-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News 'Beyond Big Thunder Mountain' Blue Sky concept revealed for Magic Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Yeah, something like that would be doable, but I also wonder if a few limited motion animals would actually detract from the attraction -- I think they could potentially take riders out of the experience instead of enhancing it.
I think it's hard to do limited motion animals in a way that's not kind of immediately in your face that they aren't real. A sleeping animal is probably the easiest solution.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
Part of the issue is that Disney seems to have forgotten the art of the mid-range attraction - they have to start delivering quality attractions that land between Journey of Water and Flight of Passage in terms of scope. Right now we mostly get things towards the extremes and have mostly lost the full spectrum of new and satisfying B, C, and D-Tickets.
Alien Swirling Saucers and Cosmic Rewind have their places in the fold, but the disparity between them is too wide for those to be the main levels of attraction we get.
Alien Swirling Saucers and Cosmic Rewind have their places in the fold, but the disparity between them is too wide for those to be the main levels of attraction we get.
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
So let’s say we do infact get Coco where does that leave Villians? That’s the one I thing I really want to see the light of day.
I’m fine with that, as long as Aladdin gets fitting representation elsewhere. It’s such a great film.
Poppins is the reason I made an account to talk on these forums. Would have loved cherry tree lane in EPCOT but with a dark ride.
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
I think it’s a combination of the fact that they seem to be completely uninterested in creating animatronics that aren’t state-of-the-art ultracomplex monstrosities and that any new simulator automatically gets scaled up to the size of Soarin’.
I get the opposite impression. I think most here recognize that crowding and capacity issues are more of a negative. But for Disney, it seems like they're constantly swinging big for home runs, when a couple of good singles or doubles would win the game for them.
Thrill rides are great, but generally lower capacity and not appealing to the younger (less than age 10) demographic. Adding 2 or 3 *GOOD* C/D tickets per park would go a long way to improving the park experience. The disincentive is of course they can't monetize a C/D ticket as well as an E-Ticket and any added capacity will diminish the profitability of monetizing rides via G+ or ILL.
Brer Oswald
Well-Known Member
They need to go back to making attractions on the level of Disneyland’s Pinocchio and Alice rides. It’s not like they’re incapable: Snow White’s Enchanted Wish is basically half of a new ride from Scary Adventures and, some questionable decisions with the lights aside, they did a pretty good job.
It's amazing that some 50 years later, they still can't or won't duplicate something on the order of HM or Pirates. (Even though the DLR versions of both are far superior)
Brer Oswald
Well-Known Member
They did, but they closed it last year.
I was referring to large capacity people eater attractions. But I certainly don't disagree with your perspective.
yensidtlaw1969
Well-Known Member
It’s very strange. Some of their most popular and best people-eating attractions rely on methods they’ve now very largely rejected. How many classic attractions offer(ed) few or no significantly advanced animatronics? How many have managed to entertain and move guests for literal decades while also maintaining intimacy to the vehicle and ride path? Meanwhile the biggest and most expensive new ride systems seem to offer sub-2000gph throughout as the rule more than the exception, with show high show quality they are not always willing to maintain.
I’m highly grateful that Tiana’s has so many complex and ambitious figures forthcoming, especially since having multiples of those within one attraction is VERY rare. But I do wish they’d also remember that figures need not be multimillion dollar A-1000’s to entertain. Even Mermaid (which doesn’t use A-1000’s) falls prey to the disparity issue I mentioned before - the very best figures there are great, but the simpler figures are *too* simple, and there’s very little in the midrange to ease the transition between them, and the guests notice.
doctornick
Well-Known Member
I don't think that's the main complaint, at least it's not one I've seen.
I think the big issues are that it is too short ("over before you know it") and "nothing happens" (it's also just watching scenery without much of any story). I do think adding some smaller AAs could help but fundamentally views of the ride wouldn't change unless they made it 50-100% longer.
Disgruntled Walt
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
I would have no issue with NRJ if there were more to do in the land and in the park in general. A ride like that can certainly have its place in the park, but when an attraction shortage makes it one of the headliners, then you have a problem.
Dr.GrantSeeker
Well-Known Member
That seems like it would have been a very long walk
doctornick
Well-Known Member
Hence when he said "tram bridge" - they would use a tram to move guests from parking to the entrance, not expecting them to walk.
Seems to me to be more hassle than it is worth though.
FigmentFan82
Well-Known Member
Dear WDW Executives who lurk on these boards. Do not get scared of "Beyond Phase II" and please put villains land in there and do it right. People will love RSR in DHS! All of this will print money for you long term.
Thank you
Thank you
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
I know I basically already said this above, but this is why I'm such a big fan of Na'vi River Journey. It's probably the best mid-range attraction they've built this century, at least in the US.
I've wanted them to look to it for inspiration/guidance for how to build well-realized modern mid-range attractions but that doesn't appear to be happening.
Last edited:
MerlinTheGoat
Well-Known Member
Peter Pan, Mr Toad and Snow White were/are C ticket attractions. If modern imagineers could pull off new rides similar to those (and not overhype them as something they aren't), I think people would be a lot more receptive.
Look at Little Mermaid. Aside from a small handful of decent AA's, it's a C ticket at best, and still manages to rank below a number of the classic Fantasyland C ticket dark rides due to artistic lapses. To make matters worse, Disney internally classifies it as a D ticket, but then they tried to market it more like an E to the public. So you've got this bizarre mess of an experience that mostly C or below, to a few elements from a D and a tiny handful of elements that fit with an E.
I'd consider the Mickey Mouse ride to be a somewhat more "successful" modern variant of a C ticket when judged on its own merits. But the problem is that it's a replacement for a far superior E, and Disney tried to market it as an E experience when it just doesn't deserve that designation by any stretch IMO. Had Mickey been designed as its own separate attraction in a smaller and more intimate building, AND marketed as a C ticket dark ride, I would have considered it a solid addition to their lineup. Its inclusion at Disneyland seems to have gone over much better.
It would have freed up the surface parking for expansion ( an option to decked parking)