MK Cars-Themed Attractions at Magic Kingdom

[ToTBellHop]

They are still a shadow of themselves in terms of how many there were.. usually taken out without any 1:1 replacement too. I don't know the strategy they are taking, but they seem far less common. Part of it could be ADA concerns too which took a bit bite out of many climbing/play areas in other venues.

Regardless, even with it there, people weren't using TSI enough.

Oh, absolutely. Putting a Cars ride there along with some sort of playscape is a far better use of the space.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I think TSI works better at Disneyland with all the locals.

I’ve never noticed DL’s island being more crowded than Florida.

 

[DisneyHead123]

The odd thing is: they do still build playgrounds. They just put in a new one at Epcot for F&G this year and are designing a new one for DAK and one for DHS. I’m not actually sure why they are placed in some parks but not others. I actually think New Frontierland will have one, too. Yet, they removed the one by TBA. After building one for Dumbo.

There doesn’t seem to be a hard and fast rule. Perhaps it’s just the designer’s vision.

My guess (just a guess) is that playgrounds are seen as a negative in many ways but have a few redeeming features that keep them in occasional rotation. They don’t raise money in the form of LLs, merch or food, the liability surrounding playgrounds is probably somewhat higher (no matter how safe they are, at a minimum there’s a much increased risk of kids colliding while running around), generally require staff for supervision, and are very limited in terms of who can use them (as opposed to a dark ride that’s truly for newborns through grandparents).

On the positive side, however, they’re great people eaters, relatively cheap (probably extremely cheap compared to most of what Disney does) appealing to the “families with kids” demographic that Disney tries on and off to court, and often particularly helpful to families with ND children, who need a brain break in an unstructured space.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

They are still a shadow of themselves in terms of how many there were.. usually taken out without any 1:1 replacement too. I don't know the strategy they are taking, but they seem far less common. Part of it could be ADA concerns too which took a bit bite out of many climbing/play areas in other venues.

Regardless, even with it there, people weren't using TSI enough.

I think the ADA element is part of it and also just safety requirement sand style of playgrounds has changed a ton I've the years. If you see a newer playground built in your town it will look a ton different than one built 30 years ago

 

[TheMaxRebo]

Regarding whether or not the theme of Tom Sawyer's Island is the reason it wasn't more popular... honestly, I still think a good chunk of the reason is because people found it too hard to get to (you HAD take a raft to and from it). If it were Moana's Island or Encanto Island, I doubt attendance would've been much higher.

I think that is a big part of it - it took a good chunk of time if you wanted to do. Even spending a relatively small amount of time actually on the island, probably looking at minimum 30-40 mins

I also suspect many park goes had no idea what was actually on the island. How many people knew there were caves and a fot with animatronics, etc. Part of that is on Disney for not promoting it more but part also is it's probably not one of the first things many guests will tell their friends "oh, you gotta do this..." And word just didn't spread among the more casual guest groups

 

[mickEblu]

I’ve never noticed DL’s island being more crowded than Florida.

Oh I didn’t mean to imply that TSI at DL actually sees more visitors. I have no clue how many people visited at MK. Just that it would make sense to me if TSI at MK had fewer visitors since you have more people on vacation and fewer locals. I’m 50/50 that I would have made it to TSI at MK. Definitely would have been lower on the priority list as a first time visitor. To be clear, I didnt view it as expendable at MK either and think it along with the river was an integral part of the park.

 

[JD80]

I don't think knowing what is on the island would change it's attendance.

 

[James Alucobond]

It’s a captive experience that requires you to wait for a lengthy boat ride to enter and exit in a world where a lot of people are at the mercy of stacked arrival windows.

 

[lazyboy97o]

On the positive side, however, they’re great people eaters, relatively cheap (probably extremely cheap compared to most of what Disney does) appealing to the “families with kids” demographic that Disney tries on and off to court, and often particularly helpful to families with ND children, who need a brain break in an unstructured space.

Playgrounds are not at all people eaters. Their allocation towards capacity is quite small because they’re used by a specific demographic and even when they’re used people don’t always count them as part of how they see their day. They cheap and that’s what makes them easy fluff.

 

[Incomudro]

I don't think knowing what is on the island would change it's attendance.

It would have gotten my family there.
I did my share of research with all of our trips, but somehow missed that was on that Island.
My sons would have loved exploring those caves!
My claustrophobic wife on the other hand would have enjoyed the break, sitting it out and taking it easy while my son's and I explored.

 

[Bocabear]

Regarding whether or not the theme of Tom Sawyer's Island is the reason it wasn't more popular... honestly, I still think a good chunk of the reason is because people found it too hard to get to (you HAD take a raft to and from it). If it were Moana's Island or Encanto Island, I doubt attendance would've been much higher.

I don't think the theme of the island had anything to do with the popularity...It needed some updates, and yes, the raft made it more of a commitment to visit... but that could have been overcome with a draw bridge or something.....
If it was a fresh new attraction and a beautifully done pay area, it would definitely draw a larger audience.... People seem to really respond to "new" these days...Like it or not....

 

[DisneyHead123]

Playgrounds are not at all people eaters. Their allocation towards capacity is quite small because they’re used by a specific demographic and even when they’re used people don’t always count them as part of how they see their day. They cheap and that’s what makes them easy fluff.

People eater is a relative term. It certainly depends on various factors (are we talking a traditional playground or a 'play exhibit', how well attended is the area, how well do they make use of the space, is there seating that encourages parents to stop and hang out for awhile, etc.) But yeah, I'm using the term 'people eater' in the way that people do when they talk about needing additional indoor shows or B list attractions as people eaters. It's certainly not going to be on the scale of an omnimover with a long line, an outdoor show / parade, etc. It would need to be one of many small attractions to help with crowds.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

When we ride the riverboat, explore TSI and the fort, we are stepping back in time, something we cannot do in normal life.
Cars land will be a dirt track, something I can go up the road and experience.

Its sad but it is what it is.

I can definitely find a river with an "island" in it in less than maybe half an hour where I'm from.

I cannot ride or see talking animated cars in real life

 

[lazyboy97o]

People eater is a relative term. It certainly depends on various factors (are we talking a traditional playground or a 'play exhibit', how well attended is the area, how well do they make use of the space, is there seating that encourages parents to stop and hang out for awhile, etc.) But yeah, I'm using the term 'people eater' in the way that people do when they talk about needing additional indoor shows or B list attractions as people eaters. It's certainly not going to be on the scale of an omnimover with a long line, an outdoor show / parade, etc. It would need to be one of many small attractions to help with crowds.

It’s really not a relative term. Indoor shows and B list attractions can actually be people eaters and impact capacity in ways that is simply not true of playgrounds.

 

[AidenRodriguez731]

It’s really not a relative term. Indoor shows and B list attractions can actually be people eaters and impact capacity in ways that is simply not true of playgrounds.

Frozen and Indiana Jones over in HS are HUGE people eaters (even though IJ is outside but still) There's no realistic way to get that many people into playgrounds.

 

[DisneyHead123]

It’s really not a relative term. Indoor shows and B list attractions can actually be people eaters and impact capacity in ways that is simply not true of playgrounds.

What’s the seating capacity for a smaller HS show?

 

[seabreezept813]

To be fair, the one for Splash was kinda gross.

We loved it. And my kids are big time bummed when they chicken out on Tiana’s that there’s nothing there.

 

[HMF]

We loved it. And my kids are big time bummed when they chicken out on Tiana’s that there’s nothing there.

I really doubt they were thinking about that when they were designing Tiana's. The only directive was "get rid of Splash no matter what, The quality of the replacement is incidental."

 

[Chi84]

I really doubt they were thinking about that when they were designing Tiana's. The only directive was "get rid of Splash no matter what, The quality of the replacement in incidental."

You don't know that.

 

[HMF]

You don't know that.

I can't confirm it but considering when it was announced, The political situation surrounding it, the situation in the Company and Imagineering at the time and the fact that no changes were made to make it fit better in Florida where Splash Mountain was (deliberately designed) bigger and better. It is pretty obvious what happened.