MK Villains Land Announced for Walt Disney World's Magic Kingdom

[Bill Cipher]

I'll be honest with you, the whole replacement vs expansion argument is a waste of time and stupid to me. I'd say SWGE is an expansion but someone on the internet will say "butbutbut it repleaced some flower pots, so it's a replacement."

I personally don't care as long as I get to do new fun things when I visit the parks.

While I understand your argument that it's hard to quantify how much of a "net gain" certain replacements are due to the differing scales of attractions, it's really disingenuous to say SWGE replaced "flower pots." Streets of America was a major section of the park containing two major special effects driven (expensive) attractions in addition to a QSR and a theatre space.

 

[thepotat5216]

While I understand your argument that it's hard to quantify how much of a "net gain" certain replacements are due to the differing scales of attractions, it's really disingenuous to say SWGE replaced "flower pots." Streets of America was a major section of the park containing two major special effects driven (expensive) attractions in addition to a QSR and a theatre space.

Yes but if we are even counting net gains on attractions, Cars and Villains is still +2 attractions, plus whatever other shops, dining and entertainment come with the new lands. You could even say Monster Inc is an expansion because the new coaster is taking up backstage parking lots and the new Monsters show is filling the same capacity that MuppetVision did.

 

[DisDude33]

I personally don't care as long as I get to do new fun things when I visit the parks.

This is how I try to feel about things. There are certainly things I WDW that I would hate to see go the truth is that even the most beloved attractions get old after so long. It generally improves overall guest experience to swap things out for a new fresh experience that 90% of the people experiencing it haven't memorized yet.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

While I understand your argument that it's hard to quantify how much of a "net gain" certain replacements are due to the differing scales of attractions, it's really disingenuous to say SWGE replaced "flower pots." Streets of America was a major section of the park containing two major special effects driven (expensive) attractions in addition to a QSR and a theatre space.

It's also hard when often things being replaced aren't running at full capacity. Like Ellen's Energy Adventure had a super high theoretical capacity but it was generally half empty at best so when Guardians replaced it, even if the theoretical capacity isn't high the number of actual physical people in the attraction and in the queue space is significantly higher.

But some would say that change was a zero net gain but others would see it as an addition as that physical footprint is absorbing a ton more actual people now

 

[dmc493]

But some would say that change was a zero net gain but others would see it as an addition as that physical footprint is absorbing a ton more actual people now

The question then becomes how many more people are coming into the park each day because of that change. If it’s zero, the attraction has positively affected the rest of the park by absorbing more people and making everything else less crowded. Doubtful it’s ever zero but I would guess higher utilization is almost always beneficial

 

[Centauri Space Station]

So counting Villains land, that makes what, +4 in what will be 20 years? I did say 'one of the few'. That's not very good.

Maybe we are finally turning a corner to expansions over rethemes on both coasts, but it remains to be seen long term.

SOA was a waste of space and DHS gained 3 rides with the expansion of SW and TSL. Pandora was all new and moved FOTLK to a better area. Space 220, via napoli, rodeo roundup, harambe marketplace, tiffins, and be our guest were all expansions too.

 

[Centauri Space Station]

While I understand your argument that it's hard to quantify how much of a "net gain" certain replacements are due to the differing scales of attractions, it's really disingenuous to say SWGE replaced "flower pots." Streets of America was a major section of the park containing two major special effects driven (expensive) attractions in addition to a QSR and a theatre space.

It was a playground and LMA. The rest was empty expect for 2 months of the year.

 

[doctornick]

It's also hard when often things being replaced aren't running at full capacity. Like Ellen's Energy Adventure had a super high theoretical capacity but it was generally half empty at best so when Guardians replaced it, even if the theoretical capacity isn't high the number of actual physical people in the attraction and in the queue space is significantly higher.

But some would say that change was a zero net gain but others would see it as an addition as that physical footprint is absorbing a ton more actual people now

I think it's a valid point and these questions aren't always black and white. There is a certain logic to replacing underperforming attractions and utilizing that space better in a way that attracts and appeals to more guests. So, I don't think it's as simple as "replacing = bad while expansion = good" automatically.

That being said, I think there has definitely been too strong of a tendency in recent years to do replacements at WDW instead of actual expansions. In some cases, there has been some definite improvement - I would argue that SW:GE and Cosmic Rewind are both improvements over the previous things on those space and absolutely Pandora (if you want to consider that a "replacement" since most everything in Camp Minny Mickey was retained elsewhere). OTOH, there's been a number of replacements over recent years that have seemed like at best running in place so it's money being spent without clear upside - MMRR replacing GMR, FAE replacing Maelstrom, TBA replacing Splash, new CBJ show, "replacement" of the shooting galley, etc. I'm not really sold on Zootopia in ToL, IJ in Dinosaur or whatever Monster show ends up in MV3D being likely better that the current attractions either.

All the the announced things being planned/built at WDW are replacing existing attractions. I don't really have a problem with any of them in isolation, but it would have been nice if at least some new things were being built on undeveloped or shuttered land so they'd have been a true expansion without any loss. To me, I would have preferred adding a TLK ride to Africa or Moana ride to Adventureland or adding the DCA Pandora ride to DAK or putting something in Stitch or WoL first before doing the builds currenting announced. I would have put anything in DHS in the Animation building plot before doing anything with the Muppets area. I just think that WDW is underbuilt capacity wise for the attendance it draws which makes visiting the parks (most notably in DHS and DAK) unpleasant due to just not enough "stuff". They really need to work on making overall attraction capacity much more over the property and simply doing replacements

 

[Casper Gutman]

This is how I try to feel about things. There are certainly things I WDW that I would hate to see go the truth is that even the most beloved attractions get old after so long. It generally improves overall guest experience to swap things out for a new fresh experience that 90% of the people experiencing it haven't memorized yet.

Yeah, nostalgia is powerless in modern culture.

Now who’s caught the blockbuster Lilo and Stitch remake or is looking forward to the sequels to Freaky Friday and Practical Magic or the new Star Wars or Fantastic Four or…

 

[Bill Cipher]

It was a playground and LMA. The rest was empty expect for 2 months of the year.

I'd argue LMA and the Backlot Tour were major attractions that weren't terribly dated when they closed, featured impressive pyrotechnics/special effects, and they still moved significant amounts of people with generally positive feedback. Both closed due to having high operational cost and large, desirable footprints. I like Galaxy's Edge and I'm ultimately happy with its placement but I don't think it's fair to ignore what it replaced, even if you don't have a personal preference for those attractions. Keep in mind, I originally responded to a poster referring to the two attractions as "flower pots."

 

[BrianLo]

Seems like with all the WDW and DLR news, Disney is moving about as fast as can be hoped for with the projects announced at D23 (given Disney timelines generally). While my brain keeps telling me 2029 is too optimistic for this, the fact that they already announced the train loop being closed until Villains opens makes me think this won't be open in 2032. Don't know if the word has gone out to fast-track the domestic expansions in response to Epic.

Re: timeframes. I don’t know why even our more optimistic posters seem to have lost the plot on timeframes that Disney typically takes on these projects. They take a long time… but they don’t take a decade like some have projected. IF they are actually working on it. Asian park partnerships sometimes seek a funding roadmap way ahead of development.

Pandora was notoriously announced when no work had occurred, had a troubled early development and opened 5.5 years later. Galaxies Edge opened its first phase under four years from its announcement and frankly it by no means was far enough in development that its concept really matched what they built. I’d hazard it was about as far along in development as Villains was last year.

The only way Villains isn’t making 2029 is if they hadn’t actually done any work on it yet and if they don’t start proper construction work by Spring 2026. Or they are purposefully slow rolling their project roadmap. None of which I believe. I very much believe active development at least started in 2023 between Vaughn’s return in March and their capital plan outlay by the Fall. Site prep is already going to get an early start this year.

 

[Centauri Space Station]

I'd argue LMA and the Backlot Tour were major attractions that weren't terribly dated when they closed, featured impressive pyrotechnics/special effects, and they still moved significant amounts of people with generally positive feedback. Both closed due to having high operational cost and large, desirable footprints. I like Galaxy's Edge and I'm ultimately happy with its placement but I don't think it's fair to ignore what it replaced, even if you don't have a personal preference for those attractions. Keep in mind, I originally responded to a poster referring to the two attractions as "flower pots."

BLT was already incredibly shrunken down from the original hour tour it was when it opened and even worse after closing residential street in 2004. As Paris showed with Cars, they could’ve made it even worse with less.

 

[BrianLo]

But some would say that change was a zero net gain but others would see it as an addition as that physical footprint is absorbing a ton more actual people now

To me it’s both. Sometimes on paper the needle doesn’t move in the same way the calculus does in person. Notoriously Disneyland picked up the majority of the DHS redo without much loss. But I feel like DHS is still an overall better park and doesn’t face the same seismic quality gap that I felt it had against Disneyland a decade ago. Still a wide gap, but I actually think DHS is relatively an enjoyable ‘ok’ park these days.

Meanwhile on paper USF shouldn’t really be as bad as I find it decade on decade. Or the atrophying of DCA.

Yes it would be nice if we had more straight additions when Disneyland resort seems to be able to uncover endless space, but I do think the net on all these projects are likely going to be more than assumed. Particularly in the case of MK.

 

[Kamikaze]

SOA was a waste of space and DHS gained 3 rides with the expansion of SW and TSL. Pandora was all new and moved FOTLK to a better area. Space 220, via napoli, rodeo roundup, harambe marketplace, tiffins, and be our guest were all expansions too.

Restaurants are necessary, but they aren't attractions.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

I think it's a valid point and these questions aren't always black and white. There is a certain logic to replacing underperforming attractions and utilizing that space better in a way that attracts and appeals to more guests. So, I don't think it's as simple as "replacing = bad while expansion = good" automatically.

That being said, I think there has definitely been too strong of a tendency in recent years to do replacements at WDW instead of actual expansions. In some cases, there has been some definite improvement - I would argue that SW:GE and Cosmic Rewind are both improvements over the previous things on those space and absolutely Pandora (if you want to consider that a "replacement" since most everything in Camp Minny Mickey was retained elsewhere). OTOH, there's been a number of replacements over recent years that have seemed like at best running in place so it's money being spent without clear upside - MMRR replacing GMR, FAE replacing Maelstrom, TBA replacing Splash, new CBJ show, "replacement" of the shooting galley, etc. I'm not really sold on Zootopia in ToL, IJ in Dinosaur or whatever Monster show ends up in MV3D being likely better that the current attractions either.

All the the announced things being planned/built at WDW are replacing existing attractions. I don't really have a problem with any of them in isolation, but it would have been nice if at least some new things were being built on undeveloped or shuttered land so they'd have been a true expansion without any loss. To me, I would have preferred adding a TLK ride to Africa or Moana ride to Adventureland or adding the DCA Pandora ride to DAK or putting something in Stitch or WoL first before doing the builds currenting announced. I would have put anything in DHS in the Animation building plot before doing anything with the Muppets area. I just think that WDW is underbuilt capacity wise for the attendance it draws which makes visiting the parks (most notably in DHS and DAK) unpleasant due to just not enough "stuff". They really need to work on making overall attraction capacity much more over the property and simply doing replacements

Definitely frustrating when there are open spots - like Stitch sitting empty, and Launch Bay/Animation Courtyard (I am working under the assumption that will see a major update as part of the 2nd 5 years of work - if we are here in 5 years an no mention of an update, that will be a bad look). Some of the updates had reasons behind them and some depends on your fondness of a given attraction (like I don't really like Dinosaur so welcome an update, etc)

There have been some true net additions - Remy, Tron - and some of the announced work definitely is expansion - the Monster's Coaster is being built in the parking lot, even if one doesn't consider Cars an expansion Villains Land definitely is. So is some, but hopefully is at least a mix of replace and expansion going forward

 

[ctrlaltdel]

Definitely frustrating when there are open spots - like Stitch sitting empty, and Launch Bay/Animation Courtyard (I am working under the assumption that will see a major update as part of the 2nd 5 years of work - if we are here in 5 years an no mention of an update, that will be a bad look). Some of the updates had reasons behind them and some depends on your fondness of a given attraction (like I don't really like Dinosaur so welcome an update, etc)

There have been some true net additions - Remy, Tron - and some of the announced work definitely is expansion - the Monster's Coaster is being built in the parking lot, even if one doesn't consider Cars an expansion Villains Land definitely is. So is some, but hopefully is at least a mix of replace and expansion going forward

If adding a major attraction/larger addition each year is the plan going forward indefinitely that should do a lot to eliminate dead spots along with some actual expansion.

The persistent problem areas are very frustrating though. Even though the recent funding boost is encouraging (along with the relatively accelerated timelines), there hasn't been much evidence they are actually looking to fix those areas.

 

[rle4lunch]

Yeah, nostalgia is powerless in modern culture.

Now who’s caught the blockbuster Lilo and Stitch remake or is looking forward to the sequels to Freaky Friday and Practical Magic or the new Star Wars or Fantastic Four or…

Investing $15 to watch a movie or $4k to go to WDW are two vastly different ways to experience nostalgia. My ROI on visiting the parks goes down each time I go and see the same tired, nostalgic attraction not getting updated or constantly in B mode, or watching a dim pre-show video screen from the 1990's beg for sweet death on a ride that I'm trying to convince my kids is actually cool/fun.

 

[Brer Panther]

It generally improves overall guest experience to swap things out for a new fresh experience that 90% of the people experiencing it haven't memorized yet.

Even if the "fresh new experience" sucks? I'll take one of those dated pre-Iger attractions over something like Tiana's Bayou Adventure anyday.

 

[rle4lunch]

Even if the "fresh new experience" sucks? I'll take one of those dated pre-Iger attractions over something like Tiana's Bayou Adventure anyday.

TBA is so weak.

 

[Chi84]

Even if the "fresh new experience" sucks? I'll take one of those dated pre-Iger attractions over something like Tiana's Bayou Adventure anyday.

This is the Villains thread.

Thread 'Impressive defunct experiences you've been able to enjoy'

Feb 23, 2025

OK, so rides and shows and restaurants get closed these days at a death rate only matched by the Bubonic Plague's devastation back in the day. So there's now a ton of experiences that you can't do any more at theme parks. Let's list here all of the most impressive things we got to do before they got shuttered. I'll go first:

1) Malestrom at EPCOT (weird ride...).
2) The Great Movie Ride at HS.
3) Seeing the cannon firing for Space Mountain Mission 2 at DLP.
4) Splash Mountain at MK.
5) Ellen's Energy Adventure (also a weird ride...).
6) The Backlot Tram Tour at WDS in Paris (in fact...

• ParadoxPortals
• Replies: 139
• Forum: WDW Parks General Discussion

• 
•