• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Disney's Animal Kingdom vs. Disney California Adventure

Disney's Animal Kingdom or Disney California Adventure?

  • Disney's Animal Kingdom

    Votes: 81 85.3%
  • Disney California Adventure

    Votes: 14 14.7%

  • Total voters
    95

aliceismad

Well-Known Member
Why do you feel DCA has a wider variety of rides? I think both pretty much run the gambit aside from a couple ride types. DCA has more rides but I wouldn't say more diverse.
DCA has more rides and more rides specifically for younger kids. For the little ones, DAK has Triceratops, Safari, and Nav'i, but everything else has a height limit. DCA also has more than one dark ride, more than one thrill ride, etc. (But that's to be expected because one of DAK's primary attractions is all of the animals.)
 

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
I'd agree. It's so sad because it had a very unique theme, a theme I do not particularly prefer but it at least had direct, now it's going to just be another hodgepodge of random IP, another DHS. It's unfortunate. But DAK is such a great park and apparently DCA just doesn't come out on top.
Part of the problem is that California Adventure's "unique theme" was so poorly executed originally, at least for a Disney Park. It seems Eisner and Co. thought that buying a bunch of off-the-shelf rides, slapping on the Disney label, and selling booze within the park would be enough. Gradually inserting a bunch of IP connections was probably the only realistic way they could have saved the park going forward.

Kind of odd that the same company got so many things right with Animal Kingdom, then got California Adventure so wrong only 3 years later.
 

plutofan15

Well-Known Member
We liked California Adventure for CarsLand, Grizzly Rapids and the Animation Academy. But Animal Kingdom is a much better overall park. If Kahli could be expanded to the length of Grizzly, it would be darn close to a landslide win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tux

Pooh.sHoneyHuntTDL

Well-Known Member
Part of the problem is that California Adventure's "unique theme" was so poorly executed originally, at least for a Disney Park. It seems Eisner and Co. thought that buying a bunch of off-the-shelf rides, slapping on the Disney label, and selling booze within the park would be enough. Gradually inserting a bunch of IP connections was probably the only realistic way they could have saved the park going forward.

Kind of odd that the same company got so many things right with Animal Kingdom, then got California Adventure so wrong only 3 years later.
Revisionist history.

AK was the same way. That park had nothing and they slowly added rides/IP.
 

BlakeW39

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
DCA has more rides and more rides specifically for younger kids. For the little ones, DAK has Triceratops, Safari, and Nav'i, but everything else has a height limit. DCA also has more than one dark ride, more than one thrill ride, etc. (But that's to be expected because one of DAK's primary attractions is all of the animals.)
Well yes. But I wouldn't equate that to a more diverse selection, just more. DAK has Dinosaur and Kili which don't really have equivalents at DCA. I guess Dino would be most like RSR. Idk if I would say DCA has more diverse rise offerings. More offering sure but not more diverse necessarily, having more dark rides isn't more diversity. But like you said animals are part of the deal too, as are some really great shows, so attraction wise I definitely think DAK takes the cake for diversity.
 

BlakeW39

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
We liked California Adventure for CarsLand, Grizzly Rapids and the Animation Academy. But Animal Kingdom is a much better overall park. If Kahli could be expanded to the length of Grizzly, it would be darn close to a landslide win.
On a loosely related topic, what could make Kali a ride on par with others at DAK? Npt that Kali's bad but ya know.
 
Last edited:

Heppenheimer

Well-Known Member
Revisionist history.

AK was the same way. That park had nothing and they slowly added rides/IP.
Animal Kingdom was always intended as a hybrid zoo-theme park, to compete against Busch Gardens Tampa. Plus, it's been well received and profitable since it opened whereas California Adventure 1.0 was widely derided and put a serious dent in the Disney Parks division's internal finances.
 

BlakeW39

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
Animal Kingdom was always intended as a hybrid zoo-theme park, to compete against Busch Gardens Tampa. Plus, it's been well received and profitable since it opened whereas California Adventure 1.0 was widely derided and put a serious dent in the Disney Parks division's internal finances.
We know. He's saying they were the same except they weren't in any way lol. DAK was too light on attractions sure but what was there was amazing; DCA was just bad.
 

Disneysea05

Well-Known Member
I don’t think that’s what PoohsHunnyHunt meant. I doubt it was suggested that DAK was as unthemed as DCA was.

DAK was no doubt heavily criticized when it opened for having very little to do. Asia was not there, I think even DinoRama debuted later. They kept saying it was a Theme Park and Nautazu, but the animal exhibits were the main draw.

The difference is that DAK seemed to pour the funds it had into a highly themed environment light on attractions and DCA filled the park with relatively more attractions but most were cheap off the shelf rides (except for Soarin) and the theming was virtually non existent except for Grizzly Peak.

So both parks had their own set of criticism. At least one was beautiful from day 1.
 
Last edited:

BlakeW39

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I don’t think that’s what PoohsHunnyHunt meant. I doubt it was suggested that DAK was as unthemed as DCA was.

DAK was no doubt heavily criticized when it opened for having very little to do. Asia was not there, I think even DinoRama debuted later. They kept saying it was a Theme Park and Nautazu, but the animal exhibits were the main draw.

The difference is that DAK seemed to pour the funds it had into a highly themed environment light on attractions and DCA filled the park with relatively more attractions but most were cheap off the shelf rides (except for Soarin) and the theming was virtually non existent except for Grizzly Peak.

So both parks had their own set of criticism. At least one was beautiful from day 1.
But he also said they slowly started adding "rides/IP"... let's zoom in on that. He is comparkng the changes to DCA to changes at DAK, when they are polar opposites, DCA changes are actual changes and alterations to the overall theme and cohesion of the park, DAK has just been additions to enhance what the park has always been. They inherently different and the similarity they have is that they were both derided (to different degrees) upon opening for lack of attractions.
 

aliceismad

Well-Known Member
On a loosely related topic, what could make Kali a ride on par with others at DAK? Npt that Kali's bad but ya know.
I don't think they can. Is there a way to make Kali longer without basically ripping up the ride and starting over? 1 drop is a bit of a disappointment if you wait standby.
 

jumpinjamie

New Member
I first visited DCA in December of 2001, even rode Superstar Limo and still think the park gets a bad rep. Though the DCA that had TOT, Muppets, and the Aladdin show is better IMO.
 
Top Bottom