppose I'll find out in a few weeks.

[DCGuy64]

12 hours ago, AMHuntFerry said:

I hope it was clear that I meant a genuine "thanks", not a sarcastic "thanks". I do appreciate constructive criticism and I think you will have valuable insights for people who may not be pleased with the Oceania experience.

Thank you! And yes, I assume your comment was a genuine "thanks," not a sarcastic one. Not to worry. I apologize if my reply implied otherwise. The travails of writing on the internet... Thanks so much.

 

2 hours ago, Harters said:

What has drawn us to O is the "finest cuisine at sea" claim.

Honestly, that wasn't a claim I felt was borne out on this trip. That's not to say the food wasn't outstanding; sometimes it was. But I think it very much depends what kind of food you like. The Jacques Pépin-inspired menus are a little froufrou for our tastes. Some examples I can think of were lots of truffle-infused items, beetroot, various mushrooms, and lots of fish. I don't care for any of that. Ironically, my favorite main course was the sirloin steak I had on the last night. Desserts were nothing short of amazing, but I often found myself too full to eat any, haha. Toscana was wonderful, especially the pasta and chicken, however a veal entrée I had there was rather tough. But again, food is extremely subjective, so no one should automatically assume that if I didn't like something, you (or anybody else) wouldn't, either. Something I'd never tried before was beef carpaccio. One night I had it with roasted peanuts, chili oil and coriander. I was in heaven. Afternoon tea was superb, certainly one of my favorite things. Even our English friends said it was better than Cunard's. The string quartet playing in the background made it even more special. And the bed-oh my goodness, the most comfortable I've ever slept in. I miss it already!

[DCGuy64]

14 hours ago, ShopperfiendTO said:

Hopefully you'll cover it in your review, but if you aren't planning to, could you let us know if the ports and hours in port were as listed in the final cruise summary that you would have received shortly before your cruise? 

No changes whatsoever, all of the ports were visited as scheduled and on time. There was a slight (i.e. ~ 20 minute) delay getting off in Busan, South Korea due to the arrival of their immigration team. But we were highly impressed with the punctuality. I have to say that the Japanese were extremely welcoming. One wonders if the absence of tourists during Covid didn't make them want to "wow" us even more than usual. Several times we were treated to a sendoff featuring local dancers, high school musicians (very good ones) and drummers. It actually brought me to tears. I won't forget their hospitality for a long time.

[Harters]

22 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

food is extremely subjective

Indeed so. But tough veal is tough veal, so I've made a mental note of that. And I've also made a note of the beef carpaccio - I've had it before but only in a European style so what I assume was an East Asian version that you describe sounds great.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Harters

[DCGuy64]

14 minutes ago, Harters said:

Indeed so. But tough veal is tough veal, so I've made a mental note of that. And I've also made a note of the beef carpaccio - I've had it before but only in a European style so what I assume was an East Asian version that you describe sounds great.

Yes, indeed. As I mentioned earlier, I had a filet mignon at the Polo Grill that was overcooked. I asked for rare and it was served medium (not medium rare, MEDIUM). Now that wasn't entirely their fault. My wife is vegetarian and they had waited until her main course was served to bring me my steak. Apparently, judging by both the exterior and interior temperatures, my steak had been sitting under a heat lamp waiting for my wife's entree to be brought out, so my steak was overdone. They probably should have waited longer to prepare my steak. As it was, I then had to wait for the new one to be done, so I sat there eating lobster mac 'n cheese in the meantime. Not the end of the world, but a bit disappointing. The steak was on the same level as filets I've had at Cagney's in terms of quality. Not bad, but not the best at sea. 

[pinotlover]

A couple comments on the two hour dinners .

 

We found them far more common on Sirena 10/22, than on the Marina 3/23 especially in the Specialties. It seemed they were purposely over reserving the two Specialties, that is putting far more people into the restaurants than in pre Covid days. The staff couldn’t handle the overload. Food would sit under the warmer far too long and waits were extensive. This additionally made more stops and fewer visitations by the wine steward! The restaurant manager would come by apologizing for the situation, yet overbook again for the next night. I had never seen every table full in the Specialties at 7:00 before! 😳 The old Oceania had a system of table and time management that didn’t occur on that sailing. We had a 6:30 in the PG one evening and left at 8:40. People with 8:00 reservations were still standing outside waiting to be seated, alongside those with 8:30s.

 

IMO, and I’m sure some disagree, people on two tops have no inherent right, and should have no expectation, to be served more quickly than all the others in the venue. For those of us sharing tables, and engaging in friendly conversations with others, the time seemed to have gone more quickly than for those only wanting two tops. That latter group seemed to protest the most.

 

Only once on the Marina did they seem to jam the restaurant which had the same results as was the case every evening on  Sirena.

[rbtan]

47 minutes ago, pinotlover said:

A couple comments on the two hour dinners .

 

We found them far more common on Sirena 10/22, than on the Marina 3/23 especially in the Specialties. It seemed they were purposely over reserving the two Specialties, that is putting far more people into the restaurants than in pre Covid days. The staff couldn’t handle the overload. Food would sit under the warmer far too long and waits were extensive. This additionally made more stops and fewer visitations by the wine steward! The restaurant manager would come by apologizing for the situation, yet overbook again for the next night. I had never seen every table full in the Specialties at 7:00 before! 😳 The old Oceania had a system of table and time management that didn’t occur on that sailing. We had a 6:30 in the PG one evening and left at 8:40. People with 8:00 reservations were still standing outside waiting to be seated, alongside those with 8:30s.

 

IMO, and I’m sure some disagree, people on two tops have no inherent right, and should have no expectation, to be served more quickly than all the others in the venue. For those of us sharing tables, and engaging in friendly conversations with others, the time seemed to have gone more quickly than for those only wanting two tops. That latter group seemed to protest the most.

 

Only once on the Marina did they seem to jam the restaurant which had the same results as was the case every evening on  Sirena.

Those of us in 2 tops do not expect quicker service & you're rather disingenuous to suggest that. We choose 2 tops for two reasons..One: Being a gay couple, we have experienced rather unfriendly tablemates. Sorry, but it DOES happen. Two: We're foodies. I would expect this on O, but have seen a number of "Meat & Potato" pax in dining rooms. We start with a cold App, next a hot App. perhaps a salad, then the entree'. It's nothing for us to spend over 2 hours at a table. I'd rather not hold up a table where the Pax may have 1 App. or perhaps just an entree'. The servers do try to serve everyone at the same table at as close to the same time as possible. We find Le Reserve to be the best place to share a table.

[Harters]

18 minutes ago, rbtan said:

It's nothing for us to spend over 2 hours at a table.

As such, I've nothing against dinner taking two hours. We go to a number of restaurants at home, where multi course tasting menus are served and a 2 - 3 hour slot is indicated. I know what to expect in those places and am fine with it. But I wouldnt expect dinner to take that long for three courses in a well organised restaurant, on shore or at sea. But, yes of course, if I was having a couple of starters, main course, cheese, dessert and then coffee, it would be taking a lot longer and I'd be fine with it.  It's the gap in between courses that can ruin an evening when it's overly long - we went to one place last summer (just before it got a Michelin star) where there was a 15 - 20 minute wait between each course. Not through anything of a hitch in service but simply becuase that's the gap the chef thought appropriate. Michelin or not, he's wrong.

Edited April 25, 2023 by Harters

[Charles4515]

23 minutes ago, Harters said:

As such, I've nothing against dinner taking two hours.

I don't mind two hours either. If I want a faster dinner I would have gone to the Terrace Cafe. We don't like 2 tops though because we like to meet poeple. Usually it works out sharing a table. 

 

The only problem we had with the food was at one of the specialty restaurants. I forget which one. The Dover Sole was recomended and it was very good but they forgot to fillet my friends fish. Mine was filleted. I know someone got in trouble for that and we recieved a lot of apologees. So if you order fish check....

[jonthomas]

Nope azamara is no way better on any respects. Have done 2 azamara.

Our 3, o cruises in the past 12 months had much better food than the Viking ship we were on 3 weeks ago. Much better is an understatement. If food is number one for you, you can't do better than O.

If food doesn't matter to you, if kids on board don't matter to you, then maybe there is no reason to sail O.

[Charles4515]

10 minutes ago, jonthomas said:

Nope azamara is no way better on any respects. Have done 2 azamara.

Our 3, o cruises in the past 12 months had much better food than the Viking ship we were on 3 weeks ago. Much better is an understatement. If food is number one for you, you can't do better than O.

If food doesn't matter to you, if kids on board don't matter to you, then maybe there is no reason to sail O.

The food matters to me. If it didn't I might as well keep booking Celebrity. I had heard the food was good on Viking but  you say otherwise. I was on Azamara a long time ago, so long ago that liquor was not included, The food and cruise was good but not enough for me to run out and book Azamara again. After cruisiing Oceania I did feel like booking Oceania agian for th food. The other line that had good food was Cunard but I don't want to wear tuxedos three nights and suits two nights all evening. 

[jonthomas]

we met people on Viking who said the food was good...but they had not sailed O...without doing that, there is NO point talking to them about food. 

 

we are escapees from Celebrity, did 50 cruises with them, elite plus....until we could "stomach" it no more...

 

so  having this variety of recent cruise lines , I know where from I speak.....besides I am a picky eater...my only complaint is the food on O is too fancy....just give me some usual soups, like a yellow pea soup, a cold potato soup, a normal minestrone without curry in it...I dont eat shellfish...so you can see I have my issues, but despite that, best food compared to what else is served on other lines.

[DCGuy64]

One thing that was a bit disappointing was the Terrace Café. It wasn't bad, by any means, but I found myself yearning for the NCL Garden Café due to a much wider selection of foods. I didn't think Oceania's offerings were that much different, and it's a much smaller venue. The fine dining in the Grand Dining Room was very nice, but I'd agree with @jonthomas, it was a bit too hoity toity for me. Then there was the time the sommelier came over to our table of 6 and said he could only take alcohol orders. Everybody but me asked for soft drinks and was told "I don't do that." And he walked away. Odd...

[Jancruz]

22 hours ago, AMHuntFerry said:

 

The smaller ships have just steam rooms and whirlpools at the spa; are you talking about a dry heat room? The larger ships have additional amenities such as the heated lounges...listed in the individual ship description for others considering O.

DCGuy64: BTW, thanks for recognizing that O wasn't a good fit for your wishes without bashing the line; I hope others will realize that their priorities are not everybody's and that it is OK to have different tastes.

Plus 1

AM Hunt Ferry you are so correct..

DC Guy what a pleasure to read your review..

Jancruz1

[jonthomas]

I am trying to see what is it about this review that is a pleasure.

As hard as I try, I can't see it.

Maybe it is a pleasure to those who prefer to sail with NCL instead of O.

Younger demographic,  faster delivery of drinks.

[rbtan]

Not every meal on O is a hit out of the park.During our Jan. Trip while In Polo, Keith had the worst Oysters Rockefeller he ever had. Normally you have the oyster covered in a nice Spinach, possibly some light cheese & flavored with Pernod His was dry with a dry cheese covering on top. We think they "grind" up the Oysters & put the topping on. Really awful, but likely done as the Oysters start out raw & are then cooked. There was really no trace of Oyster to be had. Luckily the entree' was fine. For me it was Wiener Schnitzel in Grand Diningroom. It was pounded way too thin & tough as nails. For those in Toscana, we generally advise to avoid the Suckling Pig. It's really just Pork Belly that can also be tough as nails if over cooked a tad.That being said the Dover Sole we find to be best in Toscana, though this time it was truly outstanding in the GDR.Compared to the other lines only the Queens Grill on the QM2 compares with the quality of Oceania, but as was mentioned we're done with Tuxes now.

[Jancruz]

17 minutes ago, jonthomas said:

I am trying to see what is it about this review that is a pleasure.

As hard as I try, I can't see it.

Maybe it is a pleasure to those who prefer to sail with NCL instead of O.

Younger demographic,  faster delivery of drinks.

They did not prefer Oceania BUT they did not nit pick every little thing that they didnt like.Im sorry about the word pleasure you are correct , I should have used a different word..

Thanks for picking up on this,

Jancruz1

[jonthomas]

Yes they did not pick O apart.

Can't even think of what else you can  criticize. 

I sure have changed my tune after the Viking experience. Not even complaining about so much seafood or gourmet soups...lol

[Sthrngary]

I never claim to be an expert on "O".  However I am very familiar with NCL, and the NCL Haven. I can fully understand the Author's point of view.  If what you are used too is a NCL ship and cruise, you kind of look for the the same thing.  Very few people really drill down deeply at what makes one brand different from another.  If you are new to "O" and want to learn the difference, you come to this blog.  No one is shy, everyone has different likes and dislikes.  

 

The author was transparent.  Some likes and some dislikes.  They compared it to the brand they knew best, NCL.  A very normal thing to do.  They noticed things they had not seen before and were disappointed.  It happens.  Cruise by nature are always a little bit different even sometimes on the same ship, heck, even on back-to-back cruises on the same ship.

 

When I reads a review, I log in my head what the person says.  You read enough reviews, you get a general consensus.  Different opinions allow for much more realistic expectations.  If the review was everything was perfect, or nothing was right; they are not really internalized.  It is the other 80% where you learn the real deal. 

 

So thank you to the author.  You encouraged me to do write a very transparent review when it is my turn. 

 

Cruise well and enjoy every moment.

[DCGuy64]

13 hours ago, jonthomas said:

Yes they did not pick O apart.

Can't even think of what else you can  criticize. 

I sure have changed my tune after the Viking experience. Not even complaining about so much seafood or gourmet soups...lol

I'm the OP for this thread. This is NOT a review, it's just a post summarizing some things about our first cruise with Oceania. My review is yet to be written (I'm a working stiff and I have 2 weeks of work to catch up on). I'm also a "he," not a "they." 😉 I will be more thorough when I write the actual review, which I plan to do sometime later this week. There was much that we loved about this cruise, no doubt about it. Oceania has a great product. Our overall impression was quite positive-if I nitpick, it's in the context of an overall good experience. 

[DCGuy64]

13 hours ago, Sthrngary said:

So thank you to the author.  You encouraged me to do write a very transparent review when it is my turn. 

Thank you, as always, you understood me well. 🙂 I was/am comparing Oceania to other cruise lines, especially NCL (Oceania's little brother) and MSC. I don't trust reviews that are 100% positive or 100% negative. There's always something good about even a less-than-great cruise, and always a few downsides to even an excellent cruise.

[Harters]

10 minutes ago, DCGuy64 said:

when I write the actual review, which I plan to do sometime later this week.

With our Nautica cruise only a few weeks away, I'm really looking forward to reading it. Are you intending to post it here on the forum, or in CC's review section? If the latter, may I ask that you post a heads-up to it on this thread.

 

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Harters