-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Everest- wooden coaster?
- Thread starter Dr Albert Falls
- Start date
Is it just me, or is WDW just taking ideas from current/former rides to base their new attractions on? What I mean is that I've heard RcRC described as Space Mountain on Speed, M:S is the same with Mission to Mars/Star Tours on Speed, and now EE seems to be BTMRR on Speed...... not that I mind really, just an observation.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
If you can come up with a ride system that is feasable yet does not have a predecessor using similar technology and/or ride system at some theme park around the world, you deserve a job at WDI...I don't think it's possible--you always build and expand on past studies and technology. Such is science.
ucf disneyfan
New Member
Why not??? Vekoma makes coasters at Six Flags parks and they're not themed. Disney is the one doing all the theming. They could easily build a Mt. Everest and design it so B&M style track goes through it. Thats all they do with Vekoma so they should be able to do it with any other coaster company.
CSOM does have a point though. It does seem like the unique ideas are pretty rare these days. Walt used to say, "Disneyland will never be completed as long as there is imagination left in the world." Well maybe that imagination is running out, OR maybe they DO need fresh blood at WDI. Because it does seem like most of the new attractions coming out are just a suped up rehash of a pre-existing theme OR ride system. Take EE for example, it never occured to me to compare it to BTMRR but quite a few people are now saying it is essentially "identical to BTMRR, but faster". And of course there have been comparisons to DL's Matterhorn because of the Yeti. And what about Mickey's PhilharMagic? I mean, come on!! I'm getting so tired of all these "3-D Experiences" (or "4-D" or whatever the heck you want to call it)! Come on WDI! Come up with some fresh, new, totally unique ideas for pete's sake!!
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
I can think of no completely new ride experiences. Mission: SPACE is completely innovative, like nothing else on earth, yet it's still a simulator that you say disney has "suped up"...there is basically nothing without a precursor ride system...even EMVs could be considered far more high tech versions of what you saw on Journey Into Imagination--EMVs use completely new technology, but there is always a precursor attraction.
As for B&M...they are a rather arrogant coaster company, so they let the actual parks do VERY little theming with their coasters--you basically only theme the queue. Disney would not appreciate working with a company unwilling to suit their very particular needs--B&M, for example, would not have built something like Cali Screamin' for Disney.
Lee
Adventurer
Exactly.
With B&M you sort of tell them how much room you have, your budget, and what type of coaster you want...presto! They deliver you a coaster. You do get to pick the paint color, though!
But that's the way it is with all coaster companies. Some are just easier to get along with.
Actually, IOA had fits with Hulk. B&M don't do launched coasters, so it was built without the launch system, which Universal had to put in themselves.
Also, it's not fair to compare Everest with BTMRR.
Totally different experience. Try mating Big Thunder with the Matterhorm....only much bigger, taller, faster, scarier, complex...etc. This is gonna be a major attraction, not a rehash of something already done.
With B&M you sort of tell them how much room you have, your budget, and what type of coaster you want...presto! They deliver you a coaster. You do get to pick the paint color, though!
But that's the way it is with all coaster companies. Some are just easier to get along with.
Actually, IOA had fits with Hulk. B&M don't do launched coasters, so it was built without the launch system, which Universal had to put in themselves.
Also, it's not fair to compare Everest with BTMRR.
Totally different experience. Try mating Big Thunder with the Matterhorm....only much bigger, taller, faster, scarier, complex...etc. This is gonna be a major attraction, not a rehash of something already done.
I think you've maybe stretched things a bit here in order to remain firm on your point. Of course a case could be made that EVERY idea is somehow based on SOMETHING. But I think you know that's not what I'm talking about. Nevertheless, I'll try and state my point a little more explicitly. What I mean is that I agree with CSOM's point that the attractions we see coming out now are pretty much a rehash of an existing idea. I'm not talking about some obscure connection like saying that Dinosaur's ride system is loosely based on Journey Into Imagination. I'm saying it's much more obvious than than nowadays. Mission: Space, for example really isn't a new theme. You're on a simulated journey to Mars. Perhaps they were just paying homage to the old Mission to Mars attraction, or maybe it's that they couldn't think of something more original. But you can't tell me that when you first heard that Mars was the destination, that you didn't think of Mission to Mars.
Likewise, if I say, "It's a roller coaster type of attraction which takes place on a snow-capped mountain and includes an encounter with the infamous abominable snowman", I could easily be talking about EE or the Matterhorn. As far as comparisons to BTMRR, I didn't bring that one up. Others did. In fact I mentioned that it hadn't even occured to me. But it has been used several times now (in this post as well as another) as a way of describing what EE is supposed to be like (i.e. "Think BTMRR, only faster"...Those aren't MY words, that's a quote). But the point is, it is again a concept that can EASILY be compared to an existing attraction (either by theme OR by ride design).
And seriously you can't pretend NOT to notice how many 3-D attractions Disney (and Universal too, for that matter) are coming out with. I'm not saying that I don't consider them fun, worthwhile and entertaining....but original ideas??? Not at all. When Captain EO came out, it was an original idea. Now they've just done it to death in my opinion. Granted, they've gotten better. But that's not what I'm debating here. I'm pointing out that they are not the least bit original.
X2CommNavISTC
Account Suspended
Well, heres two things Im looking forward too, the drop, which is basically the height of ToT and how they have the cars set up, with the "engine" in the back, so we won't get a blocked view (Like we sorta have with BTM) when we reach the base on Everest
AndyP
Active Member
For all of those complaining about ride systems being 'similar', I'd like to remind you that there are 4 theme parks at WDW, you can't have brand new ideas for every new ride spanning 4 parks, at least you don't find too mnay of the same type of ride in each park ( expect Aladdin and Dumbo in MK). It is also good that they do build on old styles since they know these will be popular. Completely new ideas are always a risk since they might not be liked as much. Hope that makes sense 
Just my two cents.
Just my two cents.Originally posted by AndyPretty
For all of those complaining about ride systems being 'similar', I'd like to remind you that there are 4 theme parks at WDW, you can't have brand new ideas for every new ride spanning 4 parks, at least you don't find too mnay of the same type of ride in each park ( expect Aladdin and Dumbo in MK). It is also good that they do build on old styles since they know these will be popular. Completely new ideas are always a risk since they might not be liked as much. Hope that makes sense
I think you make some very valid points. And let me clarify the point that I was getting at: I'm certainly not saying the EVERY new attraction should be based on a completely different ride system. If I gave the impression that was what I was saying then it was not intentional. What I was saying is that it would be nice to see SOME new ride systems, but more importantly some new themes. I think that if they come out with an innovative new ride system then it is reasonable to suggest that a variety of stories can be told using that same ride system. I don't have a problem with that provided it isn't overdone (as I believe has now happened with the whole 3-D thing). I'm a little less forgiving when it comes to themeing though. There certainly should not be a shortage of ideas on which to base an attraction. Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of space travel and wouldn't complain a bit if they built an entire park on that concept alone. But when they make Mission: Space a simulated trip to Mars and then try and pretend that's a totally new concept, I feel like Disney is trying to insult the public's intelligence. The same goes for putting the abominable snowman in Everest. It wouldn't be so bad except that they do so without making any mention whatsoever of acknowledging those concepts exist (or have existed) in previous attractions. To me, this type of thing begins to chip away at the things I love most about Disney, in this case it's originality.
ToTBellHop
Well-Known Member
So...let's get this straight--things you hate at wdw b/c they have similar attractions elsewhere:
Magic Kingdom:
Jungle Cruise, Tiki Room, Pirates of the Caribbean, Splash Mountain, Thunder Mountain, The Haunted Mansion, Hall of Presidents, Country Bear Jamboree, any and all firework shows or parades, Cinderella Castle, Peter Pan, Snow White, Dumbo, the carousel, "it's a small world", Space Mountain, TTA, PhilharMagic
Epcot:
all omni-mover attractions, Mission: SPACE, Body Wars, Living with the Land, arguably all shows but apparently at least Honey, I Shrunk the Audience
MGM:
Muppets, Star Tours, Rock 'n' Roller Coaster, Great Movie Ride
Animal Kingdom:
EVEREST (three years before opening--an impressive feat), Kali River Rapids, DINOSAUR, It's Tough to Be a Bug.
If you think all of the rides at wdw detract from originality if they use priorly existing technology...seems like you'd like about 5 rides at disney world...
Magic Kingdom:
Jungle Cruise, Tiki Room, Pirates of the Caribbean, Splash Mountain, Thunder Mountain, The Haunted Mansion, Hall of Presidents, Country Bear Jamboree, any and all firework shows or parades, Cinderella Castle, Peter Pan, Snow White, Dumbo, the carousel, "it's a small world", Space Mountain, TTA, PhilharMagic
Epcot:
all omni-mover attractions, Mission: SPACE, Body Wars, Living with the Land, arguably all shows but apparently at least Honey, I Shrunk the Audience
MGM:
Muppets, Star Tours, Rock 'n' Roller Coaster, Great Movie Ride
Animal Kingdom:
EVEREST (three years before opening--an impressive feat), Kali River Rapids, DINOSAUR, It's Tough to Be a Bug.
If you think all of the rides at wdw detract from originality if they use priorly existing technology...seems like you'd like about 5 rides at disney world...
Thanks Merlin.... I wasn't trying to start a large argument thread drift, so I apologize for that.
I agree it's not so much the ride system, because they do innovate there, but it is the themeing. I don't care that there are both IASW and El Rio de Tiempo or that there is both PoC and Maelstrom, or even if we got a Indy ride and compared that to Dinosaur. It just seems like the idea for themes is lacking:
Read the descriptions like Merlin said and tell me what ride you think of:
- Screen based motion simulated attraction of a trip to Mars
- Run away mine train careening down a mountain
- Indoor dark roller coaster
But I again apologize for the thread drift.... :brick:
I agree it's not so much the ride system, because they do innovate there, but it is the themeing. I don't care that there are both IASW and El Rio de Tiempo or that there is both PoC and Maelstrom, or even if we got a Indy ride and compared that to Dinosaur. It just seems like the idea for themes is lacking:
Read the descriptions like Merlin said and tell me what ride you think of:
- Screen based motion simulated attraction of a trip to Mars
- Run away mine train careening down a mountain
- Indoor dark roller coaster
But I again apologize for the thread drift.... :brick:
Again, it's not the ride system, it's the theme that has been redone within another WDW ride that I have a slight problem with. I love most of the attractions you listed there.
I will take back what I said about RnRC... the theme is different from Space Mountain. I don't really have a big problem with any of it, I would just like a little more Imagination.
<heavy sigh>
ISTCNavigator57, did you even READ my posts??? If you read the one I left just before this one, you'll see that I made a point of saying I don't object to re-using ride SYSTEMS provided they don't over do it. It's possible you may have missed it, though, as you were taking all that time listing all those attractions. You could have saved yourself some trouble if you'd just read my posts though. And for the record, I realize I need to clarify my point AGAIN, but please don't put words in my mouth (You can do a search on EVERY post I've ever made and I guarantee you will not find a single incident of me claiming that I "hate" any of the attractions at Disney).
For the record, I don't consider Space Mountain, Jungle Cruise, etc etc as being examples of what I was referring to. Those aren't examples of re-using the same technology for a different ride, nor are they re-hashing a theme. That is simply a case of Disney saying, "this is a classic attraction on the West coast and we want our WDW visitors to experience them as well." They are duplicates of attractions, not knock-offs. I don't object to that.
I also don't object to the omnimover system, as one example. For one thing, I thing it is great, efficient technology that has never been overused, AND it has never been the showcase technology of the attraction. That's one example, but for the THIRD TIME, my issue isn't really so much with re-using the ride systems anyway (not sure why I've been so unsuccessful in making that clear). My main exception to that is with the 3-D attractions and that is mainly because the 3-D aspect of it is part of the draw. It is more of a gimmick than a ride system.
What I did say that I was sad to see (again, not that I "hated") was an apparent lack of originality as of late when it comes to creating new attractions. Rather than repeat myself as far as using examples, I'll refer you to my posts and ask that you re-read those (or read them for the FIRST TIME, which I suspect is more likely the case). However in the hopes of providing further clarification, the impression I tend to have lately is that when the imagineers sit down to dream up a new attraction, they are only able to come up with ones that are either based on movies or on themes that Disney has already done. It is possible that it's not the imagineers' fault though. Maybe they're coming up with some awesome ideas that we never hear about because the upper executives are only greenlighting the "tried and true" concepts. Who knows? I'm only commenting on what I, as the Disney fan, am observing to be happening.
If ISTCNavigator57 still needs further clarification after this post, then I'm going to request that someone else take a stab at explaining it to him. I'm exhausted from trying to defend things that I didn't say in the first place. Thanks!