DAK 'Encanto' and 'Indiana Jones'-themed experiences at Animal Kingdom

ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Marc Davis Fan said:
This thread! (Insider saying it’s being viewed as a D, but will be a high D.) But as @JackCH and @James Alucobond noted above, the distinction is blurry and highly-regarded attractions can technically be Ds, so maybe we have reason for optimism about the quality and impressiveness…


It’s funny, considering the show building’s size/design and also considering the ride’s apparent premise, I’ve been wondering if it’s possible that they’re looking to MM/PHH stylistically and in terms of ride system. And WDW still doesn’t have an “intimate” trackless ride a la MM and PHH (RRA is the closest, but relies too much on screens to have the MM/PHH effect).
Click to expand...
It’s not trackless AFAIK.
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
JackCH said:
I think the distinction between a D and E ticket, especially with dark rides, is a very blurry one.
Click to expand...

Yes. It is an internal gauge and vernacular, but basically an E Ticket is something that would be drawing someone to it itself/level of investment.

E ticket originally, like the ticket system was based on budget and demand. So the term now would just mean the level of attraction. You don't have a giant budget to something that supports the guest day spending and not what gets them in the door. And D to E are so close.

But it is difficult to say the last time Disney has opened a land with more than one E Ticket.

Here is to hoping.
 
ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
celluloid said:
Yes. It is an internal gauge and vernacular, but basically an E Ticket is something that would be drawing someone to it itself/level of investment.

E ticket originally, like the ticket system was based on budget and demand. So the term now would just mean the level of attraction. You don't have a giant budget to something that supports the guest day spending and not what gets them in the door. And D to E are so close.

But it is difficult to say the last time Disney has opened a land with more than one E Ticket.

Here is to hoping.
Click to expand...
I thought both SWGE rides were Es? Obviously, most feel one is better, but Rise (on all cylinders) is next level. F ticket?
 
Architectural Guinea Pig

Architectural Guinea Pig

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
E/D Tickets are really more dependent on the park's existing offerings. Ratatouille in WDSP is an E-ticket and a headliner for the park, Ratatouille in Epcot is more of a chill D-ticket in the back of the land. Applying that logic to AK it would make sense for Encanto to be a D like NRJ, with Everest, FoP, and Indy being "the" headliners for the park. It seems to also hold the same NRJ quality, with it being a more beautiful and calm ride without a ton of showstopping wow moments.
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
ToTBellHop said:
I thought both SWGE rides were Es? Obviously, most feel one is better, but Rise (on all cylinders) is next level. F ticket?
Click to expand...
LL cost is a good indicator. F ticket is funny but E being the most desirable attractions can't really go beyond that. Extra credit for the industry I guess.
 
Starship824

Starship824

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
What is considered an E-ticket attraction doesn't matter since the ticketing system hasn't existed for 40 years and people who try to classify what ticket a ride is, is just guessing since we'll never know unless they bring back that system which will never happen. The best comparison we have is LL tiers and LL SP and if we go by that than there aren't really that many "E-tickets" and FoP would be one of them.
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
Starship824 said:
What is considered an E-ticket attraction doesn't matter since the ticketing system hasn't existed for 40 years and people who try to classify what ticket a ride is, is just guessing since we'll never know unless they bring back that system which will never happen. The best comparison we have is LL tiers and LL SP and if we go by that than there aren't really that many "E-tickets" and FoP would be one of them.
Click to expand...

People are still attracted to go to parks. That is why they are called attractions.

There is still a level of draw. The term is around like many terms we still use for thing that themselves have changed.

You can charge more for a day at a park full of them then a park with little of them.

Supply and Demand, different phrasing and specific to attraction venues.


Even without physical individual tickets, and with and without we have turnstiles both physical clicks and digital. Why we still call them clicks. The business of it did not get smaller, it got bigger with more variables.

If it is getting people into the park and ridership unique and repeat are highest in the park, you have a modern E ticket.
And it can be more fluid then ever.
 
Last edited:
Marc Davis Fan

Marc Davis Fan

Well-Known Member
My best judgment about today's E ticket categorization, extrapolating from what's widely agreed to an E ticket, is that it's a combination of:
  1. Scale
  2. (High-Quality) Detail
The attractions that pretty much everyone agrees to be an E ticket have both of those: Haunted Mansion, Splash Mountain, Big Thunder, Tower of Terror, Expedition Everest, etc.

Attractions seem to be viewed as D tickets when they lack one of those two, for instance:
  • Mine Train and Na'vi River Journey are beautifully detailed, but too small/short to be considered E tickets.
  • "it's a small world" is actually a massive-scale attraction, but the sets are too simple to make it an E ticket (despite it being rightly beloved, of course, and indeed being one of my own favorite attractions).
Of course, caveats include:
  • When something was vastly larger scale than most attractions at the time it was built (factor 1), that might outweigh its relative lack of high-quality detail (factor 2), which would be why "it's a small world" and Jungle Cruise used to be viewed as E tickets.
  • A unique/novel characteristic might for a time push something to E ticket status whose lack of scale and/or high-quality detail would otherwise relegate it to below E ticket status, e.g., Soarin' (which, as flying theaters become more common, may eventually be relegated to D ticket status).
  • Attractions with a high level of thrill and/or iconic placement might be viewed as having E ticket status, at least for a time, despite lacking in some of these other factors.
In all, I'd suggest that the E ticket concept remains useful, so long as it's understand as a family resemblance category that allows for disagreement about the categorization of some attractions.

With all that being said, I hope Encanto contains both the level of scale and the level of high-quality detail that I'd suggest would make it an E ticket for all...
 
C

celluloid

Well-Known Member
Marc Davis Fan said:
My best judgment about today's E ticket categorization, extrapolating from what's widely agreed to an E ticket, is that it's a combination of:
  1. Scale
  2. (High-Quality) Detail
The attractions that pretty much everyone agrees to be an E ticket have both of those: Haunted Mansion, Splash Mountain, Big Thunder, Tower of Terror, Expedition Everest, etc.

Attractions seem to be viewed as D tickets when they lack one of those two, for instance:
  • Mine Train and Na'vi River Journey are beautifully detailed, but too small/short to be considered E tickets.
  • "it's a small world" is actually a massive-scale attraction, but the sets are too simple to make it an E ticket (despite it being rightly beloved, of course, and indeed being one of my own favorite attractions).
Of course, caveats include:
  • When something was vastly larger scale than most attractions at the time it was built (factor 1), that might outweigh its relative lack of high-quality detail (factor 2), which would be why "it's a small world" and Jungle Cruise used to be viewed as E tickets.
  • A unique/novel characteristic might for a time push something to E ticket status whose lack of scale and/or high-quality detail would otherwise relegate it to below E ticket status, e.g., Soarin' (which, as flying theaters become more common, may eventually be relegated to D ticket status).
  • Attractions with a high level of thrill and/or iconic placement might be viewed as having E ticket status, at least for a time, despite lacking in some of these other factors.
In all, I'd suggest that the E ticket concept remains useful, so long as it's understand as a family resemblance category that allows for disagreement about the categorization of some attractions.

With all that being said, I hope Encanto contains both the level of scale and the level of high-quality detail that I'd suggest would make it an E ticket for all...
Click to expand...

This may be oversimplifying it in some ways and overcomplicating it in others if people don't also take into account fluidity.


20K and Hall of Presidents were once E Tickets.
Demand shifts.

Star Tours was without a doubt an E ticket its opening and just being a Simulator of that caliber was a fresh new concept and industry elevating standard in the late 80s.

20K was certainly not an E Ticket when it was about to close and popularity dwindles down but still being valuable enough to keep around for at times years until a time is right to change if ROI of operating is worthwhile.

Hall of Preidents definitely did not need its extended queue decades later and does not going near 50 years later, it is not an E ticket at all anymore but sitll.

Because by its nature, the ticket system was demand-based. Fluidity.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom