Same IP's in different parks

[Heppenheimer]

Well there you have it. I got a ask who decides this stuff? Are you guys underground imagineers?? Ride architects. Seems like there is someone on the boards decreeing what is lousy and what is acceptable.

Ok I take it back, it's a lousy ride rip it out immediately.

For the record WE don't think it's a lousy ride.

It's far better than Delta Dreamflight or whatever the airline-sponsored that it replaced was called.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Because we don't happen to think it's lousy. I guess our pedigree is not refined enough.

Again why do you get to decide what is allowable?

You want to talk about horrible?? Maelstrom.
You want to talk clunky and outdated?? Space mountain
'
Sorry I just don't get this "superiority" vibe here. Don't go by me though, I really don't think figment was all that either

Who says I’m deciding anything? I’m stating my opinion.

 

[Queen of the WDW Scene]

Its good business practices.
I don't really take issue with it.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Who says I’m deciding anything? I’m stating my opinion.

You asked me why I wanted to keep a lousy ride around and I was asking who decided it was lousy?

Ok so to answer your question and not go off topic, I would keep Buzz lightyear around because we like the ride. We absolutely think it's not lousy. We feel it's a different than Midway in HS so have no issues with "ip" being in 2 different places.

 

[Tom Morrow]

You asked me why I wanted to keep a lousy ride around and I was asking who decided it was lousy?

Ok so to answer your question and not go off topi, I would keep Buzz lightyear around because we like the ride. We absolutely think it's not lousy. We feel it's a different than Midway in HS so have no issues with "ip" being in 2 different places.

What if they kept the same omnimover/shooting system and re-themed it to something else? In Hong Kong Disneyland it's the same basic ride but themed to Ant-Man and the visuals and sets look much better:

 

[Tom Morrow]

Its good business practices.

Not exactly. It's a lazy, synergy-driven business practice. Each theme park is meant to be a unique experience. That's the entire reason there are four of them instead of one massive one - they weren't meant to be homogenized IP dumping grounds.

I'll also never understand why anyone who doesn't profit from these decisions cares more about what makes the company more money than what is a better experience for them, the consumer.

 

[Queen of the WDW Scene]

Not exactly. It's a lazy, synergy-driven business practice. Each theme park is meant to be a unique experience. That's the entire reason there are four of them instead of one massive one - they weren't meant to be homogenized IP dumping grounds.

I'll also never understand why anyone who doesn't profit from these decisions cares more about what makes the company more money than what is a better experience for them, the consumer.

Ok if you do not like it do not go.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Ok if you do not like it do not go.

Haven't reached that level yet. I'll keep going until they obliterate everything I liked about the parks. I suspect this will never happen because there will be a paradigm shift at some point where people finally get sick of IP-based experiences. I'm not even against IP, just the over-use of it.

 

[bUU]

Doesn't bother me in the least.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Not exactly. It's a lazy, synergy-driven business practice. Each theme park is meant to be a unique experience. That's the entire reason there are four of them instead of one massive one - they weren't meant to be homogenized IP dumping grounds.

I'll also never understand why anyone who doesn't profit from these decisions cares more about what makes the company more money than what is a better experience for them, the consumer.

I guess because a better "experience" is such a subjective thing. Now I do think it also depends on how you look at your vacations. you seem to compare it a lot to "what it was" and " what is was supposed to be". I don't. I'm never going to get to Tokyo disney, I don't really care what they do there. I mean if I did that every where I went I wouldn't be able to enjoy any vacation.
How old is buzz lightyear? maybe when they do the upgrade that would be great, not sure if it's due an upgrade.

Now I never get this "homogenized" argument. do people really go to Epcot and say "this is just like Magic Kingdom"? I don't. I go to Animal kingdom and it's different, I go to MK and it's totally different. My family has never gotten on midway mania and thought Hey this is just like the ride in MK. ever! Does seeing a popular princess in the parks mean they are homogenized? If I see Minnie in both MK and HS again, I never think the parks look the same. same with seeing Mary Poppins in England and in MK.

Sorry you're not having as great of experiences as before (am I reading that correct, that's an assumption) it is possible to really care about both. if the company makes money, my retirement will be all the better and if the parks do well I'll spend a lot of that retirement there.

 

[eliza61nyc]

Haven't reached that level yet. I'll keep going until they obliterate everything I liked about the parks. I suspect this will never happen because there will be a paradigm shift at some point where people finally get sick of IP-based experiences. I'm not even against IP, just the over-use of it.

actually one of the things I like about Disney is that it's fluid. It;s supposed to progress with the times. Yes right now folks are loving the Ip stuff. nothing wrong with giving the customer what they want.

 

[erasure fan1]

Spreading IPs out over multiple parks isn't my favorite thing but I can live with it if the theme fits. As of now though, the bigger problem is them just throwing stuff wherever they have room. That is what will kill the identity of a park.

 

[Nottamus]

No issue at all with IPs all over the place. Brings more fun to where you are at the moment...

Its not like they are installing the 8 track tapes from Pop Century at AKL right?....right? .......are they? .........

 

[Heppenheimer]

Not exactly. It's a lazy, synergy-driven business practice. Each theme park is meant to be a unique experience. That's the entire reason there are four of them instead of one massive one - they weren't meant to be homogenized IP dumping grounds.

I'll also never understand why anyone who doesn't profit from these decisions cares more about what makes the company more money than what is a better experience for them, the consumer.

I genuinely want Disney to succeed financially, because when they don't, we get cost-cutting, which brings us such wonders as the original California Adventure and the current iteration of the Imagination Pavillion.

And, because strong Disney dividens help my mutual fund investments...

 

[Janir]

Well there you have it. I got a ask who decides this stuff? Are you guys underground imagineers?? Ride architects. Seems like there is someone on the boards decreeing what is lousy and what is acceptable.

Ok I take it back, it's a lousy ride rip it out immediately.

For the record WE don't think it's a lousy ride.

With you on this one eliza61nyc. It's a fun ride and fits the Tomorrowland themeing well. ( as well as Tomorrowland is themed, but that's a different topic)
I have no problem and even prefer the spread of the IP vs an all in one area clumping of attractions. I'd much rather see some defined lands with well thought out themeing and multiple IP use as the main focus of the parks. Not that a dedicated TSL, Pandora, or Batuu aren't welcome, but if the IP for any of those lands can also be used outside of those lands easily then use them. Star Wars can be a great new example of that, where there is Batuu but you will never see Darth Vader in Batuu as the land timeline doesn't allow for that. But a Jedi Trials with a Darth Vader does work. Or having Vader parade around outside of Batuu in DHS. Having Woody represented in Frontierland woudl be a excellent use of that IP, I would prefer they don't cannibalize something already there for it, but it would be a great use and fun to see.

 

[erasure fan1]

I genuinely want Disney to succeed financially, because when they don't, we get cost-cutting,

To be realistic, even with success, they love to cost cut.

 

[larryz]

It does bother me, especially as someone who strongly prefers original experiences to movie franchise synergy. I think a film or franchise shouldn't have attractions in more than one of the four parks.

With The Little Mermaid represented in New Fantasyland, the older, outdated stage show at Hollywood Studios should close. With the Toy Story Land, Buzz Lightyear's Space Ranger Spin should be rethemed. Etc.

But wouldn't that draw the ire of those day guests who don't want to pay extra for park hoppers?

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Parks sharing the same IP doesn't bother me. I care about the four parks having distinct identities. But IP to me does not create a theme, or place, or identity. At least did not until the current fashion of IP lands.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

I'll also never understand why anyone who doesn't profit from these decisions cares more about what makes the company more money than what is a better experience for them, the consumer.

Right?

 

[danyoung56]

.....do people really go to Epcot and say "this is just like Magic Kingdom"? I don't. I go to Animal kingdom and it's different, I go to MK and it's totally different. My family has never gotten on midway mania and thought Hey this is just like the ride in MK. ever!

First of all, I completely agree with your arguments. I think some people state declaratively (is that a word?) that something is "lousy" or "excellent" when they really mean that this is their opinion. It tends to ruffle feathers when that really wasn't the intent (or was it?).

But while I think that Buzz and TSM are completely different experiences, Disney has duplicated itself with the spinners - AstroJets, Aladdin, Dumbo, the Dino thing in DAK. When it was just Dumbo and the AstroJets I could overlook the duplication. But now, how many freakin' spinners do we need?