Do you think we will have the best FYL after its expansion?

[jakeman]

Decent point, but DL still has more attractions than the MK overall. I prefer the wide-open spaces of the MK to the crowded streets of DL (which fanboys stubbornly call "quaint"), so I won't argue that the MK should be so jam-packed with attractions that the walkways are crowded every Sunday. But have you been to the MK when Splash, BTMRR, POTC, the HM, the JC, or Space Mt. is closed? The cascading effect of just one missing E-ticket is staggering. The park desperately needs another "E," but adding a couple of C's or D's wouldn't hurt either.

I agree. Especially about the walkways at DL. It is distractingly crowded there in the afternoon. Our best time was during an "extra magic hour" at DL where only resort guest had access.

I'm also by no means claiming that MK has enough to do. It really would benefit from a Mission: Space or Kilimanjaro Safari type people eater (capacity, not type of ride).

They still absorb crowds. If we were talking about one or two dark rides, I'd agree with you; but we're talking SIX attractions—one of which is an E-ticket, two of which are D's.

If it gets busy enough, guest will go on anything!

In my opinion, the quality of our actual attractions is better, if only because DL is brought down by it's bad ones. Theming, DL is way past MK currently.

For years, the MK had fewer attractions than DL but managed to trump it on show and quality. DL was dilapidated and one of the chief complaints from the "Save Disney" crew. But the park's transformation for its 50th anniversary was so complete, so gorgeous, and so well maintained in the consecutive years, that TDO's stale management at the MK suddenly became apparent. Sure, some people already knew WDW was stagnating, but the comparison between California and Florida became more pronounced.

I am encouraged to see the high number of refurbs taking place in Florida. Tarps seem to be constantly popping up overnight throughout the MK. Show elements which were neglected for years are working consistently again. The FL/TTF issues are finally being resolved. Epcot and DHS are being acknowledged and improved again. DAK still needs help.

I hope that the older side of FL gets completely reworked after the expansion opens, because otherwise, it'll look like a real-life fairy tale set next to a poor 1970s imitation. And IMO, if the land is fully refreshed, Florida's FL will at least look better than California's, even if it doesn't have as many attractions. And to reiterate what I said earlier—I've seen bigger versions of the concept art, and the area surrounding the LM ride will be just as good as FL in DLP.

I agree for the most part. DAK is not a typical Disney park. Disney has made a pretty good effort to communicate that, but it's not working. They need to throw in the towel and add a few more rides. People aren't going to spend the amount of time exploring the park like the original designers wanted them to.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I would take The Matterhorn over EE any day because its a much better coaster IMO, EE is very boring and they spent so much money and time on the Yeti that doens'work. They could have put those resources into making the coaster better.

The Matterhorn is an E ticket by virtue of nostalgia and thorough theming. The ride itself is painful - almost as much as an old wooden roller coaster. The track layout was done before computers could put together a more logical track layout. By this I mean proper turn banking and appropriate transitions from area to area.

Considering when it was built, it is an amazing attraction, but compared to Expedition Everest I don't think it's remotely close from a coaster standpoint. If you're looking at theming than you have an argument, but as a coaster, Everest is head and shoulders above The Matterhorn. A better Disney World comp would be Space Mountain.

 

[tirian]

Gosh, I forgot how much fun it was to have a legitimate, level-headed discussion online instead of resorting to fanboy drivel.

Thanks, everyone. :wave:

 

[SirGoofy]

Gosh, I forgot how much fun it was to have a legitimate, level-headed discussion online instead of resorting to fanboy drivel.

Thanks, everyone. :wave:

I agree!:wave:

But of course now it's been jinxed.:lol:

 

[Figment632]

The Matterhorn is an E ticket by virtue of nostalgia and thorough theming. The ride itself is painful - almost as much as an old wooden roller coaster. The track layout was done before computers could put together a more logical track layout. By this I mean proper turn banking and appropriate transitions from area to area.

Considering when it was built, it is an amazing attraction, but compared to Expedition Everest I don't think it's remotely close from a coaster standpoint. If you're looking at theming than you have an argument, but as a coaster, Everest is head and shoulders above The Matterhorn. A better Disney World comp would be Space Mountain.

While everything you said about the Matterhorn is true I still would take it over EE for the following reasons.

EE was a major let down for me, they spent (I love DIsney Theming but they screwed up here imo) too much time on the theme of the ride instead of building a good ride. The only part I enjoy is the reverse section. With the Yeti the way it is now the ride isn't worth it unless you have a FP imo. I find every other major coaster in WDW to be better than EE. I also find them even BTMR to be more thrilling.

 

[jakeman]

While everything you said about the Matterhorn is true I still would take it over EE for the following reasons.

EE was a major let down for me, they spent (I love DIsney Theming but they screwed up here imo) too much time on the theme of the ride instead of building a good ride. The only part I enjoy is the reverse section. With the Yeti the way it is now the ride isn't worth it unless you have a FP imo. I find every other major coaster in WDW to be better than EE. I also find them even BTMR to be more thrilling.

I just want to clarify that you have actually been on the Matterhorn, correct?

 

[Figment632]

I just want to clarify that you have actually been on the Matterhorn, correct?

Yes in May and yes it was probaly the most rough Disney coaster just like it better than EE. Are you saying you don't believe me because I will post pics of me on it if you want?

 

[_Scar]

While everything you said about the Matterhorn is true I still would take it over EE for the following reasons.

EE was a major let down for me, they spent (I love DIsney Theming but they screwed up here imo) too much time on the theme of the ride instead of building a good ride. The only part I enjoy is the reverse section. With the Yeti the way it is now the ride isn't worth it unless you have a FP imo. I find every other major coaster in WDW to be better than EE. I also find them even BTMR to be more thrilling.

I find EE as thrilling as other Orlando coasters. Plus the themeing sets it over the edge for me just enough to surpass The Mummy
(another smaller scale coaster that brings a whole lot to the table).

The yeti is in modified A mode right now and I don't see how you don't like the overload of themeing (lol, really? and you're a Disney fan?) but you won't stand in the queue (the wait time is usually around 20 minutes) because of an AA.

Plus, I don't feel like I'm going to die on Everest. :lol:


I just CAN'T see how Matterhorn is a better ride than Everest for you. Maybe if you like it for its history, fine... but you never said that. I think the real question is have you been on Everest?

 

[SirGoofy]

I find EE as thrilling as other Orlando coasters. Plus the themeing sets it over the edge for me just enough to surpass The Mummy
(another smaller scale coaster that brings a whole lot to the table).

The yeti is in modified A mode right now and I don't see how you don't like the overload of themeing (lol, really? and you're a Disney fan?) but you won't stand in the queue (the wait time is usually around 20 minutes) because of an AA.

Overload on theming?

Maybe in the queue...but Mummy's got a whole lot more on the ridepath than EE.

 

[Figment632]

Overload on theming?

Maybe in the queue...but Mummy's got a whole lot more on the ridepath than EE.

Exactly!!! That is my main problem with EE all the theming went into the que and on AA.

 

[_Scar]

Overload on theming?

Maybe in the queue...but Mummy's got a whole lot more on the ridepath than EE.

I agree. I think they're both amazing rides. Just EE's last few portions before the Yeti are more thrilling than Mummy.

Off topic, the new Mummy ride is already up anbd running at Singapore. I'm interested to see how they altered it.

 

[_Scar]

Exactly!!! That is my main problem with EE all the theming went into the que and on AA.

EE has the temple and an AA and a detailed mountain that was hand carved.... plus you're in the dark for 30 seconds of the ride, 15 seconds in the cavern, the rest is way too fast for any themeing.

Once again, have you been on Expedition Everest?

With the Mummy, it uses mainly blacklights to catch your attention. Sort of like RnRC except better quality.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Decent point, but DL still has more attractions than the MK overall. I prefer the wide-open spaces of the MK to the crowded streets of DL (which fanboys stubbornly call "quaint"), so I won't argue that the MK should be so jam-packed with attractions that the walkways are crowded every Sunday. But have you been to the MK when Splash, BTMRR, POTC, the HM, the JC, or Space Mt. is closed? The cascading effect of just one missing E-ticket is staggering. The park desperately needs another "E," but adding a couple of C's or D's wouldn't hurt either.



They still absorb crowds. If we were talking about one or two dark rides, I'd agree with you; but we're talking SIX attractions—one of which is an E-ticket, two of which are D's.


For years, the MK had fewer attractions than DL but managed to trump it on show and quality. DL was dilapidated and one of the chief complaints from the "Save Disney" crew. But the park's transformation for its 50th anniversary was so complete, so gorgeous, and so well maintained in the consecutive years, that TDO's stale management at the MK suddenly became apparent. Sure, some people already knew WDW was stagnating, but the comparison between California and Florida became more pronounced.

I am encouraged to see the high number of refurbs taking place in Florida. Tarps seem to be constantly popping up overnight throughout the MK. Show elements which were neglected for years are working consistently again. The FL/TTF issues are finally being resolved. Epcot and DHS are being acknowledged and improved again. DAK still needs help.

I hope that the older side of FL gets completely reworked after the expansion opens, because otherwise, it'll look like a real-life fairy tale set next to a poor 1970s imitation. And IMO, if the land is fully refreshed, Florida's FL will at least look better than California's, even if it doesn't have as many attractions. And to reiterate what I said earlier—I've seen bigger versions of the concept art, and the area surrounding the LM ride will be just as good as FL in DLP.

Quaint....Heh.:lookaroun


And even if they don't....FLEast still looks passable. A few tweaks here and there would do the trick.


FLWest is the problematic area, but most of it is getting changed, right? I've heard tell of the DLP Roof for the Tea Cups and Pooh getting some reworking. ...And of course, that's where the expansion starts.

 

[jakeman]

Yes in May and yes it was probaly the most rough Disney coaster just like it better than EE. Are you saying you don't believe me because I will post pics of me on it if you want?

No, just clarifying. Plenty of folks around here make crazy statements about things they haven't experienced. Just making sure your crazy statement wasn't one of those! :wave::lol:

I disagree, that's all. Matterhorn is great for what it is: a phenomenal piece of Disney history. Beyond that, I have a hard time seeing it superior to any of the Disney coasters.

Just my opinion though.

 

[RSoxNo1]

Exactly!!! That is my main problem with EE all the theming went into the que and on AA.

I think Expedition Everest is themed very well. If I was to complain about the theming it would be that steel is sometimes visible due to light leakage - those areas should have been concealed.

When comparing the show scenes of Everest (stationary scenes inside and outside the mountain specifically) to that of The Mummy, Everest does not hold up. However, I think the theming in and around the mountain is done very well, and is in my opinion better than the cutout theming in parts of The Mummy and Rock 'n' Roller Coaster.

The Mummy is a Dark Ride/Coaster hybrid.

I think many of us were expecting the same out of Everest and we didn't get it. Hence the disappointment. Imagine if the beginning of the ride was indoors, or had additional show elements before the main lift hill.

 

[SirGoofy]

I think Expedition Everest is themed very well. If I was to complain about the theming it would be that steel is sometimes visible due to light leakage - those areas should have been concealed.

When comparing the show scenes of Everest (stationary scenes inside and outside the mountain specifically) to that of The Mummy, Everest does not hold up. However, I think the theming in and around the mountain is done very well, and is in my opinion better than the cutout theming in parts of The Mummy and Rock 'n' Roller Coaster.

The Mummy is a Dark Ride/Coaster hybrid.

I think many of us were expecting the same out of Everest and we didn't get it. Hence the disappointment. Imagine if the beginning of the ride was indoors, or had additional show elements before the main lift hill.

Personally I compare EE more with BTM than Mummy, since both have similar pretenses.

And again, BTM has a ton more to look at than EE.

 

[tirian]

OT RE: DAK

People aren't going to spend the amount of time exploring the park like the original designers wanted them to.

IMO, that's because the majority of exploration trails lead to a bunch of trees and a few birds. Even the excellent paths in Asia and Africa don't get a lot of traffic. The park feels like one big walking marathon from one attraction to another, and Guests don't want to go on yet ANOTHER walking trail by the time they've finally hoofed it to the far regions of the park. I wonder if the two animal exhibit walking paths would be more popular if they weren't in the two back corners of an immense theme park.

I once discussed DAK with an Imagineer who used it as an example of poor Guest flow planning. He pointed to the bottlenecks in Africa and around EE, the confusing exit from KS, the dead-end cul-de-sac of Camp Minnie-Mickey, and a few more areas. He acknowledged that although DAK is a triumph of Imagineering's ability to create believable environments, it also suffers from a poor layout and attraction roster. WDI thought Guests would enjoy feeling like explorers, but they didn't consider that stroller brigades and hot summertime Guests wouldn't appreciate the meandering, frustrating pathways.

Anyway, I hope the FL expansion team learned from DAK! I'd hate to see the beautiful walkways covered with parked strollers.

 

[tirian]

Personally I compare EE more with BTM than Mummy, since both have similar pretenses.

And again, BTM has a ton more to look at than EE.

I prefer BTMRR. :lookaroun (I do like EE, though!)

 

[SirGoofy]

I prefer BTMRR. :lookaroun (I do like EE, though!)

I feel the exact same way.

EE is good, BTMRR is great.

 

[_Scar]

I feel the exact same way.

EE is good, BTMRR is great.

I just don't see it


To me, EE is themed amazingly outside and inside. The ride is not the kind of ride to find detail once on the ride, and still there is with the temple. This isn't Splash Mountain, and there's no need for themeing throughout the whole thrill ride.

Pick a better argument or at least justify why there should be more themeing and where!