Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout announced for Disney California Adventure

[dweezil78]

Without bogging down this thread with images for the other version, I just uploaded a few pics I snapped on my last trip that I felt showed just how classy and full of detail the WDW version is...

http://imgur.com/a/QYFWp

 

[NobodyElse]

Disclaimer: In the past, I've pointed out statements where opinion was presented as fact (I was told to just understand that). I've made direct quotes of false statements (I was told I should know what they meant, regardless of what was typed for all to see). I took a few steps back, tried to consider some of the sources, and decided it was best to just avoid those observations for a while. It seems like some of these situations are happening in this thread, so I'll briefly tread into those waters, then step back out of that particular wading pool for another 6 to 12 months.

It looks terrible, in my opinion. An attraction, especially one like this, with no signage...bad show. It doesn't help that the signage was in big, bold letters.

It doesn't necessarily have to be something that mechanically isn't working. No signage is still bad snow.

No signage is considered bad show in terms of Disney's standards, simple as that. That is a FACT. Get a job working in attractions at the DLR and come back to me if they tell you anything different.

(As has been stated by a few others) it's not hard for me to see why the above statements were questioned. It seems implied that the attraction now has NO SIGNAGE. All the accusations of "bad show" are based on "no signage". It was later noted that the attraction does indeed still have signage (decorative) as well as I assume the required signs at the entrance describing the ride. If they took away signs at the queue/attraction entrance, I would agree, but that's not the case. It almost seems implied that attractions with tall structures need a highly elevated sign, but (as was also mentioned elsewhere) attractions like the "Matterhorn Bobsleds" have survived with minimal signage for years. I think it's okay to see a large structure from a distance, then be intrigued enough to be drawn close enough to read the normal signage.

No, I said it was bad show that the signage was removed at all. I ADDED that it's really noticeable since the letters were so huge.

It seems here that the real issue is that of change (and it's merits). Change can be percieved as good or bad based on feelings, but this doesn't meet the "no signage = bad show" test.

As attraction hosts/hostesses, during training you are given a list of what is considered "bad show," and while that list of course differs depending on the attraction, signage problems/no signage is on every attraction's list as bad show. That is a fact.

Again, this doesn't meet the test.

Now, what is probably a good point of discussion is the fact that the removed sign was not the name of the attraction, but a decorative sign depicting the fictional hotel the attraction is based on / contained in. Does the building look better with or without the sign? Is the theming hurt or hindered? Everybody's entitled to their opinion. Some older hotels had giant elevated signage, some didn't, so either way could be within the scope of theme in my opinion. Again, is it necessary for "show" or "operations"? I don't think so, for the same reason we don't need a tall signs labeling "The Matterhorn", "Big Thunder Mountain" or "Grizzly Peak".

Where Star Wars Land is going, Club 33 redo, closure of Court of Angels to the general public, Matterhorn redo, Season of the Force execution in TL minus Hyperspace Mountain, WOC Celebrate.

The above was provided as examples of "recent misses at Disneyland". It seems like the term "miss" is pretty concrete. I'd invite an actual definition and criteria so that these changes can be properly judged. If it's based on attendance, I'd argue that the "Matterhorn redo" doesn't qualify. If it's more of a matter of "I don't care for it" or "I don't think it is as good as it was before the change", then we're back into the land of opinion. (And while siting multiple reasons for displeasure might sway folks over to a certain viewpoint, it'll still be an opinion.)

Remember, facts can be proven. Opinions don't need to be (but shouldn't be presented as fact.)

 

[FigmentForver96]

The ultimate defense of Disney's decisions is paying for the privilege of clicking through its turnstiles. Those of you locals who are here berating folks for not being bothered by a temporary bit of bad show might want to think about that the next time you visit. Glass houses and all that.

Well I'm no local and I won't be making trips for a while but you are right there. Of course that doesn't stop me from wanting to hold Disney to the standard they have set for themselves mind you. Many of the things Disney has done and continues to do are fantastic! I enjoy a lot of things hence why I am a big fan. I just want them to be innovative and above the rest always. I don't doubt the new ride won't be cool or even fun. I just wish it didn't come at the expense of another great ride. A ride that is arguably one of the parks stronger rides.

I imagine there are some others who tried replying to me but that ignore feature helped swat the little flies away

 

[NobodyElse]

Also based on the re-theming of the attraction, that sign was going to be removed or covered sooner of later. The real discussion seems to be should they completely close down the attraction before starting any work, or overlap operations with re-theming to increase that amount of time visitors are able to enjoy the "ride". Disney came to that decision already, and some people seem to be of the opinion that it was the wrong decision. Oh well.

 

[Stevek]

The ultimate defense of Disney's decisions is paying for the privilege of clicking through its turnstiles. Those of you locals who are here berating folks for not being bothered by a temporary bit of bad show might want to think about that the next time you visit. Glass houses and all that.

I honestly don't have a problem with the sign being gone any more than I would any other ride that is undergoing some type of change or refurb. We've seen this type of stuff for years...I mean, the castle or stores on main street covered with scrims, scaffolding covering rides, paint being applied for all to see. At least they are keeping the ride open while it's undergoing this controversial change.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Me reading this thread.

 

[Professortango1]

It's kind of a subjective thing to be fair... But in general, the DCA ToT always felt abbreviated and shortchanged. Is it tighter? Sure, I guess... but only because there's literally two super quick things that happen and you're on your way to dropping. IMO ToT shouldn't be a "tight" experience. What makes the original so good is its pacing and build up. The way you slowly snake your way through the 5th dimension and gradually work your way to the randomized drop sequence is far more pulse pounding than the way it just happens in DCA.

Also, I feel like the 5th dimension -- out of any of the on-ride sequences -- is the closest in vibe to what Twilight Zone is all about. You're in an elevator that is all of a sudden moving forward through a hallway!? It completely goes against convention. It's weird, bizarre, and screws with your head -- especially when you are a first-time rider and not sure what to expect. Why are we moving forward? When the heck are we going to drop? What is happening here!? It's the standout sequence of any version of the attraction, I really love it and was so sad when ours opened with out it.

You're also forgetting that DCA's version does have an opening moment that WDW doesn't. It sets the stage for me. Immediately you are confused and weirded out as your elevator car pulls back, the walls disappear, and you've been sucked into The Twilight Zone. The ride ends in the reverse fashion, pushing the car out of The Twilight Zone and back into reality as the walls materialize around the floating elevator doors. In WDW, you just go up and have the doors open.

If the 5th Dimension room actually WAS a hallway, I might be more impressed by it. The doors open on a similar hallway to what we just saw, but now we're moving through it. Instead it feels like a warehouse space with plastic Christmas lawn figurines, the hanging signs from visible wire, and the dated projection screens of the eye and window break. If they had animatronics that changed or appeared/disappeared before your eyes that would be fantastic...or any kind of effects. But even the first ride I went "Cool!" when the ride lurched forward, but then wondered if the effects were broken in the room as nothing was happening. It kills all the buildup. The star field opening up and swallowing the car is fantastic, but once again followed by a good 4-6 seconds of silence and nothing happening. This motif of silent awkwardness also appears at the end of the Hallway sequence as the scene just kind of peters out and then once again at the end where we see the projection screen showing the visuals from the show, including a silent Rod Sterling.

I'd love it if Disney plussed the ride as Disneyland likes to do and added effects, tightened the script, and updated the projection technology. As of right now, it's the shell of a great ride but the guts are better in California.

 

[Stevek]

We actually prefer the DCA version. I love the opening/ending moments of the car's movement and how it bookends the experience, I love the tighter script and darker narration, I love the drop scare that comes at the end of the revamped Hallway scene. The original looks amazing, but the ride has a lot of dead air and the 5th Dimension Room is clunky in execution even if amazing in design.

I'm not surprised many people like the WDW Tower more as the facade and queue are incredible and the ride is about half a minute longer, but it just doesn't hold up. I also know a lot of people who prefer WDW's Pirates, while I think they should replaced that with Guardians if people don't mind ill-fitting attractions replacing "inferior" copies of original attractions.

Having ridden the WDW a couple of times and the DCA version dozens of times, I can honestly say that I feel the WDW version is better. BUT, that does not mean that I don't enjoy the DCA version...I love it. It's just different which is ok with me.

 

[Professortango1]

I honestly don't have a problem with the sign being gone any more than I would any other ride that is undergoing some type of change or refurb. We've seen this type of stuff for years...I mean, the castle or stores on main street covered with scrims, scaffolding covering rides, paint being applied for all to see. At least they are keeping the ride open while it's undergoing this controversial change.

I think it's the difference in the way the two parks are ran. Very rarely is a Disneyland Resort Attraction open while behind scrims. Visiting the Haunted Mansion this summer was very interesting to see so much construction crowding the queue and the entire facade obstructed. Disneyland has so many more rides, so they can afford to take an attraction down to refurbish it rather than having a bad show element open to the public. WDW is so strapped for attractions, they cannot really close down an attraction while they tear it up with construction. A crane behind the castle at WDW is common, in California it is rare that the castle isn't photo ready even in the midst of decorations.

 

[dweezil78]

Very rarely is a Disneyland Resort Attraction open while behind scrims

It really all depends on what's going on inside. If they're not touching anything that impacts the on-ride experience and are strictly doing exterior work, usually they will leave it open. This is actually happening in Fantasyland right now with Peter Pan.

I think in the case of ToT, getting a scrim to cover the sign (or lackthereof) is a pretty impractical/costly task and not worth closing the ride over.

 

[Professortango1]

It really all depends on what's going on inside. If they're not touching anything that impacts the on-ride experience and are strictly doing exterior work, usually they will leave it open. This is actually happening in Fantasyland right now with Peter Pan.

I think in the case of ToT, getting a scrim to cover the sign (or lackthereof) is a pretty impractical/costly task and not worth closing the ride over.

You're right, I forgot about Pan. It is much rarer at the DLR though. Construction walls, not so much. Both WDW and DLR seem to be plagued by these, but most of DLR's are not in queues. As for TOT, a scrim would be silly. But they also shouldn't touch the front of the building until they shut down the attraction. At least leave it up through Halloween. It seems odd to create a photo opportunity and then turn off the lighting/start demoing the backdrop of that photo location. They should have had TOT stay through October 31st, then have it disappear Halloween night at Midnight. Far better send off than this half version with the facade being torn down and the ride operating effects free at night.

 

[dweezil78]

It seems odd to create a photo opportunity and then turn off the lighting/start demoing the backdrop of that photo location

In a perfect world, marketing teams are best buddies with those in charge of operations/construction and keep an open dialogue with each other and are kept in the loop. We do not live in such a world. I'm guessing Disney Parks marketing didn't realize this was happening as soon as it did given how siloed these divisions generally are at big corporate companies.

Even if they did, I suspect the construction timeline is pretty rigid in order to hit the May deadline and Halloween season can't exactly be moved either... So everyone's kind of in an impossible situation over there. Would it have been nice if they were more candid about the construction timeline to guests? Yeah, maybe... Either way people are going to be unhappy.

 

[SSG]

Either way people are going to be unhappy.

The natural state of Disney's on-line community.

 

[Disneysea05]

We will disagree there. I find the Tokyo TOT exterior breathtaking. It is ornate and intricate and detailed and stunning, especially in person. I think it was @Curious Constance who said that DCA's looks like a Syrian skyscraper.

Tokyo's is magnificent and exquisite in person. A work of art to the tiniest details in the queue. As much as I love the actual ride portion of Florida's Tower of Terror, I did not miss it at all in Tokyo. That one is my favorite of the 4 Towers.

I love the green lightning that strikes the exterior of the building on each drop!

 

[yookeroo]

100% agree. The moment your car moves from the elevator shaft into the 5th Dimension, wow! That is the big *** moment.

Meh. I found that room kind of hokey. It wasn't horrible and added a bit to the attraction, but it certainly didn't "wow!" me.

 

[mickEblu]

Did you hear it moving into the shaft on the video you watched?

Also, WDW's ToT has random drop sequences, which the DCA version did not have. However, the random drop sequences will be a part of the new ride.

Yes in the video. Can't tell if your trying to be cute or not?

 

[mickEblu]

You're also forgetting that DCA's version does have an opening moment that WDW doesn't. It sets the stage for me. Immediately you are confused and weirded out as your elevator car pulls back, the walls disappear, and you've been sucked into The Twilight Zone. The ride ends in the reverse fashion, pushing the car out of The Twilight Zone and back into reality as the walls materialize around the floating elevator doors. In WDW, you just go up and have the doors open.

If the 5th Dimension room actually WAS a hallway, I might be more impressed by it. The doors open on a similar hallway to what we just saw, but now we're moving through it. Instead it feels like a warehouse space with plastic Christmas lawn figurines, the hanging signs from visible wire, and the dated projection screens of the eye and window break. If they had animatronics that changed or appeared/disappeared before your eyes that would be fantastic...or any kind of effects. But even the first ride I went "Cool!" when the ride lurched forward, but then wondered if the effects were broken in the room as nothing was happening. It kills all the buildup. The star field opening up and swallowing the car is fantastic, but once again followed by a good 4-6 seconds of silence and nothing happening. This motif of silent awkwardness also appears at the end of the Hallway sequence as the scene just kind of peters out and then once again at the end where we see the projection screen showing the visuals from the show, including a silent Rod Sterling.

I'd love it if Disney plussed the ride as Disneyland likes to do and added effects, tightened the script, and updated the projection technology. As of right now, it's the shell of a great ride but the guts are better in California.

This is exactly what I thought as I watched the ride thru video on YouTube. @PorterRedkey

 

[Professortango1]

Uh honey...
View attachment 164357
View attachment 164358

Taken during the 60th construction... maybe a crane up every once and a while isnt as bad as this.

Rare, as is uncommon. Not to be confused with "never.".

 

[Californian Elitist]

Love you @raven24. I don't always agree with you, but your points are valid and you defend your positions passionately. Respect.

Thanks!

 

[Californian Elitist]

Disclaimer: In the past, I've pointed out statements where opinion was presented as fact (I was told to just understand that). I've made direct quotes of false statements (I was told I should know what they meant, regardless of what was typed for all to see). I took a few steps back, tried to consider some of the sources, and decided it was best to just avoid those observations for a while. It seems like some of these situations are happening in this thread, so I'll briefly tread into those waters, then step back out of that particular wading pool for another 6 to 12 months.








(As has been stated by a few others) it's not hard for me to see why the above statements were questioned. It seems implied that the attraction now has NO SIGNAGE. All the accusations of "bad show" are based on "no signage". It was later noted that the attraction does indeed still have signage (decorative) as well as I assume the required signs at the entrance describing the ride. If they took away signs at the queue/attraction entrance, I would agree, but that's not the case. It almost seems implied that attractions with tall structures need a highly elevated sign, but (as was also mentioned elsewhere) attractions like the "Matterhorn Bobsleds" have survived with minimal signage for years. I think it's okay to see a large structure from a distance, then be intrigued enough to be drawn close enough to read the normal signage.





It seems here that the real issue is that of change (and it's merits). Change can be percieved as good or bad based on feelings, but this doesn't meet the "no signage = bad show" test.




Again, this doesn't meet the test.

Now, what is probably a good point of discussion is the fact that the removed sign was not the name of the attraction, but a decorative sign depicting the fictional hotel the attraction is based on / contained in. Does the building look better with or without the sign? Is the theming hurt or hindered? Everybody's entitled to their opinion. Some older hotels had giant elevated signage, some didn't, so either way could be within the scope of theme in my opinion. Again, is it necessary for "show" or "operations"? I don't think so, for the same reason we don't need a tall signs labeling "The Matterhorn", "Big Thunder Mountain" or "Grizzly Peak".





The above was provided as examples of "recent misses at Disneyland". It seems like the term "miss" is pretty concrete. I'd invite an actual definition and criteria so that these changes can be properly judged. If it's based on attendance, I'd argue that the "Matterhorn redo" doesn't qualify. If it's more of a matter of "I don't care for it" or "I don't think it is as good as it was before the change", then we're back into the land of opinion. (And while siting multiple reasons for displeasure might sway folks over to a certain viewpoint, it'll still be an opinion.)

Remember, facts can be proven. Opinions don't need to be (but shouldn't be presented as fact.)

Okay.