Lewis Carroll said:
So I guess we wont be seeing anything on the calibur of Splash Mountain, Tower of Terror, or Indiana Jones anytime soon..
The modular format only needs to be used at the Studios, since it's the only park with soundstages.
I've read most of the comments related to the AA/projection argument, and I think that a few people have made the mistake of lumping all attractions together. Based on what I've read in recent statements and been told by Imagineering, a better way to define Disney's new focus on easily upgraded attractions is this:
if an attraction could become outdated within a few years, it will be built to take advantage of the upgrading system. Such ride systems do not necessarily need to be projection-based. ToT is considered to be an "easily upgraded" attraction. Of course, Soarin' is, too.
Yes, Disney will be utilizing new projection technology as much as they can, especially now that razor-sharp, high-definition images are possible. AAs cost more than ever before to build, and their inclusion into attractions will be based on the ride's potential long-term durability--in other words, how long will the attraction exist before it seems to be a stale experience? Is the attraction based on a timeless concept that will be become a classic (such as pirates, ghosts, dinosaurs, or a yeti); or is it based on a momentary fad that will seem outdated in a decade? The beauty of film-based attractions is that although they become outdated much faster than traditional darkrides, they can be updated more easily. Unless, of course, that attraction happens to be Star Tours.
The "Will it need to be updated?" argument will be used more and more to determine whether or not an attraction needs to have millions of dollars of AAs installed. Imagineers love the idea of being able to tweak their ride system almost effortlessly in years to come, but they know that solid, three-dimensional, tactile AAs are often necessary to tell a story convincingly.
They haven't dumped AAs in favor of movies; they're just trying to decide which upcoming attractions really require the construction costs, programming, and maintenance of an AA. Sometimes, projection-based attractions really do work better. Soarin' would have much less of an impact if you just flew over a couple of models of California.
EDIT: The reverse argument is also true. Golden Dreams, a DCA show that is basically a version of the American Adventure for California, is film-based and lacks the energy, interest, and realism that the AAs bring to the Epcot stage production. As a matter of fact, Golden Dreams is a flop. People don't go to theme parks to watch movies, which they could do at home. In this case, AAs are a preferred storytelling solution.
