I feel like this is why you prefer Pixar Pier over Paradise-to you, piers have this low-rent feel. That is your conception of them, which if fine. However, I think that an excellent pier has great atmosphere, and it's Americana. Morey's Piers in New Jersey, for example, have such electric, genuine atmosphere and life that it becomes a great place to be. Maybe it's kitschy, but honestly, parts of Disneyland are absolutely kitschy and that doesn't make them bad or out of place (in particular, I'm thinking of Tiki Room, but that's hardly the only thing at Disneyland that could fit that description). Kitsch can absolutely be great art.
I'm not going to pretend Paradise Pier was ever high art, or ever worked the way Disney probably hoped it would, but it felt more like a place, and was a more pleasant environment than its replacement. Pixar Pier to me just reeks of Disney's current insecurity that if they don't absolutely smother their parks in branding, people will lose interest. For me, my interest in the parks is based on completely different criteria, and the more Disney slaps, say, Toy Story on every conceivable surface, the less interest I have in the thing. In their attempts to hold my interest, they're only losing it faster. So for you, putting Disney branding all over something you associate with low-rent, cheap atmosphere improves it; to me, it only diminishes what little about the area worked for me. To each their own.
I think a big disconnect here is that the Paradise Pier transformation from 1.0 to 2.0 improved the theming and quality, and the transformation from Paradise Pier 2.0 to Pixar Pier also improved the theming. Even if you scrubbed all the IP from Pixar Pier, it would still be better than Paradise Pier 2.0.
I can't agree with this either. To be clear, it's not a genuinely bad coaster-despite much protestations to the former, Disney has never actually built a terrible, or terribly rough, coaster anywhere ever. However, at the end of the day, it's a Mack Wild Mouse, a ride type I've ridden many times at a variety of different places. They're never particularly exciting to me, but DCA's has the added negative that parts of the ride were made less intense or interesting to better fit the perceived audience Disney attracts. So it takes a ride that I already am indifferent to at best and further sucks the fun out of it.
Primeval Whirl was super cheap and just looked gross, as did that whole area; but I'd rather be on a Reverchon Spinning Mouse any day, because spinning mice are a LOT more fun and reridable than a tamed down Mack will ever be for me..
I don’t exactly thing Sky school belongs in a Disney park, but according to my personal preference, I enjoy it much more than PW, and given its surrounding and isolated spot, I don’t mind it as much. PW to Sky school preferences are just that, preferences, don’t really hold much weight to be honest, whether they’re mine or yours.
WDW absolutely has the edge once you leave the castle parks; however, I'd take Disneyland's coaster collection over Magic Kingdom's. The Big Thunder differences are comparatively negligible, but Disneyland has the Matterhorn and as much as I love WDW's Space, DL's is my favorite Space Mountain in the World. SDMT isn't good enough to be a factor in the discussion IMO.
To me, Disneyland easily takes the cake for everything in the parks. Once outside, WDW easily takes the cake.
Disney World’s greatest strength, and greatest weakness, is its bubble.
The resorts across property, whether or not you’re staying at them, add so much. Just the expansiveness of the resorts and whole complex is incredible. The Epcot resort area is honestly one of my favorite places on the planet. For hotels, I’m honestly pretty cheap, but I’ll splurge with little hesitation on the Epcot resorts.
That said, it’s much harder to get around WDW, especially if you’re off property. So travel expenses, whether it’s Ubers, rental cars, or parking, the expenses add up. If you want to stay on property, or close by off property, you’re going to spend a pretty penny.
And I’m going to be honest, Tokyo’s and Disneyland’s SMs are pitiful compared to Paris and WDW. They’re basically just “turn-right” simulators the whole way through with like two exceptions. Not a fan of the slow double lift-hills either, and while I’ve never experienced Hyperspace at Disneyland, I actually prefer HKDL’s Hyperspace to the defaults at Tokyo and Anaheim.
Matterhorn more than makes up for it, though, such a fun ride, especially the Tomorrowland track which I greatly prefer.
7DMT is honestly great for what it is, its downfall comes from its colosal lines.
But in terms of the six domestic parks, Disneyland easily takes the cake. I would take Disneyland over MK and HS. I would take DCA over HS and AK as well.
So I’d have no hesitation to take the two west coast parks over three parks out east. Epcot is a bit of an issue because it’s so unique and I love it, but these parks don’t exist in a vacuum. 3 days at WDW are more expensive than 5 days at Disneyland. That’s incredibly significant. In Disneyland, I have cheap hotels within walking distance. I also have cheap food within walking distance, like 2000 3:00 am heart attack calories at Denny’s for $10. Disneyland’s park hours are also much friendlier, MMRR was walk-on for at least the last hour of Toontown’s opening day.
In what world can I experience MMRR walk-on at Hollywood Studios without paying for a $150 up charge event? You can’t, especially not during spring break.
The crowding issues are so much less at DCA and Disneyland than WDW, the prices are lower, the people are nicer, the weather is better, etc. At peak crowd times, Guardians took us 30 minutes to get on. The context of DCA, having arguably the world’s best theme park across the street, is very different from any of the parks at WDW.
WDW is you get less, pay more. You say WDW has the edge once you leave the castle parks, but the castle park at Disneyland carry’s it. It’s like comparing basketball teams, but then saying, well if you ignore Lebron (at his peak) then the rest of his team is comparable to other around the league. Sure, that may be true, but that just highlights the advantages of a Disneyland if anything. DCA already has more than the secondary parks, but it also has Disneyland across the street, it’s not the same thing.
To me, Disneyland is basically perfect. Sure you could touch up Tomorrow, and perhaps make some shenanigans with the fantasyland theater, but it doesn’t necessarily need it.
DCA needs Hollywood Land to be touched up, and would greatly benefit from an Avenger’s E and a family ride, like Coco, but it’s already a solid park, and that would just minimize its weaknesses.
A fifth gate at WDW is laughable because you have two shells of a park demanding massive development, but if Disneyland announced another park tomorrow, there really wouldn’t be an issue, and honestly, that’s what I think they should do. Start construction on the Avengers E-ticket, announce a new gate, start construction on a DCA dark ride. Have the Avenger’s E open, a yearish later have the dark ride open (to have people come now and not push off trips until new park) and then open the new park a yearish later.
WDW needs better for what’s there. Disneyland needs more of what’s there. We spent a whole day at DCA marathoning the park, and we didn’t do everything. Granted, there were some rerides in there, but still. The divide between DCA perception and reality is quite immense. It’s not a broken park.
I completely agree, this and DHS are so vapid at this point that the only solutions I see are just lighting them on fire and starting new parks from scratch...lol.
