EPCOT failed - Epcot is great!

[RSoxNo1]

What has happened to EPCOT though, its completely gotten away from its purpose and that was to give the audience an optimistic view of what may lie ahead in the future. With the closing of great attractions like Horizons, World of Motion, and the old, original Journey Into The Imagination (the one with the classic Figment and Dreamfinder) EPCOT has slowly faded away from its original message. Spaceship Earth is the only remaining classic in the entire park that still relays that message.

Another thing about Journey Into Imagination is that now its a sorry excuse to resurrect Figment and then with the whole "Kimmunicator" attraction it ruins all potential for it to be a classic once more. Having been a cast member at EPCOT the worst thing that I saw was that all the props and attractions from the old ImageWorks were in the second story of the building and completely gutted.

This theme park was Walt's baby, he poured his heart and soul into its design and concept and I am sure that he would be a little disappointed to see what it has become today.

One of the greatest endearing aspects of EPCOT though is that the World Showcase offers a sense of community (which the letter C now stands for in EPCOT)
and it displays that with Illuminations: Reflections of Earth...everyone "gathers around the fire" and enjoys each others company and watches the best fireworks spectacular that WDW has to offer.

I really want EPCOT to get back to its original message and bring back the hopes and dreams that Walt had for it. (The awesome display on the TTA in MK)

So sorry for the long post but I had to get this off my chest

First things first, welcome to the boards. Second things second, you're gonna get a lot of hate because of your font. For the most part everyone sticks with the generic font on here, it's easier on the eyes.

On to your posts. The original concept of EPCOT was nothing like what was built in 1982, or what we see now (as you will see explained elsewhere). With that said, I don't know what your perception of Epcot's original message is/was. World Showcase was meant to be a celebration of cultures, while future world was intended to represent the history and future of discovery. Of the major pavillion changes, it seemed that World of Motion to Test Track was the change that Disney had the most control over.

World of Motion never had a wait, and if I'm not mistaken had a smaller capacity than Test Track now does. The problem is, Test Track is done for hours at a time, and I don't know how much that hurts the increase in capacity. With that said, Test Track is an immensly popular attraction, and of the newer attractions, it is IMO the most informative.

Horizons was closed due to the structural integrity of the building. Sure, they could have rebuilt it again using the exact same elements, but the ride itself was getting dated - and it's replacement Mission Space does share some of the same elements liek the faux-interactive capabilities and setting up space colonies.

As for Imagination, This was Kodak's call. They requested the change - as they were permitted because of their sponsorship contract. That doesn't excuse the drastic changes that were made here, but I'm willing to bet that had they gone the thrill ride route here - it also would have been successful, with or without figment.

 

[Expo_Seeker40]

World of Motion had alot more capacity than Test Track. The transportation pavilion was originally going to have a very informative queue, just like test track does, but the budget had to be toned down, and thus we got orange padded walls and a whole lot of chrome! :lol:

It would have been awesome to still have the test track cars go up the ramp to the second level so people could see Spaceship Earth, and also coming back down to the first level saving the city of tomorrow, which would need some updating.

Test Track though is just another ride within the Transportation Pavilion. Even "Inside Track" contains some of the blueprint outline for the former Transcenter. Always seeing the newer cars brings to me the same joy that Transcenter did.

Did you (anyone here on the board) know that you board and exit your test track car basically where would have boarded your omnimover during the world of motion. Look closely because you will notice you will slope up some ramps leading to the load and unload, just like people walked up ramps during the world of motion. Even the first old car you see in the test track queue was right from the world of motion.

Bedsides what I find unecessary clutter, and a tent way to large that destorys the look of the transportation pavilion, test track continues to entertain inform, and inspire.

Horizons on the other hand, being EPCOT's truly "beautiful" attraction did have its flaws. I really don't take the sinkhole/structural problem to seriously. The attraction would have not reopened from 1996-1999 if that were truly the ultimate case. Horizons originally closed in 1994 after GE went bye-bye, and a planning book from 1995 even says that a new ride was to replace the attraction.

Horizons in my opinion reopened to simply by time and entertain guests with Communicore turning into Innoventions, World of Motion becoming Test Track, and the Universe of Energy rehab. Leaving only wonders of life open.

I see the entire destruction of Horizons as the real punch to me that I feel everytime I go to Epcot. I welcome whatever becomes of Wonders of Life, an updated Energy *which should have kept the amazing ending and radok screens*, and test track and mission space are both fun.

Interestingly to note, like the living seas was supposed to have a character theme originally in it, Horizons WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A SPACE ADVENTURE ATTRACTION.....and thus we have mission:space replacing it, giving us thrill and excitment on a mission to mars in the spirit of the old tomorrowlands. Granted I would welcome a new toned down circular theater attraction on a new mission to the moon. :wave:

 

[Bravesfn1]

I think you could say there have been both positive and negative aspects of the changes that have been made to Epcot. In my opinion here is what I think:

Positive Changes- I think Soarin' was a great addition to the Land Pavilion, I was never really a fan of the Food Rocks! or Kitchen Cabaret Shows that were once housed there. I also like the new food choices in the Sunshine Food Fair.

I am a big fan of the Nemo redo to the Living Seas. I was never a fan of the original Living Seas and only went there on a couple of my visits to Epcot. It was never a priority. Although I obviously have not seen the completed product I like adding Nemo and Friends to this attraction.

Ellen's Energy Adventure was a good addition at the time they redid the Universe of Energy. Although I understand this show may becoming old, I still enjoy going to it at least once every trip.

Negative Changes- As for the negative changes, I feel replacing the World of Motion with Test Track was a mistake. The first two or three times I rode Test Track I loved it, but now every time I go on it I miss the World of Motion more. To me Test Track gets old after you have been on it several times. I found the World of Motion to have a better storyline and I loved all the audio animatronics.

Losing Horizions was a shame in my opinion too. I understand the desire to add thrill rides to the parks to attract more people, but I just don't like Mission Space that much. Again the storyline is just lacking in my opinion. However, I understand that Horizions would never increase attendance which they hoped to do with Mission Space.

The new Journey Into Imagination with Figment was not as good as the original in my opinion. I will just leave it at that. Just my two cents.

By the way, have any of you guys been over to the Disney Podcast Network. There are some great Disney related podcasts of there if you are interested. The Meandering Mouse recently did an Epcot retrospective, talking about all the old rides that have been extinct from the park. Check it out!

 

[xtimMOOthyx]

Epcot is my absolute favorite park. I would love to go back in time and see the park when it opened. Here's a tidbit of information that I found online in regards to Expo Seeker40's comment about Horizon's "sinkhole:"

"The Odyssey Restaurant, which sits between Future World and World Showcase. It is the location of Epcot's First Aid station and Baby Care Center, and will be used for several events during this year's Epcot International Food & Wine Festival. The restaurant, which probably suffered from its out-of-the-way location, was originally to be located much closer to the main walkway to World Showcase Plaza, but had to be moved due to a sinkhole that is in the middle of the pool that currently separates it from the walkway."

This quote is from MousePlanet.com. I also found it hard to believe that there was a sinkhole, however, now I am not so sure...

 

[Expo_Seeker40]

I know about the sinkhole in relationship to the Odyssey, and I'm not 100% denying that Horizons had a sinkhole under or near it, but the way Disney made it sound was that it was a crucial problem and if it was then the attraction would not have opened due to guest and CM safety.

Now what may have happened was, that I think one post somewhere in cyberland said that originally the Horizons pavilion was to be saved, with new colors and enhancements, but the sinkhole was then discovered or something like that. :dazzle:

 

[speck76]

The Magic Kingdom at WDW is the number 1 attended park in the world.

The various Disneyland parks are all (except HK) above Epcot, MGM, and DAK in terms of attendance.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that whatever it is about the MK is of the greatest desire of guests all around this planet.

The fact that the WDW MK (which seems crappy compared to DL, DLP, or TDL) is the number 1 park in the world, and attracts almost 5 million more people than Epcot each year (50% more people than Epcot) and almost double the guests as DAK and MGM.....it is no wonder why the non-MK parks are all becoming more like the MK.

It is what the majority of the guests want.

 

[basas]

The Magic Kingdom at WDW is the number 1 attended park in the world.

The various Disneyland parks are all (except HK) above Epcot, MGM, and DAK in terms of attendance.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that whatever it is about the MK is of the greatest desire of guests all around this planet.

The fact that the WDW MK (which seems crappy compared to DL, DLP, or TDL) is the number 1 park in the world, and attracts almost 5 million more people than Epcot each year (50% more people than Epcot) and almost double the guests as DAK and MGM.....it is no wonder why the non-MK parks are all becoming more like the MK.

It is what the majority of the guests want.

And yet the 'old Epcot" had higher attendance than the new one. I think there are many more factors as to why MK has the most attendance. If people are to visit one park, its most likely they'll visit the 'first/flagship/most famous' park. Then, they add their extra days on from there, and quite frankly, AK and MGM are more like MK than Epcot (which has higher attendance than either of them) which would also question your theory that people only want an MK-style park. I don't really think people want to go to 4-parks only to have the same things at each one.

 

[dxwwf3]

I think there are many more factors as to why MK has the most attendance. If people are to visit one park, its most likely they'll visit the 'first/flagship/most famous' park. Then, they add their extra days on from there, and quite frankly, AK and MGM are more like MK than Epcot (which has higher attendance than either of them) which would also question your theory that people only want an MK-style park. I don't really think people want to go to 4-parks only to have the same things at each one.

I agree completely.

 

[wannab@dis]

And yet the 'old Epcot" had higher attendance than the new one. I think there are many more factors as to why MK has the most attendance. If people are to visit one park, its most likely they'll visit the 'first/flagship/most famous' park. Then, they add their extra days on from there, and quite frankly, AK and MGM are more like MK than Epcot (which has higher attendance than either of them) which would also question your theory that people only want an MK-style park. I don't really think people want to go to 4-parks only to have the same things at each one.

All the parks had higher attendance in the mid 90's but were dropping off. Epcot was dropping faster than the other parks and had years of 10-15% drops while MK was seeing 2-5% drops. So, it appears the guests were TIRED of the old park or it was just no longer appealing to the normal guests. Since the changes have been taking place over the past few years, the numbers are picking up again.

Overall, I think Speck's assessment was right on.

 

[EpcotServo]

Looks like no one so far has been able to answer my "Why would a Seabase have pictures of Nemo and Friends on the wall? What research purposes would those serve?" question. I'm still trying to figure that one out. :lol:

 

[wannab@dis]

Looks like no one so far has been able to answer my "Why would a Seabase have pictures of Nemo and Friends on the wall? What research purposes would those serve?" question. I'm still trying to figure that one out. :lol:

I figured it was rhetorical since it's so obvious.

To ENTERTAIN

 

[CoffeeJedi]

Looks like no one so far has been able to answer my "Why would a Seabase have pictures of Nemo and Friends on the wall? What research purposes would those serve?" question. I'm still trying to figure that one out. :lol:

I think i can actually answer that question. Even in the original Seabase Alpha, we only got to see the "visitor concourse". The hydrolators even had markings on them for off-limits sections like "crew quarters" and "research labs". Its not too far fetched to think that a real research facility would decorate to appeal to kids. (not to mention that in real life, Seabase Alpha would also be soliciting donations from potentially generous backers, no better way to loosen their wallets than making their kids happy)

 

[wannab@dis]

I figured it was rhetorical since it's so obvious.

To ENTERTAIN

I'm going to expand on this since maybe it's not as obvious as I thought.

There's a lot of people that just don't find science and educational opportunities FUN. Therefore, they skip them or they just don't pay attention and miss the full aspect. If you can bring a little entertainment to it and make it inviting, then you have a two-fold success.

1. More people will see the educational information because more find it inviting and actually visit in the first place.
2. The message may be better received since people already there will find the delivery more appealing.

It's a win-win scenario.

Not everyone wants their theme park visit to be as boring as the after lunch science class with old Ms Spinster. :snore:

 

[Epcot82Guy]

I'm going to expand on this since maybe it's not as obvious as I thought.

There's a lot of people that just don't find science and educational opportunities FUN. Therefore, they skip them or they just don't pay attention and miss the full aspect. If you can bring a little entertainment to it and make it inviting, then you have a two-fold success.

1. More people will see the educational information because more find it inviting and actually visit in the first place.
2. The message may be better received since people already there will find the delivery more appealing.

It's a win-win scenario.

Not everyone wants their theme park visit to be as boring as the after lunch science class with old Ms Spinster. :snore:

I agree (with the argument, not necessarily the concept) up until the end. I don't know that the concept of Epcot was that boring. But, regardless, TLS had it's shining moments of dryness and boringness (in fact, I never was a huge fan of it). So, to find a new way to present the new information is almost necessary. Not to rehash the Nemo debate, I just would clarify that there would be ways to do it without Disney characters, but the idea is still the same. TLS aimed too "high" (not meaning that in any form of insulting way. After all, as I said, it missed me), so the general approach is great for the exact reason stated above.

For me, anyway, the only debate there was the use of what i see as an easy way to up attendance (an understandable approach) vs. a more creative way with unique presentations that don't necessarily scream "marketing ploy." I agree with wannab that appeal was far too one-sided on that little corner of FW Northwest.

 

[wdwishes2005]

I'm going to expand on this since maybe it's not as obvious as I thought.

There's a lot of people that just don't find science and educational opportunities FUN. Therefore, they skip them or they just don't pay attention and miss the full aspect. If you can bring a little entertainment to it and make it inviting, then you have a two-fold success.

1. More people will see the educational information because more find it inviting and actually visit in the first place.
2. The message may be better received since people already there will find the delivery more appealing.

It's a win-win scenario.

Not everyone wants their theme park visit to be as boring as the after lunch science class with old Ms Spinster. :snore:

If people took the time to try and understand it they would find that science is fascinating. Why can't EPCOT show them that?

 

[RedSoxPirate]

"The Odyssey Restaurant, which sits between Future World and World Showcase. It is the location of Epcot's First Aid station and Baby Care Center, and will be used for several events during this year's Epcot International Food & Wine Festival. The restaurant, which probably suffered from its out-of-the-way location, was originally to be located much closer to the main walkway to World Showcase Plaza, but had to be moved due to a sinkhole that is in the middle of the pool that currently separates it from the walkway."

Isn't this sinkhole the one that became the lake out there? Or am I confusing that with something else?

If people took the time to try and understand it they would find that science is fascinating. Why can't EPCOT show them that?

Well, in an ideal world, that's how it should be. But we have to recognize that most people don't want to be spoon-fed information without having a effective medium of conveying that information. It has to be entertaining or else no one will pay any attention. But, I contend EPCOT has never had a problem remaining entertaining. The problem is, now, people are beginning to have an expectation of Disney that it be like "other theme parks" -- that is, to have fast and/or thrilling rides and neglect story and message. And Disney is complying. Rides like M:S and TT lack that core story and message of inspiration that have always been part of the Disney story. So much more could have been done with either of those rides to help them fit the rather sizeable hole left by their predecessors.

Where Epcot is falling short is in its message: it lacks that cohesive hope for a better tomorrow that was felt at park opening. ("We've just begun to dream ...") With TT, we take a look at how the cars of today are made -- no mention is made of forms of transportation in the future; nothing about alternative fuel sources; nothing that leads to inspire the new generation of thinkers to whom Disney used to (and still should be) reach out. Similarly with M:S, show creators have looked 5-10 years into the future for inspiration. NEWSFLASH -- the technology you see in M:S is already in production. These shows will be outdated far sooner than any other of the older, more forward-thinking attractions. But this isn't a concern to Disney, because they just want to pack seats now with people who are just interested in the thrills -- because that's what the guests "want."

I do hope the new leadership team will reevaluate their stance on Epcot and do something to save the future of the park -- or at least the future of Future World; WS will always attract the people wanting the cuisine, shopping and general romantic ambience. Of course, if not, at least the lines will always be short for me.

 

[wannab@dis]

If people took the time to try and understand it they would find that science is fascinating. Why can't EPCOT show them that?

Not everyone wants to take the time to do that AT A THEME PARK.

Let's remember what we're talking about here... it's a place for enjoyment and entertainment to ESCAPE the real world. I'm all for some inspirational and educational aspects, but not at the expense (pun intended) of pure enjoyment and entertainment at a theme park.

 

[tirian]

The Magic Kingdom at WDW is the number 1 attended park in the world.

The various Disneyland parks are all (except HK) above Epcot, MGM, and DAK in terms of attendance.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that whatever it is about the MK is of the greatest desire of guests all around this planet.

The fact that the WDW MK (which seems crappy compared to DL, DLP, or TDL) is the number 1 park in the world, and attracts almost 5 million more people than Epcot each year (50% more people than Epcot) and almost double the guests as DAK and MGM.....it is no wonder why the non-MK parks are all becoming more like the MK.

It is what the majority of the guests want.

[warning: slight soapbox] I agree with everything except what I put in bold print. Prior to the 50th anniversary refurb, DL was easily the worst of the Magic Kingdom-style parks. Despite Tokyo's excellent cleanliness and friendliness--both of which are actually due to the Japanese culture, not Disney--the Florida MK is almost the same; and our Tomorrowland is still better than either California's or Tokyo's. The only reason the MK seems so crappy is that it has gone 35 years without a major refurbishment, and it's the world's most visited theme park. I'm glad the refurbs finally began with IaSW and Main Street, and the TLC is trickling to the other areas of the park. At one time, the MK and DLP were the best Kingdoms of the world. WDW is trying hard to get that back. [slight soapbox is over :wave: ]

Perhaps the biggest reason that Epcot has changed--and I'm surprised no one has mentioned this--is that experiencing the latest technology is no longer "cool." We expect it.

For example, when Epcot opened in 1982, it featured an area where Guests could peek at the computer system running the place. We have iPods, Tablet PCs, and Internet-capable cell phones now. My GPS system wirelessly dials phone numbers on my cell phone through Bluetooth. The old computer area wouldn't impress anyone. The current Imageworks features a motion-activated area, where waving your arms causes Figment to dance around and play a musical instrument. The Nintendo Wii is launching November 19th and features motion-sensor controllers.

On top of all this, the Internet allows us to see the latest scientific advancements immediately, without the need to drive to a World's Fair of any sort. It's easy to see why Epcot's Future World had to stop focusing on scientific advancements and start focusing on discovering the world around us.

I'm not saying that every decision made thus far has been correct. The wand, for example, is a tacky piece of kitsch that screams "CHEAP." It looks like a cardboard cutout. In my opinion, a Horizons attraction is still necessary to tie the elements of Future World together. The Living Seas is being overrun by Nemo; but considering that it was originally to have been hosted by Poseidon, talking fish aren't too much of a stretch. The Imagination pavilion is pathetic.

But Soarin', Test Track, the Living Seas changes, and the upcoming SSE refurb are all positive. Illuminations: RoE is the best fireworks show Epcot ever had. (But I wish they'd bring back the entire Christmas show!) Disney is finally getting sponsors back in the park, a move that should make Future World a technological showcase again. Mission: Space could be considered a success, but the pavilion needs to be more developed so that it doesn't exclude much of Epcot's Guests.

Overall, I'd say that Epcot hasn't lost its focus so much as it has changed its presentation. Committing half of the park to future technologies doomed it to becoming outdated without significantly expensive refurbishments. The park is still very committed to increasing Guests' awareness of our world's real-life wonders; but it has begun focusing on discovering the "magic" of the world that already exists around us, and hinting at what might be in the future.

p.s. I response to previous posts: Walt Disney World is governed by the original E.P.C.O.T. principles. Even though the city was never built, the property as a whole is planned and administrated according to the E.P.C.O.T. concepts.

 

[wannab@dis]

I do hope the new leadership team will reevaluate their stance on Epcot and do something to save the future of the park -- or at least the future of Future World;

They've already done so... hence the reason the park is seeing a resurgence in popularity. :wave:

 

[EpcotServo]

I figured it was rhetorical since it's so obvious.

To ENTERTAIN

You can still entertain and make sense. Like I said, I'm not against Nemo in TLS. I just think it needs to have some kind of story and place like everything else at every other Disney park around the world. I thought that they would've made it look like Nemo and friends were looking through windows into the Seabase and watching people go through. But just painting him on the wall makes no sense if it WAS a Seabase. Everywhere else at Disney, is supposed to put you in a place, or a time. And if it dosen't, it won't pretend to be. It just dosen't make any sense as it stands now. If we're in a Seabase as the signs say, why are there pictures of Nemo on the wall? If this is just a place to learn about the seas with Nemo, why does it look like a seabase in most places? Why is it called "Seabase?" It's trying to be two things at the same time. It needs to define WHAT it is trying to be. It kills me because there are so many things it could be. Like an undersea reef, or a sunken old submarine, OR a seabase where Nemo and friends take us to learn more about the Sea. But what is it now? A blue room with a gift shop. All it can be called right now is "EXIT".