The old argument seems to apply here; people attending a theme park expect a theme park. Not a zoo with some attractions.
I don’t speak for myself.
Or it's a theme park with animals
But yes the park could use more rides. But what's there doesn't seem to get enough credit. A park is more than just the ride count, but to the vast majority, I suppose they care more about ride count.
Maybe when the park first opened the zoo argument had merit. And it did. But I don't think it does now, it's a lot more fleshed out than it was in 1998 (and I was there). It's a great park. IMHO, of course. (And, again, I'd like to see a bit more added but two other parks seem to me like they need the help more at the moment).
It's a shame it has the zoo stigma attached to it. All people need to do is change their way of thinking. Instead of a zoo with rides, it's a theme park with animals. Last I checked, my local zoo was hardly on par with Animal Kingdom. Now, comparing a zoo to 1998 AK? Sure. I can agree on that.
But I get it, if people have dismissed it as just a zoo with some rides over the last 20 years their opinion, sadly, isn't likely to change.
(Obviously this post isn't necessarily geared towards you, as you were speaking how the masses view it, just used it as a jumping off point)