Little Green Men
Well-Known Member
2 E tickets? GMR, what else? By the time the backlot tour closed it certainly was not an E. DHS will have 6 E tickets soon.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
2 E tickets? GMR, what else? By the time the backlot tour closed it certainly was not an E. DHS will have 6 E tickets soon.
Backlot, but I agree it wasn't very good at the end. At one point it was though and served its purpose well. It does, however, make sense why they got rid of it in the context of the park, but GMR was just silly. Half the amount of E-tickets its Star Wars opposite will end up with and lacking C's and D's.
(Disney's) Holly Wood Studios. With time, he'll conform.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
I get what your saying here but fail to understand how any of this matters when we are talking specifically about ticketed gated parks.
Yes, WDW has many more (paid) options but the value you receive for admission to the parks in Disneyland vs. the the value you receive in WDW isn't even close. To me, them spreading the same attractions across 4 different parks and charging 4 different admissions is a bad thing for consumers.
I mean what? People get to pay more and walk more for the same thing in a state where the cost of doing business is lower?
I agree with you a lot of the time on a lot of things but I agree with the other guy here: There should be way more rides across 4 individually paid ticketed gates than 2 and the fact that it's almost the same says something. I don't see how there is any way of looking at it and saying that particular something is good.
Yes, WDW parks have more shows but do we really want to bring up things like the horribly dated Little Mermaid and B&TB or the Disney/Pixar Animation Festival in Epcot... along with whatever you want to call that thing they just opened across the former Animation Courtyard and talk about them as WDW advantages?
Sorry but it feels like a real stretch, to me.
Last edited:
Don't forget that many rides that Disneyland Park gets are spread across the Disney World parks. Technically 'Indy', Star Tours, and others.
Still not an excuse. It's lack of capital and investment and nothing more. Not adding an E-ticket to the MK since Splash Mountain is shameful. Letting EPCOT rot is unacceptable. Disneyland has its fair share of problems, but WDW has not spent anywhere near the level they should on attractions. There is no defending that.
Precisely. Pixie dusters around here. Disney can do no wrong remember
.
While we have our share, this is not the dustiest board on the Internet by any means.Precisely. Pixie dusters around here. Disney can do no wrong remember
WDW is already more underinvested than Disneyland per park by a mile. More people per park make that even worse.
The concept that people will be completely pulled to the MK is an extraordinarily flawed concept (Disneyland seems to now realize that and are getting 3 new E-tickets), and one that has allowed the park to stagnate over the past 20+ years. The other parks need more investment as a whole because of how underbuilt they are, but over a decade without a major ride is purely monetary reasons and is inexcusable. Transportation costs are just part of it. EPCOT's spine is the park's destruction since the 90's. Disneyland Park alone has 2 night shows AND the resort has a night parade... gee I wish we had one of those.
Disneyland Park was underinvested in that timeframe as well, but they didn't remove rides, added Indy, they had way more to start with, and they are now getting 3x the amount MK is getting. Something seems off, doesn't it?
Sure they're spending more and I applaud them for that, but it's 20 years overdue for the in-park investment, and the resort improvements are necessary evils of a big resort and irrelevant to the park costs which we are currently comparing sizes for. The Orlando parks are in an unacceptable state no matter how you slice it or dice it.
Stop trying to always be right. You literally cannot know about every topic even as a self-proclaimed 'rumormonger'. Just because you do something for the forums doesn't give you the right to just stomp over every discussion and dismiss anything that doesn't fit your narrative. Lots of people here get by fine by not doing that.
To that point, he literally changes the topic on every discussion to make it fit with what he believes. It's ludicrous. Of course WDW is a superior resort (excluding the parks), but that's an entirely different discussion!
And to the second point, exactly as well. What's his endgame here? There's not really anything to argue about.
You couldn't have put it better.
I agree with that, but I'm amazed how he literally cannot allow himself to see it. What's the thought process? You can still enjoy the parks and critique their flaws when presented. He's been doing the same thing over on the Uni boards being a pixie duster for Comcast haha. I was accused earlier of being a Disney fanboy. Some people are just too narrow-minded.
Last edited:
Seeing the overlay just makes it all the more exciting! It's a really good ride (albeit short) but it's a welcome addition.
Walt d
Well-Known Member
I have to say. Im a little excited , seeing some movement On this attractions .come on now Bobby igor now we need a new film to go with tron. You know its true! Get”er done bobby”
I feel like they'd properly do a TRON 3 too ala Marvel versus Legacy. Hopefully someday!
This is the crux. Your point is valid if all four parks in Orlando were like the two parks in Anaheim. But they aren't. DAK has a zoo. Epcot has a permanent worlds fair. DHS was supposed to have behind the scenes studio tours. The extras were what made the park complete (or, supposed to).
If you only count rides, you miss what the three non-MK parks are all about. They're not supposed to be four amusement parks. They're not supposed to be four Magic Kingdoms. They're supposed to have as many rides all together as DLR, but with so much more that you spend a week there as a week-long vacationing resort.
solidyne
Well-Known Member
Bingo. That sums it up.
You're still missing the point. We're talking about the ride lineups, not other metrics. And even if we were, Disneyland Park has other metrics that the others don't. It's more quaint, more intimate, there's more history. You're acting like Disneyland Park and DCA have nothing going for them besides rides which is not true at all.
The fact that Test Track gets longer lines than Radiator Springs Racers, or literally any ride at WDW is the perfect case as a significant downgrade to a parkgoers experience. Crowd levels in the streets so close together make for an awful experience, and by not having the rides to put them into, I don't care how many pavilions, animal exhibits, or former movies being made you have because those are bonuses. The ride level is what you expect in a themepark and it is the determinant for how crowded the streets are and if you can only do a few rides in a day. Themeparks are more than just rides, but every really good theme park except Orlando has a higher ride average. They're spreading basically 2.5 parks across 4 using the latter's attendance which is wrong.
Animal Kingdom is more than a zoo, but that aspect is a thematic bonus, but it doesn't give them the right to slack on attractions. The MK vs. Disneyland Park is a perfect example of the lack of investment that you are totally ignoring because those are the most comparable, and do not have other 'extras'.
I do see what you're saying, and I acknowledge that, but to entirely dismiss what we are saying is also wrong especially since we are primarily discussing one thing mostly unrelated to what you brought up.
No one said that. See DCA's ride line-up then, or compare MK's low ride count to Disneyland Park.
Last edited:
You think they're unrelated. WDW was built with them interrelated.
Can you literally not say that it hurts the park experience by having so few rides per park? All the exhibits at AK might be considered together 1 E-ticket perhaps? How much does that leave us with now... 5. Wow.
The point is valid and something to be factored in in an overall park comparison, but that's not what we're saying, but you're just in your own reality if you legitimately think it's not a big deal. Clearly, the queues prove otherwise. Even if we take your metric into account I challenge you to step foot in Disneyland Resort or Tokyo Disneyland Resort and not appreciate them. Shorter Queues, more attractions, better food. And just so you know, WDW is not the only resort that has interrelated factors. Every park does. Furthermore, HWS' is a moot point and has extremely outdated shows. People would appreciate World Showcase not destroying its World's Fair theme and having more than a couple of rides in WS and ridiculous waits for the second-tier Soarin' and the okay Test Track. AK has always been underinvested and the zoo theme allowed them to get away with building cheaper, they serve their purpose well (mostly replacing C-tickets), but you can't deny that a park opening with 2 E-tickets is on the cheap. With the investments made since, the park has never looked better and the exhibits are really good, but it's still so underbuilt compared to its peers. Beautiful for what's built, but its structure is obvious (nature is not a good excuse for the amount of trees intead of actual theming); yet this is entirely off topic from what we were discussing, now isn't it? Furthermore, the Magic Kingdom is 100% comparable to Disneyland Park. In 2022, Mk will have 7 (counting JC) E-tickets and Disneyland will have what 13 E-tickets (counting JC & the subs)? Oh and Disneyland also has a tremendous amount of C-tickets.
What is your argument? What are you trying to prove other than being right? Of course, there's more to theme parks than just rides but it is a good indicator of investment and when the average is as low as Orlando it hurts the guest experience.
First, you countered by including the 'entire resort' now it's 'things besides E-tickets', you just argue for the sake of winning. I don't care if I'm wrong, I'm just puzzled how you can't come to realize something so obvious and then keep trying to change the subject.
Last edited:
But that doesn't preclude four parks chock-full of Disney (Fox/Marvel/Lucas/Pixar) IPs...
Jones14
Well-Known Member
I get the point both sides are trying to make. WDW does have a lot less rides than it should (particularly when you look at Disneyland), but it also has a lot more in the way of non-ride attractions on a variety of scales.
Looking at AK in particular, rides don’t paint the whole picture. There are only 8 rides, which is not enough for a 21 year old theme park, especially one as popular as it is.
However, there are also:
3 E-Ticket shows (Lion King, Rivers of Light, Nemo),
2 D-Ticket shows (Bugs, Bird show)
4 C-Ticket shows/walkthroughs (Pandora suit guy, drum show, Jungle Trek, Gorilla Falls)
That doesn’t include any of the random live performers and meet and greets scattered around the park, or any of the more diversionary trails and animal exhibits. This park alone comes close to rivaling Disneyland Resort’s entire entertainment lineup.
Does that mean it doesn’t need more rides? No, and a good deal of Epcot and HS still need major facelifts in addition to what’s coming. But it does show that WDW, while still under built, is in better shape than the ride count would lead you to believe.
Looking at AK in particular, rides don’t paint the whole picture. There are only 8 rides, which is not enough for a 21 year old theme park, especially one as popular as it is.
However, there are also:
3 E-Ticket shows (Lion King, Rivers of Light, Nemo),
2 D-Ticket shows (Bugs, Bird show)
4 C-Ticket shows/walkthroughs (Pandora suit guy, drum show, Jungle Trek, Gorilla Falls)
That doesn’t include any of the random live performers and meet and greets scattered around the park, or any of the more diversionary trails and animal exhibits. This park alone comes close to rivaling Disneyland Resort’s entire entertainment lineup.
Does that mean it doesn’t need more rides? No, and a good deal of Epcot and HS still need major facelifts in addition to what’s coming. But it does show that WDW, while still under built, is in better shape than the ride count would lead you to believe.
ImperfectPixie
Well-Known Member
I agree that WDW definitely needs more attractions - especially in it's non-MK parks. BUT...you're not taking into account FP+. Prior to FP+, guests could enjoy way more rides/attractions per day because rides that previously had no lines and didn't require a fast pass now have an hour or more wait. I really believe that most people (not people like us who analyze every aspect of everything) wouldn't notice how few attractions there are if it weren't for FP+ and the false sense of urgency/scarcity that Disney seems to love creating.
MrPromey
Well-Known Member
I don't need to go into details on the problems with the current implementation of these themes and ideas at the other three parks - your wording acknowledges them. I'd just say that if over the last 15 years or so, the other three had been living up to their concepts, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.
Better than any of us, they knew the problems with three of the four parks and how that was pushing more attendance at the fourth and their solution was to increase admission to that park and start dicing up more of the hours for paid events to profit from it. They took an actual problem and figured out how best to capitalize on it rather than fix it.
It seems they've finally come around but I would guess this has more to do with some form of metric showing that the money train is in danger of starting a decline unless they work to fix some of this or just the flat acknowledgement that they cannot continue to sell four parks on the value of one of them, anymore due to the capacity problems that will never be resolved at that one park when people get here on a 5 day vacation and end up spending 2-3 of those days at the MK.
... But I'm glad we're getting Tron! (and everything else, really, regardless of the why)
