Expedition Everest effects status watch

[thelookingglass]

It's still astonishing how much attention the Yeti gets vs the state of Tower of Terror currently. Compared to the Yeti, there are so many effects that are broken on Tower that completely stand out and ruin the experience of the scene.

Absolutely. Tower of Terror is like 75% show and 25% thrill ride. Everest the opposite, 75% thrill ride and 25% show. Tower of Terror looking awful for years is a much bigger issue, but since it's a bunch of little problems and not one giant 25 foot one that everyone jokes about, people don't care.

 

[BlakeW39]

It's still astonishing how much attention the Yeti gets vs the state of Tower of Terror currently. Compared to the Yeti, there are so many effects that are broken on Tower that completely stand out and ruin the experience of the scene.

Absolutely. Tower of Terror is like 75% show and 25% thrill ride. Everest the opposite, 75% thrill ride and 25% show. Tower of Terror looking awful for years is a much bigger issue, but since it's a bunch of little problems and not one giant 25 foot one that everyone jokes about, people don't care.

Not to sound rude....but why does it have to be a contest?

Everytime the yeti's mentioned these days, a number of folks feel the need to undermine the problem and prove that other attractions have it worse. TOT, or SSE, or IASW. But it's not a contest for what attraction has the most broken effects. Any attraction that goes years without working properly, is a problem. That includes EE. It has like, one major AA? that was super expensive and heavily marketed. And it doesn't work. To the point they've basically just pushed it under the rug...most people literally don't even know it exists. With prices increasing, product quality shouldn't be decreasing at ALL.. that is true for EE, ToT, IASW, and so on.

 

[James Alucobond]

Not to sound rude....but why does it have to be a contest?

Everytime the yeti's mentioned these days, a number of folks feel the need to undermine the problem and prove that other attractions have it worse. TOT, or SSE, or IASW. But it's not a contest for what attraction has the most broken effects. Any attraction that goes years without working properly, is a problem. That includes EE. It has like, one major AA? that was super expensive and heavily marketed. And it doesn't work. To the point they've basically just pushed it under the rug...most people literally don't even know it exists. With prices increasing, product quality shouldn't be decreasing at ALL.. that is true for EE, ToT, IASW, and so on.

I don’t think people are trying to sweep it under the rug, just pointing out that its malfunction is completely imperceptible to 99% of guests whereas grime and broken animatronics are comparatively more obvious on slow-moving, show-forward attractions. You’re correct that for the prices, everything should be in working order, but if someone’s hypothetically stack-ranking priorities, I think it’s pretty natural that a normie would have this near the bottom of their list.

 

[thelookingglass]

Not to sound rude....but why does it have to be a contest?

Everytime the yeti's mentioned these days, a number of folks feel the need to undermine the problem and prove that other attractions have it worse. TOT, or SSE, or IASW. But it's not a contest for what attraction has the most broken effects. Any attraction that goes years without working properly, is a problem. That includes EE. It has like, one major AA? that was super expensive and heavily marketed. And it doesn't work. To the point they've basically just pushed it under the rug...most people literally don't even know it exists. With prices increasing, product quality shouldn't be decreasing at ALL.. that is true for EE, ToT, IASW, and so on.

I agree that it's all important. But the more the vast majority of Disney park fans focus on JUST the yeti and little else, the more it allows Disney to get away with maintaining things in this manner. This very thread was unfortunately a huge component to this hivemind mentality regarding this topic, since it was stickied at the top for 15 years.

 

[BlakeW39]

I agree that it's all important. But the more the vast majority of Disney park fans focus on JUST the yeti and little else, the more it allows Disney to get away with maintaining things in this manner. This very thread was unfortunately a huge component to this hivemind mentality regarding this topic, since it was stickied at the top for 15 years.

well I do agree we shouldn't only focus on the yeti. The yeti is flashy so it gets more clout than other broken WDW attraction effects. But it's one piece of a much bigger problem. TWDC just doesn't seem to think there's any point in fixing their attractions and making sure they're firing on all cylinders. They don't see any "incentive" in doing so.

That said, the yeti being broken is a big deal on its own. It shouldn't be undermined....that the primary show scene on one of WDW's most popular (and expensive) attractions hasn't worked almost since day 1. It's obscene. They raise prices constantly but have no "incentive" to actually....oh I don't know....maintain the actual quality of their product?

 

[Rodj]

TWDC just doesn't seem to think there's any point in fixing their attractions and making sure they're firing on all cylinders. They don't see any "incentive" in doing so.

I more so think that this is a TDO issue(or at least with other rides). WDSP keeps most of their rides in good shape, for example all show effects are checked daily with their ToT, and in fact recently added minor changes to some scenes.

 

[Dragonman]

I’d say Bird on a Stick is more noticeable than the Yeti nowadays because at least you get enough time to notice it while you’re sitting there.

 

[UNCgolf]

it's solid. But I don't think it's as much of a standout to your average guest as it would be with the yeti. It's still a very good ride, but not a "Wow!" ride.

That is the incentive TWDC has to fix it. It should be a stand out in someone's memory and a reason to travel back to WDW. Currently it's only half way there. Still a solid ride with good guest satisfaction but it lacks the Disney wow factor that it, by all rights, should have.

I agree that it's not as good as it could/should be (and said as much).

But what you're saying isn't an incentive for TWDC to fix it, unfortunately. That's not how they operate (at least now) -- it would cost them money to fix it and they see no benefit to doing so because the ride is popular as-is. It would just be wasted money to them.

 

[BlakeW39]

I agree that it's not as good as it could/should be (and said as much).

But what you're saying isn't an incentive for TWDC to fix it, unfortunately. That's not how they operate (at least now) -- it would cost them money to fix it and they see no benefit to doing so because the ride is popular as-is. It would just be wasted money to them.

it may not be enough of an incentive for them, but it is an incentive in the sense that it would have benefits for the long term success of the company if they went ahead and fixed it.

 

[UNCgolf]

it may not be enough of an incentive for them, but it is an incentive in the sense that it would have benefits for the long term success of the company if they went ahead and fixed it.

I'm honestly not sure it would.

I wish it would, but the evidence seems to suggest otherwise. People have a pretty high opinion of the ride even with all the broken effects.

 

[BlakeW39]

I'm honestly not sure it would.

I wish it would, but the evidence seems to suggest otherwise. People have a pretty high opinion of the ride even with all the broken effects.

of course guest satisfaction is still "pretty high." Everest is still a fun coaster, and the yeti being broken doesn't change that. Imo it would be ridiculous to assume guest satisfaction for EE would be low just because the yeti is broken. BUT that doesn't change the fact that guest satisfaction would almost certainly be even higher if the yeti was working. Adding another wow moment to EE would increase rider enjoyment and therefore the desire among guests to ride it again. That doesn't meat guest enjoyment is low now....it's not, but it would be even higher if the attraction were firing on all cylinders (i.e. if its most important show effect was working)

 

[James Alucobond]

BUT that doesn't change the fact that guest satisfaction would almost certainly be even higher if the yeti was working.

I think this is where most people disagree. Aside from a momentary spike in vlogger interest, I doubt a half-second swing of the yeti’s arm will meaningfully increase satisfaction scores or reinvigorate Animal Kingdom attendance. They wouldn’t even be able to properly advertise the update because it would mean publicizing the fact that it’s been broken for decades.

 

[Disstevefan1]

I go on Everest every chance I get so I am a bad example, but I am sure most folks would go on Everest just to see the Yeti working if it was fixed.

Also, the way TWDC throws away money on D+ and money losing movies, how they gave up on the Starcruiser just for the tax write off, allowing the DL peoplemover to rot in the sun, and other things and yet will not fix the yeti, just gets me mad.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I agree that it's not as good as it could/should be (and said as much).

But what you're saying isn't an incentive for TWDC to fix it, unfortunately. That's not how they operate (at least now) -- it would cost them money to fix it and they see no benefit to doing so because the ride is popular as-is. It would just be wasted money to them.

Taking on the expense also means taking on blame for the underlying issues.

 

[BlakeW39]

I think this is where most people disagree. Aside from a momentary spike in vlogger interest, I doubt a half-second swing of the yeti’s arm will meaningfully increase satisfaction scores or reinvigorate Animal Kingdom attendance. They wouldn’t even be able to properly advertise the update because it would mean publicizing the fact that it’s been broken for decades.

Where most people disagree? That EE with a working yeti would have higher guest satisfaction than EE without one? That's not exactly a controversial take. Would it reinvigorate Animal Kingdom attendance? No. But would guests like the attraction more if the yeti actually worked? yes?? how is this even a debate?

Now I agree that fixing the yeti couldn't be extensively marketed in the way that a new attraction could be. But would it be an improvement to guest satisfaction? I can't imagine how it could not be? Guests aren't as unbelievably stupid as some people on this site seem to think. The addition of an extremely impressive AA/show scene to Expedition Everest would likely cause that attraction to 'wow' guests more than it does currently, without any major show scenes at all. Yes EE is a coaster. But it's Disney coaster. No one travels to WDW for G forces. Major show scenes like the yeti matter.

But again, the yeti argument always comes down to one point I particularly dislike— that the show scene itself was too short to even matter that much. Yes, the show scene only lasted for a couple of seconds. But the main drop lasts even less time, and that's obviously an important component to the attraction. Hell the ride itself is only a couple minutes and a large part of that is turn bank and lift hill. So the fact that the yeti encounter was short isn't evidence that it wasn't important. The yeti encounter lasted just long enough for guests to see it and be impressed by the figure. Saying it doesn't matter to the ride because it only lasted a couple seconds is silly.

 

[James Alucobond]

Where most people disagree? That EE with a working yeti would have higher guest satisfaction than EE without one? That's not exactly a controversial take. Would it reinvigorate Animal Kingdom attendance? No. But would guests like the attraction more if the yeti actually worked? yes?? how is this even a debate?

Because satisfaction, at least the metric as measured by Disney, can only go so high. Let's say the current mean satisfaction rating for the ride is 8.9. How much higher might a functioning yeti push it? How much higher might cleaning up the hairbands push it? How much higher might restoring the mist machine push it? There are diminishing returns when the ride is already highly satisfying and no one (or basically no one) realizes anything about it is broken.

Now, if you tracked a separate question in your survey along the lines of ...

How would you rate the impressiveness of the animatronics on Expedition Everest during your last visit?​

... then you might see more significant movement, but you'd ultimately be fishing for the data you want and would need to convince higher-ups that it's a meaningful metric. Basically, the ride doesn't necessarily need a moving yeti to be wholly satisfying. Though added effects will make it more and more impressive, you can only process so much during a coaster, and you can only be so satisfied when asked to rate on a fixed scale.

 

[spacemt354]

Where most people disagree? That EE with a working yeti would have higher guest satisfaction than EE without one? That's not exactly a controversial take. Would it reinvigorate Animal Kingdom attendance? No. But would guests like the attraction more if the yeti actually worked? yes?? how is this even a debate?

A bump in guest satisfaction from for example 9/10 to a 9.5 or 10/10 isn't going to move the needle much.

Now I agree that fixing the yeti couldn't be extensively marketed in the way that a new attraction could be. But would it be an improvement to guest satisfaction? I can't imagine how it could not be? Guests aren't as unbelievably stupid as some people on this site seem to think. The addition of an extremely impressive AA/show scene to Expedition Everest would likely cause that attraction to 'wow' guests more than it does currently, without any major show scenes at all. Yes EE is a coaster. But it's Disney coaster. No one travels to WDW for G forces. Major show scenes like the yeti matter.

Any marketing for it would mainstream the fact that it's been in B mode for so long. In an ideal world it would have been fixed a long time ago, but nowadays I'd much rather see them invest in more attractions and market those.

But again, the yeti argument always comes down to one point I particularly dislike— that the show scene itself was too short to even matter that much. Yes, the show scene only lasted for a couple of seconds. But the main drop lasts even less time, and that's obviously an important component to the attraction. Hell the ride itself is only a couple minutes and a large part of that is turn bank and lift hill. So the fact that the yeti encounter was short isn't evidence that it wasn't important. The yeti encounter lasted just long enough for guests to see it and be impressed by the figure. Saying it doesn't matter to the ride because it only lasted a couple seconds is silly.

It's not that it doesn't matter. The effect was definitively impressive for what it was, but it was not the top highlight of the attraction for me. And in some ways I find the darkness and strobe lights create an even more terrifying impression of the Yeti compared to when the lights were on. Especially since you're moving through the mountain quickly see flashes of it out of the dark.

If the animatronic scene occurred when the train stopped after the backwards segment and before the drop, then I think it would have much more of an impact on ride satisfaction, akin to the Carnotaurus scene in Dinosuar.

 

[SteveAZee]

I think that if Iger and others want to convey a "we're listening and we care" message, I would think fixing the Yeti would be a good place to show that. If the long term decline in Disney park fandom (and attendance) comes from both a loss of quality and an increase in costs (and they don't want to decrease prices), then bumping up the quality by replacing the broken Yeti would be a good place to start.

 

[BlakeW39]

Because satisfaction, at least the metric as measured by Disney, can only go so high. Let's say the current mean satisfaction rating for the ride is 8.9. How much higher might a functioning yeti push it? How much higher might cleaning up the hairbands push it? How much higher might restoring the mist machine push it? There are diminishing returns when the ride is already highly satisfying and no one (or basically no one) realizes anything about it is broken.

See and that's where I believe you are conflating things. Guest satisfaction as quantitatively measured by Disney can only go so high. That is certainly correct. If guest satisfaction, on a quantitative scale, is already high for Everest then there isn't any way Disney can improve the attraction which will result in significantly higher guest satisfaction scores. Because guest satisfaction would already be (almost) as high as Disney is willing to measure it.

However actual guest satisfaction— that is, the enjoyment guests get out of an experience —does not 'only go so far.' There are always means by which Disney can improve its attractions that will result in guests enjoying them more. Bringing back the yeti is an example of that. Plussing BTMR is another. So instead of asking this question,

How would you rate the impressiveness of the animatronics on Expedition Everest during your last visit?​

one could more aptly ask guests to compare to the two versions of the attraction. Let's say we could hypothetically sit guests down to ride EE with and without the yeti show scene, and then ask them which version they preferred. If they preferred the attraction with the giant yeti AA, then the yeti necessarily improves guest satisfaction of the ride. If guests said they liked both versions and that the yeti didn't really do that much for them, then that would mean the yeti wouldn't improve guest satisfaction and bringing it back would have no benefit for the park.

I however am 100% banking on the former. Remember, EE as a coaster actually ain't all that. It's fun, but it's no Steel Vengeance or VelociCoaster. The ride system isn't that special and no one needs to spend thousands of dollars or travel thousands of miles to go on what is essentially a middling rollercoaster. I got CP 2+ hours away. What brings Disney over the top is its theming. That includes EE. The yeti was THE headlining themed/story moment of the attraction. Losing it means losing one of the main 'wow moments' of the ride. Bringing it back means wowing guests more than they are being wowed currently.

bad show is a missed opportunity for good show. Good show equals higher attraction quality. Higher attraction quality equals a more enjoyable experience for guests. No yeti on EE is a glaring example of this.

 

[BlakeW39]

I think that if Iger and others want to convey a "we're listening and we care" message, I would think fixing the Yeti would be a good place to show that. If the long term decline in Disney park fandom (and attendance) comes from both a loss of quality and an increase in costs (and they don't want to decrease prices), then bumping up the quality by replacing the broken Yeti would be a good place to start.

I'm with you 1000%....

but they aren't and they don't. sadly