• The new WDWMAGIC iOS app is here!
    Stay up to date with the latest Disney news, photos, and discussions right from your iPhone. The app is free to download and gives you quick access to news articles, forums, photo galleries, park hours, weather and Lightning Lane pricing. Learn More
  • Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.

DAK 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

V

veritas55

Active Member
SamusAranX said:
Unfortunately this is the not as objective of a metric as we like it to be [low wait times] to determine ride quality/ popularity

rides with higher throughput/ capacity are naturally not going to have 1+ hour waits.

Also, and you can do more research on the subject, but having “less popular” rides with consistently lower wait times can be a sign of a healthy theme park. You WANT enough attractions that spread crowds to where there’s some that churn people in and out. If every ride in the park consistently has longer waits simultaneously, that’s a sign the park is under built (hello Hollywood Studios).

Now, this isn’t a “dinosaur was super popular and is being maligned” post. I’m inclined to think that it wasn’t the most popular experience based on anecdotal conversations and the fact that it more often than not had lower wait times in a park with already low capacity in terms of attractions. But regardless, keeping dinosaur and just building from the ground up would have led to the latter situation I described; a healthier park that now has attractions that are massively popular, but with other attractions that people could easily hop on, while spreading the crowds around a bit. Long story short, wait times don’t determine how good a ride is.
Click to expand...

I generally agree with all that, other than you can control for the wait times/hourly capacity ratio mathematically. The point I was trying to make is that Dinosaur's low wait times were disproportionately low, even when controlling for its high capacity-- because it was unpopular, not because it was a people churner.

I also agree that low wait time / less popular rides are important for a park -- but it's generally a bad business move to have your "less popular rides" be your E-Ticket investments. You don't want heavy investments like Mission:Space and Countdown/ Dinosaur to fill that "less popular" role. That's for things like Little Mermaid, Mater's Junkyard Jamboree, toy story mania, Kali river rapids, etc.
 
Last edited:
V

veritas55

Active Member
Nickm2022 said:
Personally happy Encanto is a basic tracked ride as that would make it a reliable people eater of a ride, sm AK needs. Plus think the Shanghai pirates tech would be better used on Avatar, marvel, zootopia, jungle book, and others.
Click to expand...

yeah, although I think there was an opportunity for Mystic Manor-type ride system and feel for Encanto? It's a nearly 1,500 pph ride, which is pretty decent. (although I'm honestly not sure how reliable Mystic Manor has been, operations-wise?)

The Shanghai tech should rock on the Avatar ride at Disney and could be put to good use on any Moana boat ride, I guess?
 
SamusAranX

SamusAranX

Well-Known Member
veritas55 said:
I generally agree with all that, other than you can control for the wait times/hourly capacity ratio mathematically. The point I was trying to make is that Dinosaur's low wait times were disproportionately low, even when controlling for its high capacity-- because it was unpopular, not because it was a people churner.

I also agree that low wait time / less popular rides are important for a park -- but it's generally a bad business move to have your "less popular rides" be your E-Ticket investments. You don't want heavy investments like Mission:Space and Countdown/ Dinosaur to fill that "less popular" role. That's for things like Little Mermaid, Mater's Junkyard Jamboree, toy story mania, Kali river rapids, etc.
Click to expand...
Generally I agree. But with how woefully underbuilt AK is, I’m still surprised they just canned dinosaur altogether. But like you said, it was bucking the trend by having consistently low waits in a park that has ~checks notes~ 3 E tickets, NRJ (c ticket?), a water ride archetype that guests either love or hate, and a couple shows. Thankfully the animal exhibits can mitigate to an extent but not much.

And was dinosaur a true E ticket…I don’t know. Haven’t given much thought to it.

Tropical America can’t open soon enough. And unfortunately it’s definitely a case of too little too late.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
veritas55 said:
to be clear, my suggestion wasn't to bring the Shanghai POTC-themed ride over here, but rather the ride system and general design of the ride (which, in my view, was a near-perfect integration of practical effects blended with screens -- a masterclass in how to do a modern Disney dark ride -- it qualifies as that, right?)

It does appear they will use the similar technology on the Avatar ride at DL, which would be a great use of it -- and I have confidence Cameron will help push the technology and design. It may be what Na'vi river journey could have been?
Click to expand...

I think it still relies on screens too much in places -- occasionally you're just watching movies as you move (in those sections it feels like some of what Universal used to put out), which is what prevents it from reaching the overall level of rides like classic Pirates for me. Other parts of it are phenomenal, though.

I think they could use the ride system and create something absolutely incredible if they focused on using the screens as a supplement throughout the whole ride instead of the main/only focus in some areas.
 
Last edited:
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
SamusAranX said:
Unfortunately this is the not as objective of a metric as we like it to be [low wait times] to determine ride quality/ popularity

rides with higher throughput/ capacity are naturally not going to have 1+ hour waits.

Also, and you can do more research on the subject, but having “less popular” rides with consistently lower wait times can be a sign of a healthy theme park. You WANT enough attractions that spread crowds to where there’s some that churn people in and out. If every ride in the park consistently has longer waits simultaneously, that’s a sign the park is under built (hello Hollywood Studios).

Now, this isn’t a “dinosaur was super popular and is being maligned” post. I’m inclined to think that it wasn’t the most popular experience based on anecdotal conversations and the fact that it more often than not had lower wait times in a park with already low capacity in terms of attractions. But regardless, keeping dinosaur and just building from the ground up would have led to the latter situation I described; a healthier park that now has attractions that are massively popular, but with other attractions that people could easily hop on, while spreading the crowds around a bit. Long story short, wait times don’t determine how good a ride is.
Click to expand...

This is kind of the point I was making originally when I pointed out it wasn't underutilized.

I wasn't suggesting that meant it was a highly popular, beloved attraction -- just that that was not the driving force to replace it. If it was full all day long, a switch to Indy isn't going to make any significant difference in utilization/benefit the rest of the park the way switching from Tom Sawyer Island to Cars likely will (even if I hate that change).

Although they could have kept the Dino Institute as part of Tropical Americas, it's understandable to want a clean slate rather than trying to shoehorn it in to a whole new theme.
 
Last edited:
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
TrainsOfDisney said:
It’s concerning to me that so many have suggested it replace pirates -

Pirates is a fully physical, AA and effects masterpiece.
Click to expand...

Yeah, even the weaker WDW version of Pirates is a better overall attraction than Shanghai Pirates for me -- which isn't a knock on Shanghai Pirates; classic POTC is one of the best rides Disney has ever built.
 
Last edited:
Brer Panther

Brer Panther

Well-Known Member
I'm still doubtful that the Indiana Jones ride will be more popular than Dinosaur simply because of the IP. It'll still have the same location and I'm not sure how popular the IP even is nowadays.
veritas55 said:
I also agree that low wait time / less popular rides are important for a park -- but it's generally a bad business move to have your "less popular rides" be your E-Ticket investments. You don't want heavy investments like Mission:Space and Countdown/ Dinosaur to fill that "less popular" role. That's for things like Little Mermaid, Mater's Junkyard Jamboree, toy story mania, Kali river rapids, etc.
Click to expand...
Two problems with that. One, most if not all of Disney's investments nowadays are E-Tickets. Two, I'd argue that Little Mermaid, Toy Story Mania, and Kali River Rapids are all meant to be E-Tickets too.
 
FigmentFan82

FigmentFan82

Well-Known Member
The problem with Dinosaur for me is that it was so much in the dark and nothing to see, so the whole ride mostly lands flat. I have been fortunate enough to ride Indy in DL and thought it was way more fun than Dino ever was, because you could actually SEE things as you were moving along. I think Indy in AK will feel better than Dino was. My 2 cents.
 
N

Nickm2022

Well-Known Member
TrainsOfDisney said:
Debatable - but I definitely think it’s much better than 7 dwarves mine train.

With everything working it’s certainly close to an E
Click to expand...
TBH I wouldn't consider either a e-ticket. But also I don't think any of us have an agreed upon idea of what an E-ticket is. Bc my personal definition of an e-ticket is the biggest rides when it comes to size and visibility of the attraction. But I also think you could for demand, or for tech, or others and think it's completely valid. imo the only E-ticket AK has is Everest. But again I think you could argue for Dino or 7d and that's valid.
 
V

veritas55

Active Member
UNCgolf said:
Yeah, even the weaker WDW version of Pirates is a better overall attraction than Shanghai Pirates for me -- which isn't a knock on Shanghai Pirates; POTC is one of the best rides Disney has ever built.
Click to expand...

yeah, I can't go that far. The Shanghai Pirates is spectacular and improves on the WDW version. Sure, the back 1/3 is perhaps too "screeny," although the surfacing/ ship appearing effect is nonetheless spectacular.

I would not vote to replace either DL or WDW with Shanghai for various reasons -- but if you forced me to vote on which is the best ride experience, Shanghai might eek out over DL.
 
V

veritas55

Active Member
Brer Panther said:
I'm still doubtful that the Indiana Jones ride will be more popular than Dinosaur simply because of the IP. It'll still have the same location and I'm not sure how popular the IP even is nowadays.

Two problems with that. One, most if not all of Disney's investments nowadays are E-Tickets. Two, I'd argue that Little Mermaid, Toy Story Mania, and Kali River Rapids are all meant to be E-Tickets too.
Click to expand...

First, I don't think the IP is necessarily the main variable that controls popularity: the ride experience is number one. For example, Tower of Terror is immensely popular -- the IP is not strong at all, especially with the younger generation. Big Thunder, Matterhorn Mountain, Space Mountain: all immensely popular. What's their IP?

Indiana Jones is certainly a more popular IP than the Dinosaur movie. And the ride experience can't possibly be worse. I'd be shocked if it doesn't do much, much better than Dinosaur.

Second, i don't believe Disney considered Little Mermaid or Toy Story mania to be e-tickets -- their capital expenditures were a fraction of other true E tickets.
 
D

DisneyFanatic12

Well-Known Member
FigmentFan82 said:
The problem with Dinosaur for me is that it was so much in the dark and nothing to see, so the whole ride mostly lands flat. I have been fortunate enough to ride Indy in DL and thought it was way more fun than Dino ever was, because you could actually SEE things as you were moving along. I think Indy in AK will feel better than Dino was. My 2 cents.
Click to expand...
I think one of the reasons why Dinosaur was one of my favorite attractions was because of the darkness. Everything super interesting was well-lit, but the rest was in darkness and kept you guessing. With each ride-through you could catch a glimpse of a little more of the scenery, and overall it just did a great job at creating its own “world” and immersing me. I genuinely felt like I could hop off the ride and wander in the forest for hours if the ride ever broke down.

Anyways, maybe not as interesting scenery-wise as other attractions were, but I’d argue that it used darkness really well to immerse you more fully and to add to the thrilling nature of the ride.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom