Mickey and Minnie's Runaway Railway confirmed

[shortstop]

How is their experience worse? Cause they got a cloned ride that makes it worse? Because a ride they have is now in Epcot will make their visit worse? Or because they are getting a ride we have in the swamps is going to make it worse? The thrill of the different parks is not the rides it is the way they disguise these rides and lands in different ways to fit these countries and places. But having Peter Pan in every park is a bad thing? Having a Space Mountain? Come on really.

I believe it makes it worse. Visiting DLP becomes an objectively lesser experience once Rat opens in Epcot, since there will be less there that is unique. By your logic, should we clone the city of Paris and bring it to the US so that those who will never travel to Europe can experience that too? Some clones are fine obviously (especially in castle parks) but I strongly feel that Disney parks around the world should all be anchored by unique attractions.

 

[DisneyDodo]

I believe it makes it worse. Visiting DLP becomes an objectively lesser experience once Rat opens in Epcot, since there will be less there that is unique. By your logic, should we clone the city of Paris and bring it to the US so that those who will never travel to Europe can experience that too? Some clones are fine obviously (especially in castle parks) but I strongly feel that Disney parks around the world should all be anchored by unique attractions.

DLP does not get any worse when Rat comes to Epcot. DLP remains unchanged. Epcot just becomes better and life becomes more convenient for anyone in the United States who wants to ride Rat.

 

[Jones14]

I certainly don't mind a clone here and there, but I think there should be at least three major (E-ticket) attractions per park (not resort) that are not clones, or are substantially different from/considered to be the best of their sister attractions. For the most part, I think that they've achieved that. With that said, WDSP is not going to be done any favors by losing the exclusivity of its headliner to a resort that is already more appealing to many vacationing Europeans.

 

[britain]

I think that the Disney fan community didn't mind the idea of clones at all back when a "cloned" ride still meant a unique version tailored for the park it was now going in.

Tokyo Disneyland is perceived to be top notch in terms of operations quality, but it's oddly designed simply because of the copy-paste all over the place. Whereas everything at DLP, despite inferior operations, was redesigned from scratch.

 

[matt9112]

That's still debatable.

jeez I would rather we keep some unique rides here.

 

[matt9112]

Okay dude, you could literally say that about everything we argue about on these boards. Don't try to put this one complaint into perspective to make your point. Try again and come up with a real reason to back your argument.

the original that Walt left behind on purpose right?

 

[matt9112]

That's cool that they're cloning it. Hopefully they clone the ride system and concept but not the actual location. Because it's all going to be screens and stuff they'd just have to animate a different plot and stuff.

Edit: also it sucks that DHS will be a park almost completely built on clones but it's whatever.

TOT is vastly different than any of the clones that came after if. enough so that I consider it truly unique.

 

[cheezbat]

Why would that feel like a slap in the face to WDW fans?

lol someone sounds a little greedy

Ok...you guys can have it at DCA...but we want a clone of Indiana Jones and Radiator Springs Racers for DHS then!

 

[Casper Gutman]

DLP does not get any worse when Rat comes to Epcot. DLP remains unchanged. Epcot just becomes better and life becomes more convenient for anyone in the United States who wants to ride Rat.

No one is saying that EPCOT or any other WDW park shouldn't get new rides. People are saying they should get new, original rides crafted to suit that specific park, rides that are of no lesser quality then Rat.

The ride cloning trend is annoying in and of itself because it results in fewer new and interesting attractions. I can go to both DL and WDW for roughly the same cost and effort - how exciting is the MGM makeover when I'll likely experience the EXACT same SWL in DL earlier? The only genuine advantage of the MGM makeover is that I'll be able to ride MMRR a couple years before it opens in DL. Yay? At that point, what will be unique about MGM? Muppets? I love the attraction, but I still suspect its on its way out. Other than that... MGM has nothing unique other then a few lackluster shows that are over two decades old. Wheeeeee... And as to MGM having the original, better versions of the rides, that only seems to apply to ToT.

But this is all missing the point, which is the homogenization of the parks. Disney's parks should not be interchangeable - they should have unique coherent themes. Are DHS in Paris and EPCOT thematically identical? How about MGM and DL? EPCOT and DCA? Then how can a ride be lifted, unchanged, from one park and stuffed into another? They can't - unless theme no longer really matters. Management seems to view almost all the parks as vague collections of IPs with little to make them distinct. People on these boards got mad when park specific napkins went away and when the One Disney program caused the merch on both coasts to be identical. This is the same principle, but on a much, much larger scale.

It's not a coincidence that my favorite park at WDW, the only one I feel approaches the quality of classic Disney, is AK, which boasts an almost entirely original slate of attractions and, largely as a result of this, is thematically coherent. And its not a coincidence that almost everyone agrees the best theme park in the world, Disney or otherwise, is TDS, which has one cloned ride.

 

[shortstop]

No one is saying that EPCOT or any other WDW park shouldn't get new rides. People are saying they should get new, original rides crafted to suit that specific park, rides that are of no lesser quality then Rat.

The ride cloning trend is annoying in and of itself because it results in fewer new and interesting attractions. I can go to both DL and WDW for roughly the same cost and effort - how exciting is the MGM makeover when I'll likely experience the EXACT same SWL in DL earlier? The only genuine advantage of the MGM makeover is that I'll be able to ride MMRR a couple years before it opens in DL. Yay? At that point, what will be unique about MGM? Muppets? I love the attraction, but I still suspect its on its way out. Other than that... MGM has nothing unique other then a few lackluster shows that are over two decades old. Wheeeeee... And as to MGM having the original, better versions of the rides, that only seems to apply to ToT.

But this is all missing the point, which is the homogenization of the parks. Disney's parks should not be interchangeable - they should have unique coherent themes. Are DHS in Paris and EPCOT thematically identical? How about MGM and DL? EPCOT and DCA? Then how can a ride be lifted, unchanged, from one park and stuffed into another? They can't - unless theme no longer really matters. Management seems to view almost all the parks as vague collections of IPs with little to make them distinct. People on these boards got mad when park specific napkins went away and when the One Disney program caused the merch on both coasts to be identical. This is the same principle, but on a much, much larger scale.

It's not a coincidence that my favorite park at WDW, the only one I feel approaches the quality of classic Disney, is AK, which boasts an almost entirely original slate of attractions and, largely as a result of this, is thematically coherent. And its not a coincidence that almost everyone agrees the best theme park in the world, Disney or otherwise, is TDS, which has one cloned ride.

This sums up well what I am trying to say. When I travel to Disney Parks around the globe, I want unique experiences. This opportunity starts to fade if every Disney attraction added is a clone of a ride elsewhere. It seems selfish to me to prefer clones over original attractions.

 

[Movielover]

By your logic, should we clone the city of Paris and bring it to the US so that those who will never travel to Europe can experience that too?

Oh god please no! the smell of all over that city was worse than me taking a dive in the local sewage treatment plant...

 

[Disneyhead'71]

By your logic, should we clone the city of Paris and bring it to the US so that those who will never travel to Europe can experience that too.

Ummm. You do realize that they are putting a clone of the Rat ride into a clone of Paris, right?

It's like the "Inception" of cloning. A clone within a clone. Ooooo, kinda deep, huh?

I have no problem with cloning headliners, but I prefer shared tech instead. But I believe Dinosaur showed the danger in relying on that. I would have rather had a straight up clone of IJA than than a loud dark ride through the Hobby Lobby Plastic Plant Warehouse. A clone of the Rat ride in WS is quasi-theme appropriate. Which, oddly enough, WDI seems to be struggling with these days. And it is a solid and popular attraction. For the target audience (3-10 year olds), I think it is an appropriate introduction to French culture when combined with the rest of the pavilion. And it's a 1000% better than what they are doing over in the other half of the park. Which is not a clone, and is NOT theme appropriate in any way, shape, or form.

 

[Casper Gutman]

Ummm. You do realize that they are putting a clone of the Rat ride into a clone of Paris, right?

It's like the "Inception" of cloning. A clone within a clone. Ooooo, kinda deep, huh?

I have no problem with cloning headliners, but I prefer shared tech instead. But I believe Dinosaur showed the danger in relying on that. I would have rather had a straight up clone of IJA than than a loud dark ride through the Hobby Lobby Plastic Plant Warehouse.

Shared tech is fine and generally avoids cloning problems. The only thing Dino shows is the problem when execs choose ride tech because they have it rather then because it fits the attraction they want to build. A strong counter-example is RSR, which is so vastly superior to TT it's amazing.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Shared tech is fine and generally avoids cloning problems. The only thing Dino shows is the problem when execs choose ride tech because they have it rather then because it fits the attraction they want to build. A strong counter-example is RSR, which is so vastly superior to TT it's amazing.

Test Track was basically a "proof of concept" for the tech. Universal Orlando Resort was founded on the concept with Kong and they are still doing it to this day. They build a small "proof of concept" into the Tram Tour in Hollywood and then give it steroids in the process of bringing it to Orlando. Here is an interesting article about the creation of USF.

https://www.orlandovacation.com/universal-studios/articles/universal-theme-park-history/

 

[Casper Gutman]

Test Track was basically a "proof of concept" for the tech. Universal Orlando Resort was founded on the concept with Kong and they are still doing it to this day. They build a small "proof of concept" into the Tram Tour in Hollywood and then give it steroids in the process of bringing it to Orlando. Here is an interesting article about the creation of USF.

https://www.orlandovacation.com/universal-studios/articles/universal-theme-park-history/

It makes me so happy that they destroyed one of the greatest dark rides ever built for a "proof of concept" in an empty warehouse.

I suspect even Disney execs knew that the TT tech had to function as an actual attraction in addition to being a test for a new kind of ride mechanic. After all, they didn't reuse the system for 14 years, so they weren't precisely chomping at the bit to put it elsewhere.

 

[Mike S]

It makes me so happy that they destroyed one of the greatest dark rides ever built for a "proof of concept" in an empty warehouse.

I suspect even Disney execs knew that the TT tech had to function as an actual attraction in addition to being a test for a new kind of ride mechanic. After all, they didn't reuse the system for 14 years, so they weren't precisely chomping at the bit to put it elsewhere.

It was reused in Tokyo in 2001 for Journey to the Center of the Earth.

 

[doctornick]

I think that the Disney fan community didn't mind the idea of clones at all back when a "cloned" ride still meant a unique version tailored for the park it was now going in.

I agree with this. I really don't have any problems with clones, but it would be nice if we could go back to different versions of the same ride having at least subtle differences that given them individual character. That used to be the rule, not the exception, in the early years of having multiple parks. Nowadays, it seems like the rides tend to always be exact clones with differences mostly being in the queue.

 

[Movielover]

The only thing Dino shows is the problem when execs choose ride tech because they have it rather then because it fits the attraction they want to build.

I believe the EMV was a perfect choice for Countdown To Extinction, the main problem was the constant budget slashing to remove a lot of scenery elements and the shortened cloning of Indy's layout. Would I want a true Indy ride? Of course! but Dinosaur will always be a guilty pleasure of mine.

 

[Goofyernmost]

It sure seems to utilize DL's geography better.

I'm thinking that they altered DL's geography drastically. So I'd say not without a lot of effort. Move a train track, alter a river to accommodate seems to me to be a very big earth moving operation.

 

[Goofyernmost]

This sums up well what I am trying to say. When I travel to Disney Parks around the globe, I want unique experiences. This opportunity starts to fade if every Disney attraction added is a clone of a ride elsewhere. It seems selfish to me to prefer clones over original attractions.

Ideally, sure! But, if it means no attractions instead of previously designed ones, then I see no harm in them cloning. The thing we always seem to lose sight of is that Disney parks are controlled by people that are primarily business men and not entertainment. There has been a proliferation of theme parks all over the place and each one has used up the limited variation of a ride, making it more and more difficult to come up with something absolutely original. I have yet to see any attraction, cloned or not, that has been absolutely identical to one that shared the theme and basic plans in other location. SWL may be one of the sole exceptions, but, the demand for that requires it to be situation in more then one place or otherwise whatever area got it, would be quickly overwhelmed. The reason of SWL cloning is completely different then the simplistic idea that they are just being cheap. Sometimes you can also be clever in that decision. In the mean time a clone is available to many more people thus offering the opportunity to entertain many more people. I fail to see what can be wrong with that.

Not everything is clone worthy, but, many things are. Just think about how much more appealing that TSL would have been with Carsland involved in it. Before anyone says it. Yes, same basic ride system as Test Track! So what?? Didn't seem to bother anyone when Omni-movers were used over and over again.

Plus you make it sound like everyone just travels the globe in search of unique entertainment. I went to Paris a couple of years ago* and although there were many cloned ideas located there I can assure you that none of them were exactly like the others. Even so, it is a minority that get the opportunity to travel that extensively. Parks should not be built strictly on the premise that a few might venture to another country.

Spoiler: *

I might add that I was in Paris for 5 days and only one of those was spent in Disneyland Paris. There is a whole lot of unique real world to see beyond fantasy.