Rteetz
Well-Known Member
If they were selling this resort already they would've shown the main pool
Seriously though, this is the quiet pool. Main pool is near the other wing of this resort. You can see it in the aerials.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Disney Riviera Resort announced
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Seriously though, this is the quiet pool. Main pool is near the other wing of this resort. You can see it in the aerials.
Won’t the gondolas go 2 ways? One line heading from CBR through Riviera, then BW turn station to Epcot. Then the gondolas circle through the Epcot station and head back through the BW turn station, through the Riviera Station then back to CBR.
So the gondolas going to Riviera from CBR will face one way and those going from Riviera to CBR will face the other way?
Or are you seeing a more subtle difference that I haven’t spotted?
On another note, I just returned from the French Riviera 11/5 & thought it was gorgeous - likely because it wasn’t full of boring stark gray monoliths such as Disney’s Riviera Resort is shaping up to be.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Images like this are typically produced using existing assets, namely the “blueprints” of the building. It’s not like someone had to model as much of the hotel as possible in a short time span and this is what could be completed (and if it is then somebody doesn’t understand the tools they’re using).
Lensman
Well-Known Member
Let me provide a little more context so you understand where these two cars are. The cars on the segment from the Riviera station to the turn station are all facing the same direction, though the uneven spacing bothers me a little - particularly the big gap on right hand side. I also think the cars look a bit too close together, even given the foreshortening effect of the angle.
Actually, another thing that is starting to bother me is that it's hard for me to believe that these two are on parallel lines between two towers. It's unclear where the lines are that get the gondola cars down to the station that is just to the right and below the cars. Anyway, let me know what you think based on this wider close-up.
To clarify, I'm not saying that they created the art from scratch as a best effort, but rather that some non-technical person selected it from a set finished product images that got generated from the model by a technical person.
Disney Dad 3000
Well-Known Member
I am gravitating to the idea that the release was just of "best-effort availability" concept art for the event, but I also wonder if it was intentionally selected for its adultness and the non-kid focus? I wonder what the current main target demographic is for DVC? I suppose it's still parents in their 30's and 40's with kids from 5-10, based on their marketing videos. But I wonder if they have a different demographic for addon members? Or are they trying to appeal to the adult-ish side of parents?
I wonder if there was other concept art that did show the main pool but that art didn't have other elements that they wanted to show like the Skyliner and the Epcot fireworks?
Don't be offended, but if you're not liking the marketing, it might just be the case that you're not being targeted. Wait for some different marketing materials to be released that is more to your liking. Or consider that this might not be the DVC for you. (For your sake, I hope Reflections isn't either! Ha!)
I might be in the target audience since the closest I've gotten to a DVC pool is the laundry room.
There are things in the concept art that bother me more. After looking at it close up, the fact that the two gondola cars on the CBR station side are hanging at different angles really bugs me. That can't happen!View attachment 326987
Forgot to use the sarcasm font. Sorry!
In all seriousness, I'll withold judgement until seeing the resort in its totality. Probably not my cup of tea as I typically prefer the more themed resorts when we are on property but it does appear to have some good things going for it. I think I'm bugged more by Reflections than Riviera if I'm being honest.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
You are zooming in on the wrong section of the art. Notice how everyone in the art is wearing pants except for the people next to the pool? What’s with that? Is this resort going to have a formal dress code? No shorts or sleeveless shirts allowed.
Concept art doesn’t always show factual details. The artist uses his/her “artistic license” when showing things. Turn off the left side of your brain and look at the art again...it will all make sense then.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
Honestly, I don't know how you haven't noticed over the years how Disney parks and resorts always end up looking so much more spectacular in reality than in the early concept art.
jaxonp
Well-Known Member
I don’t disagree with this.
The new concept art makes the building look like a modern hotel in Orlando. Looks nice enough but there's nothing particularly exciting about it. 
Nmoody1
Well-Known Member
The new concept art makes the building look like a modern hotel in Orlando. Looks nice enough but there's nothing particularly exciting about it.
I think that's the direction Disney may be taking thier hotels going forward. We've already seen a more streamlined look inside the rooms.... I think Disney have realised they have enough themed resorts that cater to Disney fans and families of various financial backgrounds. One thing they are missing out on is the folks that want a Disney vacation and enhanced amenities but not necessarily a Disney themed resort - yes there may be nods to Disney history, think of the adult spaces on a Disney cruise ship - I'm thinking COVE Cafe in particular.
Disney are building a future resort that caters to the upper classes, with more money to spend on extra fastpasses, resort add in's, $5 soda and curated seminars and events (ie beverage seminars, Disney chef programs etc)
GoofGoof
Premium Member
There are definitely some trends we are seeing with Disney. Some are more customer driven, industry standard and some are Disney decisions. For the interiors the industry standard has gone away from bedspreads (which were kinda gross anyway) and colorful thick curtains to the more vanilla duvets with plain white covers and more neutral tones overall. Same with the flooring going from paterned carpet to the faux hardwood look. Lots of hotels are switching these things but they make it more difficult to portray a theme. Difficult but not impossible. I was recently at Disney’s Hilton Head resort for a few nights and while they have gone through those transformations they still have plenty of details that keep honest to the fishing camp theme. It works there so is possible elsewhere. Disney just has to try.
The other trend is the mid-rise tower vs multiple low rise buildings. A lot of the exterior details happens around the ground level and at the roof line. The more floors you add in between the more difficult it is to continue to effectively keep the building in theme. As I said in a previous post the balconies also add an additional challenge. While enjoyable for the guest in the room they can be an eye sore. For a good example of these elements compare the DVC tower at GF to the original building.
I think it’s a combination of Disney changing to a more generic design to make things more interchangeable/cheaper and also a change in demand from guests. For example, I think many people would not react positively if Disney kept the grimy bedspread instead of the duvets. Many people also like the views from higher floors even if they don’t look into a theme park and almost everyone would prefer a balcony if possible.
I've highlighted what I think is the key phrase. These days, it seems more and more like they don't. "Good enough" and "following trends" and "industry standards" are the new norms for a company that, for 50 years, set the bar for itself very high and went against industry standards because it was what guests expected and they didn't even realize that until they went there. What's wrong with being bold? "Generic" and "On the cheap" is the Disney resort standard now, because they seem to think "A majority of guests just want what they can get everywhere else"? Really? I'm not buying that one bit. They kowtow to that lowest common denominator while charging a higher and higher premium for the lower bar the company has now set for itself, all while happily offering even more up-charges and premiums that guests gobble up because they simply don't know any better (I'd use the term "too dumb", but that would probably offend the thin-skinned).
I don't know what's more disturbing - The company's philosophies these days or the number of guests who swallow Disney marketing and PR hook, line, and sinker.
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
A DVC studio is basically the same as a standard room, and you can book them as a cash guest without much difficulty. We're not DVC members and we don't rent points, but we've stayed at Old Key West and Saratoga Springs multiple times. You just book them like you'd book any other hotel room.
jaxonp
Well-Known Member
Be careful, this “isn’t” any type of “marketing”. Disney hasn’t given you the okay to think for yourself, just yet.
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
Yup. I love to laugh at the people who want to return to the good old days of... the Contemporary Resort?
GoofGoof
Premium Member
You are preaching to the choir here, but I’m not so sure we are right anymore. If everything you describe is true and Disney is not providing what guests really want then why don’t the numbers slip? Prices keep going up (a lot) but room occupancy doesn’t drop. They are now beginning to add rooms again too. I think there must be a large portion of guests who either prefer the more mainstream, industry standard type rooms or if not, the difference between the current state and the past isn’t enough to move the needle. I don’t really consider it too dumb, just a difference in taste and expectations. Plenty of people out there would call it dumb to continue to visit WDW each year or multiple times a year in general. It’s all in the eyes of the beholder.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I love the Contemporary Resort. Stayed there as a kid. The monorail going through the hotel was just about the coolest thing I’d ever seen. I remember I loved the old arcade too, and swimming in the lake. Don’t sell nostalgia short.
CaptainAmerica
Well-Known Member
I like it too, and I'm not complaining about this new place either. I'm just saying if the concept art for the Contemporary were posted online in 2018, people would be absolutely ripping it to shreds as boring/generic/hospital/office building.
Not everything needs to be AKL, the Poly, or WL because [shocker] different people like different things.
Chapek doesn't care about anything but moving merchandise, higher revenue, and higher guest spending each quarter. Most people are too lazy and dumb when it comes to WDW, and think what's there is the greatest thing since sliced bread because that's what the TV ads and social media posts tell them. It's all about giving Johnny and Susie their "MAGICAL!!!" WDW vacation, because that's what the parents think they're supposed to do (again, thanks to marketing and PR).
If Disney doesn't do anything but copy "industry standards", those guests today will know nothing different. They won't realize that Disney used to immerse them from the moment they walked into the resort lobby until the time they checked out (and really, with DME it's from the time they land until the time they arrive back at the airport). They think, "well, I like what my local Holiday Inn offers, so if Disney does the same thing, I'm happy". Guest satisfaction achieved without taking a single step towards what the company used to offer. It's Disney regressing to the mean, moving to be just another of the most common denominator instead of being the least common denominator that it used to be. It used to be an experience (and almost literally a magical experience back in the 80's and 90's) to stay at a Disney resort. With what they're building recently, it looks and feels more like what you can get anywhere. Sure, the CBR refresh was good and fit the vibe of the resort, but that's a refresh of an existing, long-standing property. New builds likely won't have that "character" any time soon, if ever. And that saddens me.
Blame technology, blame a declining culture, blame a declining educational system... it doesn't really matter. Nothing about any of this will change without a wholesale directional shift at the top of the company, and swift kick in the collective societal backside. It is what it is, but that won't stop me from calling them out when they make a bone-headed move, and I'll also praise them when they do something right (And I did so with their CBR refresh, as noted above). But the bone-headed moves seem to be far outnumbering the good things by a hefty margin under Chappie. And don't anyone think I'm just hammering Iger and Chapek - Eisner shoulders a lot of burden on this, because it was on his watch that a lot of these things started. But Eisner also did a lot of good in his first 10 years at the helm for the parks, whereas the Bob's don't have any goodwill built up to draw upon.
Would I stay at Riviera? Possibly, but that's because I'd like to stay at every DVC resort at least once.
Would I add on points there? Not a chance. DVC point costs have outstripped even the government-manipulated rate of inflation by 200% since Iger took over - $98/point in 2005 would be $126 today, a $28/point increase, and current pricing is $185/point, or $59/point higher than that.