"Adios" El Rio del Tiempo!

[Victor]

not me... :lookaroun *sings* "My little buttercup...":lol:

Yeah, I'd rather see a Three Amigos ride than the Three Caballeros...

"It's a mail plane."
"How can you tell?"
"Didn't you notice it's little balls?"

:lol:

 

[planet7]

Just prior to M:S's opening. With massive walls covering most of Future World East and the whole figment debacle fresh in the public's mind the park was not bringing in guests. Attendance went below MGM.

What you're talking about is a temporary blip, due to attraction closures. That's to be expected. What I keep reading, regarding EPCOT Center's attendance (it was not longer EPCOT Center by then), was that the original park had dramatically slipped in attendance, due--or so the story goes--to original EPCOT Center being dated.

As I said, I wasn't there for several years. But when I did visit, I just never saw this attendance drop of mythic proportions. I think that more likely, the truth of the matter is, that it simply didn't do as well as the Magic Kingdom. See my prior post on "Cola Wars".

G7

 

[Main Street USA]

Yeah, I'd rather see a Three Amigos ride than the Three Caballeros...

"It's a mail plane."
"How can you tell?"
"Didn't you notice it's little balls?"

:lol:

Ah, yes!

Wherever there is injustice, you will find us!
Wherever there is suffering, we'll be there!
Wherever liberty is threatened, you will find...
The Three Amigos!

 

[AEfx]

All of this in a thread with El Rio in the title? You bet. It happens all the time on these forums, and I know that you know it does. Not sure why you jumped on me for simply replying to another's post about Epcot as a whole.

Ay yi yi...Still backpedaling? I'm sorry, but while I appriciate the thoughtfulness of your last post I'm not going to let you pretend that you were just minding your own business when suddenly people began to give you a hard time for no reason. Starting a fire and then saying, "Who, me?" is only cute if you are Dennis the Menace.

You didn't reply to someone's posting about "Epcot as a whole". If that was your intention, you didn't follow through very well. I followed the conversation just nicely, thank you, in spite of your repeated attempts to say I somehow don't get what was going on or that your original posting was something it did not.

In fact, there are no quotes in your original posting to this thread. How is it "obvious" what you were referring to, when you don't quote anyone, and just jump into a thread about a rehab with a rant about the ruination of Epcot and how "the slow people have spoken!"...and we aren't supposed to think the two are connected? Come on. We're all brighter than that.

You jumped in, made an emotional rant that wasn't entirely relevant, and just can't admit it. So please stop acting like I'm inventing your overreaction, and you can stop trying to rewrite what you said...it's here in plain text for anyone to read. And I'm not the only one who felt it was out of place, as other replies to this thread confirm, including those from moderators.

Regardless, it's great that you can admit that you love Epcot. It certainly has changed, but not as drastically as some people would have you believe. Epcot was never a University, nor was it ever intended to be from the moment the Disney company broke ground on it. Educational themes are great, and still abound at Epcot. However, the dry, dated presentation of them is gone, and the park that was falling apart a decade ago is being resurged. Anything "lost" has simply been in the minds of Internet fans who paint a nostalgic picture that never really existed in the first place of an idealized concept that was simply unsustainable.

AEfx

 

[Victor]

Regardless, it's great that you can admit that you love Epcot. It certainly has changed, but not as drastically as some people would have you believe.

Are you being serious? :lookaroun The park has changed pretty drastically. If you think otherwise, you're living in a fantasy world. Here is a list of what has come and gone: Communicore, Horizons, World of Motion, Kitchen Kabaret, Food Rocks, The Living Seas, Wonders of Life (almost there), Journey Into Imagination (the original, the only one that matters), the original Universe of Energy...and there is more.

But you're right. It hasn't 'changed as drastically as some people would lead you to believe'. It's all part of some conspiracy...

However, the dry, dated presentation of them is gone, and the park that was falling apart a decade ago is being resurged.

Journey Into Imagination was far more entertaining and less dry than what replaced it. World of Motion was anything but dry, it was sight gag after sight gag. I'll give you Universe of Energy...

Anything "lost" has simply been in the minds of Internet fans who paint a nostalgic picture that never really existed in the first place.

I love how you try and make it seem like the EPCOT Center many love and remember is just a figment of our imagination (no pun intended). Memories exist for a reason. Look back at literature and guide books about EPCOT Center in 1982, the place you see described and the entusiasm for it is far from what exists today. If EPCOT Center didn't work for you, that's ok, I get it. But don't be an a____________ and tell others what they remember never existed, just because you want to further your self-righteous agenda.

So eat some of your own signature: ""Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."

 

[DKampy]

It certainly has changed, but not as drastically as some people would have you believe. Epcot was never a University, nor was it ever intended to be from the moment the Disney company broke ground on it. Educational themes are great, and still abound at Epcot. However, the dry, dated presentation of them is gone, and the park that was falling apart a decade ago is being resurged. Anything "lost" has simply been in the minds of Internet fans who paint a nostalgic picture that never really existed in the first place of an idealized concept that was simply unsustainable.

AEfx

I could not have said it better myself. Epcot Center was fine as it was when it first opened. I enjoyed it then. Even when everyone else my age at the time said it was "dull and boring." I was 11 at the time. However Epcot needed a change. It was feeling very dated. I think the changes thus far have been a positive one. It is the Disney Purist who are still holding on to the past. There is education still to be found. Perhaps even more educational value. If someone is enjoying themself then he/she will tend to remember it...including what they may have learned.

Not to mention it is bringing more people into the park. That is Disney's ultimate goal. They are still a business...besides they are not even losing any of the people who complain....since all of you will probably go reguardless.

 

[AEfx]

Are you being serious? :lookaroun The park has changed pretty drastically. If you think otherwise, you're living in a fantasy world. Here is a list of what has come and gone: Communicore, Horizons, World of Motion, Kitchen Kabaret, Food Rocks, The Living Seas, Wonders of Life (almost there), Journey Into Imagination (the original, the only one that matters), the original Universe of Energy...and there is more.

But you're right. It hasn't 'changed as drastically as some people would lead you to believe'. It's all part of some conspiracy...

You mean like the conspiracy so-called "traditionalists" like yourself seem to believe is destroying "their" Epcot?

I didn't say attractions hadn't come and gone. I simply said that it has not changed as drastically as some people (like yourself) would have people believe in theme, not that it hasn't undergone transformations.

If one knew nothing about Epcot, and then read some of your posts, they'd think that Epcot was a collection of classrooms and that the entire thing was geared toward education. That doesn't mean it didn't strive to be educational, but it was never the bastion of knowledge that some people like to think it was.

Journey Into Imagination was far more entertaining and less dry than what replaced it. World of Motion was anything but dry, it was sight gag after sight gag. I'll give you Universe of Energy...

As I've said in many of my previous posts, I enjoyed WoM. I also liked the original JIY. But they were NOT these strictly educational attractions people make them out to be.

I love how you try and make it seem like the EPCOT Center many love and remember is just a figment of our imagination (no pun intended). Memories exist for a reason. Look back at literature and guide books about EPCOT Center in 1982, the place you see described and the entusiasm for it is far from what exists today. If EPCOT Center didn't work for you, that's ok, I get it. But don't be an a____________ and tell others what they remember never existed, just because you want to further your self-righteous agenda.

Yup, EXACTLY my point : look back at the LITERATURE AND GUIDE BOOKS. The marketing material. Epcot was INITIALLY marketed as this broad educational concept that people like yourself latched on to.

Just like the "real working studio" part of MGM, that educational intention proved to not work in a theme park environment (as I and others have previously discussed here) and Epcot evolved. It could never sustain that "World's Fair" thing without spending 100's of millions of dollars redoing every attraction every year.

I have no "self-rightous agenda" - it's ironic that someone who defends this concept of a park that was presented some 25 years ago and didn't even last through the first decade would say that to me.

So eat some of your own signature: ""Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."

Eat it? LOL, aren't we pleasant. Guess I hit a nerve with the truths of the matter.

You have this idealized theme park in your head that no, never existed. You bought into a marketing idea that never really panned out. Again, I *LOVED* Horizons and WoM. But if that is your definition of "educational", again, it's you who are looking at this the way you wish to further your own agenda.

I don't have an agenda here - I really like Epcot, and all the changes from the 80's until now. I liked the old Epcot, because it was right for a certain time and place, and then it sat still while the world moved on. I miss a few old favorites, but time marches on.

It's you that can't let go. We can sit in 1982, talking about what the pamphlets told you the park was like, or we can live in the present reality. I know which one I choose, and it seems that is the opposite of what you do.

AEfx

 

[Victor]

You have this idealized theme park in your head that no, never existed. You bought into a marketing idea that never really panned out. Again, I *LOVED* Horizons and WoM. But if that is your definition of "educational", again, it's you who are looking at this the way you wish to further your own agenda.

I don't have an agenda here - I really like Epcot, and all the changes from the 80's until now. I liked the old Epcot, because it was right for a certain time and place, and then it sat still while the world moved on. I miss a few old favorites, but time marches on.

It's you that can't let go. We can sit in 1982, talking about what the pamphlets told you the park was like, or we can live in the present reality. I know which one I choose, and it seems that is the opposite of what you do.

AEfx

You keep mentioning 'educational' when I've never been one to harp about the educational aspect and I haven't. Like I've said before, I think there is a place for what used to be and what is. EPCOT Center made an attempt to deliver a message, not necessarily educate, I 'got' the message, maybe you did too, but many others didn't. I didn't rely on literature to tell me what it was all about, I understood it without it. But my point is that Epcot used to be aiming for something.

I don't mind change, but believe there are different ways to go about it. Yes, I think that there are great things that have been done at Epcot: Soarin', Energy '96, and regardless of how I feel about their predecessors, Test Track and Mission: Space are top notch attractions.

EPCOT Center didwork for many, and for some it didn't, same goes for the current state of the park. I defend it because I believe it is worth defending. So I respect your opinion...but no, it isn't all in my head. So as far as making anymore comments about EPCOT Center and the changes since, I'm gonna stop here, because the debate could go back and forth without end. To each his own, and that's the way it is.

 

[AEfx]

But my point is that Epcot used to be aiming for something.

And my point is simply that that "something" was an abstract concept that people ran off with on their own, that wasn't actually supported by the attractions that were there, and the attempts to achieve ended up leaving the place stagnant.

It was an abstract idea, not the basis for a sustainable theme park.

AEfx

 

[planet7]

Yup, EXACTLY my point : look back at the LITERATURE AND GUIDE BOOKS. The marketing material. Epcot was INITIALLY marketed as this broad educational concept that people like yourself latched on to.

I can't speak for anyone else, but here's my experience. I visited EPCOT Center on October 1, 2, and 3, 1982. Fresh out of the cellophane. I visited countess times after. I worked there from '87 to '89. I think that's as much of a first-hand experience as one can expect to have, seeing it as both guest and Cast Member in its heyday. And I'll tell you in no uncertain terms, that EPCOT has lost its soul. It's not just about the loss of individual attractions, much as those hurt. It's about cohesion, purpose, and vision. The current Epcot has none.

In "Future World" we have an attraction about present-day automotive technologies and testing procedures. Next to it, what once was the synthesis of all the Future World themes (back when it had themes) in a compelling, inspiring, family-friendly presentation, has been replaced with a fun, but highly forgettable ride that many are rightly afraid of. Skip an unused pavilion (do you remember any time prior to the 90's, when they just closed buildings with no plans for repurposing them? I don't) and you have a dated show based on pop culture characters of the time--and not especially compelling ones at that. Why does a company that's so averse to "keeping up with the future" install pop references that they know (or should know) are going to be dated in a few years? Make your way around to a once glorious Spaceship Earth, now festooned with a hideous and incongruous Mickey hand and wand, venture inside to see its attraction in tatters, then get shunted around plywood walls, encircling what once was a lively and inviting space. If you can bear to go on after that, there's The Living Seas, which I can only hope has improved some with the Nemo overlay, though I'm not sure that it can justify the cheap blue paint job, barely disguising the once futuristic (but admittedly now dated) interior. The Land has inexplicably become The Airport, with a cheap airport-themed overlay that pales in comparison to many real airports. Circle of Life still chugs along (I believe) in a hopelessly dumbed-down nod to the elegant (and dare I say, educational) Symbiosis. I haven't been on Land Boats since they lost live CM's, but it's a personal touch that must be sorely missed. Soarin' is--I know it's blasphemy, but I'll say it--a snooze. And Imag--well, there just aren't words for what's happened to that.

In between, these disjointed, ugly, and wholly pointless "adventures", you can sneak into Innoventions for a hefty dose of claustrophobia, chaos, darkness, and dated technology.

Yep, EPCOT has come a long way all right. I'm all for keeping EPCOT fresh, relevant, and updated--but it is NONE of those things. Nor, as I said, is there any cohesion, vision, or purpose. It's a random mix-mash of largely half-hearted "fixes", often for things that didn't need fixing to begin with.

G7

 

[planet7]

And my point is simply that that "something" was an abstract concept that people ran off with on their own, that wasn't actually supported by the attractions that were there,

That is stinking, steaming, pile of utter BS (and I mean that in the nicest possible way). But for the sake of argument, I'll give you that for the moment. So what concept or purpose does Epcot represent now? The future? Please don't make my brain hemmorage by saying "yes". Adventure? Uh-huh. Like Test Track is that different from the drive on I-4, or that we can forget that our big "adventure" in Mission: Space was an utterly pointless trip to nowhere, when they go out of their way to say it in so many words. How about the disjointed Snoozin'? That could be a great ride, with a decent film. Of course, it doesn't have one yet, so we can only speculate there. The rest--well, read my previous post.

G7

 

[AEfx]

And I'll tell you in no uncertain terms, that EPCOT has lost its soul.

And that's your opinion, one you are entitled to. A "soul" of a theme park is certainly such an abstract concept that it's not something that can be solved on a message board.

However, another statement you made really stuck with me - about seeing Epcot "fresh out of the cellophane".

Yes, I'm sure it was amazing and brand new and exciting and felt somehow ethereal - just like when a kid gets a new toy. Then, after awhile, once reality sets in, and the cellophane is long in the trash, and the original flaws that were always there but ignored because of the "bright shiny new" packaging, the new toy isn't so amazing.

Epcot was new and relevant and exciting when it opened, and then over time it's flaws became apparent as it grew out of that infant stage into it's toddler years. And you are correct that they have had to make a lot of "fixes", but they weren't made for no reason. Just like a baby who is just adorable and wonderful and then becomes a two-year old with "I want" and "GIMMIES!", when Epcot began to mature it became stagnant.

I understand people are passionate about what Epcot meant to them, but I think what is missing from that viewpoint is that the idealized version that some people felt (the "soul") was there really wasn't. Yes, I loved WoM and Horizons because I love dark rides and I'd give anything to have them back...but I understood why they went. Horizons simply couldn't be sustained to keep up with the world it tried to present (as the horizon on those concepts change every minute, let alone in attraction refurb cycles), and while WoM was a great history lesson and a beautiful ride, it wasn't exactly profound.

I hate the wand too, but people act as if Disney went in and raped some Epcot that it was sold as in it's initial few years. The "World's Fair" thing just was not sustainable, but for a few golden years it worked. Then when the park had to stand on it's own, and not ride on the coattails of "NEW NEW NEW", we found out it was crippled by the very concepts it tried to present.

I'm sorry Epcot isn't what you believe it used to be. I guess I just don't see the point of bellyaching over it, you either like to go there or you don't, but then again, this is a Disney message board, so I understand. I'm far from a Disney apologist (hey, I put in bold earlier in this thread "Disney lied to you", LOL), but I can't help but see the evolution of Epcot as just that : evolution and not some abstract loss of "soul".

AEfx

 

[AEfx]

That is stinking, steaming, pile of utter BS (and I mean that in the nicest possible way). But for the sake of argument, I'll give you that for the moment. So what concept or purpose does Epcot represent now?

It's still finding it's identity.

I didn't say Epcot was perfect, or that it was fully formed.

What I did say is that the initial box it tried to create for itself to live in simply didn't pan out. They've been stuck trying to find that new identity ever since the first one tanked.

I don't have all the answers, but I experienced the same Epcot as you did, and I see evolution. You see destruction. I guess that's where we differ.

AEfx

 

[planet7]

abstract concept that it's not something that can be solved on a message board.

I think it was a Supreme Court justice who once said of , that he "couldn't define it", but he "knows when he sees it". You may not be able to define the "soul" of a theme park, but that doesn't make it any less real. The reality is, that if Imagineers are doing their jobs right--which they did with EPCOT Center--the experience is far beyond anything that the Guest can define.

Yes, I'm sure it was amazing and brand new and exciting and felt somehow ethereal - just like when a kid gets a new toy. Then, after awhile, once reality sets in, and the cellophane is long in the trash, and the original flaws that were always there but ignored because of the "bright shiny new" packaging, the new toy isn't so amazing.

You don't see the flaws in a park any more than you do when working it. I worked all over the park, I saw just about every wart there is, and I still loved it. And it still had cohesion, vision, and purpose--those magical three things that you didn't bother to address. Those three things that make it a theme park, not just a random collection of rirdes.

I guess I just don't see the point of bellyaching over it, you either like to go there or you don't

1) I only responded to your message; so if--as you're suggesting--I'm wasting my time, then I'm only following your lead

2) Enough of the "take it or leave it" business already. Read my prior post, about the reality that no one is likely to ever create anything of the caliber of Disney's earlier creations again. So I have to count on Disney to get it right.

evolution of Epcot as just that : evolution and not some abstract loss of "soul".AEfx

An "evolution" leads to the strengthening of a species or organism. What has been done with Epcot is retrograde, de-evolution. I guess it's appropriate to a de-evolution obsessed society. Maybe it is "Future World" after all.

G7

 

[marni1971]

I can't wait until the traditionalists realize that the "slow" people only look slow because they are moving so fast....

HEY! Not all `traditionalists` do.

Maybe they`ll hang a banner for the ride from the wand whilst they`re at it. Finish the job properly.

Another case of a hundered and one ways to give the attraction a much needed makeover. Pick one that `Fantasylands` it (no disrespect to Fantasyland!)

 

[planet7]

It's still finding it's identity. I didn't say Epcot was perfect, or that it was fully formed.

I've worked in software development most of my adult life. A really popular practice--which I thoroughly despise, both as a consummate professional and a consumer of software alike--is to release applications long before the technology behind them has sufficiently matured (see Microsoft). Consumers pay outrageous prices for things that aren't fully developed yet and may never be. Obviously, we've been conditioned to accept this not only in software, but in theme parks as well.

The reality is, Epcot was "fully formed" when it opened. It is not now, and there clearly is absolutely no plan in place to render it "fully formed".

What I did say is that the initial box it tried to create for itself to live in simply didn't pan out.

According to who? The throngs of guests who supposedly quit going? Again, I'm still not sure if I buy that myth.


G7

 

[AEfx]

I think it was a Supreme Court justice who once said of , that he "couldn't define it", but he "knows when he sees it". You may not be able to define the "soul" of a theme park, but that doesn't make it any less real. The reality is, that if Imagineers are doing their jobs right--which they did with EPCOT Center--the experience is far beyond anything that the Guest can define.

Your opinion. It's a feeling. You found it enriching; many people found it cold and uninviting.

You don't see the flaws in a park any more than you do when working it. I worked all over the park, I saw just about every wart there is, and I still loved it. And it still had cohesion, vision, and purpose--those magical three things that you didn't bother to address. Those three things that make it a theme park, not just a random collection of rirdes.

You are missing the point. I'm not talking about operational flaws a CM would find.

What you saw as a cohesive, visionary, purposeful experience was evocative of a TIME AND PLACE, not the theme park itself. The designs of the attractions (how quickly they became outdated) were flawed in terms of decades of use. They worked very well for a several year span, like the attractions that inspired it (World's Fair), but in permanent, theme park pavilions where you spend a 100 million bucks to build something, you can't just ride on the edge for very long without falling off.

1) I only responded to your message; so if--as you're suggesting--I'm wasting my time, then I'm only following your lead

2) Enough of the "take it or leave it" business already. Read my prior post, about the reality that no one is likely to ever create anything of the caliber of Disney's earlier creations again. So I have to count on Disney to get it right.

I wasn't suggesting you were wasting your time. It's yours to do with as you wish, just like at the moment I'm traveling and have nothing better to do than discuss this. However, I just don't get that part of Disney fan-dom that gets off on bellyaching about how the park was 25 years ago. Lots of things change in 25 years. If I got to a point where I was as upset as some of you guys seem to be about the changes to Epcot, I just would leave it. I don't expect Disney to cater to me, I expect them to develop their theme parks based on the wants and needs of their guests. You seem addicted to the Disney crack, but you just don't like the formula they have been selling lately. At that point, you either have to a) give up the addiction, or b) somehow learn to live with the new concoction.

An "evolution" leads to the strengthening of a species or organism. What has been done with Epcot is retrograde, de-evolution. I guess it's appropriate to a de-evolution obsessed society. Maybe it is "Future World" after all.

I'm not going to make comments on your larger statement about society; again, that's not what this is about.

I believe Epcot has evolved to survive. The point is, YOU believe it is retrograde, but I don't think the average guest would say that.

You see, because even if this "soul" of higher purpose did exist (and for the sake of argument let's pretend it does), the truth of the matter is that isn't the type of experience most people are looking for in a vacation to Disney World.

Again, I liked the old Epcot, I like the new Epcot. I don't think they are as different as many people like to think. The methods have changed, and some of the pretention has been dropped in favor of some fuzzy character goodness, but the "brand shiny new" Epcot that existed in 1982 was simply not sustainable. Mourn it all you wish, but it ain't comin' back. No one but internet fans are going to Epcot these days saying, "Gee, I wish this place had that cold yet reassuring soul it had in the 80's!"

I'm not here to rain on parades...I guess I just feel sorry for people that are so upset over this perceived pillaging of the epic "EPCOT Center" concept that simply wasn't that strong to begin with. You can't even quanitify it as more than "soul" or a "feeling you know when you see". It was an exciting, revolutionary time, no doubt; but eventually the park had to stop riding those coattails and had to grow into more of an identity than an abstract utopian vision of the future.

I hate Mission : Space. But I understand why it's there.

AEfx

 

[AEfx]

The reality is, Epcot was "fully formed" when it opened. It is not now, and there clearly is absolutely no plan in place to render it "fully formed".

The Epcot you are talking about worked for a span of a couple of years while it was "new". It worked because of the time and place it was built. However, the people who designed many of the attractions (Horizons in particular) were short-sighted into how those attractions that fit so well in 1982 would fare in 1992, or 2002.

AEfx

 

[marni1971]

Perhaps, but it was more coherant 20 years ago - for all it`s flaws - than the hotch potch miss match that Futureworld has become. Some parts are brilliant. Some parts are good as standalones. Some parts belong in a non-Disney park. They just don`t gel as one anymore.

As always, IMHO.

 

[planet7]

Your opinion. It's a feeling. You found it enriching; many people found it cold and uninviting.

It did very, very well for at least a decade in its "cold and uninviting" state. It's never going to be all things to all people. We're back to homogenization and consistent mediocrity again.

You are missing the point. I'm not talking about operational flaws a CM would find.

No, you're missing the point--and making broad and unfounded assumptions about my experiences. Your point is that the park becomes stale with repeated visits, that you lose the "wow" factor, that it's dated. I had far more exposure to the park than any Disney guest. I saw the things that worked, the things that didn't, the things that were dated, I "saw the wizard behind the curtain", and it still wowed me.

What you saw as a cohesive, visionary, purposeful experience was evocative of a TIME AND PLACE,

And you would be wrong again. You're convinced that this is all about nostalgia, that the park never "worked" to begin with, that there was no vision, no story, nothing at all. Why do you think I and others spent so much time there, if there was nothing to it? Nostalgia only happens after the fact, and we're never nostalgic for things that were unpleasant or even mediocre.

not the theme park itself. The designs of the attractions (how quickly they became outdated) were flawed in terms of decades of use. They worked very well for a several year span, like the attractions that inspired it

So what you're saying is that the problem with the park, is that it needed to be updated. And what are they doing now? They're "updating" it. Granted, not in a positive way, not with any purpose, but they are updating it. And the "updates" will be dated just as quickly, if not more so. And that's an improvement how?

You seem addicted to the Disney crack, but you just don't like the formula they have been selling lately. At that point, you either have to

One more time: You don't know me.

I believe Epcot has evolved to survive. The point is, YOU believe it is retrograde, but I don't think the average guest would say that.

You don't know that. And the "average guest" doesn't know what they want anyway. Do you think the "average guest" could have envisioned the original Epcot or Magic Kingdom? That's what Imgaineers are for.

the truth of the matter is that isn't the type of experience most people are looking for in a vacation to Disney World.

i think the average guest is expecting a premium experience for the premium price of Disney parks. I don't believe that they're delivering it. People will still buy it, just as they'll still buy Windows and MS Office. But that doesn't make them what they could, or should be.

You can't even quanitify it as more than "soul" or a "feeling you know when you see".

The "soul" of a park is something greater than the sum of its parts. But I can detail all of the parts, and how they work as a cohesive whole. Can you do the same for the current Epcot? Can you tell me how Test Track relates to Spaceship Earth, or how Spaceship relates to Mission: Space, or what Soarin' is doing in The Land? How about what finding Nemo has to do with the future? You can't, because there is no rhyme or reason to any of it. THAT is my point. You can't have something that's greater than the sum of its parts, if the parts don't even work together.

G7