News Guardians of the Galaxy Cosmic Rewind attraction confirmed for Epcot

I don't really know much about the Citizens of Orlando, but do you think Orlando can even support 2 more Theme Parks? I know Orlando has a pretty low population compared to big cities, and financially could the tourist pay for that? The majority of the people want to go to WDW and Universal, adding 2 more parks to Universal would instantly double the cost to visit Universal.

Not complaining that Universal is expanding, and I hope Disney finally learns there lesson, doing nothing with the parks for decades. Just a little concerned that this might change the market drastically, for better or for worst.

Sea World is on its last leg, tourism is going through the roof, emerging markets from South America - so yes it can support more theme parks.
 
I know a lot of Disney fans aren’t fans of coasters, I think Disney is doing the right things and seems to be aiming for 2 coasters per work. I think that’s fine for those who want something slightly more thrilling than a dark ride like Peter Pan

Rollercoasters are cheap, slow loads meaning huge queues, and are aimed at a specific thrill seeking audience rather than the whole family.

It's getting tiresome the sheer volume being built lately. Sea World, Six Flags make alot of coasters as they are pretty cheap to make. Disney shouldn't be looking at budget attractions not at a time of record attendance.
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Rollercoasters are cheap, slow loads meaning huge queues, and are aimed at a specific thrill seeking audience rather than the whole family.

It's getting tiresome the sheer volume being built lately. Sea World, Six Flags make alot of coasters as they are pretty cheap to make. Disney shouldn't be looking at budget attractions not at a time of record attendance.
Roller coasters are not always slow loads.

The coasters being added to WDW currently are not in any way budget attractions.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Not to be picky, but all of which will involve "rocking backwards and forwards in front of screens"…....

Either way it's not slanted towards either coaster or dark ride. I'd say that's a tad picky ;) even if accurate. Still a moving vehicle with some practical sets. Screens don't seem to be going away. I think in certain cases they can enhance the ride (personally, a couple on Na'vi River Journey are used well). But still, can't deny a reliance on screens even in the dark rides.
 

Kman101

Well-Known Member
Rollercoasters are cheap, slow loads meaning huge queues, and are aimed at a specific thrill seeking audience rather than the whole family.

It's getting tiresome the sheer volume being built lately. Sea World, Six Flags make alot of coasters as they are pretty cheap to make. Disney shouldn't be looking at budget attractions not at a time of record attendance.

I'm not a major coaster fan either. I don't do Six Flags, Bush Garden/Sea World coasters ... but to be fair, Guardians coaster hardly sounds like it's going to be 'cheap', though I understand the point you're making. They're "easy thrills" and folks run to them and love them. I'm not super fond of RnRC because I thought it was a lazy attempt to counter Islands of Adventure at the time. I still don't care much for it but man will people defend the Aerosmith theme, lol. So ....

Disney is balancing it at least with dark rides. We just got a boat ride (with one in the pipeline, maybe/possibly). Yeah, they have screens but it's not sitting on a non-moving (non-moving meaning you are seated and not in a moving vehicle that moves around show scenes) seat that parks you in front of a screen the entire attraction. So it seems balanced to me. The parks probably needed a few more coasters to appeal to that crowd, whether I like them or not I know there's a huge audience for them.

Let's see
- Little Mermaid (omnimover dark ride)
- Seven Dwarfs Mine Train (family coaster - replaced dark ride)
- Flight of Passage (simulator, on bikes, and better than Soarin')
- Na'vi River Journey (slow moving boat ride)
- Slinky Dog Dash (family coaster that DHS needed; though I'd rather have Monsters this looks fun enough, bare steel aside)
- Alien Swirling Saucers (flat/whip ride)
- Mickey & Minnie's Runaway Railway (LPS dark ride - replacement)
- Star Wars Battle Escape attraction (LPS dark ride)
- Star Wars Millenium Falcon attraction (simulator)
- Ratatouille Kitchen Calamity (LPS dark ride)
- TRON Light Cycle Power Run (bike coaster)
- Guardians of the Galaxy attraction ("drifting" coaster)

I'd say there's quite a variety of attractions. But compared to the past it does seem, in isolation, that a "lot" of coasters are on the way because we're not used to them adding them, but I'd say they needed to fill a bit of a void. And they have a slew of LPS dark rides coming. Not to mention the possible Poppins dark ride.

We also go from no LPS attractions to three, two in the same park.
 
Last edited:

Movielover

Well-Known Member
Rollercoasters are cheap, slow loads meaning huge queues, and are aimed at a specific thrill seeking audience rather than the whole family.

Hey man, I worked at Kings Island for 3 summers on Diamondback, the star attraction at the park. We took pride in moving trains effecianly and never stacked (when trains have to wait on break runs for the station to clear). We could take lines that were suppose to be an hour+ and move them under 30 minutes. It all depends on operation.

Oh and we had riders ranging from the shortest children safely allowed to ride all the way up to seniors, and they were nothing but smiles getting off.

Don't sell rollercoasters short my friend, they're half the reason theme parks are still around.
 

Winter

Well-Known Member
Roller Coasters are fine as long as there isn't too much of them and they're good. If Disney went six flags and made a whole park almost all roller coasters of course it would be a big problem, but they aren't doing that, they're adding one roller coaster to Epcot. People's problem with it isn't that it's a roller coaster, it's how it fits thematically that people are annoyed about.

(Also, as for the cheap thing, isn't this ride costing a lot? Wouldn'r say cheapness is why they'rw building it)
 

rle4lunch

Well-Known Member
I'm not a major coaster fan either. I don't do Six Flags, Bush Garden/Sea World coasters ... but to be fair, Guardians coaster hardly sounds like it's going to be 'cheap', though I understand the point you're making. They're "easy thrills" and folks run to them and love them. I'm not super fond of RnRC because I thought it was a lazy attempt to counter Islands of Adventure at the time. I still don't care much for it but man will people defend the Aerosmith theme, lol. So ....

Disney is balancing it at least with dark rides. We just got a boat ride (with one in the pipeline, maybe/possibly). Yeah, they have screens but it's not sitting on a non-moving (non-moving meaning you are seated and not in a moving vehicle that moves around show scenes) seat that parks you in front of a screen the entire attraction. So it seems balanced to me. The parks probably needed a few more coasters to appeal to that crowd, whether I like them or not I know there's a huge audience for them.

Let's see
- Little Mermaid (omnimover dark ride)
- Seven Dwarfs Mine Train (family coaster - replaced dark ride)
- Flight of Passage (simulator, on bikes, and better than Soarin')
- Na'vi River Journey (slow moving boat ride)
- Slinky Dog Dash (family coaster that DHS needed; though I'd rather have Monsters this looks fun enough, bare steel aside)
- Alien Swirling Saucers (flat/whip ride)
- Mickey & Minnie's Runaway Railway (LPS dark ride - replacement)
- Star Wars Battle Escape attraction (LPS dark ride)
- Star Wars Millenium Falcon attraction (simulator)
- Ratatouille Kitchen Calamity (LPS dark ride)
- TRON Light Cycle Power Run (bike coaster)
- Guardians of the Galaxy attraction ("drifting" coaster)

I'd say there's quite a variety of attractions. But compared to the past it does seem, in isolation, that a "lot" of coasters are on the way because we're not used to them adding them, but I'd say they needed to fill a bit of a void. And they have a slew of LPS dark rides coming. Not to mention the possible Poppins dark ride.

We also go from no LPS attractions to three, two in the same park.

They could theme rnrc pretty much anything and I'd be fine with it. Just as long as they keep the quality plywood set pieces and blacklight paint... sigh.
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Either way it's not slanted towards either coaster or dark ride. I'd say that's a tad picky ;) even if accurate. Still a moving vehicle with some practical sets. Screens don't seem to be going away. I think in certain cases they can enhance the ride (personally, a couple on Na'vi River Journey are used well). But still, can't deny a reliance on screens even in the dark rides.
Oh I don’t think they’re going to go away either. They’re not a bad thing if used appropriately.

I was an If You Had Wings fan after all...
 

Haymarket2008

Well-Known Member
Not to be picky, but all of which will involve "rocking backwards and forwards in front of screens"…....

I’m hoping Battle Escape’s screens will only be used for depth and to enhance a show scene....if not, how could that qualify as one of Imagineering’s hopeful gold standard?
 

Indy_UK

Well-Known Member
No. IMHO.

Tron is future themed and going in Tomorrowland. Slinky Dog fits the theme of a Toy Story land. Everest suits animal kingdom quite well.

The only one I’m sceptical of is Guardians but I bet once all said and done, everyone will say what a wonderful addition it is and how wellnit suits what Epcot is likely to become
 

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

Back
Top Bottom