Disney YOU HAD BETTER START LISTENING...

[DisneyMusician2]

Oh I agree, but I always argue against the Disney = kids line, but its hard if thats how the marketing is pitched.
Most in the UK will be looking for a theme park experience that resembles Alton Towers, so while WDW looks great and even non fans comment about the themeing and layout, the expectation is based on rides like Air and Nemesis, Universal meets and exceeds that. And given the 30% hike in UK ticket prices for Disney from this week from what Ive read more people are looking at the Orlando flex ticket at the expense of a trip to WDW

I would fight the Disney=kids as well.

That is really a shame as non-American guests are where the profits are going to be at for Disney...This could be a problem.

 

[ClemsonTigger]

I wish people would just read the above post. Close out all other thoughts. Read it. Let it seep in. Maybe then, some folks will open their minds and realize why some of us are so tough on the Mouse.

Sites like this tend to attract three groups -- the old guard who understands what it was that made Disney, Disney; fanboys/girls who believe Disney has never been better, can do no wrong and can't (or won't let themselves) think that Disney ever was better or could do better; and very casual fans who simply think WDW is a fun vacation destination and really don't think much beyond it's a place that makes them happy.

I can't find fault with groups one and three, but the folks in group two bother me tremendously because they are Defenders of Mediocrity and they absolutely contribute to Disney's ability to WalMart its product.

Disney can do better and does every day, even now ... in Anaheim, Tokyo, Paris and even to certain quality standards Hong Kong too.

I'd love to take all the newbies back to WDW in 1988 and show them that bigger ain't better, but my time machine had to be E-bayed when my 401K disappeared and my stock became worthless.

You forgot the other groups that sites like these tend to attract:

4. The people who want to see WDW frozen in time. All change is bad, all retired attractions were exceptional, all new attractions sully Walt's legacy.
5. The people who want to educate the ignorant masses with their vast knowledge of WDW.
6. The people who are CONVINCED THEY KNOW MORE THAN DISNEY EXECUTIVES and the company would be MUCH BETTER OFF IF THEY WERE IN CHARGE.

I find fault with all three of the above because they are, in order, not objective, condescending, and naive.

So with the six or so groups listed above,
1) Why are people surprised at the answers at this as it is a fan site, and the above mentioned groups are far from a casual Disney visitor.
2) With these various groups fairly intrenched in their beliefs....why do people think they will change their view?

 

[whylightbulb]

I haven't said much on this thread because you're doing a great job, whylightbulb.

I wish people would just read the above post. Close out all other thoughts. Read it. Let it seep in. Maybe then, some folks will open their minds and realize why some of us are so tough on the Mouse.

Sites like this tend to attract three groups -- the old guard who understands what it was that made Disney, Disney; fanboys/girls who believe Disney has never been better, can do no wrong and can't (or won't let themselves) think that Disney ever was better or could do better; and very casual fans who simply think WDW is a fun vacation destination and really don't think much beyond it's a place that makes them happy.

I can't find fault with groups one and three, but the folks in group two bother me tremendously because they are Defenders of Mediocrity and they absolutely contribute to Disney's ability to WalMart its product.

Disney can do better and does every day, even now ... in Anaheim, Tokyo, Paris and even to certain quality standards Hong Kong too.

I'd love to take all the newbies back to WDW in 1988 and show them that bigger ain't better, but my time machine had to be E-bayed when my 401K disappeared and my stock became worthless.

Thanks for the kudos. My work is starting to pick up again so anytime you can help with the responses please go ahead. The work I'm referring to is an interesting international dark ride project. It is relevant here because for a budget of under $4 million (including the show building and infrastructure. Although to be fair construction costs are much less in this country. The ride and show itself will come in at under $2.5 million) our ride will include the following features:

• Touch screens in each vehicle that will include a game integrated with each scene and will tally up the scores for the finale sequence.
• Tactile on-board physical effects including a let tickler and seat actuator.
• Large-format video projection with a fly-through sequence and custom distortion software to allow for real-time adjustment and optimization.
• An 80' by 40' outer space sequence with special projection and lens as well as hundreds of fiber optic points.
• A custom ride system.
• Multiple physical, auditory and visual effects.
• Full scenic elements for 10 - 50' x 40' (average) scenes.

If I were to list those features and tell you this was for a Disney ride how much do you think it would cost? Granted there are elements being value engineered significantly but that will be mostly scenic.

My point is, and I know I'm preaching to the choir when it comes to you, if we can put together an attraction like this for under $4 million why should anyone be satisfied with the Spaceship Earth redo for example? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they updated it and I think they did a reasonable job. I don't know what their budget was but I would venture to guess it was somewhere in the range of what it's costing us to build a completely new building and outfit the interior with a completely custom ride. Why are we not extremely excited over the experience at SSE after the rehab? Why are we saying, "it's pretty neat," or "that was pretty good?" Rhetorical question I know.

I'm not trying to brag (well maybe a little) but if we can build the $4 million ride with all those features why can't Disney build a $90 million ride that will blow us away? You and I know the answer but apparently many on this board will refuse to acknowledge the problem or simply don't care. For those in categories one and three that you list above, I can understand their position. But like you, I wish group two would wake up.

The funny thing is, we don't even need a time machine to show what a decent attraction should be like. All they have to do is visit Haunted Mansion, Splash Mountain or Carousel of Progress (for those that think our definition of a quality attraction has to be a major E ticket. Although, in line with the current line up of poorly written attraction content, the updated COP's script is pretty bad).

 

[whylightbulb]

I guess what I was trying to say as far as a contradiction was that Whylightbulb seemed to suggest that the whole company was pushing mediocrity whereas you seem to suggest that the problem lies largely within WDW. I was wondering what Whylightbulb's thoughts were on the other parks. From what you say, there does appear to be many inconsistencies.

I think you make good points in one and six. WDW has a huge tourist base that may not be as discerning as others. My wife will be having our first child in March and we are planning an October trip. I must admit that the excitement of bringing my son on his first trip will probably keep me from looking at chipped paint, dirty bathrooms, etc. I guess I am saying that since so many people only go occasionally, they may not be as quick to notice something wrong.

As far as point #6, the area that I, and others constantly talk about on this site is Epcot. I have vivid memories of a much different "Future World" but that is a whole other can of worms.

I am curious to know your opinions on the four parks individually within WDW. I ask because your argument seems to concentrate largely on MK. Could it be MK's specific management that is the problem? If WDW's management is that bad on a whole, what are the chances of having a shakeup from the top down?

I have been going to WDW since 1974 which was the year I was born. We used to go about four times a year up until I was about twelve. Now, we go about once, sometimes twice a year. (DVC). I have only been to Anaheim twice and that was a long time ago. However, I have seen enough video and heard enough from many people (including yourself) to be of the opinion that the other parks look cleaner, and are generally up to snuff. I have said before that I agree with you in that WDW does need attention.

BTW, since you enjoy the "Glory days" so much, you might wish to click below my signature where it says "My photo album" The album consists entirely of pictures from the 70's and early 80's. They are not the best quality but there might be one or two that you enjoy looking at.

I'm referring to both WDI and WDW management. In the case of WDI management for a Tokyo project, OLC is more involved and will not accept mediocre work. To a lesser extent this also happens with Anaheim. Especially since the Burbank group is so close. When it comes to WDW, their management is so inept and careless (in general) that they will accept a lesser product if it means coming in under budget. Not all WDW management is like this but the ones that really could make a difference are. They are too busy with their lunches and meetings to be bothered with little things like poorly executed show and ride product.

 

[lighteningqueen]

Just a thought, Some are saying the parks were packed. I think they offered some good sicounts this past month and also free dining is going to bring people in alot more than anything else. We are going in Dec, supposedly the slowest time of the season and cannot get one discount for anything. Every week before us and after us is getting the big breaks. I have begged or asked every week while on the phone with them and they say there are none. WHY??? Why just that week not getting any kind of help. I took the dining plan off and will pay for tickets when we arrive. We are driving down, will take 2 days and lots of gas. It is 1.89 here but wondering what it will be down the road. This will be our last for a long time.This will be our second time ever. The CM told me yesterday they have had alot of cancels, Just cost alot to go.Airline tickets for some is out of hand, for familys...I think if they could come down on their hotel rates it would greatly help to keep people coming. That is the biggest expense for 9 days for us. The food, well you can eat cheap if you look for it. Tickets, it's a good value for the days we are going (35) per day that includes the hopper.

 

[whylightbulb]

I would agree here, just like those that demand perfection are also in the minority.

I don't demand perfection. Disney, like any company, is made up of humans. There are going to be mistakes made and not everything in every project will come out perfect. What I do request however is that we strive for perfection. Not, "mediocre is good enough," or "why make it better if this will be good enough to get by."

I can't argue with the marketing other than to say I'm not sure many folks went down just for a chance to win a fastpass this past year. However, Pixar is Disney, Disney is Pixar. To continously seperate the two is folly and a hollow arguement at this point.

I never said Pixar is not Disney. I'm a huge fan of Pixar and I wish there were more theme park tie ins with Pixar properties.

My point is, as you have indirectly proven, that if you get upset over every Blue Sky project that you like that didn't get green lighted you aren't going to be a happy camper.

I don't get upset over every blue sky project that doesn't get approved. What I do get upset about is a blue sky project that gets approved and ends up being so much less than would have been possible if it weren't for the inept and uncaring management and bean counters. As I've stated before, WDI used to operate knowing that the 130% submittal will be reduced down to 70% or 80%. We were are all okay with that. But when our 130% gets reduced down to 30% or 40% it then becomes a lesser product and not worthy of Disney's legacy and far below Disney's standards.

Not really. Disney is a theme park. If, in my opinion, the quality is slipping then I will take my money elsewhere. I worked there, met my wife, got engaged, honeymooned, bought DVC, and buy annual passes. With that said, I would have no problem never going there again. I have great memories, but I can make memories anywhere.

I would postulate, in your case, that if the Disney standards I, and many others, speak of had been maintained and would continue to be upheld that you would have an even more difficult time taking your out-of-home entertainment dollar elsewhere.

One of the reasons you would have no problem never going there again is because there isn't enough of an incentive, i.e., stellar, amazing attractions that could capture your attention to the point of motivating you to return for the next one. As you and others have stated, you are happy with the attractions, but you are certainly not motivated enough to return come hell or high water. That's one of the reasons they call these things "attractions," they are supposed to be designed to attract an audience. The stronger the attraction (quality and magnitude) the more will be attracted and the stronger the attraction will be.

You are comparing apples and oranges here, especially with Indiana Jones and Laugh Floor. My wife and I enjoy Laugh Floor and we don't expect it to be Indiana Jones or the Haunted Mansion. I'm not sure anyone who goes in there does. As for the bolded statement, if it is what the majority of the public wants, why is that bad?

I've given examples of E Ticket level attractions vs. lower level. We need lower level attractions to round out the mix for any park. That doesn't mean they have to be poorly written and executed product. I've used Cranium Command and Carousel of Progress as examples of nicely executed attractions that certainly couldn't be considered E tickets.

Laugh Floor has some good points, but from a professional standpoint, its content and execution is sorely lacking. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing here but the fact is it is sloppy and rather cheap. The biggest expense is the performance animation software/CGI content. Too bad such a wonderful technology is being used in a mediocre show. In Turtle Talk it is being used correctly in my opinion. There is another example of a nicely executed attraction for what it is.

 

[MousDad]

Tactile on-board physical effects including a let tickler and seat actuator.

:lookaroun

 

[Glasgow]

There is a seriously fine line in between upholding Disney standards while also turning a profit. I think this is the biggest culprit of producing mediocre attractions.

I'm not going to comment on the attractions and their alleged quality or lack thereof, but I can tell you this .. the CEO and his staff have a job and that is to make a profit .. period. WDI is there to uphold the company's standards but if the company does not do well financially then the only people to blame are those at the top in management. Hence, not making money equals not making the shareholders happy equals getting fired.

The real trick is to spend the 'correct' amount of money on the attractions so that you turn a profit while also upholding the company's standards. Thus, the ebb and flow of the theme park business. There is a limited amount of money to be spent - where do you spend it? On the division of the company making big profits or the part of the company that needs the most help? Well, once WDW becomes the latter (which is coming soon) it'll get the money. You can say that it already needs that help but until attendance drops off it's not going to happen.

 

[ClemsonTigger]

I think another good example here is DL. I don't know how many of you have the opportunity to visit with any regularity, but "Walt's original" was run into the ground. It put the worst situations currently seen at WDW to shame. Only with a major effort over the last four years, years with large parts of the park draped and plenty of money was it restored to it's current enviable state.

I don't think WDW is nearly as bad as DL was up to about 5 years ago, so while I agree, there is plenty of room for improvement, it's also not near as bad as it can get.

 

[burninup4nick]

I'm with you. Unless there's a significant raise in prices, I'm going to keep going. And going. And then go some more. They don't need new attractions, hotels, or anything of the like to keep me coming back. I'll be there regardless. A lot of people just sound like a bunch of spoiled brats.

agreed.....


DISNEY IS ONE OF MY FAVORITE PLACES ON EARTH.....

Ill keep going unless there is a HUGE rise in prices....

 

[jakeman]

I would postulate, in your case, that if the Disney standards I, and many others, speak of had been maintained and would continue to be upheld that you would have an even more difficult time taking your out-of-home entertainment dollar elsewhere.

One of the reasons you would have no problem never going there again is because there isn't enough of an incentive, i.e., stellar, amazing attractions that could capture your attention to the point of motivating you to return for the next one. As you and others have stated, you are happy with the attractions, but you are certainly not motivated enough to return come hell or high water. That's one of the reasons they call these things "attractions," they are supposed to be designed to attract an audience. The stronger the attraction (quality and magnitude) the more will be attracted and the stronger the attraction will be.

This really isn't the case. I would have no problem never going again because it is a big world and Disney is not the be all end all of my vacation experience. I would venture to say that a vast majority of folk who attend the park and I would even hazard to say a good chunk that frequent these boards would agree.

I've given examples of E Ticket level attractions vs. lower level. We need lower level attractions to round out the mix for any park. That doesn't mean they have to be poorly written and executed product. I've used Cranium Command and Carousel of Progress as examples of nicely executed attractions that certainly couldn't be considered E tickets.

Laugh Floor has some good points, but from a professional standpoint, its content and execution is sorely lacking. I have no problem with anyone disagreeing here but the fact is it is sloppy and rather cheap. The biggest expense is the performance animation software/CGI content. Too bad such a wonderful technology is being used in a mediocre show. In Turtle Talk it is being used correctly in my opinion. There is another example of a nicely executed attraction for what it is.

However, as I have stated, if only a very small minority of guest (those with theme park construction/project management experience) can tell what is lacking, why is that bad? I can't tell there is anything wrong with Laugh Floor and I enjoy it. For example, I didn't storm out of Body Wars because they didn't appropriately display how the immunoglobin cascade on the helper-T cell reacted to Elizabeth Shu. In my opinion they could have shown the way the immune system reacts more accurately, but why bother when only 99.99% of the guest are going to notice? That's not mediocrity. It's good business sense.

 

[Missing20K]

There is a seriously fine line in between upholding Disney standards while also turning a profit. I think this is the biggest culprit of producing mediocre attractions.

I'm not going to comment on the attractions and their alleged quality or lack thereof, but I can tell you this .. the CEO and his staff have a job and that is to make a profit .. period. WDI is there to uphold the company's standards but if the company does not do well financially then the only people to blame are those at the top in management. Hence, not making money equals not making the shareholders happy equals getting fired.

The real trick is to spend the 'correct' amount of money on the attractions so that you turn a profit while also upholding the company's standards. Thus, the ebb and flow of the theme park business. There is a limited amount of money to be spent - where do you spend it? On the division of the company making big profits or the part of the company that needs the most help? Well, once WDW becomes the latter (which is coming soon) it'll get the money. You can say that it already needs that help but until attendance drops off it's not going to happen.

Well said.

 

[whylightbulb]

This really isn't the case. I would have no problem never going again because it is a big world and Disney is not the be all end all of my vacation experience. I would venture to say that a vast majority of folk who attend the park and I would even hazard to say a good chunk that frequent these boards would agree.

So on one hand you think there is nothing else like Disney (or do you not think that), on the other hand you feel as though you could replace the experience you can purchase at Disney with other vacation destinations? I don't think there are too many people that would only visit Disney for their vacations. But to say you would be satisfied never visiting again would mean that you feel as though there is nothing that will be built in the future worth seeing at Disney. If that's the case than perhaps you need to see the type of attractions I'm speaking of.

However, as I have stated, if only a very small minority of guest (those with theme park construction/project management experience) can tell what is lacking, why is that bad? I can't tell there is anything wrong with Laugh Floor and I enjoy it. For example, I didn't storm out of Body Wars because they didn't appropriately display how the immunoglobin cascade on the helper-T cell reacted to Elizabeth Shu. In my opinion they could have shown the way the immune system reacts more accurately, but why bother when only 99.99% of the guest are going to notice? That's not mediocrity. It's good business sense.

First of all it's not just those that work in the industry that can tell what is lacking. I hear it all the time from guests, friends and family. Part of my job as an attraction designer is to walk in the shoes of the average guest. I do spend some time at the parks, waiting in lines and talking to the guests. Those that are first timers obviously don't suspect any kind of change in standards. But there are many frequent visitors that I have talked with that don't plan on visiting as often as they used to. I hear a lot of comments referring to the cleanliness and quality in general slipping. Some can't quite put their finger on it but they know something isn't right. Myself and others, as designers, know what is wrong. I'm revealing one aspect of it here.

Some refer to it as the "magic." Part of that magic is experiencing events in three-dimensions that you can't encounter elsewhere. Being immersed in an otherworldly environment with very little to no intrusion from the outside world. When I see cheap sintra cutouts and very minimal scenic work in the queue for Laugh Floor, for example, my impression is not that I'm entering the world of Monstropolis but rather an amusement park show. That is not the Disney of the 60s through the 80s.

My point is, you may enjoy Laugh Floor as it is, but there is a difference between simply enjoying an attraction and being immersed because you are able to suspend disbelief. You have probably been to movies that you forgot you were sitting in a theater. You got so involved with the story and you vicariously experienced it through the characters. You probably remember movies like that fondly. That is supposed to be one way a Disney Attraction should make you feel.

You are proving my point when you say things like, "it's just a theme park ride." If that is your impression than clearly Disney is not producing these attractions to the level they should be. If they did, you would look forward to your next Disney vacation with anticipation for the newest emotional, thrilling and immersive experience.

Your example for Body Wars perhaps wasn't presented in the right context. movies, TV, books...they all take creative liberties in order to advance the story or make it more interesting. I don't have a problem with that. What I do have a problem with is bad writing and poor execution. In the case of Body Wars there was some pretty cheesy diolog and some bad acting.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Thanks for the kudos. My work is starting to pick up again so anytime you can help with the responses please go ahead. The work I'm referring to is an interesting international dark ride project. It is relevant here because for a budget of under $4 million (including the show building and infrastructure. Although to be fair construction costs are much less in this country. The ride and show itself will come in at under $2.5 million) our ride will include the following features:

• Touch screens in each vehicle that will include a game integrated with each scene and will tally up the scores for the finale sequence.
• Tactile on-board physical effects including a let tickler and seat actuator.
• Large-format video projection with a fly-through sequence and custom distortion software to allow for real-time adjustment and optimization.
• An 80' by 40' outer space sequence with special projection and lens as well as hundreds of fiber optic points.
• A custom ride system.
• Multiple physical, auditory and visual effects.
• Full scenic elements for 10 - 50' x 40' (average) scenes.

If I were to list those features and tell you this was for a Disney ride how much do you think it would cost? Granted there are elements being value engineered significantly but that will be mostly scenic.

My point is, and I know I'm preaching to the choir when it comes to you, if we can put together an attraction like this for under $4 million why should anyone be satisfied with the Spaceship Earth redo for example? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they updated it and I think they did a reasonable job. I don't know what their budget was but I would venture to guess it was somewhere in the range of what it's costing us to build a completely new building and outfit the interior with a completely custom ride. Why are we not extremely excited over the experience at SSE after the rehab? Why are we saying, "it's pretty neat," or "that was pretty good?" Rhetorical question I know.

I'm not trying to brag (well maybe a little) but if we can build the $4 million ride with all those features why can't Disney build a $90 million ride that will blow us away? You and I know the answer but apparently many on this board will refuse to acknowledge the problem or simply don't care. For those in categories one and three that you list above, I can understand their position. But like you, I wish group two would wake up.

The funny thing is, we don't even need a time machine to show what a decent attraction should be like. All they have to do is visit Haunted Mansion, Splash Mountain or Carousel of Progress (for those that think our definition of a quality attraction has to be a major E ticket. Although, in line with the current line up of poorly written attraction content, the updated COP's script is pretty bad).

What in God's great Spaceship Earth are you working on?!

 

[whylightbulb]

What in God's great Spaceship Earth are you working on?!

LOL...ancient Chinese secret. It will be a pretty decent ride for the budget.

 

[Bob Connor]

Why light bulb:
You don't by any chance work for the Sally corporation and worked on Nights in White Satin - The Trip at Hard Rock Park, did you? Unfortunately, they went bankrupt so people may never see that ride but it is all screens and sounds like what you are working on.

I wonder how much that ride cost? Since it is in an existing building maybe it was done for 4 million? By the way, I have had people tell me it is only about 1/4 as good as the original journey to imagination, but it's still much better than what Disney has in that building now.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

LOL...ancient Chinese secret. It will be a pretty decent ride for the budget.

Ah.

 

[jakeman]

So on one hand you think there is nothing else like Disney (or do you not think that), on the other hand you feel as though you could replace the experience you can purchase at Disney with other vacation destinations? I don't think there are too many people that would only visit Disney for their vacations. But to say you would be satisfied never visiting again would mean that you feel as though there is nothing that will be built in the future worth seeing at Disney. If that's the case than perhaps you need to see the type of attractions I'm speaking of.

No, I think in general, WDW is just not that important in the grand scheme of life. It has nothing to do with the quality or what they are building. Right now I am happy with my fun to cost ratio of going to WDW. If that changes, I won't go. It's pretty simple.

You are proving my point when you say things like, "it's just a theme park ride." If that is your impression than clearly Disney is not producing these attractions to the level they should be. If they did, you would look forward to your next Disney vacation with anticipation for the newest emotional, thrilling and immersive experience.

I disagree. I think I have a different perspective. I've never been "lost in the immersion of a ride experience". It's a ride, or a show, nothing more. That holds true for the new attractions as well as the old.

 

[WDW1974]

I guess what I was trying to say as far as a contradiction was that Whylightbulb seemed to suggest that the whole company was pushing mediocrity whereas you seem to suggest that the problem lies largely within WDW. I was wondering what Whylightbulb's thoughts were on the other parks. From what you say, there does appear to be many inconsistencies.

That is the key point, I think.

Disney, and WDW, are very inconsistent.

It's almost like staying in a hotel on the sixth floor and everything is pefect and brand new and amazing, while the room three floors above you is a dump (which can happen at WDW and has too!)

I don't believe everything Disney is pushing is mediocre. In any division. And certainly not even parks and resorts. ...

I think you make good points in one and six. WDW has a huge tourist base that may not be as discerning as others. My wife will be having our first child in March and we are planning an October trip. I must admit that the excitement of bringing my son on his first trip will probably keep me from looking at chipped paint, dirty bathrooms, etc. I guess I am saying that since so many people only go occasionally, they may not be as quick to notice something wrong.

And that's fine too. If I were bringing a child for the first time, I would likely be focusing on that.

BUT ... if I see chipped paint (or holes in the walls like in the new TSMM or the old Buzz Lighyear) or dirty bathrooms, it bothers me. Doesn't ruin the trip, but it bothers me.

I can still recall my amazement as a child when I saw my first WDW bathroom (I admit that sentence sounds weird but ...) because it was so large, so bright and so spotless. I still recall my father proudly saying 'this place is so clean you could eat off the sidewalks.'

That's the stuff Disney conditioned me to accept and it isn't OK to me to see them lower their standards even if it doesn't bother the fanboys.

As far as point #6, the area that I, and others constantly talk about on this site is Epcot. I have vivid memories of a much different "Future World" but that is a whole other can of worms.

Some of the attractions may have been dry ... and some were certainly stale in their final years ... but FW was so much more impressive in 1988 than it is 2008.

I am curious to know your opinions on the four parks individually within WDW. I ask because your argument seems to concentrate largely on MK. Could it be MK's specific management that is the problem? If WDW's management is that bad on a whole, what are the chances of having a shakeup from the top down?

Individually, I enjoy aspects of all of them. But I truly love EPCOT (the park that made me a Disney parks fan for life) and DAK (shows that WDI still can do the job ... or some people there can.)

The MK would rank next, although unlike every other MK-style park I've been in (all but TDL), I get bored ... usually after 3-4 hours. A friend's wife calls in 'a mass market characture of DL' and I can't disagree. Too many rundown and empty areas. Too many things taken away and not replaced. A total WalMarting of the place. So many of the little Disney Details whittled away over the years.

The Park Formerly Known as The Disney-MGM Studios would come in dead last. It's actually my least favorite Disney park in the world. It has two things that I visit for -- the ToT and the Brown Derby (although I do enjoy the new TSMM I don't feel it's a must do). That's really it. The BAH plopped down in the middle of Hollywood Blvd. so sums up the WalMarting and marginalizing of the place. As an APer who lives a few hours away, I can (and just did) go nine months without setting foot inside and not feel like I am missing anything. That park has been absolutely ruined ... totally muddled throw anything theming.

I have been going to WDW since 1974 which was the year I was born. We used to go about four times a year up until I was about twelve. Now, we go about once, sometimes twice a year. (DVC). I have only been to Anaheim twice and that was a long time ago. However, I have seen enough video and heard enough from many people (including yourself) to be of the opinion that the other parks look cleaner, and are generally up to snuff. I have said before that I agree with you in that WDW does need attention.

BTW, since you enjoy the "Glory days" so much, you might wish to click below my signature where it says "My photo album" The album consists entirely of pictures from the 70's and early 80's. They are not the best quality but there might be one or two that you enjoy looking at.

'74 was a very good year! I'll check the pics out, thanks!

 

[WDW1974]

Thanks for the kudos. My work is starting to pick up again so anytime you can help with the responses please go ahead. The work I'm referring to is an interesting international dark ride project. It is relevant here because for a budget of under $4 million (including the show building and infrastructure. Although to be fair construction costs are much less in this country. The ride and show itself will come in at under $2.5 million) our ride will include the following features:

• Touch screens in each vehicle that will include a game integrated with each scene and will tally up the scores for the finale sequence.
• Tactile on-board physical effects including a let tickler and seat actuator.
• Large-format video projection with a fly-through sequence and custom distortion software to allow for real-time adjustment and optimization.
• An 80' by 40' outer space sequence with special projection and lens as well as hundreds of fiber optic points.
• A custom ride system.
• Multiple physical, auditory and visual effects.
• Full scenic elements for 10 - 50' x 40' (average) scenes.

If I were to list those features and tell you this was for a Disney ride how much do you think it would cost? Granted there are elements being value engineered significantly but that will be mostly scenic.

Hmm ... $4 million in real world dollars? That's at least $40-50 million in WDI dollars, I'd say ... sadly.

And it sounds like you've got an impressive attraction getting built. I'd be interested in finding out where I'd have to go to experience it ... I'll guess China!

My point is, and I know I'm preaching to the choir when it comes to you, if we can put together an attraction like this for under $4 million why should anyone be satisfied with the Spaceship Earth redo for example? Don't get me wrong, I'm glad they updated it and I think they did a reasonable job. I don't know what their budget was but I would venture to guess it was somewhere in the range of what it's costing us to build a completely new building and outfit the interior with a completely custom ride. Why are we not extremely excited over the experience at SSE after the rehab? Why are we saying, "it's pretty neat," or "that was pretty good?" Rhetorical question I know.

I'm not trying to brag (well maybe a little) but if we can build the $4 million ride with all those features why can't Disney build a $90 million ride that will blow us away? You and I know the answer but apparently many on this board will refuse to acknowledge the problem or simply don't care. For those in categories one and three that you list above, I can understand their position. But like you, I wish group two would wake up.

I am tired of saying 'that wasn't so bad' or 'that was pretty good' to describe a new Disney ride or attraction. They always used to wow me ... now I'm supposed to be happy when they produce something that is just OK or doesn't suck?

Sorry, but Disney is better than that ...

The problem with group two is that for them Disney might as well be a religion or a political party. They will mindlessly accept anything so long as it has a Hidden Mickey in it.

The funny thing is, we don't even need a time machine to show what a decent attraction should be like. All they have to do is visit Haunted Mansion, Splash Mountain or Carousel of Progress (for those that think our definition of a quality attraction has to be a major E ticket. Although, in line with the current line up of poorly written attraction content, the updated COP's script is pretty bad).

Yeah ... whenever I hear excuses for why Disney doesn't build long, immersive, family rides with AAs and huge sets and cool effects, I always point to things like Mansion and Pirates and Peter Pan and Small World ... things that were created in the 1960s but are as popular and relevant as ever.

Does anyone thing MILF or Turtle Talk or SGE ... or even Mission Space or Soarin will still exist in 40 years?

I'm willing to bet right now that none of them will. But if the planet still exists and Disney parks do, I'll also bet that people will still be enjoying Mansion and Pirates and Peter Pan and Small World because they are timeless. Just like great stories ... they get passed from generation to generation.

What worries me is I see very few Disney attractions from the past 15 years that have those qualities.

At WDW I see two ... ToT and KS. That's it. And that speaks volumes.