Right, so it begs the question -- what's different?
1) More immediately recognizable and/or appealing IP - I'd wager more people know what Terminator is versus Bourne, in part because it has several iconic images between the "Terminator skeleton," the T-1000, and Arnold; Bourne does not have an iconic image that immediately grabs the average guest or connects them to the IP, in part because they can't use Matt Damon's likeness
2) Prominence in resort marketing - Terminator frequently made flashy appearances in Universal print and filmed media (again, with iconic images; Bourne lacks these); this was in part because it was a headlining addition in the mid 1990s
3) Easier for guests to plan/find showtimes - As I recall, Terminator more or less ran continuously for, say, the first decade of its run? As popularity waned, they pivoted to frequent showtimes, which were handily featured on park maps (as we've just seen)
4) Different park flow/attraction mix - Pre-Diagon, guests moved throughout the park differently. Back to the Future used to be a weenie, and for a time, Men in Black was the biggest/newest ride. All of these factors pulled guests to the right, where they were more likely to encounter the (IMO) more prominent and eyecatching attraction signage. There was also a greater emphasis on shows over rides during Terminator 2's peak years.