Goodbye Poachers?

[progroupie]

It would be nice if they had more than one storyline ala GMR.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Good, let the storyline dissappear. :sohappy:

The whole of AK suffers from too much story. The park was built during the heyday of 'the Disney difference is Story'. As a result, rides that could've been awesome are merely good: Safari, Kali River, Everest. They all suffer from trying too hard to tell a narrative story.

 

[Mansion Butler]

Take it with a grain of salt-

There are rumors that the entire "poachers" storyline could go away at Kilimanjaro Safaris. As a result the poacher area at the end of the safari would be made into a new animal habitat.

YES!

I'm all for stories and adventure on rides, but "you are now in an animal preserve" is enough of a story for me. No need to force anything else (sorry Mr. Rhode, I still love you).

Good, let the storyline dissappear. :sohappy:

The whole of AK suffers from too much story. The park was built during the heyday of 'the Disney difference is Story'. As a result, rides that could've been awesome are merely good: Safari, Kali River, Everest. They all suffer from trying too hard to tell a narrative story.

I'm not going that far, though.

 

[Prototype82]

I'm very unhappy about this.

 

[Prototype82]

It would be nice if they had more than one storyline ala GMR.

I agree.

 

[Tom Morrow]

Good, let the storyline dissappear. :sohappy:

The whole of AK suffers from too much story. The park was built during the heyday of 'the Disney difference is Story'. As a result, rides that could've been awesome are merely good: Safari, Kali River, Everest. They all suffer from trying too hard to tell a narrative story.

Everest has an overbearing story? The story isn't much more than: "theres a Yeti. Stay away from it!"

I don't see how it's story would lower your experience on Everest in any way.

 

[Choodles]

Good, let the storyline dissappear. :sohappy:

The whole of AK suffers from too much story. The park was built during the heyday of 'the Disney difference is Story'. As a result, rides that could've been awesome are merely good: Safari, Kali River, Everest. They all suffer from trying too hard to tell a narrative story.

The only thing EE suffers from is a lack of a certain working AA.

 

[The Empress Lilly]

Everest has an overbearing story? The story isn't much more than: "theres a Yeti. Stay away from it!"

I don't see how it's story would lower your experience on Everest in any way.

The story doesn't lower the ride experience as is, when riding the coaster. Rather, the ride experience is too low because of the design choice to tell a narrative story on a three minute coaster ride. It is a limited concept, restraining. Rhode is a better art director than ride designer.

The story is ambitious. Ride through the countryside, climb up ever more into the forbidden mountain, discover the Yeti has destroyed the tracks, rush back, climaxed by a high speed narrow escape from the yeti.
Cool, it would make for a fun adventure cartoon. But it doesn't work on a coaster.
For one, a coaster's climaxes are at full speed. The story's climax is the encounter with the yeti. As a result, one encounters the biggest, most complex AA on property for just a split second as one whizzes past it.

Everest was the most expensive roller coaster ever build, anywhere in the world. Yet it did not manage to progress beyond thirty year old Thunder Mountain, neither in atmosphere or ride experience. :shrug:

Speaking of which, Thunder and Space show how 'story' is better implemented. Neither lack in atmosphere, theme, intuitive story compared to Everest. But unlike Everest neither are restrained by too much story.

The only thing EE suffers from is a lack of a certain working AA.

Whether fully functioning or not at all, a high speed thrill ride does not rely on one single AudioAnimatronic.

 

[Cosmic Commando]

Everest has an overbearing story? The story isn't much more than: "theres a Yeti. Stay away from it!"

I don't see how it's story would lower your experience on Everest in any way.

There is a story to EE. Even shops have stories now. I haven't heard it or read it anywhere but during a tour behind the construction walls in early '06, but there is a story written by WDI. The gist of it is that the coaster cars are tea trains. The tea company closed shop mysteriously decades ago. Now, the tour operators whose offices we walk through in the queue (can't remember their names, something and Bob?) are re-purposing the trains as a way to make it easier for people to climb Everest. Apparently, to climb Everest, there is a long hike just to get to the base of the mountain and the trains will allow you to skip all that. The locals tell them it's a bad idea and the whole yeti thing but the tour operators don't care. So we riders are all mountain climbers taking the train through yeti territory to base camp at the bottom of Everest.

 

[Disneyson 1]

The only thing is that KS needs a SUREFIRE finale. Due to the nature of the ride, it is incredibly possible that you will not see any animals up-close on your journey despite the tricks WDI use to get them close to the road. Therefore, some people may have only seen, say, crocodiles, a shakey bridge, half of a hippo in the water, antelope, and a giraffe. The ending justifies the entire long journey and gives a good "kiss goodnight" to the finale of the ride.

If the finale is replaced with another enclosure, it might be entirely possible that you will not be able to see whatever animal is in that enclosure, leaving you with an animal-less finale and basically just a plain ending. I believe that every Disney ride has some sort of a punchy ending that ties up the ride and puts it in a pretty bow, and without the poachers there's no reliability that you'll have a good ending on the ride.

 

[Choodles]

The story doesn't lower the ride experience as is, when riding the coaster. Rather, the ride experience is too low because of the design choice to tell a narrative story on a three minute coaster ride. It is a limited concept, restraining. Rhode is a better art director than ride designer.

The story is ambitious. Ride through the countryside, climb up ever more into the forbidden mountain, discover the Yeti has destroyed the tracks, rush back, climaxed by a high speed narrow escape from the yeti.
Cool, it would make for a fun adventure cartoon. But it doesn't work on a coaster.
For one, a coaster's climaxes are at full speed. The story's climax is the encounter with the yeti. As a result, one encounters the biggest, most complex AA on property for just a split second as one whizzes past it.

Everest was the most expensive roller coaster ever build, anywhere in the world. Yet it did not manage to progress beyond thirty year old Thunder Mountain, neither in atmosphere or ride experience. :shrug:

Speaking of which, Thunder and Space show how 'story' is better
implemented. Neither lack in atmosphere, theme, intuitive story compared to Everest. But unlike Everest neither are restrained by too much story.

Whether fully functioning or not at all, a high speed thrill ride does not rely on one single AudioAnimatronic.

Oh I agree with you whoever was incharge of EE should have been fired even if it was Joe Rhode!

 

[disneyonmymind]

The only thing is that KS needs a SUREFIRE finale. Due to the nature of the ride, it is incredibly possible that you will not see any animals up-close on your journey despite the tricks WDI use to get them close to the road. Therefore, some people may have only seen, say, crocodiles, a shakey bridge, half of a hippo in the water, antelope, and a giraffe. The ending justifies the entire long journey and gives a good "kiss goodnight" to the finale of the ride.

If the finale is replaced with another enclosure, it might be entirely possible that you will not be able to see whatever animal is in that enclosure, leaving you with an animal-less finale and basically just a plain ending. I believe that every Disney ride has some sort of a punchy ending that ties up the ride and puts it in a pretty bow, and without the poachers there's no reliability that you'll have a good ending on the ride.

Exactly, to me the ride needs that extra bit of speed at the end. I'm not attached to the current story at all but to me something is better than nothing. :shrug:

 

[Zummi Gummi]

Maybe I'm over-simplifying things, but why isn't "going on an African safari" enough of a story for people? Why must there be manufactured, corny "danger"?

 

[Disneydreamer23]

When will this change be occuring>?:shrug:

 

[WaltDis4Life]

Count me among those hoping for no story. The backdrop of being on a safari in Africa is really all the story you need.

I, for one, hope they go with the original Jungle Cruise approach from here on- your driver will identify the animals you are seeing and provide bits of information about them, perhaps with a conservatory message in keeping with the general theme/purpose of DAK, but not much more.

I know this is an old post, but the only thing that I could think of when I saw this was, "Does that mean we get to shoot hippos?"

 

[DancingPhoenix]

Oh I agree with you whoever was incharge of EE should have been fired even if it was Joe Rhode!

I hope you're joking! The thing that does make Disney different for me is the theme. It's what keeps me coming back even as an adult, like what I say to my friends "Sure Universal has great fast moving rides, but Disney has the atmosphere." I mean for rides like EE and ToT I almost prefer doing the stand by line, because I get to see all of the story working up to it. They're just normal rides without a story, the story makes them Disney.


As for the original topic, I can see both pros and cons with taking out the poacher story line. Pros include adding more re-rideability because yeah, the story is enough for one ride but not like 3. Also, if you have a really half hearted CM driving, it's just plain annoying to watch, almost painful. I would often want to grab the "radio" mic and do the dialogue myself. But yeah the first times I rode it before it got too watered down and half hearted it was nice. Another pro is a possible other storyline, which is what I would like.

Cons for me would be getting rid of the message about poachers. But as of late seeing how many people go on safari's and are dumb about wild animals, perhaps the end of the ride could be an elephant chasing you or something? A general don't mess with animals; the elephant could mistake the group for the poachers? Another downside is that with how few animals you see somtimes, it could get really boring for kids. Adults may like a simple safari ride, but kids like something to keep them interested.

Either way like the OP said, just a rumor, so we'll have to wait and see what happens

 

[HMF]

Maybe I'm over-simplifying things, but why isn't "going on an African safari" enough of a story for people? Why must there be manufactured, corny "danger"?

Because Disney has conditioned people to be expecting every single attraction to have a forced storyline implemented in it rather than just be an immersive experience for guests to enjoy.

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

No storyline, its just an animal attraction, or Zoo as they are normally called.

 

[Susan Savia]

Good!