Maus au Chocolat

[RSoxNo1]

The only fact in the above quote is their commercial success.

Everything else is your opinion, which of course you're entitled to.

I just happen to disagree.

Aside from the commercial and critical success and the 4 quadrant appeal, I agree Pixar movies are crap. And aside from the Holocaust Hitler will be remembered as a mediocre painter. How about, aside from baseball the Red Sox will be remembered as a lousy soccer team? What else can you completely discount in a completely idiotic way?

Pixar movies are the only guaranteed blockbusters at the box office at this point. No actor save maybe Will Smith has the type of pull that the Pixar name has.

 

[whylightbulb]

I guess I'm just different. I guess I'm too caught up in actually playing the games and concentrating on what I'm supposed to be, to notice how 'unthemed' the rest of the ride is. Which it isn't imo, as they have carnival stuff plastered everywhere keeping in with it's theme. The ride established what it's set out to do/be, which is fun. I can just imagine some people trying to soak up the details, when they're supposed to be paying attention to the screens. If you want to ride a disney ride that has detail, go ride the Haunted Mansion or Pirates, and a countless other amount of their rides. TSM is about the game, and it's successful at what it's supposed to be about.

I'm going to attempt to explain where I'm coming from in an effort to offer an alternative viewpoint. This won't mean anything to anyone that doesn't care about the future of Disney or the theme park business in general. If you visit the parks just to have fun and expect nothing more than perhaps I can help open your mind to new possibilities. I don't fault you for your opinion and I do understand if you don't share mine. That being said I'm still hoping after reading this and some of my other posts in the past few years that some will open their minds to what Disney can be. Sorry for the long post but I'm in that kind of mood today.

When I visit a Six Flags amusement park I go in with certain expectations. I'm not expecting highly themed attractions with theatrical elements designed to excite emotional triggers and immerse me in nonreality environments. The only trigger I'm expecting is adrenalone inducing excitement. If there is some theming it's an unexpected surprise but I'm not expecting much and therefore will not be disappointed. When I visit a Disney park I'm expecting much more, or at least I used to expect much more.

Throughout Disney's history there have always been attractions that didn't live up to the standard in my opinion. Back in 1989 Body Wars opened for example. The thing is that even though every once in a while these lower quality venues made it through QA there were still plenty of other attractions opening that made up for it.

When Countdown to Extinction opened with the rest of Animal Kingdom in 1998 I thought it was just another undesirable mishap. This was the first Disney attraction that had let me down, especially after being involved in the development of Temple of the Forbidden Eye and knowing what Countdown was supposed to be. Countdown was going to put us face to face with a realistic brush fire racing toward our vehicle, an exciting asteroid impact, dinosaurs set in realistic and highly detailed enviornments, and a finale that would have everyone laughing and clapping. Alas what we got was a true "dark" ride with very to see and not much to offer in terms of story content. Most of the dialog is laughable - "we're not going to make it...we're not going to make it...we made it". They tried to compensate for the lack of scenic and story by making it loud and even tried to spruce up the finale. All in all this is a ride that is not worthy of the Disney name.

"Well," I thought to myself, "no matter. That obviously was just another accident and many people from that development team will never work for WDI again. Besides in a few years they will go back and retool it" Boy was I wrong. The slippery slope of "just being good enough" had begun. This was about the time that Eisner's new management team had started to flex their muscle. A few years later when referring to the California Adventure plans Paul Pressler stated, "if it's good enough for Six Flags...".

CTE was just the start of a litany of miserable failures such as JII versions 2 and 3, Stich, DCA park, Nemo, MILF, Tiki UNM, Sounds Dangerous, Rafiki's Planet Watch, Dino-Rama, the new Mexico ride, etc., or "just good enough" efforts like Test Track, Mission Space, Soarin', Everest, R&RC, TSM, Philarmagic and so on. I have written about some of these in previous posts and why they don't make the grade in my opinion and how they could be improved significantly so I'm not going to go into that here. The point is that from 1998 till today I have only seen a few attractions open stateside that are worthy of the Disney name, or what the name used to represent. I think Tough to Be A Bug and Turtle Talk are two examples. I'm not saying that those are everyone's cup of tea but I'm saying that they at least meet most of the quality standards and include a few surprises; something we should expect from Disney.

Another of the few examples to point out is the wonderful series of updates the Haunted Mansion has received. While I don't agree with everything they have done, all in all this is what we should expect for all the Disney attractions. The updates have begun to turn a timeless classic into a modern classic. Why is it that most of the recent new attractions do not even come close to an attraction that opened at Disneyland in the 60's? You can't say because they are each meant to acheive different results because I'm talking about quality, i.e., attention to detail, story, workmanship etc. Regardless of whether or not TSM is meant to just be a fun game or not it is still a Disney ride and therefore could and should have the qualities of past Disney rides. Aside from the attractions we also see merchandise and food quality lowered.

Disney does monitor these boards and they partially use feedback they read to gauge their success. If peole continue to give them a pass with each new downgrade in quality the slippery slope will continue until there is nothing left of the former Disney standards.

Prices continue to rise while quality continues to fall. A recent exception to this is Star Tours where if it were not for Lucas and pressure from Corporate we wouldn't have even gotten this at WDW. On top of that it is basically an update that we should, once again, expect.

I'm rambling so I'll stop now. I do wish that more consumers would expect more for the hundreds of dollars they are spending. Every time I see an excuse for the lazy design and execution of a new attraction in a post I get a bit frustrated. I'd like to request that people stop excusing mediocrity. We all deserve more for our money.

 

[njDizFan]

great post again lightbulb...Maybe you need your own thread like Eddie Sotto.

Just a question about some of the substandard rides yopu mentioned. I agree with most but what is your issue with Mission space and Soarin, neither is a favorite of mine, but they seem to be up to disney standards. EE also , with a proper functioning Yeti, I believe is an exceptional ride with a top notch queue.

 

[the-reason14]

I'm going to attempt to explain where I'm coming from in an effort to offer an alternative viewpoint. This won't mean anything to anyone that doesn't care about the future of Disney or the theme park business in general. If you visit the parks just to have fun and expect nothing more than perhaps I can help open your mind to new possibilities. I don't fault you for your opinion and I do understand if you don't share mine. That being said I'm still hoping after reading this and some of my other posts in the past few years that some will open their minds to what Disney can be. Sorry for the long post but I'm in that kind of mood today.

When I visit a Six Flags amusement park I go in with certain expectations. I'm not expecting highly themed attractions with theatrical elements designed to excite emotional triggers and immerse me in nonreality environments. The only trigger I'm expecting is adrenalone inducing excitement. If there is some theming it's an unexpected surprise but I'm not expecting much and therefore will not be disappointed. When I visit a Disney park I'm expecting much more, or at least I used to expect much more.

Throughout Disney's history there have always been attractions that didn't live up to the standard in my opinion. Back in 1989 Body Wars opened for example. The thing is that even though every once in a while these lower quality venues made it through QA there were still plenty of other attractions opening that made up for it.

When Countdown to Extinction opened with the rest of Animal Kingdom in 1998 I thought it was just another undesirable mishap. This was the first Disney attraction that had let me down, especially after being involved in the development of Temple of the Forbidden Eye and knowing what Countdown was supposed to be. Countdown was going to put us face to face with a realistic brush fire racing toward our vehicle, an exciting asteroid impact, dinosaurs set in realistic and highly detailed enviornments, and a finale that would have everyone laughing and clapping. Alas what we got was a true "dark" ride with very to see and not much to offer in terms of story content. Most of the dialog is laughable - "we're not going to make it...we're not going to make it...we made it". They tried to compensate for the lack of scenic and story by making it loud and even tried to spruce up the finale. All in all this is a ride that is not worthy of the Disney name.

"Well," I thought to myself, "no matter. That obviously was just another accident and many people from that development team will never work for WDI again. Besides in a few years they will go back and retool it" Boy was I wrong. The slippery slope of "just being good enough" had begun. This was about the time that Eisner's new management team had started to flex their muscle. A few years later when referring to the California Adventure plans Paul Pressler stated, "if it's good enough for Six Flags...".

CTE was just the start of a litany of miserable failures such as JII versions 2 and 3, Stich, DCA park, Nemo, MILF, Tiki UNM, Sounds Dangerous, Rafiki's Planet Watch, Dino-Rama, the new Mexico ride, etc., or "just good enough" efforts like Test Track, Mission Space, Soarin', Everest, R&RC, TSM, Philarmagic and so on. I have written about some of these in previous posts and why they don't make the grade in my opinion and how they could be improved significantly so I'm not going to go into that here. The point is that from 1998 till today I have only seen a few attractions open stateside that are worthy of the Disney name, or what the name used to represent. I think Tough to Be A Bug and Turtle Talk are two examples. I'm not saying that those are everyone's cup of tea but I'm saying that they at least meet most of the quality standards and include a few surprises; something we should expect from Disney.

Another of the few examples to point out is the wonderful series of updates the Haunted Mansion has received. While I don't agree with everything they have done, all in all this is what we should expect for all the Disney attractions. The updates have begun to turn a timeless classic into a modern classic. Why is it that most of the recent new attractions do not even come close to an attraction that opened at Disneyland in the 60's? You can't say because they are each meant to acheive different results because I'm talking about quality, i.e., attention to detail, story, workmanship etc. Regardless of whether or not TSM is meant to just be a fun game or not it is still a Disney ride and therefore could and should have the qualities of past Disney rides. Aside from the attractions we also see merchandise and food quality lowered.

Disney does monitor these boards and they partially use feedback they read to gauge their success. If peole continue to give them a pass with each new downgrade in quality the slippery slope will continue until there is nothing left of the former Disney standards.

Prices continue to rise while quality continues to fall. A recent exception to this is Star Tours where if it were not for Lucas and pressure from Corporate we wouldn't have even gotten this at WDW. On top of that it is basically an update that we should, once again, expect.

I'm rambling so I'll stop now. I do wish that more consumers would expect more for the hundreds of dollars they are spending. Every time I see an excuse for the lazy design and execution of a new attraction in a post I get a bit frustrated. I'd like to request that people stop excusing mediocrity. We all deserve more for our money.

When it all falls down, not everyone see it like that. I can see your point of view, but when you throw out rides like EE and Dinosaur not being up to the 'Disney standard' than I think you've come to expect too much. I can see a little why Dinosaur 'may' not be up there, but it's still a 'good' ride.

As far as TSM is concerned, like I've said before, it's a game. You're supposed to be immersed in the game, not the scenery/theming which does exist but just happens to be minimal. I also don't think every ride in WDW should look and be the same. It's a big and vast place, variety is what should exists, and whether a certain ride meets the 'Disney standard' all falls down to personal opinion. I guess as long as I'm enjoying myself, then thats all that matters. If I ever was as pessimistic about WDW's 'decline' and these new rides not meeting the 'Disney standard' as you and a lot of others seem to be, then I sure as heck won't keep spending more money each year to help fund the 'mediocrity.' You say you get a bit frustrated when people make excuses for what you feel aren't Disney quality attractions, well I can't help but shake my head to those who complain so much and still pay the rising prices to go. Granted, it's your money not mine, and I'm sure you still have fun. But to really get your point across you have to go a little more extreme than just typing on a message board.

 

[Spike-in-Berlin]

This was the first Disney attraction that had let me down, especially after being involved in the development of Temple of the Forbidden Eye and knowing what Countdown was supposed to be. Countdown was going to put us face to face with a realistic brush fire racing toward our vehicle, an exciting asteroid impact, dinosaurs set in realistic and highly detailed enviornments, and a finale that would have everyone laughing and clapping. Alas what we got was a true "dark" ride with very to see and not much to offer in terms of story content. Most of the dialog is laughable - "we're not going to make it...we're not going to make it...we made it". They tried to compensate for the lack of scenic and story by making it loud and even tried to spruce up the finale. All in all this is a ride that is not worthy of the Disney name.

Are you an imagineer or a former imagineer or why were you involved in the development?

 

[whylightbulb]

great post again lightbulb...Maybe you need your own thread like Eddie Sotto.

Just a question about some of the substandard rides yopu mentioned. I agree with most but what is your issue with Mission space and Soarin, neither is a favorite of mine, but they seem to be up to disney standards. EE also , with a proper functioning Yeti, I believe is an exceptional ride with a top notch queue.

I've posted specifically on those attractions before but I'll give the abbreviated version here.

Mission Space: a ride that should have been built for the Kennedy Space Center that transports guests to the exciting world of a real world simulator. I'm sorry but in my opinion the concept is flawed from the start. There is no attempt to dress it up or offer anything more innovative or unique than a technologically advanced Gravitron. The graphics quality isn't even up to standards. Once again, if this were at the Kennedy Space Center I probably would like it or at least understand why others do. Since it's at Disney I expect to be immersed and offered an inspiring experience that triggers some emotion and not just adrenaline. It's essentially a warehouse with a minimally themed simulator.

Soarin' makes no sense at all. I'm fully aware of my surroundings and can easily see the mechanics of the ride system, not to mention the edge of the screen. The story is that I'm on some kind of flying contraption taking off from some kind of airport? Once again, lazy story telling and lazy theming. Let's not even get into the quality of the film and the fact that it is film and not video.

I don't have a problem with the EE queue but I do have a problem with a Disney coaster that includes only 2 basic show elements. No I'm not including the bird on a stick or the temple on the lift but you get the idea. Yes it's a pretty mountain and yes the backwards segement is a lot of fun but as far as show elements on a major E ticket ride this one falls short.

 

[whylightbulb]

Are you an imagineer or a former imagineer or why were you involved in the development?

Yes I have been an Imagineer and have worked in various capacities in theme park design and operations for over 22 years. I worked on Indy, TOT Florida, Forbidden Journey, JTTCE and several others.

 

[whylightbulb]

When it all falls down, not everyone see it like that. I can see your point of view, but when you throw out rides like EE and Dinosaur not being up to the 'Disney standard' than I think you've come to expect too much. I can see a little why Dinosaur 'may' not be up there, but it's still a 'good' ride.

I expect the same or better quality found in rides like Pirates and Mansion. I don't believe that is expecting too much.

As far as TSM is concerned, like I've said before, it's a game. You're supposed to be immersed in the game, not the scenery/theming which does exist but just happens to be minimal. I also don't think every ride in WDW should look and be the same. It's a big and vast place, variety is what should exists, and whether a certain ride meets the 'Disney standard' all falls down to personal opinion. I guess as long as I'm enjoying myself, then thats all that matters. If I ever was as pessimistic about WDW's 'decline' and these new rides not meeting the 'Disney standard' as you and a lot of others seem to be, then I sure as heck won't keep spending more money each year to help fund the 'mediocrity.' You say you get a bit frustrated when people make excuses for what you feel aren't Disney quality attractions, well I can't help but shake my head to those who complain so much and still pay the rising prices to go. Granted, it's your money not mine, and I'm sure you still have fun. But to really get your point across you have to go a little more extreme than just typing on a message board.

I don't spend money to get into the parks. I do sometimes spend to eat but I certainly don't buy any merchandise. I agree that not every ride should look and be the same. What I'm finding is that most of the new rides do look and feel the same in that I feel like I'm in a warehouse.

 

[the-reason14]

I expect the same or better quality found in rides like Pirates and Mansion. I don't believe that is expecting too much.

I don't spend money to get into the parks. I do sometimes spend to eat but I certainly don't buy any merchandise. I agree that not every ride should look and be the same. What I'm finding is that most of the new rides do look and feel the same in that I feel like I'm in a warehouse.

I agree that a lot of the pixar rides have similar 'themes.' Nemo's screen based, Toy Story is screen based, the Monsters show is screen based. Out of all of them, I think TSM is the only one that fits the bill as a 'Disney' experience as it brings innovation and new tech, and it's just plain fun! I think for a 'ride' like that, you are expecting to much to be immersed outside of the screens as that's where your attention is supposed to be. There's no point in littering the rest of the 'warehouse' with AAs and stuff you would see in a traditional Disney dark ride. I just think that's expecting too much.

 

[Sassagoula]

I'm going to attempt to explain where I'm coming from in an effort to offer an alternative viewpoint. This won't mean anything to anyone that doesn't care about the future of Disney or the theme park business in general. If you visit the parks just to have fun and expect nothing more than perhaps I can help open your mind to new possibilities. I don't fault you for your opinion and I do understand if you don't share mine. That being said I'm still hoping after reading this and some of my other posts in the past few years that some will open their minds to what Disney can be. Sorry for the long post but I'm in that kind of mood today.

When I visit a Six Flags amusement park I go in with certain expectations. I'm not expecting highly themed attractions with theatrical elements designed to excite emotional triggers and immerse me in nonreality environments. The only trigger I'm expecting is adrenalone inducing excitement. If there is some theming it's an unexpected surprise but I'm not expecting much and therefore will not be disappointed. When I visit a Disney park I'm expecting much more, or at least I used to expect much more.

Throughout Disney's history there have always been attractions that didn't live up to the standard in my opinion. Back in 1989 Body Wars opened for example. The thing is that even though every once in a while these lower quality venues made it through QA there were still plenty of other attractions opening that made up for it.

When Countdown to Extinction opened with the rest of Animal Kingdom in 1998 I thought it was just another undesirable mishap. This was the first Disney attraction that had let me down, especially after being involved in the development of Temple of the Forbidden Eye and knowing what Countdown was supposed to be. Countdown was going to put us face to face with a realistic brush fire racing toward our vehicle, an exciting asteroid impact, dinosaurs set in realistic and highly detailed enviornments, and a finale that would have everyone laughing and clapping. Alas what we got was a true "dark" ride with very to see and not much to offer in terms of story content. Most of the dialog is laughable - "we're not going to make it...we're not going to make it...we made it". They tried to compensate for the lack of scenic and story by making it loud and even tried to spruce up the finale. All in all this is a ride that is not worthy of the Disney name.

"Well," I thought to myself, "no matter. That obviously was just another accident and many people from that development team will never work for WDI again. Besides in a few years they will go back and retool it" Boy was I wrong. The slippery slope of "just being good enough" had begun. This was about the time that Eisner's new management team had started to flex their muscle. A few years later when referring to the California Adventure plans Paul Pressler stated, "if it's good enough for Six Flags...".

CTE was just the start of a litany of miserable failures such as JII versions 2 and 3, Stich, DCA park, Nemo, MILF, Tiki UNM, Sounds Dangerous, Rafiki's Planet Watch, Dino-Rama, the new Mexico ride, etc., or "just good enough" efforts like Test Track, Mission Space, Soarin', Everest, R&RC, TSM, Philarmagic and so on. I have written about some of these in previous posts and why they don't make the grade in my opinion and how they could be improved significantly so I'm not going to go into that here. The point is that from 1998 till today I have only seen a few attractions open stateside that are worthy of the Disney name, or what the name used to represent. I think Tough to Be A Bug and Turtle Talk are two examples. I'm not saying that those are everyone's cup of tea but I'm saying that they at least meet most of the quality standards and include a few surprises; something we should expect from Disney.

Another of the few examples to point out is the wonderful series of updates the Haunted Mansion has received. While I don't agree with everything they have done, all in all this is what we should expect for all the Disney attractions. The updates have begun to turn a timeless classic into a modern classic. Why is it that most of the recent new attractions do not even come close to an attraction that opened at Disneyland in the 60's? You can't say because they are each meant to acheive different results because I'm talking about quality, i.e., attention to detail, story, workmanship etc. Regardless of whether or not TSM is meant to just be a fun game or not it is still a Disney ride and therefore could and should have the qualities of past Disney rides. Aside from the attractions we also see merchandise and food quality lowered.

Disney does monitor these boards and they partially use feedback they read to gauge their success. If peole continue to give them a pass with each new downgrade in quality the slippery slope will continue until there is nothing left of the former Disney standards.

Prices continue to rise while quality continues to fall. A recent exception to this is Star Tours where if it were not for Lucas and pressure from Corporate we wouldn't have even gotten this at WDW. On top of that it is basically an update that we should, once again, expect.

I'm rambling so I'll stop now. I do wish that more consumers would expect more for the hundreds of dollars they are spending. Every time I see an excuse for the lazy design and execution of a new attraction in a post I get a bit frustrated. I'd like to request that people stop excusing mediocrity. We all deserve more for our money.

Really great post, whylightbulb! It perfectly summarizes why I am increasingly dissatisfied with WDW. (Haven't visited any of the others yet, so that's the only one I feel safe judging.) It's not about being picky, or having impossibly high standards, or having rosy-hued memories of past attractions. I still feel that Disney quality in POTC, HM, Splash, and so on. The newer attractions are simply lacking for all the reasons you stated. It seems like the only way to experience new attractions of that caliber is to visit foreign parks. It simply isn't right that American parks get lower quality attractions because the visitors don't expect or demand more. I often see complaints along these lines answered with, "Well, if you don't like it, don't go! More for me!" Well, as you said, it's a slippery slope. I love Disney, but that doesn't mean I can't criticize it. Disney needs to always, always work to stay ahead of the competition, to make their parks better and more special. When the competitors step it up, Disney needs to work that much harder to stay the best. They can't just rest on their laurels with rides that, while they may be great, are decades old.

I had some hope that Disney had made steps to regain quality when they fired Paul Pressler and gang, but the ensuing mad rush to cram moneymaking schemes into every inch of the parks and cut corners on new attractions/entertainment made me lose any hope of that.

One last thing, a little off-topic: I absolutely love Forbidden Journey, and it is easily the best ride I've experienced in a very, very long time. Thank you for whatever hand you had in creating it. We need more attractions of that stature in the world.

 

[space42]

I agree that a lot of the pixar rides have similar 'themes.' Nemo's screen based, Toy Story is screen based, the Monsters show is screen based. Out of all of them, I think TSM is the only one that fits the bill as a 'Disney' experience as it brings innovation and new tech, and it's just plain fun! I think for a 'ride' like that, you are expecting to much to be immersed outside of the screens as that's where your attention is supposed to be. There's no point in littering the rest of the 'warehouse' with AAs and stuff you would see in a traditional Disney dark ride. I just think that's expecting too much.

Watch the video on the first page again. Same exact ride as TSMM, but it is fully themed like Disney used to. There are even animated props between the screen scenes. That along with the 'stained-glass' doors that open to reveal each 'cupboard' go a long way to making it not look like a bunch of video screens in a warehouse.

 

[SleepingMonk]

It is not my opinion that they are the most critically acclaimed studio. Look at their Academy awards nods and wins.

Yes it is.

They've never even produced a "best picture" winner.

Several studios have much more history and wins to their credit.

Here's an easy example....

"Currently, MGM boasts a total of 205 Academy Awards® in its vast library. Among those are 15 Best Pictures."

 

[SleepingMonk]

... completely idiotic way?

Pixar movies are the only guaranteed blockbusters at the box office at this point. No actor save maybe Will Smith has the type of pull that the Pixar name has.

Moronic pot, meet idiotic kettle.

:hammer:

I'll try to use small words next time so perhaps you can better understand.

 

[the-reason14]

Whether the other ride is fully themed or not, it doesn't take away from the fact that TSM is themed.

 

[xdan0920]

Yes it is.

They've never even produced a "best picture" winner.

Several studios have much more history and wins to their credit.

Here's an easy example....

"Currently, MGM boasts a total of 205 Academy Awards® in its vast library. Among those are 15 Best Pictures."

Not even sure you are trying to be taken seriously at this point.

 

[SleepingMonk]

Not even sure you are trying to be taken seriously at this point.

Excellent retort, backing your claims with non sequiturs is brilliant.

Really.

 

[unkadug]

Excellent retort, backing your claims with non sequiturs is brilliant.

Really.

How to win an internet argument:

Step 1: ....

 

[xdan0920]

Yes it is.

They've never even produced a "best picture" winner.

Several studios have much more history and wins to their credit.

Here's an easy example....

"Currently, MGM boasts a total of 205 Academy Awards® in its vast library. Among those are 15 Best Pictures."

Excellent retort, backing your claims with non sequiturs is brilliant.

Really.

Fine, but I'm done after this.

Several studios have more history you say. Well of course that is correct. Seeing as how Pixar only started making feature length films in 1995 with Toy Story.

They have never won a Best Picture. Also true. Has an animated movie ever won? No. But Pixar has had 2 nominations in that category. Doubling Disney Animations number. And no other studio even 1.

Pixar has dominated the Best Animated feature category, winning 6 of a possible 8 times.

Finally Pixar's average critical reception, is far and above any other studio. Every movie they have made has been rated fresh on review aggregate Rotten Tomatoes. With the worst reviewed being Cars at 74% positive reviews.

Sorry you don't like Pixar, but your irrational hatred is making you unreasonable.

 

[SleepingMonk]

Maybe next time you should argue that Pixar is the most critically acclaimed modern animation studio.

Big difference between that opinion and what you stated as fact earlier.

 

[Scar Junior]

I'm going to attempt to explain where I'm coming from in an effort to offer an alternative viewpoint. This won't mean anything to anyone that doesn't care about the future of Disney or the theme park business in general. If you visit the parks just to have fun and expect nothing more than perhaps I can help open your mind to new possibilities. I don't fault you for your opinion and I do understand if you don't share mine. That being said I'm still hoping after reading this and some of my other posts in the past few years that some will open their minds to what Disney can be. Sorry for the long post but I'm in that kind of mood today.

When I visit a Six Flags amusement park I go in with certain expectations. I'm not expecting highly themed attractions with theatrical elements designed to excite emotional triggers and immerse me in nonreality environments. The only trigger I'm expecting is adrenalone inducing excitement. If there is some theming it's an unexpected surprise but I'm not expecting much and therefore will not be disappointed. When I visit a Disney park I'm expecting much more, or at least I used to expect much more.

Throughout Disney's history there have always been attractions that didn't live up to the standard in my opinion. Back in 1989 Body Wars opened for example. The thing is that even though every once in a while these lower quality venues made it through QA there were still plenty of other attractions opening that made up for it.

When Countdown to Extinction opened with the rest of Animal Kingdom in 1998 I thought it was just another undesirable mishap. This was the first Disney attraction that had let me down, especially after being involved in the development of Temple of the Forbidden Eye and knowing what Countdown was supposed to be. Countdown was going to put us face to face with a realistic brush fire racing toward our vehicle, an exciting asteroid impact, dinosaurs set in realistic and highly detailed enviornments, and a finale that would have everyone laughing and clapping. Alas what we got was a true "dark" ride with very to see and not much to offer in terms of story content. Most of the dialog is laughable - "we're not going to make it...we're not going to make it...we made it". They tried to compensate for the lack of scenic and story by making it loud and even tried to spruce up the finale. All in all this is a ride that is not worthy of the Disney name.

"Well," I thought to myself, "no matter. That obviously was just another accident and many people from that development team will never work for WDI again. Besides in a few years they will go back and retool it" Boy was I wrong. The slippery slope of "just being good enough" had begun. This was about the time that Eisner's new management team had started to flex their muscle. A few years later when referring to the California Adventure plans Paul Pressler stated, "if it's good enough for Six Flags...".

CTE was just the start of a litany of miserable failures such as JII versions 2 and 3, Stich, DCA park, Nemo, MILF, Tiki UNM, Sounds Dangerous, Rafiki's Planet Watch, Dino-Rama, the new Mexico ride, etc., or "just good enough" efforts like Test Track, Mission Space, Soarin', Everest, R&RC, TSM, Philarmagic and so on. I have written about some of these in previous posts and why they don't make the grade in my opinion and how they could be improved significantly so I'm not going to go into that here. The point is that from 1998 till today I have only seen a few attractions open stateside that are worthy of the Disney name, or what the name used to represent. I think Tough to Be A Bug and Turtle Talk are two examples. I'm not saying that those are everyone's cup of tea but I'm saying that they at least meet most of the quality standards and include a few surprises; something we should expect from Disney.

Another of the few examples to point out is the wonderful series of updates the Haunted Mansion has received. While I don't agree with everything they have done, all in all this is what we should expect for all the Disney attractions. The updates have begun to turn a timeless classic into a modern classic. Why is it that most of the recent new attractions do not even come close to an attraction that opened at Disneyland in the 60's? You can't say because they are each meant to acheive different results because I'm talking about quality, i.e., attention to detail, story, workmanship etc. Regardless of whether or not TSM is meant to just be a fun game or not it is still a Disney ride and therefore could and should have the qualities of past Disney rides. Aside from the attractions we also see merchandise and food quality lowered.

Disney does monitor these boards and they partially use feedback they read to gauge their success. If peole continue to give them a pass with each new downgrade in quality the slippery slope will continue until there is nothing left of the former Disney standards.

Prices continue to rise while quality continues to fall. A recent exception to this is Star Tours where if it were not for Lucas and pressure from Corporate we wouldn't have even gotten this at WDW. On top of that it is basically an update that we should, once again, expect.

I'm rambling so I'll stop now. I do wish that more consumers would expect more for the hundreds of dollars they are spending. Every time I see an excuse for the lazy design and execution of a new attraction in a post I get a bit frustrated. I'd like to request that people stop excusing mediocrity. We all deserve more for our money.

Thank you for posting this... I completely agree.

I've ridden once. I waited 40 min. The queue was boring and so poorly conceived I was almost in denial; I kept thinking that I'd enter another room where the 'real' story would begin.

The ride was literally a warehouse with screens and it felt like it. The technology is fun, but the attraction is so one-dimensional that I was distracted twice from the start of the new game by the lack of detail.

I have yet to go back on it - and I live 10 min away. I'll ride again when there are low wait times or when I'm with people that want to ride... but I was seriously taken aback by the nakedness of the attraction.

It reminded me of a few of the other attractions you mentioned. I'm glad to see others concerned when the hyped new experience is little more than the application of a new technological advancement. Because 'experience' is being a little too generous.