mickEblu
Well-Known Member
The island and river were never designed to be a people eater though. Quite the opposite. Plus It was designed to be transportive. Taking people to another time and place. That’s what the castle parks are. Yesterday, Tomorrow and Fantasy. National Park meets talking Cars (based on a film set in the modern world) works better in a non castle park. That’s without getting into the fact that Liberty Square, Frontierland and their remaining attractions were designed to be facing the river/ island. To see Disney disregard all of this, the history and aesthetic beauty of the river, island and steamboat to shoehorn in this Cars ride is just sad to witness.
I get that the park will have more capacity but at what cost? And that extra capacity won’t come until Villains Land opens up. I don’t think the Cars ride(s) on its own will have more capacity than the island/ steamboat in any meaningful way, if at all. The obvious move was Villains, no Cars and keep the lower loop. Cars should have gone to DHS.
Yes I’m quoting myself here haha.
But let’s be honest, this isn’t about capacity as much as it’s about how much more money they’ll make on that real estate now. It’s certainly not about thematic integrity. Villains and Cars ride LLs, tons of merch and themed food up the wazoo. They currently make 0$ on that real estate now… at least on a spreadsheet. Obviously its intrinsic value and how it contributes to the overall picture and guest satisfaction is immeasurable. But some people aren’t aware or are not able to put it into words. And Disney will word their surveys in a way to get exactly the answers they want.
What about these two comments @phillip9698 and @Chi84 would make it seem like the steamboats/ TSI’s capacity has anything to do with my main argument? It’s more that people cherry pick something they feel they can debate and forget or disregard the main point of the posts entirely.
Last edited: