Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway confirmed

Fable McCloud

Well-Known Member
I gotta say, I love the trackless aspect of it.

What I don't care for the fact that you can't see everything from every seat. If it's about re-rideability, the Haunted Mansion directs every doombuggy the same way and I find that better. It allows me to see what I was meant to AND when I re-ride it I always look around in every scene to see little details. I know they wanted this big, immersive environment with large set pieces, but some people might only be able to ride it once, and they could lose out on seeing some of the punchlines or details if they're not in the right seat or car. Everyone should have the same viewing opportunities.

The Mystic Manor and Winnie the Pooh rides are both trackless and you can see everything. When you ride again, you can start to look around and see details and little nods and Easter eggs, but if you only ride once, you don't miss out on anything.
 
Last edited:

SplashZander

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
@wdwmagic no review for this? Usually you guys have a new ride review up pretty quickly after the ride opens. Or did I just miss it?
 

SplashZander

Well-Known Member
I gotta say, I love the trackless aspect of it.

What I don't care for the fact that you can't see everything from every seat. If it's about re-rideability, the Haunted Mansion directs every doombuggy the same way and I find that better. It allows me to see what I was meant to AND when I re-ride it I always look around in every scene to see little details. I know they wanted this big, immersive environment with large set pieces, but some people might only be able to ride it once, and they could lose out on seeing some of the punchlines or details if they're not in the right seat or car. Everyone should have the same viewing opportunities.

The Mystic Manor and Winnie the Pooh rides in Shanghai are both trackless and you can see everything. When you ride again, you can start to look around and see details and little nods and Easter eggs, but if you only ride once, you don't miss out on anything.
Honestly, I think it would be very hard for a projection based ride like this to display everything perfectly to everyone, especially when the rooms transform. There is just so much going on as it is not all physical and thus there are far fewer static points.

As for Mystic Manor and Winnie the Pooh, MM is in Hong Kong and Winnie the Pooh is in Tokyo Disneyland. Shanghai does not have a trackless dark ride.
 

Touchdown

Well-Known Member
Honestly, I think it would be very hard for a projection based ride like this to display everything perfectly to everyone, especially when the rooms transform. There is just so much going on as it is not all physical and thus there are far fewer static points.

As for Mystic Manor and Winnie the Pooh, MM is in Hong Kong and Winnie the Pooh is in Tokyo Disneyland. Shanghai does not have a trackless dark ride.
Pirates is a trackless ride at SDL.
 

Touchdown

Well-Known Member

mousedroid

Member
Wait times are still being extremely overstated. Posted line was 105 at 10:45 and am boarding now at 11:50!
Dumb question, but the 105 wasn't meant to be 1 hour and 5 minutes, was it? Because then it was dead on. I don't recall if the signs read out strictly in minutes or in hours and minutes.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
Dumb question, but the 105 wasn't meant to be 1 hour and 5 minutes, was it? Because then it was dead on. I don't recall if the signs read out strictly in minutes or in hours and minutes.
They're in minutes.

They're also always artificially inflated; you should always wait a shorter amount of time than the posted wait time unless something unforeseen like a ride stoppage happens.
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
I disagree. MK probably needs 6-7000 guest per hour in attraction capacity relative to its attendance. DHS probably needs 3-4000.
“Relative to its attendance” . . . the problem is that every time you add something to MK you increase attendance. By the time you add enough attraction capacity to accommodate the additional guests they bring in you have an MK with multiple dozens of attractions and 3 other parks with a dozen or less.

Or you could soften attendance at MK by giving guests more compelling reasons to spend time at the other gates.
 

tirian

Well-Known Member
“Relative to its attendance” . . . the problem is that every time you add something to MK you increase attendance. By the time you add enough attraction capacity to accommodate the additional guests they bring in you have an MK with multiple dozens of attractions and 3 other parks with a dozen or less.
Or we could restore the MK and Epcot to their massive capacities from the late ‘80s through early ‘90s, and continue building out the other two parks. ;)

...you could soften attendance at MK by giving guests more compelling reasons to spend time at the other gates.
I completely agree.
 

yensidtlaw1969

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Or we could restore the MK and Epcot to their massive capacities from the late ‘80s through early ‘90s, and continue building out the other two parks. ;)
Oh for sure, I would KILL for that.

It just seems that the most popular idea on these boards for addressing MK's attendance and capacity issues is to just keep lavishing attractions on it, despite the fact that it has almost always been miles ahead of the other parks in terms of offerings (EPCOT Center excepted, but they've done some serious damage since then).

Can you imagine a world where MK and EPCOT have the massive capacities they used to, and DHS and Animal Kingdom are COMPARABLE in that regard? It almost seems inconceivable these days, but what a thing that would be! If only they'd ever given that a real try.
 

MisterPenguin

Rumormonger
Premium Member
Or we could restore the MK and Epcot to their massive capacities from the late ‘80s through early ‘90s, and continue building out the other two parks.
Can you imagine a world where MK and EPCOT have the massive capacities they used to, and DHS and Animal Kingdom are COMPARABLE in that regard? It almost seems inconceivable these days, but what a thing that would be! If only they'd ever given that a real try.
What do you mean by MK having much greater capacity in the 80's and 90's? Did they shut down a quarter of their attractions since then?

I don't have the figures for the 80's and 90's, but since 2006, MK's attendance has increased by 4 million guests a year.

The "lack of capacity" is really "more guests pushing regular capacity past its tipping point."

And yes, WDW didn't expand capacity like they should have to compensate. But the idea that capacity in MK was slashed since the 80's and 90s and that's why it's so overcrowded is just... crazy.
 
Last edited:

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
And yes, WDW didn't expand capacity like they should have to compensate. But the idea that capacity in MK was slashed since the 80's and 90s and that's why it's so overcrowded is just... crazy.
I was wondering about that too. EPCOT definitely has less capacity in numerous ways, but I don't think the Magic Kingdom has less. The rides that were shut down have been replaced by others (20,000 was replaced by two rides). I suppose there could be a small decrease in capacity with the Stitch theater closed and a few other small things gone (like the keel boats), but I think the Seven Dwarfs/Little Mermaid combo would make up for that.

They absolutely failed to keep up with the attendance increase, though. And if you want to argue the quality of some of the new rides is less than what they replaced, I'd agree with that, but it's a separate argument from capacity.
 
Last edited:

tirian

Well-Known Member
What do you mean by MK having much greater capacity in the 80's and 90's? Did they shut down a quarter of their attractions since then?

I don't have the figures for the 80's and 90's, but since 2006, MK's attendance has increased by 4 million guests a year.

The "lack of capacity" is really "more guests pushing regular capacity past its tipping point."

And yes, WDW didn't expand capacity like they should have to compensate. But the idea that capacity in MK was slashed since the 80's and 90s and that's why it's so overcrowded is just... crazy.
Which is why I never said that.

I was wondering about that too. EPCOT definitely has less capacity in numerous ways, but I don't think the Magic Kingdom has less. The rides that were shut down have been replaced by others (20,000 was replaced by two rides). I suppose there could be a small decrease in capacity with the Stitch theater closed and a few other small things gone (like the keel boats), but I think the Seven Dwarfs/Little Mermaid combo would make up for that.

They absolutely failed to keep up with the attendance increase, though. And if you want to argue the quality of some of the new rides is less than what they replaced, I'd agree with that, but it's a separate argument from capacity.
The MK and Epcot have lost many high-capacity attractions over the years. Most replacements don’t have the hourly counts of the original attractions. This has been discussed many times on the boards; I don’t know why it would seem like a shocking thing to say.
 
I disagree. MK probably needs 6-7000 guest per hour in attraction capacity relative to its attendance. DHS probably needs 3-4000.
I totally get what you’re saying with the math behind the capacity of rides relative to park attendance. That said it’s a tad disappointing to me that Mk has like 2 dozen rides while the other parks less than 10 or around 10. Feels a little soft to me for the other parks. I think they could be up around 12 to 15 and MK at maybe 25 to 30. Of course everyone wants more rides but it’s kind of crazy how lacking DHS got for rides and even with all the investment how it still has so few. Just my personal opinion, overall I’m thrilled with what Disneys been doing as of late at all the parks.
 
Top Bottom