7DMT Animatronics

[MerlinTheGoat]

Did you really compare the 5% of spaceship earth that isn't fully animatronic centered to the almost entirely screen based attractions at Universal?

The rest of that 95% is just what was left over from the original ride from 1982, scenes that by and large aren't new in the slightest and were built back in the glory days. Both what Disney and Universal have built during the past couple of decades have been moving towards more screen based rides. There are a few exceptions for Disney such as Sinbad at Disneysea or others, but again Disney going just as screen crazy as Uni in a ton of new attractions has a lot of accuracy. Even recent rides that are well liked from Disney such as Mystic Manor are heavily screen based (or the disappointing Toy Story Mania which is entirely screen based). You can also look at Mission Space vs Horizons, Soarin vs Food Rocks, Test Track vs World of Motion etc etc. The current version of Imagination has a lot of video screens as well (bad ones too). The Pirates attraction at Hollywood Studios appears to be heavily screen based, and there has been some rumor that the new Pirates at Shanghai Disneyland will be heavily screen based as well.

I love practical physical effects for show scenes and characters and dislike heavy use of video screens myself. And for what it's worth, WDW1974 has said the same exact thing and offered some substantial criticism towards Universal for this in their newer rides (including both Gringotts and the yet to be built Kong). But to bash Universal for such a thing and say Disney hasn't been guilty of some of the same exact things is ridiculous. Gringotts will also probably have a lot of video screens, but they're putting a good amount of AA figures in there as well apparently. The goblin tellers for example, or the fire breathing dragon on top of the bank. I'd imagine there will be a couple of nice figures inside the ride as well.

One nice thing I will say about the Mine Train is that it's so small in scale that there's probably not much space to go crazy on video screens in the first place. And except for the faces it would be inappropriate for such a ride to project the scenery and characters.

 

[Figment2005]

The rest of that 95% is just what was left over from the original ride from 1982, scenes that by and large aren't new in the slightest and were built back in the glory days. Both what Disney and Universal have built during the past couple of decades have been moving towards more screen based rides. There are a few exceptions for Disney such as Sinbad at Disneysea or others, but again Disney going just as screen crazy as Uni in a ton of new attractions has a lot of accuracy. Even recent rides that are well liked from Disney such as Mystic Manor are heavily screen based (or the disappointing Toy Story Mania which is entirely screen based). You can also look at Mission Space vs Horizons, Soarin vs Food Rocks, Test Track vs World of Motion etc etc. The current version of Imagination has a lot of video screens as well (bad ones too). The Pirates attraction at Hollywood Studios appears to be heavily screen based, and there has been some rumor that the new Pirates at Shanghai Disneyland will be heavily screen based as well.

I love practical physical effects for show scenes and characters and dislike heavy use of video screens myself. And for what it's worth, WDW1974 has said the same exact thing and offered some substantial criticism towards Universal for this in their newer rides (including both Gringotts and the yet to be built Kong). But to bash Universal for such a thing and say Disney hasn't been guilty of some of the same exact things is ridiculous. Gringotts will also probably have a lot of video screens, but they're putting a good amount of AA figures in there as well apparently. The goblin tellers for example, or the fire breathing dragon on top of the bank. I'd imagine there will be a couple of nice figures inside the ride as well.

My comment was not focused on using or not using screen based attractions at either park, it was more focused on the fact that an attraction which has probably the best maintained animatronics on property was being compared to screen based attractions simply because of the decent. And honestly, Uni is not very good with animatronics.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

My comment was not focused on using or not using screen based attractions at either park, it was more focused on the fact that an attraction which has probably the best maintained animatronics on property was being compared to screen based attractions simply because of the decent. And honestly, Uni is not very good with animatronics.

The SSE comment was made to show how Disney has also been skewing heavily towards projected show elements now. And in SSE's case, a badly done one. What was already there before the 2007 overhaul can hardly be used as an argument to say Disney is still dedicated to physical show sets and figures (and what they did in the 2007 version is a definite downgrade to what was implemented in '94). And this goes doubly when you consider that when Project Gemini was on the table, the original plan for Spaceship Earth was that they were going to gut the inside of SSE entirely (removing all show scenes) and convert the show building into a projection-based roller coaster. Thank god that never happened, but that will tell you where Disney has stood regarding physical show scenes for a long time now. Hell, as awesome as Pooh's Hunny Hunt is regarding its animatronic figures, even it has a major show scene with Tigger that is just a video screen. Disney too has been going heavily towards screen based attractions over the course of the past two decades now, new large scale animatronics heavy rides have been few and far between. I'd say Sinbad at Disneysea may have even been a "last of its kind" attraction similar to the sort of physical AA heavy rides they used to create in the early 90's and prior.

Both Disney and Universal now use the same external manufacturer for animatronics- Garner Holt. There's hardly any cause anymore to give one company credit over the other in regards to how good they are, neither are making them anymore now that Disney has shut down their in-house AA creation department. If there's ever an impressive figure made for either company, it's by Garner Holt and that's where the credit goes.

 

[spacemt354]

The rest of that 95% is just what was left over from the original ride from 1982, scenes that by and large aren't new in the slightest and were built back in the glory days. Both what Disney and Universal have built during the past couple of decades have been moving towards more screen based rides. There are a few exceptions for Disney such as Sinbad at Disneysea or others, but again Disney going just as screen crazy as Uni in a ton of new attractions has a lot of accuracy. Even recent rides that are well liked from Disney such as Mystic Manor are heavily screen based (or the disappointing Toy Story Mania which is entirely screen based). You can also look at Mission Space vs Horizons, Soarin vs Food Rocks, Test Track vs World of Motion etc etc. The current version of Imagination has a lot of video screens as well (bad ones too). The Pirates attraction at Hollywood Studios appears to be heavily screen based, and there has been some rumor that the new Pirates at Shanghai Disneyland will be heavily screen based as well.

I love practical physical effects for show scenes and characters and dislike heavy use of video screens myself. And for what it's worth, WDW1974 has said the same exact thing and offered some substantial criticism towards Universal for this in their newer rides (including both Gringotts and the yet to be built Kong). But to bash Universal for such a thing and say Disney hasn't been guilty of some of the same exact things is ridiculous. Gringotts will also probably have a lot of video screens, but they're putting a good amount of AA figures in there as well apparently. The goblin tellers for example, or the fire breathing dragon on top of the bank. I'd imagine there will be a couple of nice figures inside the ride as well.

SSE was not the same ride from 1982. Not only was the narration changed but AAs were enhanced and show scenes added to include a 70s computer scene and the garage in California scene.

To say Disney has gone screen crazy is a bit excessive in my view. Sure, there are examples of Disney using screens for attractions, but there is a difference between using screens and relying on screens. It seems Uni, for as good as it has been over the last few years, is relying on screens. Aside from simply renaming two attractions in WWoHP (Dueling dragons and Flight of the Hippogriff), their big name additions over the last few years, on both coasts, have relied on screens.

Forbidden Journey, Despicable Me, Transformers, and now Gringotts, Hogwarts Express, and possibly Kong?

Mission: Space has been bashed for its intensity and screens which can cause nausea if simply looking away. So much so that they had to open a tamer version of the ride. Screen based rides can do that to people, and that is why a lot of members of my family cannot enjoy the main attractions in Uni because the screens make them nauseous. So I think if Mission: Space got the criticism (it still does) it is fair game for Uni's new rides such as Transformers.

The "screen" issue becomes more noticeable when the top tier new attractions at Uni (you know the ones people want to experience) are all reliant on screens and intense motion simulation. Does Disney have screens? Absolutely. But at Disney is it an issue where some people cannot ride "any" new rides? Not as much.

 

[Figment2005]

The SSE comment was made to show how Disney has also been skewing heavily towards projected show elements now. And in SSE's case, a badly done one. What was already there before the 2007 overhaul can hardly be used as an argument to say Disney is still dedicated to physical show sets and figures (and what they did in the 2007 version is a definite downgrade to what was implemented in '94). And this goes doubly when you consider that when Project Gemini was on the table, the original plan for Spaceship Earth was that they were going to gut the inside of SSE entirely (removing all show scenes) and convert the show building into a projection-based roller coaster. Thank god that never happened, but that will tell you where Disney has stood regarding physical show scenes for a long time now. Hell, as awesome as Pooh's Hunny Hunt is regarding its animatronic figures, even it has a major show scene with Tigger that is just a video screen. Disney too has been going heavily towards screen based attractions over the course of the past two decades now, new large scale animatronics heavy rides have been few and far between. I'd say Sinbad at Disneysea may have even been a "last of its kind" attraction similar to the sort of physical AA heavy rides they used to create in the early 90's and prior.

Both Disney and Universal now use the same external manufacturer for animatronics- Garner Holt. There's hardly any cause anymore to give one company credit over the other in regards to how good they are, neither are making them anymore now that Disney has shut down their in-house AA creation department. If there's ever an impressive figure made for either company, it's by Garner Holt and that's where the credit goes.

I still understand your point, but your seem to still be missing mine. You are using an attraction that happens to use a touchscreen on a 2 minute portion of a 15 minute ride, and then comparing it to attractions in Universal that use screens 95% and actual sets 5%. (estimated of course) I wouldn't be arguing with you if you had used an attraction that was screen based like... let me see... Soarin, TSMM, Star Tours.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

At least there won't be any screen based rides in Pandora.

What? Really? Oh.......ok......never mind.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

I am aware of what has changed about SSE over the years (I rode all versions from '91 and after). The ride has undergone some changes and enhancements over the ages (or downgrades in regards to the descent in 2007), but the ride's new show elements since 2007 definitely do show how Disney has shifted their priorities.

I'm fine with complaints about screen based rides. But my complaints do not stem from getting motion sick, I don't have that problem at all usually. I like seeing physical show elements and figures far better (even as a young child I was less impressed by heavily screen based rides like Star Tours or the Mexico one than others using physical show scenes). I think seeing a physical show scene with actual AA figures simply looks better than being carted through empty rooms with video screens. I think that Disney is escalating to the same thing that Universal has, and has been for some time (though their usage of screens are far below par with what Universal has achieved with Harry Potter). They're using more and more projections all the time, and generally fewer and fewer physical AA's or show scenes (and the elimination of their in-house AA creation department and outside contracting to Garner Holt isn't very promising either). Even some of their greater efforts recently such as Mystic Manor have been heavily screen based throughout and had far fewer AA figures than what they used to create.

Pandora's "E ticket" is going to be a simulator, and it remains to be seen what the boat ride will use for show scenes. The Shanghai Disney rides have yet to be seen to the public, but there are rumors that Pirates is potentially using less physical show scenes than previous versions. Probably newer non-cloned rides original to the park will also be skewed heavily to projections.

I still understand your point, but your seem to still be missing mine. You are using an attraction that happens to use a touchscreen on a 2 minute portion of a 15 minute ride, and then comparing it to attractions in Universal that use screens 95% and actual sets 5%. (estimated of course) I wouldn't be arguing with you if you had used an attraction that was screen based like... let me see... Soarin, TSMM, Star Tours.

I did mention those rides though, did you not read my posts? I'm not missing your point at all. What you're missing is WHEN these rides were created. SSE is again using infrastructure which is still traced directly back to 1982, back when Disney still used tons of physical show sets and impressive AA's. The original AA figures HAVE been upgraded over the years, but there's a huge difference between plussing a ride's already existing assets and creating new scenes (or rides) from scratch. By and far the general consensus about the 2007 refurb in regards to the show scenes is that the first 3/4 of the ride were just fine (even an improvement in ways), but the descent of the ride (the part where the most changes happened to the ride's scenes) crapped itself.

And of the rides that are actually new or original (not including clones or plusses of pre existing ones), even some of the better ones in the past two decades have been going more and more towards screens. Toy Story Mania is a lesser example which is entirely screen based (badly done), but even again Mystic Manor has a massive emphasis on screens. Pandora's headliner will probably be all screens as well.

For the record- I generally like to leave Uni out of my posts having not had the chance to experience it in person yet. I tend to compare Disney to its own legacy instead. Easier for me because I visited WDW in the early 90's and know what they used to be capable of back in the "good old days". Like Lee, I am actually pretty pleased with these dwarf figures and think they'll do their job. My complaints were stated before, but they're largely due to the inflated hype, budget and construction period more than anything.

 

[Magenta Panther]

I don't think the faces are just projections. Look at grumpy in particular. As grumpys cheek bone goes up, does the layer its been projected on move with it? Because that's what it looks like to me.

I think his face looks weird too, although in that scene it's mostly in shadow.

 

[Magenta Panther]

That would seem to be a no-brainer....so probably not.

Too bad. PPF is, as I'm sure you know, pretty popular. Plussing that into something spectacular would indeed be a no-brainer...and not much of a risk either. (muttering) God I hate Iger...

 

[Magenta Panther]

Can we please see an upgrade to Peter Pan's Flight?

That depends on what you mean by "upgrade". Supposedly, the new Hitchhiking Ghosts in Haunted Mansion are an upgrade...but what they are in reality are fuzzy, unimpressive animation that doesn't look the least bit convincing and have little impact because everything happens so quickly. The old version was superior in every way. The Ghosts looked like they were actually in the buggies with you, and the gag wasn't killed by superfluous action. The CGI animation for the new Ghosts doesn't fit in with the rest of the Mansion. It's worse than the new Constance in the attic scene.

 

[GoofGoof]

Very probable. The mine train was in some ways a test to see if it could be done well and on a reasonable budget.
I don't expect a sweeping change to this tech for existing rides, but some isolated applications are certainly on the table.

Last question, I promise. Is the main advantage of the projection technology that it is significantly cheaper to build and more importantly maintain than building full blown AAs which have moving faces? Seems like this is a compromise between just screen based sets with no physical characters and full blown AAs. Maybe I'm off base on this line of thinking, but something whylightbulb posted in Spirit's thread about Universal's growing dependence on screens led me down this line of thought. It was a great post so I suggest everyone check it out if you haven't already. To sum it up he was saying the cost to maintain rides with a large number of physical AAs is very high and some higher ups at Universal are leaning towards more and more screen based sets to bring down the maintenance costs. Disney would face this same issue so maybe they are trending more to a hybrid projection/AA ride as opposed to a mostly screen based ride. I think this works well with cartoon characters and will probably work with blue aliens who are all CGI based anyway, but it probably won't translate well to something like Pirates with human based AAs.

 

[MerlinTheGoat]

One potentially positive thing I will say about the projected faces- they'll most likely look better in person than they do in these videos. Projected video never looks right when recorded. Anyone who has ever tried to take footage of projected video (no matter how good the camera) will tell you that it usually doesn't work out well at all. With the right quality of camera and proper lighting, it's quite possible to video practical effects such as fully physical AA's in an accurate manner. Even the ancient World of Color episodes using 60's TV cameras pretty accurately captured the quality of Walt's old AA's. But projected video pretty much never looks right when captured on camera, even with the latest and greatest camera technology. We've got decent ride through video footage of even long gone EPCOT rides, but there's still not any good quality videos of projection heavy attractions such as Forbidden Journey and whatnot. The lighting and crispness of projected effects are far better in person (provided again the effect is properly maintained), and you don't get nearly as much of that odd flickering that is often seen in video taped projections.

Maintenance is still a grave concern though. We've seen how horrible Disney's track record is with projection effects in other attractions at WDW. Including other New Fantasyland effects such as the Wardrobe and apparently Lumiere (i've also heard the magical rose wasn't looking very good recently and don't know whether it's fixed yet). Davy Jones and Blackbeard looked AWFUL for ages before they did anything to fix it. Not to mention the continual state of disrepair Soarin's video has been in for years now. American Adventure still seems to have respectably maintained animatronic figures, but its projected sequences are also in disrepair.

 

[spacemt354]

I'm fine with complaints about screen based rides. But my complaints do not stem from getting motion sick, I don't have that problem at all usually. I like seeing physical show elements and figures far better (even as a young child I was less impressed by heavily screen based rides like Star Tours or the Mexico one than others using physical show scenes).

I like physical show elements as well. The reason I had brought up motion sickness because it is a concern that is elevated when motion based screens are implemented at such a great capacity.

For the record- I generally like to leave Uni out of my posts having not had the chance to experience it in person yet. I tend to compare Disney to its own legacy instead.

Personally, I hate the Disney vs. Uni argument. I think it's a waste of time because there are very passionate fans on both sides who are loyal to their favorite resort. You can argue whatever points you want, but rarely are you going to change the opinion of a fan, regardless of logic.

I have had the luxury of visiting WDW much more often than Uni, but I don't really have a loyalty to one anymore that would prevent a logical argument from swaying my opinion. I think there are pros and cons to both resorts. One of the cons to Uni is their reliance on screens. Yes, Disney uses screens too, no denying that. However when the "must-see" E-tickets are screen reliant and can cause motion sickness, that's an issue to me. While rides such as Star Tours and TSMM use screens, I'd hardly put them in the E-ticket level category of Forbidden Journey and (what sounds like) the Gringotts ride.

 

[raymusiccity]

Or they will just throw a bag over their heads like they did with Madame Wardrobe.

I think you're missing the point that she was just imitating a Chicago Cubs fan for the day !

 

[rioriz]

Honestly, complain a lot about Disney not doing anything innovative but they are the first to use this tech (first in Cars) so lets not complain that much

 

[Marc Gil]

So.... Um... How 'bout those Animatronics?

 

[Sevier]

The rest of that 95% is just what was left over from the original ride from 1982, scenes that by and large aren't new in the slightest and were built back in the glory days. Both what Disney and Universal have built during the past couple of decades have been moving towards more screen based rides. There are a few exceptions for Disney such as Sinbad at Disneysea or others, but again Disney going just as screen crazy as Uni in a ton of new attractions has a lot of accuracy. Even recent rides that are well liked from Disney such as Mystic Manor are heavily screen based (or the disappointing Toy Story Mania which is entirely screen based). You can also look at Mission Space vs Horizons, Soarin vs Food Rocks, Test Track vs World of Motion etc etc. The current version of Imagination has a lot of video screens as well (bad ones too). The Pirates attraction at Hollywood Studios appears to be heavily screen based, and there has been some rumor that the new Pirates at Shanghai Disneyland will be heavily screen based as well.

I love practical physical effects for show scenes and characters and dislike heavy use of video screens myself. And for what it's worth, WDW1974 has said the same exact thing and offered some substantial criticism towards Universal for this in their newer rides (including both Gringotts and the yet to be built Kong). But to bash Universal for such a thing and say Disney hasn't been guilty of some of the same exact things is ridiculous. Gringotts will also probably have a lot of video screens, but they're putting a good amount of AA figures in there as well apparently. The goblin tellers for example, or the fire breathing dragon on top of the bank. I'd imagine there will be a couple of nice figures inside the ride as well.

One nice thing I will say about the Mine Train is that it's so small in scale that there's probably not much space to go crazy on video screens in the first place. And except for the faces it would be inappropriate for such a ride to project the scenery and characters.

"Disapointing" is very much your opinion on toy story mania. According to everyone I've ridden the attraction with, it is anything but disappointing. In fact, it's my wife's favorite attraction in all of WDW.

 

[Gabe1]

Well I missed the video being distracted being in the World.

Mixed emotions dancing in my head. The projections are cute and quaint but Oh Boy! my imagination spurred from the concept drawings wasn't this over the last few years. My imagination had all sorts of Animatronics similar to Splash bouncing in my head.

We were on Haunted Mansion many times over our trip and those projections joining us in the buggy at the end were not operating correctly our entire trip.

Going to take a little bit to wipe my imagination of Animatronics and to get excited and onboard with projections instead.

 

[wm49rs]

"Disapointing" is very much your opinion on toy story mania. According to everyone I've ridden the attraction with, it is anything but disappointing. In fact, it's my wife's favorite attraction in all of WDW.

And where did he say it wasn't?

 

[Lee]

Last question, I promise. Is the main advantage of the projection technology that it is significantly cheaper to build and more importantly maintain than building full blown AAs which have moving faces? Seems like this is a compromise between just screen based sets with no physical characters and full blown AAs. Maybe I'm off base on this line of thinking, but something whylightbulb posted in Spirit's thread about Universal's growing dependence on screens led me down this line of thought. It was a great post so I suggest everyone check it out if you haven't already. To sum it up he was saying the cost to maintain rides with a large number of physical AAs is very high and some higher ups at Universal are leaning towards more and more screen based sets to bring down the maintenance costs. Disney would face this same issue so maybe they are trending more to a hybrid projection/AA ride as opposed to a mostly screen based ride. I think this works well with cartoon characters and will probably work with blue aliens who are all CGI based anyway, but it probably won't translate well to something like Pirates with human based AAs.

Nah...it's not that much cheaper. It's just a step forward (a small one) in the evolution of AAs. Maybe not even forward...more of a step sideways.

One concern I have...what happens when the projection system fails? A blank face? How many have to go out before the ride goes 101?