News Big changes coming to EPCOT's Future World?

trainplane3

trainplane3

Well-Known Member
tparris said:
Walls have been extended to block part of the original MouseGear location, and also to block off access through the center of FW.
Click to expand...
As mentioned:
epcot-central-spine-future-world-construction-walls-01242020-3.jpg

blogmickey.com

More Epcot Construction Walls Cut Off Central Future World Walkway; Force Use of Bypasses

Walt Disney World news, photos, and reviews! We provide you with daily news from the Walt Disney World theme parks and beyond
blogmickey.com blogmickey.com

This is something else. We all knew this was the next step but it's interesting to see the center cut off.

To compensate for the loss, the East walkway is now open:
future-world-east-widened-walkway-01242020-5.jpg

blogmickey.com

Widened Future World East Walkway Now Open at Epcot

Walt Disney World news, photos, and reviews! We provide you with daily news from the Walt Disney World theme parks and beyond
blogmickey.com blogmickey.com

It's probably going to look like this very soon since the East bypass is finished:
new-epcot-future-world-map-east-walkway-1.jpg
 
jt04

jt04

Well-Known Member
HauntedPirate said:
But you just said "99% of visitors go to WDW for Disney content". Most of what they lean on is post-Walt by decades and "99% of visitors" have little to no idea who Walt actually was, not to mention several of the attractions listed were built long after Walt died. So which is it?
Click to expand...

I'm for some content percolating up from WDI. (Pirates) And other content being sent to WDI to develop.(GE) I said that posters here are not reflective of 99% of fans. I'm a poster here and don't care which strategy is employed as long as the results are great! That doesn't change the masses want what they are most familiar with.
 
Mac Tonight

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
Lost deep inside the whole "IP vs non-IP" debate is the fact that everything created for the theme parks is inherently an intellectual property. Thus, whether we want to admit it or not, it's all "Disney content", either purchased or created in-house.

Some of us just happen to prefer the stuff created in-house and wish that upper management didn't treat it like the plague.
 
rle4lunch

rle4lunch

Well-Known Member
Mac Tonight said:
Lost deep inside the whole "IP vs non-IP" debate is the fact that everything created for the theme parks is inherently an intellectual property. Thus, whether we want to admit it or not, it's all "Disney content", either purchased or created in-house.

Some of us just happen to prefer the stuff created in-house and wish that upper management didn't treat it like the plague.
Click to expand...

I've argued this exact point for a decade. No one listens to it tho.
 
ImperfectPixie

ImperfectPixie

Well-Known Member
HauntedPirate said:
Right, it's not "IP is bad", because as has been correctly stated, it's all IP. It's the fact that movie IP is shoehorned into every nook and cranny now, regardless of fit, form, or function.
Click to expand...
To be even more specific...that the same small selection of movies are shoehorned in over and over again.

ETA: Seriously. I feel like they want to beat us up with the Frozen and Beauty & the Beast stuff.
 
danlb_2000

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Mac Tonight said:
Lost deep inside the whole "IP vs non-IP" debate is the fact that everything created for the theme parks is inherently an intellectual property. Thus, whether we want to admit it or not, it's all "Disney content", either purchased or created in-house.

Some of us just happen to prefer the stuff created in-house and wish that upper management didn't treat it like the plague.
Click to expand...

It is well understood by most people in these discussions that when someone says "IP" they are referring to movies and tv shows developed independent of the parks. We understand that everything is ultimately a Disney IP, but there is a big difference between trying to fit an existing IP into the parks, and developing one specifically for an attraction. It all come back to the core problem most have with IP, it's not the IP itself that is the problem, it's how it's being used, and the balance between IP's developed for the parks, and the use of existing one.
 
M

MJL92

Active Member
danlb_2000 said:
Then why are there so many extremely popular rides that are not based on an IP? Space Mountain, Test Track, Soarin, Big Thunder, Everest, etc should regularly be walk on.
Click to expand...

Personally, IP integration isn't really a consideration for what's a good ride and what's not. I always thought the Maelstrom was lame, and it's still a lame ride, now with an hour wait. But to the little girl who shows up in an Elsa dress, that's probably the best part of her whole trip.

Splash Mountain is my favorite attraction, and I rode it countless times before I learned it was based off an old film that people pretend doesn't exist.
 
Mac Tonight

Mac Tonight

Well-Known Member
danlb_2000 said:
It is well understood by most people in these discussions that when someone says "IP" they are referring to movies and tv shows developed independent of the parks. We understand that everything is ultimately a Disney IP, but there is a big difference between trying to fit an existing IP into the parks, and developing one specifically for an attraction. It all come back to the core problem most have with IP, it's not the IP itself that is the problem, it's how it's being used, and the balance between IP's developed for the parks, and the use of existing one.
Click to expand...
I feel like that always bears repeating for some.

Balance is desired, but rarely achieved. And I agree that's the bigger problem.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom