I agree that Las Vegas is the place where tourists from all counties are totally free to roam in their day packs (or fanny packs plz excuse expression) It's also the city in which they had the biggest concentration tourists eating junk food while "sight-seeing".



Gibraltar was also very toursity.

Over the years, we have run across many overly-touristed places, both domestic and overseas.

One recent eye-popper was in -- of all places -- Bran Castle in Transylvania, Romania, purportedly the home of Dracula, known locally as Vlad Tepes, the Impaler. Stalls and stalls of masks, false fangs, capes, skeletons, etc. ad nauseum.

Perhaps the all-time winner, however, turned out to be Land's End in Cornwall. Just awful! It even exceeded the excesses of Brighton, on the Channel coast. Tacky, bad taste, crowds -- yet somehow we got into the mood and remember it with a smile.

Warwick Castle in England: After paying the 30+ American dollars to get in I was very disappointed to see they had cheesy carnival type game booths. The kids running them were wearing tabards over their t-shirts and tennis shoes.

Rothenburg in Germany: This city could be so much better if they just limited the cars driving through the historic down-town section during the day.

By my personal definition of touristy these place are disappointments, but that probably has a lot to do with my interest in seeing things that are historically accurate and not all done up and blown out of proportion. I do not need kids in bad medieval costumes to get into the mood of a historic site. By the same token I hate when movie directors change history to make an historical movie more palatable to the masses.

On the other hand Las Vegas does not bother me. I think the whole point of Las Vegas is to be over the top. I could do with a lot less people in Vegas, but it takes these crowds to fund all of the insanely overdone Casinos.

I think the only place I will never want to see again is Branson MO.

I always have a great time in Vegas, and my trips to Europe and Asia are usually not to the touristy destinations, so I have no complaints (other than, maybe our quick visit to Pisa).

Las Vegas was created for tourists (to lose their money), therefore, I guess I wouldn't necesssarily include it in this list.

I'm more interested in real places that have given way to tourism in a bad way - that it can overshadow it's content and the experience. Zakopane, Poland in the Tatras really surprised me in their incredibly touristy main street and the 100's of booths with sheepskin, and tchotchas for tourists. This is a place for skiing, so maybe it was created for tourists in the first place. However, I've been to other mountain areas that tourists go to and have never, ever seen anything like what we saw in Zakopane.

Sticking to Europe, the Place du Tertre in Montmartre (Paris). I loathe it--tacky, crowded, dirty--and every time I'm dragged up to Montmartre, I swear I'll never go there again, but then another friend on his/her first visit to Paris asks me to take them there, so...

Yes, theme parks like Disney, SeaWorld, and Las Vegas (a theme park city), are OTT touristy, but that is their whole point for existence, so anyone who goes there and doesn't expect to see hordes of tourists isn't thinking straight.

agree about Vegas and Disney World - I don't think you can count them since they were purely designed to be tourist traps.

Niagara Falls is pretty bad, and Cancun is a nightmare. I can't think of any European destinations that really struck me as overly touristy in a bad way.

I have a co-worker who just got back from Acapulco...and she kept talking about how "great it was to be back in the States"...I realized quickly that when you go to a place so touristy that one can't feel safe leaving the resort -- THAT to me is the ultimate definition of over-touristed...but then I never was chicken to mix with the locals like my co-worker obviously is.

For me, I'd say the most touristy places I've been are:

Europe: Venice
South America: Rio de Janeiro
North America: WDW and Vegas

I still liked them, but I didn't consider them to be much in the way of pure examples of the country I was in.

Jules
Still looking forward to finding Asia, Africa and Australia's most touristed areas. :)

Jules
Jules

I have a co-worker who just got back from Acapulco...and she kept talking about how "great it was to be back in the States"...I realized quickly that when you go to a place so touristy that one can't feel safe leaving the resort -- THAT to me is the ultimate definition of over-touristed...but then I never was chicken to mix with the locals like my co-worker obviously is.

For me, I'd say the most touristy places I've been are:

Europe: Venice
South America: Rio de Janeiro
North America: WDW and Vegas

I still liked them, but I didn't consider them to be much in the way of pure examples of the country I was in.

Still looking forward to finding Asia, Africa and Australia's most touristed areas. :)

Jules

Time of year often plays a big part of "touristy".(AND time of day!)
We stopped by Rothenberg on mid morning, in April and there was hardly anyone out and about. I can think of several other "touristy" places with similar situations.
We are lucky to be able to travel in March/April and Oct/ Nov so quite often do not find crowds. Some people like the crowded places like Octoberfest in Germany, others avoid them.
If a place in Europe is considered "touristy" then it is often worth seeing. Others like to be off the beaten path. There are some interesting posts here .

Champs-Elysses(sp?) in Paris. Not sure what I was expecting, but the proliferation of fast food and clothing chains mixed in with the exhaust fumes was pretty underwhelming.

The U.S. equivalent of Brighton has to be Ocean City, NJ. Miles and miles of tacky shops selling tacky Chinese souvenirs to tacky visitors.

Ocean City, MD used to be pretty nice, but I haven't been there in a coon's age.

I'd say Rome. We were there in early February and even then it was unbelievably crowded. But there was lots to like and we're planning to go back next February--but this time we'll steer clear of the bigger sites and 'must sees'--

I'd have to agree with Fisherman's Wharf in San Francisco.

Mykonos in August.

I had to laugh when I read Cimbrone's comments about York: "Ye olde such and such." I felt the same about that, though it's worth seeing York Minster and taking a walk around the city's medieval wall.

I'll never go to Rome again unless some handsome man sweeps me off my feet and wants to take me to all the finest restaurants there. Trevi Fountain and Spanish steps are loaded with tourists in summer.

Vegas: Yuck, yuck, yuck. I hate the fake frescoes in the Venician and "high rollers" trying to impress with their high stakes and fat cigars. The whole scene is a turn-off.

Blue Grotto - we were in and in a minute, I don't remember anything and wanted my money back

Yosemite Valley in July - there were hordes of people and I liked Acadia and Mt.Rainier much better

Pisa - I still liked it

Venice - loved it, all you need to do is walk away from the square and there are plenty of little street where you're alone

Another vote for Place du Tertre, Montmartre. And Carnaby Street.

Unlike most of you, though, I LIKE cheesy tourist tat. Cheap junk and cheap people define countries in a really interesting way. On Place du Tertre I acquired my collection of fantastic Michael Thomas postcards, you know the ones, from the 60s and 70s, with the large-eyed urchins in famous Paris scenes. They are by far the finest artifacts I returned home with.

Where's the Blue Grotto?

Orlando, Florida...Seems like everyoe, from everywhere goes there.

Also, who goes to Las Vegas to sight-see?? Years ago it was trying to market itself as a family vacation hot-spot. They've stopped doing that. Now it's about "What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas".