News Avatar Experience coming to Disneyland Resort

[mickEblu]

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.

Well all those things need to be taken into account. The hot IP they re motivated to bring to the parks that may or not make sense for a coaster, the rate at which they will build these projects over the next 20+ years and the space they have. Sure they have room for 4 coasters but in reality they maybe have room for 1-2 that I might see in my lifetime.

 

[Disney Irish]

Well all those things need to be taken into account. The hot IP they re motivated to bring to the parks that may or not make sense for a coaster, the rate at which they will build these projects over the next 20+ years and the space they have. Sure they have room for 4 coasters but in reality they maybe have room for 1-2 that I might see in my lifetime.

Agreed, which is why if its 2 then go with one "kiddie" coaster and one thrill coaster.

 

[Professortango1]

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.

I think WDW is filled with mediocre attractions with inflated wait times. I love Living with the Land, but I've even waited 30 minutes for that before. And that ride does not go over well with lay people. 45-70 minutes is what I call a standard wait time for any E-ticket, and SDMT is a faux E, so it makes sense.

Also, I think what drives me to Disney is the idea that appeasing people isn't the goal, its elevating the theme park experience. If it was about just giving people what they want, we'd see IP's shoved in regardless of theme or lands and an overall move to cram as much in as possible. I know I'm not alone as this is why people have been disappointed with the fairly recent direction of Epcot, the filling in of the Rivers of America for Cars, and even things like the Haunted Mansion interactive queue. You can argue that people like it, sure. But most people on here would argue that is makes the attraction weaker, artistically speaking. Same with the placement of the Hatbox Ghost.

So I guess it depends where you sit. If you think any additions are good if people like them, then sure, Disney can build 3 kiddie coasters that have 60 minute waits and have one show scene each. People will wait in line if the queue/facade look interesting enough. Or if you think Disney is an industry leader and the parks are a form of artistic expression that should capture the imaginations of folks young and old, then you might prefer a more substantial attraction that has more to offer than rockwork and a low height limit.

 

[Disney Irish]

I think WDW is filled with mediocre attractions with inflated wait times. I love Living with the Land, but I've even waited 30 minutes for that before. And that ride does not go over well with lay people. 45-70 minutes is what I call a standard wait time for any E-ticket, and SDMT is a faux E, so it makes sense.

Also, I think what drives me to Disney is the idea that appeasing people isn't the goal, its elevating the theme park experience. If it was about just giving people what they want, we'd see IP's shoved in regardless of theme or lands and an overall move to cram as much in as possible. I know I'm not alone as this is why people have been disappointed with the fairly recent direction of Epcot, the filling in of the Rivers of America for Cars, and even things like the Haunted Mansion interactive queue. You can argue that people like it, sure. But most people on here would argue that is makes the attraction weaker, artistically speaking. Same with the placement of the Hatbox Ghost.

So I guess it depends where you sit. If you think any additions are good if people like them, then sure, Disney can build 3 kiddie coasters that have 60 minute waits and have one show scene each. People will wait in line if the queue/facade look interesting enough. Or if you think Disney is an industry leader and the parks are a form of artistic expression that should capture the imaginations of folks young and old, then you might prefer a more substantial attraction that has more to offer than rockwork and a low height limit.

The difference though is that those here, especially those that post daily, aren't representative of the GP. So their opinions are more critical than those of the GP. And while some may think that is good, and in some or even many cases it is, that isn't who Disney is trying to build for, and in many cases never was. That is something that many here have lost sight of. Too many think their opinions over the opinions in the GP matter more because we post about it everyday. And that just isn't the reality. And that is something that some just have to accept.

So yeah you'll have the GP waiting 60+ minutes for what is perceived by some here as a mediocre experience. But that is their right to do so. That doesn't mean their opinion is any less valid than yours. If having a "kiddie" coaster like Oaken's at DLR doesn't appeal to you, and that is what Disney decides to build, well then don't wait in the 60-75 minute line and go on something else. As you said there are lots of experiences at DLR for you to do.

Also no one said shove Oaken's where ever, it would be in an Arendelle theme land. So lets not get crazy here. Lol

 

[mickEblu]

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.

Interesting that you view 7DMT and Slinky as “kiddie” coasters. I’ve always viewed them as family coasters. Like less thrilling Big Thunder Mountains if you will. I think kiddie coaster implies more like an off the shelf coaster with a 30- 60 second ride time.

 

[Disney Irish]

Interesting that you view 7DMT and Slinky as “kiddie” coasters. I’ve always viewed them as family coasters. Like less thrilling Big Thunder Mountains if you will. I think kiddie coaster implies more like an off the shelf coaster with a 30 second ride time.

Anything that has a height requirement under 40" for a coaster is considered a "kiddie" coaster, which is why they are listed officially as a "junior coaster" or "family coaster". Its all different terms for the same thing.

 

[mickEblu]

Anything that has a height requirement under 40" for a coaster is considered a "kiddie" coaster, which is why they are listed officially as a "junior coaster" or "family coaster". Its all different terms for the same thing.

Who does? Disney? I didn’t see any such labeling on the app but when I filtered “kids” attractions the only rides it filtered out were Incredicoaster and Mission Breakout. Those are the only two rides at DLR Ive ever considered to be thrill rides in the “real world” and looks like Disney agrees.

Anyway to get back on topic I think there is a clear difference between a kiddie coaster and a family coaster. Gadgets Go coaster is designed specifically for children. An adult would go ride 7DMT and Slinky with no kids. You won’t find very many adults riding Gadgets by themselves. 7DMT and Slinky are family coasters.

 

[mickEblu]

Agreed, which is why if its 2 then go with one "kiddie" coaster and one thrill coaster.

Well now that I know that by “kiddie coaster” you actually mean family coaster I agree. Haha.

 

[Disney Irish]

Who does? Disney? I didn’t see any such labeling on the app but when I filtered “kids” attractions the only rides it filtered out were Incredicoaster and Mission Breakout. Those are the only two rides at DLR Ive ever considered to be thrill rides in the “real world” and looks like Disney agrees.

These are industry terms.

Now when most people think of a "kiddie" coaster they think of a traveling carnival one with the dragon for example. But really I've known it as any coaster that has a height restriction under 40" can be seen as a "kiddie coaster" as it just means no thrills, no loops, etc., being off the shelf was never part of the classification. The newer term "family coaster" has sort of replaced "kiddie coaster", also sometimes called a "junior coaster", as it gets away from the negative carnival type "kiddie coaster" visual. But to me they are just different terms for the same thing. Any coaster that the family can ride together that doesn't have a major height restriction.

Anyway to get back on topic I think there is a clear difference between a kiddie coaster and a family coaster. Gadgets Go coaster is designed specifically for children. An adult would go ride 7DMT and Slinky with no kids. You won’t find very many adults riding Gadgets by themselves. 7DMT and Slinky are family coasters.

You obviously haven't been lately, I see more adults riding Go Coaster than kids, especially after the recent redo of TT.

 

[Disney Irish]

Well now that I know that by “kiddie coaster” you actually mean family coaster I agree. Haha.

The terms are interchangeable really, especially these days.

But we can use the term family coaster if you want, as that is really almost all of Disney coasters anyways. I just want to classify something different from BTMRR and SM vs Go Coaster, as Go Coaster has a lower height restriction. So I want something with under 40", like Oaken's.

 

[mickEblu]

The terms are interchangeable really, especially these days.

But we can use the term family coaster if you want, as that is really almost all of Disney coasters anyways. I just want to classify something different from BTMRR and SM vs Go Coaster, as Go Coaster has a lower height restriction. So I want something with under 40", like Oaken's.

Well whatever they re called it's time to start manifesting the Ewok coaster. Consider me officially on the clock.

 

[Disney Irish]

Well whatever they re called it's time to start manifesting the Ewok coaster. Consider me officially on the clock.

I'd be down for that.

 

[PiratesMansion]

DLR doesn't need any other kiddie coasters. We already have Gadget's, and that's elevated about as much as it could be without it becoming ridiculous IMO. Building a coaster of that sort out in a way that's overly elaborate, like they did in Hong Kong in their Frozen area, is just asking to disappoint people.

I'm open to a new themed coaster, I just don't want a Tron clone. I'd be much more enthusiastic if I thought modern Disney parks decision making was in any way rational and logically followed with what's already here. I do worry that with any new coaster there's a HUGE danger of it interfering with the rest of the resort to a degree I'd find invasive, especially since Disney's approach to theming and placemaking has largely shifted to "lol whatever! As long as the kids like it and we hit our Disney+ metrics!!!1111".

Be careful what you wish for.

EDIT: it's not incorrect to point out that MK and DL serve somewhat different audiences that have somewhat different expectations of what's going to be inside. Because Epcot came about so early in that park's history, and then MGM followed soon after, MK became the "kiddie" park in a way that DL, by virtue of being around as one park for much longer and DCA taking so long to find its footing, has largely avoided. In the WDW context, teens and thrillseekers went to Studios, and the sophisticated adults went to Epcot. And in many ways, despite the hollowing out of the original WDW park themes, that's all still true today.

I genuinely believe that Alien Encounter might still be around, or at least have lasted far longer, had it been built at DL instead of Magic Kingdom.

 

[Professortango1]

Who does? Disney? I didn’t see any such labeling on the app but when I filtered “kids” attractions the only rides it filtered out were Incredicoaster and Mission Breakout. Those are the only two rides at DLR Ive ever considered to be thrill rides in the “real world” and looks like Disney agrees.

Anyway to get back on topic I think there is a clear difference between a kiddie coaster and a family coaster. Gadgets Go coaster is designed specifically for children. An adult would go ride 7DMT and Slinky with no kids. You won’t find very many adults riding Gadgets by themselves. 7DMT and Slinky are family coasters.

SDMT and Slinky could even have been decent attractions had they not cut corners and had the experiences be a little more substantial. Imagineers just need a Marc Davis who can stage fun scenes to pass by. As of right now everyone I know comments on how short they feel and how they were expecting more. And these aren't folks who are on Disney forums, they are everyday adults and parents taking kids to Disney.

I know I find Snow White's Scary Adventure more satisfying, even if it is a cruder attraction. I waited 10 minutes to see some iconic darkride scenes and experiences vs I waited 70 minutes to silently coast around a really pretty, but generic mountain. One promises something fun for the family and exciting and delivers. The other promises a Disney mountain attraction with swinging cars and we get a really pretty Gadgets Go Coaster.

 

[coffeefan]

It's a hot take, but I would favor Avatar Land replacing the Grizzly area. Grizzly could be expanded and rethemed to Pandora or Avatar Mountain. Then Soarin' could be Soarin' over Pandora. There's a restaurant there already that could be rethemed. Then, there's room for expansion with the Redwood Creek area or the nearby Little Mermaid ride. I think it would be the quickest way to make Avatar land happen. But I'm also not attached to the California theming, tbh.

 

[mickEblu]

SDMT and Slinky could even have been decent attractions had they not cut corners and had the experiences be a little more substantial. Imagineers just need a Marc Davis who can stage fun scenes to pass by. As of right now everyone I know comments on how short they feel and how they were expecting more. And these aren't folks who are on Disney forums, they are everyday adults and parents taking kids to Disney.

I know I find Snow White's Scary Adventure more satisfying, even if it is a cruder attraction. I waited 10 minutes to see some iconic darkride scenes and experiences vs I waited 70 minutes to silently coast around a really pretty, but generic mountain. One promises something fun for the family and exciting and delivers. The other promises a Disney mountain attraction with swinging cars and we get a really pretty Gadgets Go Coaster.

Yeah they could have been more for sure and thats always a shame when you can see that just a little more budget, ride time, one extra show scene etc would have gone very far.

I haven't rode 7DMT but I don't imagine I'll share your sentiment here. I have to imagine that the physical nature + that very charming dwarves mine scene would put it over the top for me. Now sure if you consider the fact that you're waiting 70 minutes vs 15 minutes I can see how that might factor into ones decision. Snow Whites Scary Adventure was always my least favorite Fantasyland dark ride. I suppose maybe now I enjoy Enchanted Wish more than Pinocchio. That old school Disney golden chorale kind of does it for me as does the new mine scene. Pinocchio just feels...sad and dark for the most part. With that said I do acknowledge that Enchanted Wish is choppier now but it was never my favorite and the parts that do work work more for me than anything that was there previously. I also wish they would have left the exterior alone. At the very least the dungeon in the queue. The fact that they turned it into a bedroom is ridiculous and unnecessary. Wouldn't change the outcome or perception of the ride at all.

 

[D.Silentu]

I'm also not attached to the California theming, tbh.

Not to worry, neither is Disney.

 

[Disney Irish]

Not to worry, neither is Disney.

And neither is most in the GP.

 

[Professortango1]

Not to worry, neither is Disney.

I just wish they would commit to either identity for the park. Its California focused, but its also not. RSR celebrates car culture and Pixar Pier celebrates our oceans and piers, but Avatar fits.....

No, wait. We're not focused on California, we are focused on IP's and movies and no longer care about California as a theme. Except for Grizzly Peak, which has no IP and is 100% cemented in California appreciation.

I just want Disney to make their choice and stick with it. I love the California idea but hated the execution. But with the current state of the park, I'd fully support moving away from California as a theme. Disney just needs to lock that in.

 

[Disney Irish]

I just wish they would commit to either identity for the park. Its California focused, but its also not. RSR celebrates car culture and Pixar Pier celebrates our oceans and piers, but Avatar fits.....

No, wait. We're not focused on California, we are focused on IP's and movies and no longer care about California as a theme. Except for Grizzly Peak, which has no IP and is 100% cemented in California appreciation.

I just want Disney to make their choice and stick with it. I love the California idea but hated the execution. But with the current state of the park, I'd fully support moving away from California as a theme. Disney just needs to lock that in.

I think they have made their choice and just dropped it from being California focused, Avatar being announced basically confirmed that, they just haven't rethemed Grizzly Peak yet but I suspect its coming soon enough.