Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks (Part II)

[lazyboy97o]

That is a real shame about Dragon Challenge. I wonder if this will have any implications on Battlestar Galactica.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

That is a real shame about Dragon Challenge. I wonder if this will have any implications on Battlestar Galactica.

It's getting so much harder to design attractions with a "wow" and to a small degree, this is certainly a reason that film based rides are getting a foothold in that you can use 3D effects to "break the barrier" between the guest and the show without being liable to hurt anyone. You get the reaction without the liability. The ride "envelope" (distance between maximum arm reach and the show set) is so big now that it's hard to make anything seem threatening.

 

[Scuttle]

At this point now all you have are two decent steel coasters. I've long said that the steel coasters in IOA really disrupt that park for me. I enjoy Dragon Challenge but I really think the park could do without Dragon Challenge and The Hulk in favor of highly themed attractions.

The removal of the dueling aspect of the coaster removes a lot of the uniqueness. I'm hoping this can somehow be addressed as part of the Potter Expansion.

Completely agree. But then again isn't this kind of what separates WDC from any other theme park in the world. So having said that I don't go to IOA for theming. I go for thrill rides and that's about it, but I agree the Hulk looks hideous looking from the WWHP.

 

[WDW1974]

Interesting read as always, Eddie. Just back from a brief (almost week) visit to the O-Town parks. I'm glad to see your thoughts on the DDP and that you agree with those of us who see it as destroying dining at the resort ... and interesting to hear your take on Joe Rohde's merits (I'd like if his detractors learned how to spell his name ... oh and John Lasseter's as well ... it seems like anyone who rips them can't even spell the guys' names!)

Don't know if you've covered this, but a new park opened in Central Florida last weekend. Legoland made its debut on the site formerly known as Cypress Gardens. Some folks (especially Disney Lifestyle bloggers/podcasters) have been harsh on it because it's largely aimed at a younger audience (let's forget for a moment that Disney has been working on making its FLA parks, especially the MK, into children's parks).

Just wondered what you thought about the Legoland model ... and what you think they do well or don't.

~GFC~

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Interesting read as always, Eddie. Just back from a brief (almost week) visit to the O-Town parks. I'm glad to see your thoughts on the DDP and that you agree with those of us who see it as destroying dining at the resort ... and interesting to hear your take on Joe Rohde's merits (I'd like if his detractors learned how to spell his name ... oh and John Lasseter's as well ... it seems like anyone who rips them can't even spell the guys' names!)

Don't know if you've covered this, but a new park opened in Central Florida last weekend. Legoland made its debut on the site formerly known as Cypress Gardens. Some folks (especially Disney Lifestyle bloggers/podcasters) have been harsh on it because it's largely aimed at a younger audience (let's forget for a moment that Disney has been working on making its FLA parks, especially the MK, into children's parks).

Just wondered what you thought about the Legoland model ... and what you think they do well or don't.

~GFC~

Nothing against the model, it works, or there would only be one park right? I'm not really a fan of the parks. I was a huge Lego fan as a kid, as it was my number one toy. We took the kids when they were like 6 and they would look at the ride, and then the long line, then say the line was not worth the wait. Unless you are in the sweet spot of easily entertained, it kind of misses. The capacity of most of the stuff is so low, making the waits punishing that it's kind of a non starter in many cases. They liked it overall but I never heard of any desire to return. They'd rather do the Zoo.

They love national parks and forests, etc, so it's not the ADD factor, it's just that the payoff was not there.

 

[AEfx]

It's getting so much harder to design attractions with a "wow" and to a small degree, this is certainly a reason that film based rides are getting a foothold in that you can use 3D effects to "break the barrier" between the guest and the show without being liable to hurt anyone. You get the reaction without the liability. The ride "envelope" (distance between maximum arm reach and the show set) is so big now that it's hard to make anything seem threatening.

If you are Disney, LOL. Universal gets you incredibly close to the action in Harry Potter. That was the most shocking thing about the attraction to me, used to Disney keeping you as far away as possible. That said, I much prefer being further away to yet another "let's watch a big TV" attraction.

On a side note, that's one stark difference I noticed between Disneyland and WDW, in fact - how much closer you are to all the sets there, when the newer versions at WDW keep you much further away.

 

[HMF]

Interesting read as always, Eddie. Just back from a brief (almost week) visit to the O-Town parks. I'm glad to see your thoughts on the DDP and that you agree with those of us who see it as destroying dining at the resort ... and interesting to hear your take on Joe Rohde's merits (I'd like if his detractors learned how to spell his name ... oh and John Lasseter's as well ... it seems like anyone who rips them can't even spell the guys' names!)

Forget the spelling it took me a while to know how to pronounce his name. I used to think it was pronounced like "Road" instead of "Roadie".

 

[MarkTwain]

It's getting so much harder to design attractions with a "wow" and to a small degree, this is certainly a reason that film based rides are getting a foothold in that you can use 3D effects to "break the barrier" between the guest and the show without being liable to hurt anyone. You get the reaction without the liability. The ride "envelope" (distance between maximum arm reach and the show set) is so big now that it's hard to make anything seem threatening.

This subject of the increasing requirement for arm length is interesting to me. This is partially what has prevented the return of Disneyland's Peoplemover, isn't it? I've also heard complaints that DCA's Little Mermaid scenes seem too "distant," possibly for this same reason.

I will say Forbidden Journey at IoA seemed to do a fine job with it though, with its dragon and dementor elements.

 

[RSoxNo1]

It's getting so much harder to design attractions with a "wow" and to a small degree, this is certainly a reason that film based rides are getting a foothold in that you can use 3D effects to "break the barrier" between the guest and the show without being liable to hurt anyone. You get the reaction without the liability. The ride "envelope" (distance between maximum arm reach and the show set) is so big now that it's hard to make anything seem threatening.

I think this is part of the reason why Forbidden Journey is such a great experience. The set pieces get closer than anything else I've experienced in a theme park attraction save being able to reach out and touch a volcano on Peter Pan's Flight.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

I think this is part of the reason why Forbidden Journey is such a great experience. The set pieces get closer than anything else I've experienced in a theme park attraction save being able to reach out and touch a volcano on Peter Pan's Flight.

quite a feat at that.

 

[KevinYee]

Eddie, earlier you've said that you seldom get the freedom to invent attractions from whole cloth, and instead have to solve a problem someone else hands you. Two questions:

1. Do you agree that creative restraints sometimes actually make for better, maybe even more creative, products? Examples might include the shark in Jaws (which malfunctioned and had to be seen only in flashes, making it more terrifying)

One might posit a corrollary: unlimited money doesn't guarantee a great product.

2. What problem in today's park screams for an Imagineer solution? That could either be what is "not working" the most, or maybe just a pet project you'd love to tackle.

 

[George]

2. What problem in today's park screams for an Imagineer solution? That could either be what is "not working" the most, or maybe just a pet project you'd love to tackle.

Great questions. Based on the things I've seen folk post over the years, my guess is that a composite answer to number 2, average over the past 3 or 4 years would be 1) the Yeti and 2) Journey into Imagination.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Eddie, earlier you've said that you seldom get the freedom to invent attractions from whole cloth, and instead have to solve a problem someone else hands you. Two questions:

1. Do you agree that creative restraints sometimes actually make for better, maybe even more creative, products? Examples might include the shark in Jaws (which malfunctioned and had to be seen only in flashes, making it more terrifying)

One might posit a corrollary: unlimited money doesn't guarantee a great product.

2. What problem in today's park screams for an Imagineer solution? That could either be what is "not working" the most, or maybe just a pet project you'd love to tackle.

1. Reasonable challenges and limitations do create a ripe environment for breakthroughs. Budget constraints sometimes send you in directions you would not have explored otherwise. When the constraints are too far out of balance you end up with DL's current Tomorrowland. You are right, unlimited cash does not guarantee a great show. Unlimited paint does not mean great art. To the contrary, you have to instinctively know when the painting is done and stop. If you go back a page or two to an earlier response to your post, I bring up the fact that informed compromise is how you succeed in this delicate budget driven maze.

2. Hmmm. You could cherry pick something isolated or think broader. I think solving the balance of experience would be the biggest bang for the idea. Balancing the food, merchandise and attraction mix relative to how much show value they all need to carry would be of huge impact to the park. Your DDP article draws attention to the food's business model impacting the experience. If the food and shops were treated more as "attractions" subsidized by the admission, not stocked as repetitive "stand alone businesses" (or entitlement centers!), then the guest satisfaction and desire to return would go through the roof. Look at the "treasure hunt" of a shopping experience at old New Orlean's or old Liberty Square (cooking, silver, jewelry, and real antique stores) or exotic dining at Tahitian Terrace, or Aladdin's Oasis? More unique signature items like Dole Whip? What a day you had just by walking around and eating. The best thing an Imagineer could do is to work with the other divisions to think holistically of what would make the whole thing come together more as a show. I had a taste of getting to do that in the 90's at DL, and it can be done. Trust has to be built. Those in the other divisions are only limited by their marching orders. The priorities and business goals would need to be more aligned to make it possible.

 

[unkadug]

1. Reasonable challenges and limitations do create a ripe environment for breakthroughs. Budget constraints sometimes send you in directions you would not have explored otherwise. When the constraints are too far out of balance you end up with DL's current Tomorrowland. You are right, unlimited cash does not guarantee a great show. Unlimited paint does not mean great art. To the contrary, you have to instinctively know when the painting is done and stop. If you go back a page or two to an earlier response to your post, I bring up the fact that informed compromise is how you succeed in this delicate budget driven maze.

2. Hmmm. You could cherry pick something isolated or think broader. I think solving the balance of experience would be the biggest bang for the idea. Balancing the food, merchandise and attraction mix relative to how much show value they all need to carry would be of huge impact to the park. Your DDP article draws attention to the food's business model impacting the experience. If the food and shops were treated more as "attractions" subsidized by the admission, not stocked as repetitive "stand alone businesses" (or entitlement centers!), then the guest satisfaction and desire to return would go through the roof. Look at the "treasure hunt" of a shopping experience at old New Orlean's or old Liberty Square (cooking, silver, jewelry, and real antique stores) or exotic dining at Tahitian Terrace, or Aladdin's Oasis? More unique signature items like Dole Whip? What a day you had just by walking around and eating. The best thing an Imagineer could do is to work with the other divisions to think holistically of what would make the whole thing come together more as a show. I had a taste of getting to do that in the 90's at DL, and it can be done. Trust has to be built. Those in the other divisions are only limited by their marching orders. The priorities and business goals would need to be more aligned to make it possible.

Thank you. The homogenization of merchandise hasn't gotten pretty bad.

The loss of the magic shoppe on Main Street was the loss of a great attraction, and made Main Street lose some of it's own "magic".

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Thank you. The homogenization of merchandise hasn't gotten pretty bad.

The loss of the magic shoppe on Main Street was the loss of a great attraction, and made Main Street lose some of it's own "magic".

Disneyland's solution to this is the right one. Bring in a leasee that knows and has a passion for magic and let them run it. It has a soul again. Disneyland has tried with some success to bring back these kinds of unique experiences. Tony and I were very passionate about this when I was down there and I know he still is and it shows.

 

[unkadug]

Disneyland's solution to this is the right one. Bring in a leasee that knows and has a passion for magic and let them run it. It has a soul again. Disneyland has tried with some success to bring back these kinds of unique experiences. Tony and I were very passionate about this when I was down there and I know he still is and it shows.

But doesn't that make it a stand alone business and NOT a part of the subsidy of the admissions. I'm sure Disney is not giving Houdini's a part of the gate.

Unique experiences should be part of what we are paying for in admissions. Isn't parceling out these experiences to outside vendors forcing them to do Disney's work?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

But doesn't that make it a stand alone business and NOT a part of the subsidy of the admissions. I'm sure Disney is not giving Houdini's a part of the gate.

Unique experiences should be part of what we are paying for in admissions. Isn't parceling out these experiences to outside vendors forcing them to do Disney's work?

Yes...They willingly show up to do it! I started at DL working for Sunkist, not Disney and they knew the Orange Juice business in a way that made them money and provided a "fresh squeezed just of you" product. Very Main Street. Disney could not reproduce that so when they bowed out, the experience vanished. I'm cool with the "stand alone business" if it is the right thematic fit and the vendor brings something unique to the table. The Silhouette cutter was the same way. A family artisan. Disney is more of a generalist, and does some of that, but those niche features are not big grossers and more at risk of being phased out in favor of more easily managed items. So the shops all have the same "glaze" on them.

 

[yankspy]

1. Reasonable challenges and limitations do create a ripe environment for breakthroughs. Budget constraints sometimes send you in directions you would not have explored otherwise. When the constraints are too far out of balance you end up with DL's current Tomorrowland. You are right, unlimited cash does not guarantee a great show. Unlimited paint does not mean great art. To the contrary, you have to instinctively know when the painting is done and stop. If you go back a page or two to an earlier response to your post, I bring up the fact that informed compromise is how you succeed in this delicate budget driven maze.

2. Hmmm. You could cherry pick something isolated or think broader. I think solving the balance of experience would be the biggest bang for the idea. Balancing the food, merchandise and attraction mix relative to how much show value they all need to carry would be of huge impact to the park. Your DDP article draws attention to the food's business model impacting the experience. If the food and shops were treated more as "attractions" subsidized by the admission, not stocked as repetitive "stand alone businesses" (or entitlement centers!), then the guest satisfaction and desire to return would go through the roof. Look at the "treasure hunt" of a shopping experience at old New Orlean's or old Liberty Square (cooking, silver, jewelry, and real antique stores) or exotic dining at Tahitian Terrace, or Aladdin's Oasis? More unique signature items like Dole Whip? What a day you had just by walking around and eating. The best thing an Imagineer could do is to work with the other divisions to think holistically of what would make the whole thing come together more as a show. I had a taste of getting to do that in the 90's at DL, and it can be done. Trust has to be built. Those in the other divisions are only limited by their marching orders. The priorities and business goals would need to be more aligned to make it possible.

One of my fondest childhood memories was the old restaurant on WDW's Main Street that was sponsored by Oscar Mayer. (Now Tony's). They used to serve breakfast but there was a covered patio where you could have your breakfast in a semi-outdoor environment. Main Street is chock full of sights, smells, and sounds so it was a memorable experience to be able to have a meal while "breathing in" Main Street so to speak. In my opinion it was one of the best attractions there.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

If the food and shops were treated more as "attractions" subsidized by the admission, not stocked as repetitive "stand alone businesses" (or entitlement centers!), then the guest satisfaction and desire to return would go through the roof. Look at the "treasure hunt" of a shopping experience at old New Orlean's or old Liberty Square (cooking, silver, jewelry, and real antique stores) or exotic dining at Tahitian Terrace, or Aladdin's Oasis? More unique signature items like Dole Whip? What a day you had just by walking around and eating. The best thing an Imagineer could do is to work with the other divisions to think holistically of what would make the whole thing come together more as a show. I had a taste of getting to do that in the 90's at DL, and it can be done. Trust has to be built. Those in the other divisions are only limited by their marching orders. The priorities and business goals would need to be more aligned to make it possible.

If I may, two quick remarks that touch on the subjects you bring up above:

1 I spend twice as much time in Paris' Main Street as I do in Orlando's. So much to see and read and soak up there. (Maybe it is the European in me, I think I've read somewhere we tend to spend time slightly differently at Disney Parks)


2 I would pay double the admission price if the MK would bring back a Main Street with a Centre Street West with flower market, with the Cinema, a Penny arcade and unique shops. And antiques in Liberty Square. And great shopping in Adventureland.
That is, I would indeed subsidise shops and immersive experiences with a higher general admission.

I don't need a new coaster. They've got better ones at Universal anyway. What I want is to be treated like an adult, and an educated one at that. I don't really do 'latest blockbuster / quick thrill / buy the shirt'. I want an immersive experience, without cartoons or celebrities.
I nowadays leave Disney with money burning in my pocket. This summer, I went to WDW for two weeks, then afterwards added in a quick trip to Paris (the city, not the theme park) just because I wanted to get rid of my holiday spending money. Not because I had so much to spare to begin with, but because Disney didn't know how to take my money. :shrug:

 

[COProgressFan]

One of my fondest childhood memories was the old restaurant on WDW's Main Street that was sponsored by Oscar Mayer. (Now Tony's). They used to serve breakfast but there was a covered patio where you could have your breakfast in a semi-outdoor environment. Main Street is chock full of sights, smells, and sounds so it was a memorable experience to be able to have a meal while "breathing in" Main Street so to speak. In my opinion it was one of the best attractions there.

Not sure if you've ever been, but this is also part of the charm of breakfast at Carnation Cafe in DL.

And just an FYI, there is currently NO OPTION for a sit down, non-character breakfast at the MK, and no option for a hot quick serve breakfast either. Searching for breakfast a while back, a manager told me I could get a muffin from the Lunching Pad in Tomorrowland -- and they were being kept in the pretzel case. Not appetizing at all.