lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Multiple.When this is all said and done I would be curious if all the ground work and construction costs if we could have gotten an actual A to C ride that would have actually helped with the crowds.
Multiple.When this is all said and done I would be curious if all the ground work and construction costs if we could have gotten an actual A to C ride that would have actually helped with the crowds.
When this is all said and done I would be curious if all the ground work and construction costs if we could have gotten an actual A to C ride that would have actually helped with the crowds.
I actually believe that one…wonders of life on the other hand is as shell game as it getsGo on…
And don’t say sinkhole.
I mean, the art already shows it with canopies?How long before the whole thing is littered with patio umbrellas and then awkwardly covered up with Innoventions-style canopies later?
Somehow people manage to experience and enjoy the animal trails at DAK and Swiss Family Treehouse in the same Florida sunLet's see... a walk-through attraction about water with lots of foliage in the Florida sun. Nah, that won't be hotter than the 7th level of hell 6 months of the year.
Are those mostly composed of concrete which retains and radiates heat?Somehow people mange to experience and enjoy the animal trails at DAK and Swiss Family Treehouse in the same Florida sun
But the newer crop of Epcot rides are the most popular. Those with the shortest waits tend to be the legacy rides (or at least adapted versions of them).It does, but almost no one cares about riding half of them. That wasn't an issue in the park's prime.
We can’t assume because we see in in the art it will be there. We have seen stuff in the art that was never implemented.I mean, the art already shows it with canopies?
I personally love such classic omnimovers (my favourite Epcot attraction is Spaceship Earth), but I’m not convinced that they are especially appealing to the larger public. The most striking demonstration of this I’ve seen is the story of the two Horizons super-fans who, on multiple occasions, were able to get off the ride vehicles and spend time in the scenes, taking photos and videos as proof of their illicit antics. They were able to do this precisely because there were so few people on the ride (at least during the times they visited).Well, think about it -- most of the future living concepts from Horizons don't even exist now, nearly 40 years later. It was a very 1980s look at future living, but the concepts themselves still haven't been realized with a few exceptions (like the video chat).
They could do an updated space station, a colony on Mars, and even just a futurist planned green city on Earth with arcologies or something like that -- all things that are likely still decades away.
I agree that it wouldn't be an easily advertised marketing tool, but that's true of a lot of attractions. If it's a great attraction, people will want to go back to ride it again once they've been on it. Current Disney isn't going to build something like that, though, so it's a moot point -- I just personally wish they would, because it would make me a lot more interested in going back to WDW than most of what they've built in the past few years.
This isn’t an especially meaningful metric, though. Watching a movie and experiencing an attraction based on that movie are two very different things. If you’re asking me to choose, I would always prefer the movie to the attraction, even if I really love the latter.Not really - The odds seem pretty low that anyone who loves the movie and the character would prefer to walk around a fountain-filled grotto for 10 minutes than just watch the decently epic movie whose name is on the sign.
But the newer crop of Epcot rides are the most popular. Those with the shortest waits tend to be the legacy rides (or at least adapted versions of them).
I personally love such classic omnimovers (my favourite Epcot attraction is Spaceship Earth), but I’m not convinced that they are especially appealing to the larger public. The most striking demonstration of this I’ve seen is the story of the two Horizons super-fans who, on multiple occasions, were able to get off the ride vehicles and spend time in the scenes, taking photos and videos as proof of their illicit antics. They were able to do this precisely because there were so few people on the ride (at least during the times they visited).
The true story of the unauthorized, daredevil documentation of the Horizons ride at Disney World
Unless you happened to vacation at Walt Disney World Florida in the ‘80s and ‘90s, you might not be familiar with Horizons, a dark ride attraction at EPCOT widely thought of as the greatest vision of “future living” ever created. The two-story, spaceship-shaped pavilion located on the east side...dangerousminds.net
The past 15 years or so.When was Epcot ever this? Please, give examples.
But it’s the rides from the “prime” era that people are no longer interested in riding. (Sorry if I’m missing your larger point.)Oh sure -- my point was just that EPCOT having more rides than it's ever had doesn't mean that much when people don't care about riding so many of them. That wasn't an issue when EPCOT was in its prime.
The park’s attendance was also in a trough and there were notable slow periods. Even as recently as the late 00s and early 10s I went during times when the parks were deserted, riding classics like Pirates of the Caribbean alone.It does say they had to specifically plan it out by counting vehicles etc. -- it's not like they were able to just do it on a whim whenever they wanted.
More importantly, this was when the ride was close to shutting down (in fact, they'd already closed it and then reopened it just for additional capacity). The scenes were pretty outdated at that point, as was the major video. Horizons did not have an issue attracting guests when it was newer. I remember having to wait in line to ride it in the early 90s even though it was an omnimover with a massive hourly capacity.
But it’s the rides from the “prime” era that people are no longer interested in riding. (Sorry if I’m missing your larger point.)
Good.Where to begin….
Nah. I give up.
They counted how many unoccupied vehicles there were between riders to determine how long they had to wonder the sets. The fact that there were so many unoccupied vehicles to begin with is what I find striking and telling.It does say they had to specifically plan it out by counting vehicles etc. -- it's not like they were able to just do it on a whim whenever they wanted.
That the ride had so few people on it even after its closure was announced is to me an even clearer indication that such attractions are not as popular as we here think (or wish) they were.More importantly, this was when the ride was close to shutting down (in fact, they'd already closed it and then reopened it just for additional capacity). The scenes were pretty outdated at that point, as was the major video. Horizons did not have an issue attracting guests when it was newer. I remember having to wait in line to ride it in the early 90s even though it was an omnimover with a massive hourly capacity.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.