Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
That IMO is still on the milder side. Why not a 100 foot drop and faster than 50 mph.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
Epcot81Fan
Well-Known Member
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry man but this is just not true. And to be honest I find it a little disheartening that the IP mandate is so extreme at this point that people honestly believe IP just flat-out makes attractions better.
IP does not inherently make attractions better. Shanghai pirates wouldn't be inferior if it were an original attraction. If you need proof, then I'd turn your attention to the original POTC ride, which wasn't elevated once they injected it with needless movie IP.
Likewise, an original dinosaur attraction is not automatically a Jurassic Park imitator, and is not set up for failure. Dinosaurs were popular long before Jurassic Park, and they will be popular long after. They exist well outside and superior to the interest in Jurassic Park as a series. Universal does not own the concept of dinosaurs, like I have seen suggested here countless times, and quite frankly the reception to their franchise isn't anywhere near good enough to put Disney at an insurmountable disadvantage when competing with it. An original attraction based on dinosaurs has plenty of potential to surpass what Universal is doing with dinosaurs down the road, which is exceedingly little might I add.
The IP mandate exists solely for the marketing pop that a successful franchise lends to a new attraction. It does NOT improve the actual quality of an attraction in any way. It is perfectly feasible to design an original attraction based on dinosaurs, or pirates, or Aztec mythology, and have it be just as good as anything that any oversaturated movie IP is capable of.
Last edited:
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Honestly Disney's thrill rides are made for children below the age of 10 and adults who have either never visited a regional theme park or are just scared of thrill rides.
I honestly think Disney could benefit from having some slightly more thrilling options to compete with Universal for the teen & young adult demographic.
SplashJacket
Well-Known Member
Do we really think Indy would be better if stripped of its IP and made to be generic?
I’ll answer for you, it wouldn’t be.
And I agree, the original POTC wasn’t elevated once they injected IP, but that’s the issue, it was IP shoehorned into an existing concept.
You’re right that IP does not inherently improve the quality of an attraction, and that’s not what I’m talking about.
Two notable rides that started as non-IP but became IP because their concepts greatly overlapped are Indy, and Radiator Springs Racers. I think both are definitively better because of it.
The issue isn’t IP, the issue is shoehorned IP where it doesn’t belong.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
How so? Financially Disney’s formula wins over the Universal formula.
Maybe? The IP is not the reason I love that attraction. An Indy rethemed to adventurers club would be better in my opinion! Haha
BlakeW39
Well-Known Member
Even so, that doesn't mean Disney's formula can't be improved. Disney currently doesn't offer attractions to satisfy thrill seekers, when its primary competitor does. I think no matter how you frame things, that is an oversight.
While it may not be a #1 priority, I do think it would be advantageous to include some higher level thrills to appeal to coaster fans. Because as it stands, Universal has major thrill rides and Disney really doesn't.
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I disagree 100% - I think that is a major part of the Disney formula. The “thrill rides” can be experienced by the majority of guests.
I don’t think Disney is #1 but could be better with thrill rides, I think Disney is #1 because they don’t have them - it is part of the formula.
That’s only my opinion of course - but it does seem to be a winning formula.
KDM31091
Well-Known Member
To me Disney has never been about thrill rides, at least not extreme thrills. It just isn't part of their formula/branding/whatever you call it. There are many places to go to just get a straight up thrill ride with a lower cost. With Disney it has always been about a mild to moderate thrill combined with theming. I don't think this needs to really change; it's just part of their identity.
People complain about the proposed Villains land leaving out young children, but extreme rides do the same thing. You can't have it both ways. If you want classic Disney and accessible to the whole family, no extreme thrills.
People complain about the proposed Villains land leaving out young children, but extreme rides do the same thing. You can't have it both ways. If you want classic Disney and accessible to the whole family, no extreme thrills.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
Universal is almost the opposite, though. It's not like it has a bunch of great family friendly rides that are enjoyable for everyone -- it basically has thrill rides and kid rides with a handful of exceptions.
There's really nothing there comparable to rides like Pirates, Haunted Mansion, Spaceship Earth, etc.
Even Epic isn't really doing much to fix this. It's doing a little, but it doesn't deviate that much from what's on offer at the two existing parks -- and I don't think that's really a problem, just like it's not a problem that Disney doesn't have any huge coasters.
Last edited:
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
It used to… jaws, twister, earthquake, King Kong. :-( Those were the days!
Exactly. This has been an issue with studios in the last decade. While not family target properties, the park opened and spent a decade plus with very few height requirements at all.
With Fallon, Rockit and Fast on near future blocks, this is being corrected.
DarkMetroid567
Well-Known Member
I’m still shocked that they’re allergic to slow-moving dark rides, especially considering how good SLOP was. It seems like just about every experience at the park is going to clock in at under 5 minutes, and realistically, closer to 2-3.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
I don't think it's they are allergic do adding in slow moving dark rides. IMO it doesn't move the needle much for Universal in regards to attendance. I would imagine Hagrids and Velocicoaster did more for attendance than a slow moving dark ride.
Universal to me is the Disney alternative. Focusing on theme and thrills. It's worked for them.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Which is exactly how parks end up with insufficient capacity.
gerarar
Premium Member
In Dinoland currently and just saw a group of imagineers and executives touring the area.
I overheard some of what the guide was saying and I heard something like "Tropical Americas". They all had headsets on as well. The guys shirt had the WDI logo on it.
I was originally trying to peek through the walls to see if anything was new then the above happened lol.
I think the silver fencing is new, and there was some staged construction stuff (not in pictures).
I overheard some of what the guide was saying and I heard something like "Tropical Americas". They all had headsets on as well. The guys shirt had the WDI logo on it.
I was originally trying to peek through the walls to see if anything was new then the above happened lol.
I think the silver fencing is new, and there was some staged construction stuff (not in pictures).
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Right. They would be wearing the same types of headsets used during tours like in Keys to the Kingdom. Only those walking around can hear the conversation. These may be equipped with all headsets having microphones as opposed to only the guide in tours so that they can talk to each other.
Starship824
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No