Mine Coaster Ride Through.

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Yep, and as I said in another thread, so could everything ever conceived to be built! I'd like R'nRC to be twice as long, and wish ToT was a 25 storey drop (if not for that 200 ft. Florida height thingy). Anyway, even if something more gradiose was desired, there are always footprint and budget restrictions. Besides, I'd rather more money be allocated to the themeing than just the track layout. I can go ride roller coasters above parking lots anywhere. That's not what I expect, nor want, when at WDW. Yay for 7DMT just the way it is. :)
I'm not sure how a parking lot coaster enters into this discussion, but Disney is not know for getting the best bang for their buck. That's part of the frustration with Fantasyland, is that the money spent, in the right hands, could have built more.
 

ryguy

Well-Known Member
Why should a land be crippled with such a limited appeal? It's the exact opposite of what Disneyland was about. It's entirely possible to impress other age groups and not resort to vicarious enjoyment without thrills. The Seven Dwarfs Mine Train could easily be more expansive and impressive without being more physically thrilling.

I was talking about a specific area in the park not all of MK. So I don't see the comparison. Actually it's pretty much unlimited appeal since most people will be able to ride the attraction. I understand your theory about Disneyland but you can have areas of the park that appeal more so to certain groups of guests, in this case families. Fantasyland should be rather tame and inclusive to all guests. I think thats the appeal of Disney theme parks, compared to other companies. Six Flags, Universal, Cedar Fair all focus on the thrill and have height restrictions that keep my family (right now) away. From my study of Disney the idea was to have a place where families can have fun together. The more rides that have fewer restrictions is actually supporting that concept, rather than adding rides that only half the family can enjoy because of height or health restrictions. Not that I am against thrill rides, but I have no problem with the scale and scope of this project, based on the drawings I think it will be a nice add to Fantasyland.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I was talking about a specific area in the park not all of MK. So I don't see the comparison. Actually it's pretty much unlimited appeal since most people will be able to ride the attraction. I understand your theory about Disneyland but you can have areas of the park that appeal more so to certain groups of guests, in this case families. Fantasyland should be rather tame and inclusive to all guests. I think thats the appeal of Disney theme parks, compared to other companies. Six Flags, Universal, Cedar Fair all focus on the thrill and have height restrictions that keep my family (right now) away. From my study of Disney the idea was to have a place where families can have fun together. The more rides that have fewer restrictions is actually supporting that concept, rather than adding rides that only half the family can enjoy because of height or health restrictions. Not that I am against thrill rides, but I have no problem with the scale and scope of this project, based on the drawings I think it will be a nice add to Fantasyland.
Why resort to mentioning thrill rides when I explicitly ruled the increase in physical thrill? Being for families need not be limited by focusing appeal on young children and those with them.
 

td1129

Well-Known Member
Why should a land be crippled with such a limited appeal? It's the exact opposite of what Disneyland was about. It's entirely possible to impress other age groups and not resort to vicarious enjoyment without thrills. The Seven Dwarfs Mine Train could easily be more expansive and impressive without being more physically thrilling.

Yeah, so crippled.
 

SirLink

Well-Known Member
It's rather well known throughout the themed entertainment industry.

Exactly - its precisely why budgets get out of control and create a political clash. One could argue the BoD want a better 'bang for buck', yet you have Joe Rohde and his team going out to - was it Nepal or India - to learn about the Yeti mysticism, whilst a teleconference would have sufficed.

It also doesn't help that WDI is bloated, whist UC is a small agile team, and get Despicable ME up and running from starting the project to opening within 18 months.
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Exactly - its precisely why budgets get out of control and create a political clash. One could argue the BoD want a better 'bang for buck', yet you have Joe Rohde and his team going out to - was it Nepal or India - to learn about the Yeti mysticism, whilst a teleconference would have sufficed.

It also doesn't help that WDI is bloated, whist UC is a small agile team, and get Despicable ME up and running from starting the project to opening within 18 months.

Did you mean Transformers? Despicable Me was about 8 months.
 

dreamscometrue

Well-Known Member
...you have Joe Rohde and his team going out to - was it Nepal or India - to learn about the Yeti mysticism, whilst a teleconference would have sufficed.

Wow dude! That statement right there speaks volumes about what you know/think about properly researching anything. Teleconference same as being there walking though Asia, speaking with locals, sleeping there, eating there, etc.? Really? Keep that in mind next time you're planning a vacation to Uni or wherever you like to travel. Perhaps you can just watch it on Youtube, or get a friend with a webcam mounted on his or her head to show you around. :)
 

SirLink

Well-Known Member
Wow dude! That statement right there speaks volumes about what you know/think about properly researching anything. Teleconference same as being there walking though Asia, speaking with locals, sleeping there, eating there, etc.? Really? Keep that in mind next time you're planning a vacation to Uni or wherever you like to travel. Perhaps you can just watch it on Youtube, or get a friend with a webcam to show you around. :)

Different purposes one is to collect data to design something, purpose of WDI.
 

WED99

Well-Known Member
I can't wait for this to open! It will look great in FL, will be just what NFL needs and will be a nice break from thrill rides and kiddie rides (somewhere nicely in the middle)
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Since likely nobody on here is privy to how Disney spends all their money, you sure it's not just an urban myth?

Maybe EuroDisney's costs nearly tripling were just urban myths too.. and all that financial reporting was just.. fake? And the fact that even Eisner was on record numerous times about trying to control the costs in imagineering? And just about every industry person (including former WDI people themselves...) knowing it. And of course we get the real world examples of Disney builds for a cost vs what others build for far less money.

Yeah.. all really suspicious.. not.

The information is well covered in biographies, industry coverage, and other reference materials. Its out there for those who actually do more than just read forums..
 

danlb_2000

Premium Member
Since likely nobody on here is privy to how Disney spends all their money, you sure it's not just an urban myth?

Here is a post from one of our members, WhyLightbulb, who has worked on attractions for both Disney and Universal, touching on how Disney spends money....

CBOMB said:
Whylightbulb I know one of the big problems you had, and have with WDI were the ridiculace cost overrides on some of the projects. I know it's difficult to generalize a topic such as that, but could you give it a try?​
Well as I've pointed out using examples such as Mission Space there is either some real exaggeration with respect to publicized numbers or some amazing waste that even our current federal government couldn't duplicate.

I remember when I first started at WDI and my boss was giving me the tour. He took me into a room where three people were sitting around sculpting and painting fairies. While my boss was taking a call I asked one of them what this was for. She shrugged her shoulders and replied, "I don't know...they just want us to paint fairies." It was very comical but indicative of what goes on that contributes to project budget waste. My boss didn't know what they were for either by the way. I still to this day don't know what those fairies were for.

CBOMB said:
Having read so many of your interesting post it seems so much is being lost on different projects because of this. Cutting the budget while wasting what money you have seems like a plan to create a very mediocre attraction that could have been great. What thought process permeates WDI that causes this mindset of wasteful spending?​
I think a lot of it is because they have it to waste. i remember when I was first exposed to a project outside of Disney or Universal where we didn't have the enormous budgets they are so lucky to have. We actually had to be just as creative in value engineering and planning as concepting the story and creative elements. This is something that most at WDI don't have experience with. They'll design to budget and rely on expensive technology rather than rely on innovation and creativity to derive entertainment value from.

Ego is another huge money waster. Because certain managers have to put their mark on each element of a project they will assign countless extra hours to mock-ups and POC that don't need to be done. It's true that the devil is in the details but many at WDI have taken that to an innefficient extreme.

Another reason is simply because many of them don't have the ability to think in terms of balance between managing a budget and producing an entertainment product. This is something you either have or you don't in my opinion. These project managers should be working at general construction jobs rather than a creative-based job.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom