EPCOT Test Track to be reimagined

plutofan15

Well-Known Member
Which includes you and any opinion you give here...

he-man laughing GIF by Challenger
Correct, they do not care about what I post. Boy, you really got me there. 🙄
 
Last edited:

mergatroid

Well-Known Member
I think your discounting the fact that Imagineering is supposed to be the one's giving it thought so people on a forum aren't having to talk about it. Why bother giving an attraction a name?
Pretty sure it's so people can find it on a map or ask for directions? I mean if you don't have an attraction name it would hugely complicate it for first timers. But if you know the name of the attraction and you want to go to the shop that's connected to it, it would make it very easy to just ask for the shop there.

If you don't know the name of the shop it's not exactly a complicated process to find it by either asking for "The test track shop" or look on the map for Test Track knowing the shop is connected to it. This would be exponentially harder if the attraction didn't have a name.
 

ᗩLᘿᑕ ֊ᗩζᗩᗰ

Hᴏᴜsᴇ ᴏʄ  Mᴀɢɪᴄ
Premium Member
Pretty sure it's so people can find it on a map or ask for directions? I mean if you don't have an attraction name it would hugely complicate it for first timers. But if you know the name of the attraction and you want to go to the shop that's connected to it, it would make it very easy to just ask for the shop there.
Well that's not true. It could be called "Water ride with Pirates" and people would find it on a map. There was a time when Imagineering would strive for creative names and signage. The Disney difference is dead. I got it! Let's call it Gear Shop Adventure! Phew, we can check that one off the list. Mission accomplished.

If the Poly Resort can have a gift shop called "BouTIKI" I don't see why an attraction couldn't have a shop name befitting it's theme. 🤯
 
Last edited:

Centauri Space Station

Well-Known Member
Heard from a game of telephone that this is taking riders now. Apparently largely screen based (boooo).
Did they say how? A lot of 2.0 had screen ish areas too. The beginning where the On star connection was, the simulation of slippery rain, the thunder bolt and city were projected. I’m assuming the forest area from concept art is physical at least.
 

DreamfinderGuy

Well-Known Member
Did they say how? A lot of 2.0 had screen ish areas too. The beginning where the On star connection was, the simulation of slippery rain, the thunder bolt and city were projected. I’m assuming the forest area from concept art is physical at least.
That's the hope I'm clinging to, 2.0 used a lot of projections but still came out as a great overall experience. Sadly don't know specifics, just told that it has taken riders and there's screens. This is all from at least a friend of a friend, so I'm not sure how diluted the info got before it ended up to me lol
but what about the one bad piece of concept art with lush forest that we've all been clinging to for years?!
That scene does have the physical tree props in it and is apparently "the highlight of the ride". I refuse to believe some trees can be the best it has to offer so I am just writing that off in my head as someone's bad opinion (coping). At this rate maybe we'll all get to go into this attraction blind and figure it out for ourselves.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom