News Big changes coming to EPCOT's Future World?

Surferboy567

Well-Known Member
I think they are counting test track and attraction pavilions separate from the middle overhaul. Though wonders was suppose to be part of it I guess.
I’d argue that the attractions are the thing that’s gonna make the most impact in the long run. I also largely enjoy those new additions more than just standard pathway. Seems weird to market that and not the “big” additions as the overhaul.

As for the overhaul as a whole, attractions added have been decent. The other stuff is underwhelming not necessarily bad just underwhelming. Except the points of light on Spaceship Earth and around the park that stuff is great.

Side Note; That Encanto show really doesn’t belong in EPCOT, if it was in a Columbia pavilion or at the tropical americas thing in AK I’d think it would fit much better but not a fan in its current position.
 

Casper Gutman

Well-Known Member

EPCOT's CommuniCore Plaza and Hall: All Construction Walls Down for Grand Opening​

CommuniCore-Hall_Full_56292.jpg


CommuniCore-Hall_Full_56295.jpg
CommuniCore-Hall_Full_56307.jpg
Ah, the beloved “decaying gas station” aesthetic.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Hagrid's (which I also like very much) is largely an outdoor coaster than hugs terrain. It can't be stated how much it costs to house such a massive coaster indoors. Cosmic Rewinds is even longer than Hagrid's in terms of track length. The money was spent simply on such a massive indoor ride.

I get the sentiment about tastes though. If they are going to spend all the money - you and many others would probably rather a largely outdoor coaster with copious rock work.

Though in terms of whether it was 'worth it'? For Disney the answer is a resounding yes. There's nothing on the docket for Epcot anytime soon and Cosmic Rewind will slowly pay itself off on the back of ILL and that's what they were after. That's the final indictment of the ride, did they deliver something big enough to be seen as a mega headliner that people will pay a la carte for years for? Yes. Does the public think it's a good enough attraction to pay a la carte for? Also yes.

Though I also 100 percent appreciate Hagrid's would achieve the same thing. But again, that's largely outdoors.

Coasters don't cost that much, though. The fact that CR is longer wouldn't be a significant increase in the price. Constructing a building is obviously more expensive than not constructing one, but the amount of money spent on Hagrid's for theming (sets, AAs, etc.) should make up for a lot of the difference, since CR doesn't really have much of that.

Expedition Everest is another good example; it's more impressive than CR in basically every way other than the actual coaster experience, and it involved building a major structure that's also themed plus an elaborate queue. It only cost $100 million. Of course things are more expensive now, and not solely from inflation, but that's not enough to account for a 5x cost increase for something that feels much cheaper in execution.

There's just little to point at with CR, including the fact that it's indoors, that makes it understandable that it cost $200m more than Hagrid's. And I actually like the fact that CR is indoors for a space based coaster; they just didn't execute it well.

As for Disney -- obviously they're happy that the ride is a big success, but I think it's arguable whether they think it was worth the price tag. If they built two $250m attractions that were major successes, that's a lot more helpful to them than one $500m attraction. They don't have an unlimited budget.
 
Last edited:

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

Back
Top Bottom