News Avatar Experience coming to Disneyland Resort

[Disney Irish]

If there is enough room I’m good with a Junior coaster but not before we get a real E ticket coaster. DLR probably has more to do for kids and families per square foot than any theme park or resort in the world. It’s pretty light on thrills though especially comparing to some of WDW’s recent additions. Not to mention that over 2/3 of the thrill rides at DLR can be accomplished by a 4 year old.

I know I keep mentioning it, but it bears repeating again since I think it applies to a lot of people, I don't need more thrills at DLR. If I want more thrills I can go to Uni, Six Flags, or any other regional amusement park. I go to DLR for the other experiences that don't involve thrills. And as you get older and age starts hitting your body I suspect you'll start falling into that and feeling the same way as well.

DLR went a whole 69 years with the limited thrill rides it has had, I think it can go another 69 years with continuing to be limited on thrills, even if they add a few more.

Also I can't speak for your 4 year olds, but I can tell you that not all 4 year olds are thrill seekers and won't go on even the ones they have. So adding more for the under 40" crowd, including another coaster, would also add more for those that don't want thrills, or want limited thrills.

 

[Professortango1]

I know I keep mentioning it, but it bears repeating again since I think it applies to a lot of people, I don't need more thrills at DLR. If I want more thrills I can go to Uni, Six Flags, or any other regional amusement park. I go to DLR for the other experiences that don't involve thrills. And as you get older and age starts hitting your body I suspect you'll start falling into that and feeling the same way as well.

DLR went a whole 69 years with the limited thrill rides it has had, I think it can go another 69 years with continuing to be limited on thrills, even if they add a few more.

Also I can't speak for your 4 year olds, but I can tell you that not all 4 year olds are thrill seekers and won't go on even the ones they have. So adding more for the under 40" crowd, including another coaster, would also add more for those that don't want thrills, or want limited thrills.

I don't care about the thrill level, I care about the ride being a full experience that matches its aesthetic. Oaken is a worse version of SDMT, which itself has a lot of complaints about not living up to the look of the attraction and the wait time. I love both BTMRR and Pinocchio's Daring Journey, so its not about how intense the ride is, but if Disney is building a themed mountain coaster, it should be substantial enough where it stands toe to toe with BTMRR and SM in terms of length, show scenes, detail, and signature moments.

I will also point out that the little kids do have Chip and Dale's Go Coaster already. Not sure that the under 4 demographic needs a wide variety of "my first coaster" options considering there are plenty of experiences they can enjoy and its not like they are at the park from opening to close.

 

[Disney Irish]

I don't care about the thrill level, I care about the ride being a full experience that matches its aesthetic. Oaken is a worse version of SDMT, which itself has a lot of complaints about not living up to the look of the attraction and the wait time. I love both BTMRR and Pinocchio's Daring Journey, so its not about how intense the ride is, but if Disney is building a themed mountain coaster, it should be substantial enough where it stands toe to toe with BTMRR and SM in terms of length, show scenes, detail, and signature moments.

I will also point out that the little kids do have Chip and Dale's Go Coaster already. Not sure that the under 4 demographic needs a wide variety of "my first coaster" options considering there are plenty of experiences they can enjoy and its not like they are at the park from opening to close.

I don't need a themed coaster to be able to stand "toe-to-toe" with BTMRR or SM. I just need it to be different enough of an experience that I feel its worth my time. Everyone judges their level of experiences differently, so there shouldn't be a one size fits all approach here.

Also Go Coaster is the only coaster in the entire resort for the under 40" crowd. You don't think they deserve at least one more or are they not worthy? It used to be that Disney Parks were for a family, where kids of all ages and parents alike can experience it together. If you build all the coasters to being over 42" (or more likely taller than 48" which a thrill coaster would most likely be), you just mostly limited that experience to primarily teens and adults. As I said if you want that type of experience you can go to Uni, Six Flags, or any other regional amusement park.

 

[mickEblu]

I know I keep mentioning it, but it bears repeating again since I think it applies to a lot of people, I don't need more thrills at DLR. If I want more thrills I can go to Uni, Six Flags, or any other regional amusement park. I go to DLR for the other experiences that don't involve thrills. And as you get older and age starts hitting your body I suspect you'll start falling into that and feeling the same way as well.

DLR went a whole 69 years with the limited thrill rides it has had, I think it can go another 69 years with continuing to be limited on thrills, even if they add a few more.

Also I can't speak for your 4 year olds, but I can tell you that not all 4 year olds are thrill seekers and won't go on even the ones they have. So adding more for the under 40" crowd, including another coaster, would also add more for those that don't want thrills, or want limited thrills.

Lol oh I think I already have. Not quite as eager to get on Mission Breakout these days. I hate the sensation I feel of the way down after the initial shot up. Which is probably the most physically thrilling moment of any ride at DLR. Not sure what happened as I used to look forward to that part. Anyway Im not asking for a giga coaster. Id be happy with something like Cosmic Rewind or Hagrids.

Sure but from the 70's through the early 2,000s DLR received at least 1-2 thrill rides per decade or so on average. Its now been 20 years since TOT so the resort is due for an advanced coaster/ thrill ride in the same way we were due for a trackless ride when we got ROTR.

Every kid is different of course. My son was wasn't terrified of Space or Thunder but he did them at 4 and then took little breaks from each when he decided they were scary. He probably didn't truly start enjoying them until he was about 5 1/2 - 6. My daughter on the other hand seems to be a thrill seeker. I have videos of both of their first rides on Gadgets Go Coaster. My son was terrified but my daughter was laughing and smiling. She likes the drops on Timber Mountain Log Ride too and she's only three.

 

[mickEblu]

Also Go Coaster is the only coaster in the entire resort for the under 40" crowd. You don't think they deserve at least one more or are they not worthy? It used to be that Disney Parks were for a family, where kids of all ages and parents alike can experience it together. If you build all the coasters to being over 42" (or more likely taller than 48" which a thrill coaster would most likely be), you just mostly limited that experience to primarily teens and adults. As I said if you want that type of experience you can go to Uni, Six Flags, or any other regional amusement park.

Disneyland has more kid and family friendly rides than probably any theme park on Earth. Attractions of quality too like POTC, HM, Jungle Cruise, Casey Jr, IASW etc in addition to all of the FL dark rides and flat rides. What the resort doesn't have is a modern themed coaster.

 

[Disney Irish]

Lol oh I think I already have. Not quite as eager to get on Mission Breakout these days. I hate the sensation I feel of the way down after the initial shot up. Which is probably the most physically thrilling moment in DLR. Not sure what happened as I used to look forward to that part. Anyway Im not asking for a giga coaster. Id be happy with some something like Cosmic Rewind or Hagrids.

I think you're going to find it getting harder and harder on the body going on all these thrill attractions. I haven't been on it but I have a feeling Cosmic Rewind is one of those that is going to be hard on the body with the spinning car.

Sure but from the 70's through the early 2,000s DLR received at least 1-2 thrill rides per decade or so on average. Its now been 20 years since TOT so the resort is due for an advanced coaster/ thrill ride in the same way we were due for a trackless ride when we got ROTR.

I'm not saying they shouldn't build a thrill ride, I'm just saying they should also be building a coaster for the under 40" crowd as well. As for whether one should be before the other, well I would think they would build Arendelle first with Oaken's but that is just my opinion.

Every kid is different of course. My son was wasn't terrified of Space or Thunder but he did them at 4 and then took little breaks from each when he decided they were scary. He probably didn't truly start enjoying them until he was about 5 1/2 - 6. My daughter on the other hand seems to be a thrill seeker. I have videos of both of their first rides on Gadgets Go Coaster. My son was terrified but my daughter was laughing and smiling. She likes the drops on Timber Mountain Log Ride too and she's only three.

Given my experience with kids, both in my family and back in my days working at an amusement park, I would say more are like your son than your daughter, very hesitant to ride a thrill ride. So having another non-thrill coaster for the under 40" crowd would be good. Also remember that not all kids grow at the same rate. So just because your kids might have been over 40" by age 4 doesn't mean all kids are. For example my 6 yr old niece is under 40", she's a late bloomer evidently.

 

[Disney Irish]

Disneyland has more kid and family friendly rides than probably any theme park on Earth. Attractions of quality too like POTC, HM, Jungle Cruise, Casey Jr, IASW etc in addition to all of the FL dark rides and flat rides. What the resort doesn't have is a modern themed coaster.

Again I'm not saying they shouldn't build a themed coaster, I'm just saying they should also build one for the under 40" crowd like Oaken's.

 

[mickEblu]

I think you're going to find it getting harder and harder on the body going on all these thrill attractions. I haven't been on it but I have a feeling Cosmic Rewind is one of those that is going to be hard on the body with the spinning car.

Haha maybe. I will say that I did not enjoy the spinning on Sierra Sidewinder at Knotts but I have a feeling the G forces are much worse than Cosmic Rewind.

Given my experience with kids, both in my family and back in my days working at an amusement park, I would say more are like your son than your daughter, very hesitant to ride a thrill ride. So having another non-thrill coaster for the under 40" crowd would be good. Also remember that not all kids grow at the same rate. So just because your kids might have been over 40" by age 4 doesn't mean all kids are. For example my 6 yr old niece is under 40", she's a late bloomer evidently.

Yeah my daughter will most likely not hit 40" until she's 5. Regardless if 6 year olds can do most of your thrill rides then they cant be all that thrilling. We're not talking about Superman or Tatsu at Magic Mountain. Most Disney coasters are "family" coasters.

 

[Professortango1]

I don't need a themed coaster to be able to stand "toe-to-toe" with BTMRR or SM. I just need it to be different enough of an experience that I feel its worth my time. Everyone judges their level of experiences differently, so there shouldn't be a one size fits all approach here.

Also Go Coaster is the only coaster in the entire resort for the under 40" crowd. You don't think they deserve at least one more or are they not worthy? It used to be that Disney Parks were for a family, where kids of all ages and parents alike can experience it together. If you build all the coasters to being over 42" (or more likely taller than 48" which a thrill coaster would most likely be), you just mostly limited that experience to primarily teens and adults. As I said if you want that type of experience you can go to Uni, Six Flags, or any other regional amusement park.

Disney coasters are not akin to Six Flags or even Universal in terms of thrill. At all. That's like saying "if you need a Coors light at Disney, you should just go do shots at the UVA bar."

Number one, Disney makes their coaster far more accessible. Not only for kids and families, but larger folks as well. Before I lost my weight, I didn't really have the option of "just go to Six Flags." Especially if I wanted to ride with a nephew who can't handle those types of coasters.

And yes, one kid coaster is enough when you consider kids under 3 are free and most 5 year olds can go on just about anything at the resort. A child under 5 is likely attending the park for 5-7 hours max. They're maybe doing 10 rides. Let them enjoy Tiki Room, ride Casey Jr, explore Storybook Land, experience all 5 Fantasyland darkrides, sail Pirates, take off with Astro Blasters, meet Mickey at his house, take a spin in the teacups, explore the 100 Acre Wood with Pooh, find bongo frogs with Tiana, and pilot the Millennium Falcon. There is so much to do at Disneyland where parents can enjoy the parks with their kids, they don't need a massive coaster that doesn't appeal to average guests.

If it's a substantial attraction in size and scope, it should really have broad appeal. Oaken and SDMT have the scale and scope that should have broad appeal, but the attractions are so short and lacking in moments, that they underwhelm a large portion of Park guests.

 

[mickEblu]

Again I'm not saying they shouldn't build a themed coaster, I'm just saying they should also build one for the under 40" crowd like Oaken's.

Im not opposed to a coaster for the kiddos. My daughter loves Gadgets so another option would be great. Of course by the time it opens we'll have moved on. Oakens is beautiful (along with non-replicable Hong Kong Mountain back drop) but I think its just takes up too much space for a kiddie coaster.

 

[Disney Irish]

Haha maybe. I will say that I did not enjoy the spinning on Sierra Sidewinder at Knotts but I have a feeling the G forces are much worse than Cosmic Rewind.

Possible, everyone is different but age is the great equalizer. So even if you're fine now you may not be a year or two from now. Anyways when that happens you'll be happy if they build more of the non-thrill attractions than just focusing on thrill attractions. Means you can continue to do those experiences later in life.

Yeah my daughter will most likely not hit 40" until she's 5. Regardless if 6 year olds can do most of your thrill rides then they cant be all that thrilling. We're not talking about Superman or Tatsu at Magic Mountain. Most Disney coasters are "family" coasters.

Except when you talk about a "thrill" coaster even at Disney, you're more likely to get Incredicoaster which is 48" than BTMRR or SM which is 40". Even Cosmic Rewind is more than 42".

 

[mickEblu]

Except when you talk about a "thrill" coaster even at Disney, you're more likely to get Incredicoaster which is 48" than BTMRR or SM which is 40". Even Cosmic Rewind is more than 42".

Sure but it’s just one ride/ ride type the resort is lacking. Give me one Hagrids or Cosmic Rewind and I’ll shut up for 15 years.

 

[Disney Irish]

Disney coasters are not akin to Six Flags or even Universal in terms of thrill. At all. That's like saying "if you need a Coors light at Disney, you should just go do shots at the UVA bar."

Number one, Disney makes their coaster far more accessible. Not only for kids and families, but larger folks as well. Before I lost my weight, I didn't really have the option of "just go to Six Flags." Especially if I wanted to ride with a nephew who can't handle those types of coasters.

And yes, one kid coaster is enough when you consider kids under 3 are free and most 5 year olds can go on just about anything at the resort. A child under 5 is likely attending the park for 5-7 hours max. They're maybe doing 10 rides. Let them enjoy Tiki Room, ride Casey Jr, explore Storybook Land, experience all 5 Fantasyland darkrides, sail Pirates, take off with Astro Blasters, meet Mickey at his house, take a spin in the teacups, explore the 100 Acre Wood with Pooh, find bongo frogs with Tiana, and pilot the Millennium Falcon. There is so much to do at Disneyland where parents can enjoy the parks with their kids, they don't need a massive coaster that doesn't appeal to average guests.

If it's a substantial attraction in size and scope, it should really have broad appeal. Oaken and SDMT have the scale and scope that should have broad appeal, but the attractions are so short and lacking in moments, that they underwhelm a large portion of Park guests.

So you really think the average guest is underwhelmed by a coaster like Oaken's and SDMT? Interesting since SDMT still has a long line most days, even many years after its opening. So that doesn't mean to jive with what you're saying. If it was so underwhelming it'd have short lines.

 

[Disney Irish]

Sure but it’s just one ride/ ride type the resort is lacking. Give me one Hagrids or Cosmic Rewind and I’ll shut up for 15 years.

Yes but if you go by what some are saying here they should only build coasters like Hagrid and Cosmic Rewind, or even Incredicoaster. So no Oaken's, no SDMT, nothing like that. That to me is very shortsighted.

 

[mickEblu]

So you really think the average guest is underwhelmed by Oaken's and SDMT? Interesting since SDMT still has a long line most days, even many years after its opening. So that doesn't mean to jive with what you're saying. If it was so underwhelming it'd have short lines.

This was the only part of his post I disagreed with. I think everything else was spot on. Still think it takes up way too much room though and land is at a premium at DLR. In Hong Kong, Oakens makes much more sense than at DLR. First off, the park didn’t have a kiddie coaster. The park needed a new big land / draw and they chose Frozen so it’s easier to understand the choice of making the secondary ride a kiddie coaster and I’m certainly not going to fault them for making it beautiful even if its a bit misleading. I look at it as atmosphere that happens to have a kiddie coaster attached. Could they have added a couple real show scenes? Probably but I prefer the route they went over a secondary attraction like Maters or Alien Saucers.

 

[mickEblu]

Yes but if you go by what some are saying here they should only build coasters like Hagrid and Cosmic Rewind, or even Incredicoaster. So no Oaken's, no SDMT, nothing like that. That to me is very shortsighted.

I think we re all specifically talking about DLR or at least I am. I don’t think DLR needs a kiddie coaster that takes up a lot of room. Don’t think it’s a wise choice. I do think that the resort could use a Cosmic Rewind or a Hagrids. In general though I’m not opposed to more kiddie coasters at Disney parks. I think one per park though is probably more than enough in most cases. Most these parks have toms to do for kids and limited expansion opportunities. Or at least Disney makes it seem that way. So it becomes a matter of what you are willing to lose or not get instead for a second kiddie coaster.

If you want to put another coaster the size of Gadgets in DL Forward be my guest but now you run into other issues. Trying to make a bare-ish coaster blend in with these newer age highly immersive lands. It’s gotta make sense with the IP. I couldn’t see a kiddie coaster in Pandora or GE for example but I could see one in like a zany Zootopia Land. This is the reason that Oakens looks like more than it is. They had to make it blend in with the immersive new land they created but seems like the ride was budgeted to be a kiddie coaster. Anyway, the opportunities seem slim for a well executed kiddie coaster at DLR that makes sense.

 

[Disney Irish]

This was the only part of his post I disagreed with. I think everything else was spot on. Still think it takes up way too much room though and land is at a premium at DLR. In Hong Kong, Oakens makes much more sense than at DLR. First off, the park didn’t have a kiddie coaster. The park needed a new big land / draw and they chose Frozen so it’s easier to understand the choice of making the secondary ride a kiddie coaster and I’m certainly not going to fault them for making it beautiful even if its a bit misleading. I look at it as atmosphere that happens to have a kiddie coaster attached. Could they have added a couple real show scenes? Probably but I prefer the route they went over a secondary attraction like Maters or Alien Saucers.

Whats funny though is that WDW has at least three "kiddie" coasters, but DLR only has one. So I don't think adding just one more is a waste of space, I think its needed in my opinion, especially since I also think they should add another mid-to-large regular coaster too.

 

[Professortango1]

So you really think the average guest is underwhelmed by a coaster like Oaken's and SDMT? Interesting since SDMT still has a long line most days, even many years after its opening. So that doesn't mean to jive with what you're saying. If it was so underwhelming it'd have short lines.

I know a lot of people who were looking forward to it when it was being built and frustrated Disney built something so lackluster.

MK is also a different animal. They get far more tourists and have a lower bar to clear for guest satisfaction..MK is also a very young skewing park with a much smaller attraction line-up. They don't have 5 Fantasyland Darkrides, they have Pooh and Mermaid. They don't have Storybook Land.

If this ride was at Disneyland, I'd wager it would have 20-35 minute waits once interest wained. And that's because of the capacity issues of the ride, the same reason why Go Coaster can get to 30-40 minutes some days.

If I get a Frozen Coaster, I don't want it to be what they have in Hong Kong. Nothing says Frozen like riding a sleigh through a green forest. Give me the icy version of Big Thunder with wolves pursuing us like Anna and Kristoff.

Tokyo showed us what a good Frozen attraction is instead of the Disney Jr "you get to visit Elsa, lucky!" story and experience.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think we re all specifically talking about DLR or at least I am. I don’t think DLR needs a kiddie coaster that takes up a lot of room. Don’t think it’s a wise choice. I do think that the resort could use a Cosmic Rewind or a Hagrids. In general though I’m not opposed to more kiddie coasters at Disney parks. I think one per park though is probably more than enough in most cases. Most these parks have toms to do for kids and limited expansion opportunities. Or at least Disney makes it seem that way. So it becomes a matter of what you are willing to lose or not get instead for a second kiddie coaster.

I think there is more room than you realize. I think they could literally put 3-4 more coasters in there at least, even if we know they won't do that.

 

[Disney Irish]

I know a lot of people who were looking forward to it when it was being built and frustrated Disney built something so lackluster.

MK is also a different animal. They get far more tourists and have a lower bar to clear for guest satisfaction..MK is also a very young skewing park with a much smaller attraction line-up. They don't have 5 Fantasyland Darkrides, they have Pooh and Mermaid. They don't have Storybook Land.

If this ride was at Disneyland, I'd wager it would have 20-35 minute waits once interest wained. And that's because of the capacity issues of the ride, the same reason why Go Coaster can get to 30-40 minutes some days.

If I get a Frozen Coaster, I don't want it to be what they have in Hong Kong. Nothing says Frozen like riding a sleigh through a green forest. Give me the icy version of Big Thunder with wolves pursuing us like Anna and Kristoff.

Tokyo showed us what a good Frozen attraction is instead of the Disney Jr "you get to visit Elsa, lucky!" story and experience.

Well to each their own, but I don't think its as underwhelming to the GP as you think it is. Tourists opinions count too, even if you think their bar is lower.