Eddie Sotto's take on the current state of the parks

[EPCOT Explorer]

Remember though, real space craft are claustraphobic and have tiny screens. And the graphics of the real thing are cheesier than what you see at MS. I can't think of an attraction at Epcot that has a more immersive feel to it. I find it amazing for what it is.

That being said, I hope someday it offers a "real" trip to Mars or a Space Station which could be realized by connecting the Space Pavilion to the WoL Pavilion to create a mega-pavilion similar to "The Land" in size and scope.

Agreed in full. Although it's missing some key EPCOT elements, I think it's pretty spot on. I just have to ride the damn thing. I'm getting sick of exploring the queue/Vids/Post show..:lol:

That was my biggest disappointment in the ride, the post-show. I expected to walk out into the Red Planet, not into an arcade. It was certainly disheartening to see. I would love to go into a Space pavillion from the ride.

I wonder if it's possible to extent the building.:lookaroun

Esp. with a empty plot next door.

Yep, we have talked about this before. I would love to see a particle accelerator simulation or some sort of attraction with black holes. A next level planetarium would be nice too. As far as merchandise, anyone for Mickey Moon Rocks?:lol:

Or just use the 1978 plans.:lookaroun

And they sold Red Mars Rocks at M:S for a while.

 

[jt04]

And it would be nice to allow ALL guests to experience space-related activities. M:S is great, but what about the younger crowd and those who get violently motion sick like moi? (Or claustrophobic?). Not saying that WDW has to make every attraction fitting for all audiences, but it seems like a missed opportunity for sure. I can easily see many interative exhibits being a big hit.

"What about me? What about Raven?"

They now have a non-spinning side. And if they expanded the pavilion I am sure they would have a "chicken" entrance for the 1 in 5000 that is claustrophobic.

Oh, and if you want to see Mr Sotto's work rendered in Google Earth 3-D, the "Disney and More" blog has a great display just posted today!

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

"What about me? What about Raven?"

They now have a non-spinning side. And if they expanded the pavilion I am sure they would have a "chicken" entrance for the 1 in 5000 that is claustrophobic.

Oh, and if you want to see Mr Sotto's work rendered in Google Earth 3-D, the "Disney and More" blog has a great display just posted today!

Wayyyyy more than that.:wave:

 

[jt04]

Yep, we have talked about this before. I would love to see a particle accelerator simulation or some sort of attraction with black holes. A next level planetarium would be nice too. As far as merchandise, anyone for Mickey Moon Rocks?:lol:

Mickey Moon Rocks? I take it you mean something like a small meteorite (with tiny craters etc) and shapped like a hidden mickey.

I was actually thinking of some Space themed vinylmation dolls and Disney character space themed plush. Sorry Epcot Explorer. I know you hate characters at Epcot. :lol:

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

Mickey Moon Rocks? I take it you mean something like a small meteorite (with tiny craters etc) and shapped like a hidden mickey.

I was actually thinking of some Space themed vinylmation dolls and Disney character space themed plush. Sorry Epcot Explorer. I know you hate characters at Epcot. :lol:

I hate the fact that they are everywhere. If they were used in good taste, and with some originality, I would not mind.

See, your idea works.

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Spaced out.

I saw concept art for a Space Pavillion that involved 2 g-force simulator attractions (one would be about you travelling to the space station and the other returning to Earth). The main pavillion would be themed to a space station and one of the other attractions in the building would have been this really cool looking cable car ride that had a stick on each vehicle that let you control some of the movement.

I think it was supposed to be housed in the Horizons building which would have been repainted black.

With respect to Eddie, I really dislike the Mission Space attraction that is currently at Epcot. I think it lacks coherency, the pods feel claustraphobic, the screens are tiny and the video looks like cheaply done Computer graphics, the "interactivity" is misleading, and the way the attraction ends is pretty random. It is easily one of the worst attractions built at Epcot Center.

LOL. You're not the first to say that The pavilion you mentioned was what we were competing against, and it was rejected by WDW and the project was shelved. Our proposal was a reaction to that because they explained the kind of more thrilling show they wanted, put a check on the table and there were no takers. Susan Bonds, the producer of the shelved concept came to me and was upset saying that there is still a chance and would I partner with her to try and save the project for WDI. For one, I didn't like the notion of being in a fake "Space Station" filled with tourists, screaming kids and real world "exit" signs that blew any realism you could achieve. Plus no weightlessness. It felt very theme park, like Seabase Alpha in Space. Let's try and push the envelope. How could you really give the impression of real Spaceflight? when you ask people what they expect from Space, they say Zero G and liftoff. Epcot to me had to tell the more science oriented story. The more personal experience of the extended G Force capsule idea was born in Horizons and we sold that almost instantly. We thought we were focused on what interested guests most. At least it was not told by cute characters.

In some aspects, I agree with your critique of MS (I don't think it's "easily one of the worst"), I would have handled the graphic quality and story very differently if I had the authority to do so, and the post show could always be more (but almost was even less). Truth be told, the producers did a great job getting more into that show than management wanted via Compaq. Susan Bonds, the producer (and later Larry Gertz) made that bigger show happen by sheer will. But the capsule is intimate and personal by design and meant to be that way. Space is not luxurious and we were trying to deliver something realistic and intense, not typical of theme parks. I sat in the real Shuttle and pressed the buttons and it's like that. I'm VERY claustrophobic myself and maybe it would have been better if the media had a "heads up" grid or cross hair gyro graphic to give you a horizon line so you don't get sick easily. Simulation without reference points gets people disoriented (i.e. Body Wars). The capsule show I was pushing for was more spiritual (2001-esque) and not as action packed. Less dependent on spinning and disaster. You may have hated my "directors cut" version even more. We'll never know.

In the end, it's a "love or hate it" kind of show. Pushing the envelope of experience does that sometimes. Adding the option of spin and non spin rooms was a great idea too. In rebuttal, I think it's pretty cohesive in that you are in a "trainer", not really going to Mars. Having a breakthrough ride system is a big deal to me as IMHO it delivers on the unique feel that vertical liftoff has, extended G forces. I think it does fit into the EPCOT mantra very well, but there are, as I said, things I would have done differently in tone. So what. I'm sure there are things the producers would have done differently too, for lack of funds or other reasons. We'll never know. The unbuilt pavilion concepts never suffer budget cuts and always have the unfair advantage of being flawless in our imagination! Paint never peels in our minds eye! Good critiques just the same.

 

[HMF]

That was my biggest disappointment in the ride, the post-show. I expected to walk out into the Red Planet, not into an arcade. It was certainly disheartening to see. I would love to go into a Space pavillion from the ride.

I have plans to fix this when I get in.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

LOL. You're not the first to say that The pavilion you mentioned was what we were competing against, and it was rejected by WDW and the project was shelved. Our proposal was a reaction to that because they explained the kind of more thrilling show they wanted, put a check on the table and there were no takers. Susan Bonds, the producer of the shelved concept came to me and was upset saying that there is still a chance and would I partner with her to try and save the project for WDI. I didn't like the notion of being in a "Space Station" filled with tourists and real world "exit" signs that blew any realism you could achieve. It felt very theme park. How could you really give the impression of real Spaceflight. Epcot to me had to tell the more science oriented story.The more personal experience of the extended G Force capsule idea was born in Horizons and we sold that almost instantly.

In some aspects, I agree with your critique of MS (I don't think it's "easily one of the worst"), I would have handled the graphic quality and story very differently if I had the authority to do so, and the post show could always be more (but almost was even less). Truth be told, the producers did a great job getting more into that show than management wanted via Compaq. Susan Bonds, the producer (and later Larry Gertz) made that bigger show happen by sheer will. But the capsule is tight by design and meant to be that way. Space is not luxurious and we were trying to deliver something realistic and intense, not typical of theme parks. I sat in the real Shuttle and pressed the buttons and it's like that. I'm VERY claustrophobic myself and maybe it would have been better if the media had a "heads up" grid or cross hair gyro graphic to give you a horizon line so you don't get sick. Simulation without reference points gets people disoriented. The capsule show I was pushing for was more spiritual (2001-esque) and not as action packed. Less dependent on spinning and disaster. You may have hated my "directors cut" version even more. We'll never know.

In the end, it's a "love or hate it" kind of show. In rebuttal, I think it's pretty cohesive in that you are in a "trainer", not really going to Mars. Having a breakthrough ride system is a big deal to me as IMHO it delivers on the unique feel that vertical liftoff has, extended G forces. I'm pleased with the overall project because I think it does fit into the EPCOT mantra very well, but there are, as I said, things I would have done differently. So what. I'm sure there are things the producers would have done differently too, for lack of funds or other reasons. We'll never know. The unbuilt pavilion concepts never suffer budget cuts and always have the unfair advantage of being a wow in our imagination! Paint never peels in our minds eye! Good critiques just the same.

This is very, very true. It's very close to what the original EPCOT Center wanted to do- however, it's just been modernized. I think that if it had been done as a whole pavilion and not just a ride, it would have been even closer to what EPCOT Center wanted.

 

[imagineer boy]

Yeah, the disapointing part about MS for me was that it was supposed to be a simulation according to the story. For me, that sucked all of the feel of adventure out of the ride. Don't get me wrong, the ride's a lot of fun but I was disapointed in that aspect.

 

[EPCOTCenterLover]

I know in a previous interview, Eddie, that you had mentioned the idea of a dungeon with an AA dragon "under" the Disneyland castle. Can you tell us more about it?

 

[Eddie Sotto]

Outta time for now

I'm sorry to say this, but tomorrow I'll need to get back into work at the studio and the restaurant and won't be on the boards that often. It's been great chatting with all of you and answering the questions that grew out of the online interviews. I hope this thread has given you a bit of insight into what Imagineers go through to get ideas into reality, even if they are not always 100% of what we intend, we do practically kill ourselves at times to deliver the best we know how and will always continue

Thanks for the fun!
Eddie .:wave:

 

[The Conundrum]

Remember though, real space craft are claustraphobic and have tiny screens. And the graphics of the real thing are cheesier than what you see at MS.

Your argument about the actual craft being small and claustraphobic is legitimate but what do you mean the graphics in the real thing are cheesier? The real thing is REAL the M:S graphics look like there from an early 90s playstation game. They should have just used real footage with some CG enhancements or spent the money and made a more realistic CG representation. Star Tours, Body Wars, and Stormrider use live action footage with special effects. M:S should have done the same because what they have now is cheesy.

 

[CBOMB]

I hate it when real life, like jobs, and business, get in the way of idle time.

Thanks for the wealth of information.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Your argument about the actual craft being small and claustraphobic is legitimate but what do you mean the graphics in the real thing are cheesier? The real thing is REAL the M:S graphics look like there from an early 90s playstation game. They should have just used real footage with some CG enhancements or spent the money and made a more realistic CG representation. Star Tours, Body Wars, and Stormrider use live action footage with special effects. M:S should have done the same because what they have now is cheesy.

I think he is talking about real simulators, not actual space flight. Mission: SPACE is a "training mission" and you are supposed to know you are in a simulator. That is also why one does not get off and step onto Mars, but more "training facilities". It seems that the frustrations with Mission: SPACE's story stem from not paying attention to what is being said.

 

[The Conundrum]

I think he is talking about real simulators, not actual space flight. Mission: SPACE is a "training mission" and you are supposed to know you are in a simulator. That is also why one does not get off and step onto Mars, but more "training facilities". It seems that the frustrations with Mission: SPACE's story stem from not paying attention to what is being said.

What's the point of the queue trying to make you believe your in the year 2037 and people go to and from Mars on a regular basis? It has nothing to do with not paying attention it has everything to do with Disney poorly telling the theme/story.

My original point was that there were TONS of great concepts for a Space Pavillion including some kickass ideas by Eddie Sotto and modern Disney Company picked the worst one to save some bucks while not giving any consideration to the customers enjoyment as usual.

 

[hpyhnt 1000]

I think he is talking about real simulators, not actual space flight. Mission: SPACE is a "training mission" and you are supposed to know you are in a simulator. That is also why one does not get off and step onto Mars, but more "training facilities". It seems that the frustrations with Mission: SPACE's story stem from not paying attention to what is being said.

No, I think most of us understand that. Its made quite clear that you are (as Capcom Sinise says), "here today for a flight training." While the story is there, I think most of us would agree that a storyline where we actually take a trip to Mars instead of just training for a trip to Mars would be more fun and more popular (and wouldn't be that much of a stretch). As far as expanding the pavilion, there's more than enough room in back to expand. Maybe one day. At the very least, even if the storyline stays the same, more attractions that focus on how astronauts are trained would be helpful. The current "Space Race" thing is a feeble attempt at a "training lab" (but at least there's something there).

Many thanks to Mr. Sotto for your insights; its great to have you as a member. :wave:

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

I'm sorry to say this, but tomorrow I'll need to get back into work at the studio and the restaurant and won't be on the boards that often. It's been great chatting with all of you and answering the questions that grew out of the online interviews. I hope this thread has given you a bit of insight into what Imagineers go through to get ideas into reality, even if they are not always 100% of what we intend, we do practically kill ourselves at times to deliver the best we know how and will always continue

Thanks for the fun!
Eddie .:wave:

Thank you for joining, Mr. Sotto...It's been interesting hearing your insight!

Hurry back!:lol::wave:

 

[jt04]

Your argument about the actual craft being small and claustraphobic is legitimate but what do you mean the graphics in the real thing are cheesier? The real thing is REAL the M:S graphics look like there from an early 90s playstation game. They should have just used real footage with some CG enhancements or spent the money and made a more realistic CG representation. Star Tours, Body Wars, and Stormrider use live action footage with special effects. M:S should have done the same because what they have now is cheesy.

The actual shuttle panel (or Nasa shuttle simulator) is void of any graphical representations that would be meaningful to a theme park ride. As for real footage, there wouldn't be any from the perspective the Imagineers wanted to portray. You are meant to have the sense you are laying back and looking straight up through a window. Nasa does not shoot video straight up as they know where the are going (up) and there are no visual reference points. They do have video looking downward since the Columbia loss but that would be of little value in the MS attraction as it is not a shuttle rocket.

As a simulator it is very well executed. It's not supposed to be perfect as it is depicting training in a controlled environment. Even the best simulators used by the military do not have video as well rendered as the video in MS.

 

[WDWGoof07]

What's the point of the queue trying to make you believe your in the year 2037 and people go to and from Mars on a regular basis? It has nothing to do with not paying attention it has everything to do with Disney poorly telling the theme/story.

Um, no...The preshow makes it clear you are training for the first mission to Mars.

I think Mission: Space is well done, and it is one of my favorite attractions on property. Still would have loved the full Space Pavilion though, complete with the space walk attraction...

 

[jakeman]

My original point was that there were TONS of great concepts for a Space Pavillion including some kickass ideas by Eddie Sotto and modern Disney Company picked the worst one to save some bucks while not giving any consideration to the customers enjoyment as usual.

I hear they eat babies too...:lookaroun