MSN Travel Tips: Avoid AK?

[Dukeblue1016]

I will grant you that when MGM opened, it was quite barren. I was there about six months after it's formal opening and there was very little to be had. It was a rush opening.

Again I say that AK is not a bad park and it has a lot of potential. At the moment though in my personal opinion, there's just not enough to define and seperate it as a full-day, standalone experience. Your mileage may varry.
-m

Again, I respect opinions... and I agree, its not enough for a full day alone... but i don't think any park besides MK really is... I couldn't do ToT and RnRC all day long and then go off and do SW, Muppets, GMR, enough to take up a full day... Epcot most definitely I couldn't... Plus, again, Epcot wasn't bare when it opened... it had NOTHING... They thought it was the biggest mistake the Disney Co. had ever made... and they were terrified it would ruin WDW altogether because no one wanted to go there...

I didn't speak about MK in its first 8 years if you notice... and I didn't because... it was open for 11 years before another park opened... it didn't have time to develop slowly as AK is doing... if people didn't like MK, WDW would suffer... MK WAS WDW then... it didn't have three other parks, two water parks, downtown disney, and everything else... so they had to stock-pile it....

Plus, have you done Everest yet? I admit, I'd see your side FAR more prior to the addition of Everest, but now with Everest, it is gaining strength... I'd rather spend a full day at AK (9-6) opposed to 9-9 at Epcot or 9-9 at MGM now... (thats IMO though, and everyone else has their own...)

As someone else said too "am i the only one who DOES NOT think of animals when i think of AK" No, you're not... I couldn't see it any less as a Zoo... like seriously, I went to AK five times this past trip... MGM 3, Epcot 4, and MK like 7... I only did the Safari once... so that means on 4 trips to AK I didn't even see an animal...

Most important point I will make right here... Since when do you go to Zoos... spend 4+ hours there, have a great time, and not see animals????

 

[PSU_Princess]

Why can't we all have different opinions about the various attractions/parks without having to call them a mistake??? On my last trip I took a nap during the Hall of Presidents and American Adventure. Does that mean that I thought they were a mistake?? NO! They just happened to not be my favorite attractions and they were very easy to take a quick nap in but that still doesn't mean I thought it was a mistake to build those attractions. Do I spend as much time in AK as I do in MK or Epcot...No but that doesn't mean the whole park was a mistake. Obviously there are a lot of people who enjoy AK and it provides something different that you can't get at the other 3 parks. Just because you don't like a certain thing doesn't mean it is a mistake....to each his own! Part of the beauty of Disney is that there are 4 different parks...and within these 4 parks there is something for everyone!

 

[imagineer boy]

Why did they have to create Animal Kingdom? Why not have spent that money on the three parks that you already have?

The thing about AK was that it was a good idea, built at good time, but not executed to its fullest extent.

 

[WDW Monorail]

The thing about AK was that it was a good idea, built at good time, but not executed to its fullest extent.

I agree.
As I stated earlier, Disney had to approach this project with caution.
I try to see things from Disney's viewpoint

 

[DDuckFan130]

I've recently started to frequent AK more, especially because of EE. In fact, this last trip was the first time I did KS since '98 and the trails period :lookaroun

I think the fact it's a huge park and it was always hot made us not want to go there. But over the trips I have come to appreciate the park more and now have to take away time from the other parks to go to AK :lookaroun

I think the park just needs time to grow...I mean it hasn't even been 10 years people :hammer: Give it time and maybe, just maybe people will "get" AK. If not, oh well.

 

[dopey]

"Travel should be about one-of-a-kind experiences, not chain stores or overpriced attractions. Here are our picks for tourist traps you're better off staying away from."

AK is a one-of-a-kind experience. Overpriced? Maybe. But people are willing to splurge when they take vacations to unique destination. It's not overpriced if the customer is satisfied, as I think would describe most visitors to WDW. Tourist trap? Well, heck, just put the whole of Orlando on the list if that's your criteria.

San Francisco is the second most beautiful big city in the U.S. But the biggest problem with Fisherman's Wharf is that it much of the area reeks of urine. I can walk past the tacky shops and whatnot, but the only way to escape the foul smell is to go inside Ghiradelli's and not come back out. Such sacrifice I'm willing to make.

As for Chicago, THE most beautiful big city in the U.S., they are right to rank Navy Pier on their list of places to avoid. I would have listed it second. The attractions are extremely lame and overpriced. With the great variety of retail and dining options in Chicago, you'd be insane to shop or eat at some cookie-cutter joint on the pier. Navy Pier was better when it was used in the summer for Chicagofest. Now that was cool.

Someone said it earlier, but it was a good point worth repeating: If you go up to the top of the Sears Tower on a cloudy day, you are an imbecile.

 

[Lanipie]

Why does AK have to be a mistake just because you don't like it???

I completely agree. And the battle wages on over opinion. No one is telling anyone that they are not entitled to dislike AK. The point is that the writer dismissed the park as a bad version of a zoo. Which is just ignorant. It's more than a zoo, and to not point out that it is more than a zoo, is just whack.

 

[NemoRocks78]

I used to HATE the park....but I love it now. It's my 2nd favorite park (behind Epcot). I would rarely go there until Everest construction began. Once it started, I went to take construction photos and while I was there I would do more attractions and just walk around. It made me appreciate it a lot more.

 

[polynesiangirl]

Edited: OK, I wanted to cut a bit of my rant out of here, I was really on a roll. I don't want to fan the flames or anything. ;-) I just was ranting about how I do in fact "get" AK, and that it makes me sad that people act like I don't....people, I know it's not a zoo, etc etc etc....*sheepish*

And, to reiterate what I wrote before, I don't even think AK *is* a "place to skip", especially not for people who haven't ever seen it before. I am looking forward to seeing it again - and YES, I also understand that every park needs time to evolve and grow. *sigh* I'm not trying to get into a flame war here, or anything, but sheesh.

 

[joelleharbert]

Why does AK have to be a mistake just because you don't like it???

I didn't say AK itself was a mistake. I'm just saying that, yes, Disney does make mistakes and misjudgments and it seems that when people like me don't like something, certain people, like yourself, like to jump all over them on these boards. Reread my post. I NEVER said AK was a mistake.

 

[joelleharbert]

Why can't we all have different opinions about the various attractions/parks without having to call them a mistake??? On my last trip I took a nap during the Hall of Presidents and American Adventure. Does that mean that I thought they were a mistake?? NO! They just happened to not be my favorite attractions and they were very easy to take a quick nap in but that still doesn't mean I thought it was a mistake to build those attractions. Do I spend as much time in AK as I do in MK or Epcot...No but that doesn't mean the whole park was a mistake. Obviously there are a lot of people who enjoy AK and it provides something different that you can't get at the other 3 parks. Just because you don't like a certain thing doesn't mean it is a mistake....to each his own! Part of the beauty of Disney is that there are 4 different parks...and within these 4 parks there is something for everyone!

AGAIN I NEVER SAID IT WAS A MISTAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:brick: :brick: :brick: :brick:

 

[tampabrad]

Personally, I agree that AK is not worth $67 for a short park day. I don't think any of the parks in the area are worth $67. I have APs to WDW, Universal, and Busch Gardens. I really don't see the value in buying a one day ticket to any of these parks. I agree that I (and others who live close to the attractions) am (are) spoiled. I can go to AK and actually experience the park and what it has to offer.

Yes, you can do all of the rides in about half a day. I have done all of the rides in half a day at every park in the area. There are more to the parks than just rides. Something that most media will never get. It is kind of like saying that paying to see the Mona Lisa is a waste because it is just one picture. There is more to the Louvre than just one painting. (No, I do not think that any attraction in the Orlando area comes close to the Mona Lisa.)

What the writer fails to realize is that everything on his list is a "must do" for any tourist. Of course, these are not places that you go to every day, or every trip, but they are places that just have to be seen once in a person's life. I have been to San Francisco many times, and the chocolate at Ghiradelli just tastes better there. The Guinness at St James Gate just tastes better there. Put AK in the middle of nowhere and it would be stupid. AK and everything else on the list is just one part of a whole.

Just because a place is labeled a tourist trap doesn't mean you are trapped there.

 

[PSU_Princess]

I agree with joelleharbert. Just because we see that Disney makes mistakes doesnt mean we don't get disney.

There were many people back in the begining when Walt disney was alive that had his imagination. People around ehre seem to think that The people who work at disney are the only ones. On this board if you mention anything bad about disney you get flammed and everyone is nasty to you. Also that kind of attitude is not DISNEY like at all .

Why did they have to create Animal Kingdom? Why not have spent that money on the three parks that you already have?

ITs obvious they borrowed Ideas from other parks and zoos when they created Animal Kingdom. In the specials the engineers who helped build the park even mentioned this fact. So why berate people who think this park was a mistake. There were a lot better uses for that money.

joelleharbert--I was not trying to be rude to you, but your post was entirely about AK and then you end it talking about the Disney mistakes...so maybe you didn't specifically say that but it sure implied. Forgive me if I interpreted it wrong. I wasn't trying to flame you..just point out that different people have different opinions. It is very hard to convey emotions on here!

AGAIN I NEVER SAID IT WAS A MISTAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:brick: :brick: :brick: :brick:

If you read the quote above you will see that this person specifically says they agree with you and they think the park is a mistake...that was what I was responding to--maybe I should have quoted that before so there was no confusion.

 

[joelleharbert]

Edited: OK, I wanted to cut a bit of my rant out of here, I was really on a roll. I don't want to fan the flames or anything. ;-) I just was ranting about how I do in fact "get" AK, and that it makes me sad that people act like I don't....people, I know it's not a zoo, etc etc etc....*sheepish*

And, to reiterate what I wrote before, I don't even think AK *is* a "place to skip", especially not for people who haven't ever seen it before. I am looking forward to seeing it again - and YES, I also understand that every park needs time to evolve and grow. *sigh* I'm not trying to get into a flame war here, or anything, but sheesh.

Somebody I can agree with! Please, I encourage everyone to go see it at least once and form your own opinion. After that, you're free to choose whether you ever go back. Once again, I think that some people are so pro-Disney that they cannot take a neutral view on anything Disney does. While I do not believe that the AK is a mistake in and of itself, I do think that Disney has used poor judgment and quick reactive thinking on some of their projects. Call them mistakes, call them whatever you like, but it's true and if this offends the pro-Disney people, well then, so be it. I will still enjoy my Disney vacation and I will still have my own opinions on what and what not to enjoy while I'm there.

 

[joelleharbert]

joelleharbert--I was not trying to be rude to you, but your post was entirely about AK and then you end it talking about the Disney mistakes...so maybe you didn't specifically say that but it sure implied. Forgive me if I interpreted it wrong. I wasn't trying to flame you..just point out that different people have different opinions. It is very hard to convey emotions on here!



If you read the quote above you will see that this person specifically says they agree with you and they think the park is a mistake...that was what I was responding to--maybe I should have quoted that before so there was no confusion.

Sorry. I was a bit confused there! Thanks for clearing that up!

 

[Skippy]

You guys are yanking my chain right??? Really... Test Track wasn't Epcot's biggest attraction?

I'm sorry if I didn't come off as clear as I hoped, it's obvious that Test Track is a 'big' and popular attraction. I was just stating that thrill rides aren't the only attractions that are 'big'.

17 years after it opened did it finally get its first BIG attraction, followed by MS and Soarin...

in 1983, Horizons, Imagination!, The Living Seas didn't open until '86. I would consider these some pretty big additions to the park.

 

[gboiler1]

I think the list is a bit unfair, as AK is just a portion of WDW as a whole, where several of the other places listed have "attractions" not run by the same people. For instance in the Fisherman's Wharf area, there are cheap souvenir shops, Guiness World Records museum, etc. Navy Pier has all those little t-shirt shops and trinket stands, high priced rides and the like. AK can't compare, it's not a side show built by someone not associated with Disney. The author would have done better to look back at Disneyland and all the "tourist traps" that people built across the street many years ago to sponge of the tourists dollars.
Also the author must have missed the AK theme, it's Naht'a-zu!

 

[imagineersrock]

Ok folks, I have little desire to get too involved in this particular thread because it is really starting to get on my nerves.

AK just-so-happens to be my favorite park. (In my opinion) The architecture and attention to detail is stunning, many of the attractions offered are some of the best and most unique on property, and ofcourse the animals... I love them.

I'm not trying to make anyone change their opinion on AK either way, it's fine with me whether you like it or not... The thing that is getting on my nerves here is some of the incredibly ignorant posts I've seen in this thread that cross the line between opinion and trying to convey it as fact. It's okay that you don't like the park, I don't expect everyone to, but don't try and come up with statistics or try to downplay the success of the park just because you hold some kind of a grudge against the place.

One thing that I've noticed is that a lot of the "AK sucks, I'm never going back there"-type posts I've read seem to come from people who haven't even visited the park in a long time.

This opinion was something I widely encountered before Everest, but since it has opened, I feel Nemo's post is the perfect explanation of the public's new view of the place:

I used to HATE the park....but I love it now. It's my 2nd favorite park (behind Epcot). I would rarely go there until Everest construction began. Once it started, I went to take construction photos and while I was there I would do more attractions and just walk around. It made me appreciate it a lot more.

Having worked at the park both pre-and-post the opening of Everest, I for one can tell you there has been a MAJOR change in the way people view AK. Before, a lot of people used to complain about the lack of things to do in the park and how it was such a half day park... Guests would hit the Safaris, Dinosaur, maybe the rapids and figure they'd seen everything there was to be seen and then left.

Nowadays though, like Nemo said the entire outlook has changed. It is truly amazing what one major E-ticket can do for a park. Everest alone has pulled in a remarkable amount of people, and those people are not just doing Everest and leaving. I'm guessing that while waiting for their fastpass times to come around or just deciding to "come back later in the day" because of how high the current posted wait time at Everest might be guests are actually starting to explore the park--the different attractions, shows, walking trails and other hidden gems they might have missed before Everest opened. It seems a lot of people are finally starting to "get" the park and "get" what the origional AK lovers have known all along. Ever since Everest opened up more people than ever have told me how much fun they're having in the park, how beautiful it is, and how AK has become one of, if not their favorite park... something I rarely heard before EE opened up.

In my opinion Everest has done a great job putting AK on the map and has really begun to "round-out" this once half-day park (and even more new things are always on the way.) The numbers speak for themselves. more people than ever are visiting--and staying in the park until park close.

These days, the only real complaint I tend to get is that the park closes too early and they simply don't have enough time in the day to do everything they wanted to do at the park.

 

[Shiloh]

4) As a zoo, it isn't very good.

AK isnt a zoo, perhaps that is the reason other 'Zoos' do "Zoo" better.

 

[Dukeblue1016]

I'm sorry if I didn't come off as clear as I hoped, it's obvious that Test Track is a 'big' and popular attraction. I was just stating that thrill rides aren't the only attractions that are 'big'.

in 1983, Horizons, Imagination!, The Living Seas didn't open until '86. I would consider these some pretty big additions to the park.

Yeah I'm sorry, rough day at work... I see your point, I like a lot of rides a lot more than Test Track, and as you do agree with me partially... I was just trying to point out its significance to Epcot... it put it back on the map after Splash Mt and ToT popped up in the other parks and AK arrived and was unkown... Epcot was fading a tad...

See, I don't know much about Epcot from the 80s except when I read (only the first half of) Disney War, they talked about how Epcot was a disaster at first because it didn't appeal to anyone... and then from things I've seen on different television documentaries of WDW... they said the same thing...

So, sorry if I was a little harsh and a little too rude with my initial response, I knew what you were saying, but didn't react as though I did...



I think this entire argument is moot... I really really do... I mean, as many have said, AK isn't worth $67. I think almost all of us agree. But, it should be agreed, that 90+% of Disney's guests are either doing multi-day passes OR park hoppers OR APs... so the $67 is entirely irrelevant... So, if you look at it as this:

$240 FOR SEVEN DAYS WITH THE PARK HOPPER OPTION... SHOULD I GO TO AK??? YES...

I think we can all agree on that... no, its not worth $67... IMO none of the parks except MK is though, but others will disagree and that is fine... but the article is stupid because... the majority of people visiting are really only paying like... 30 bucks a day for park hopping options... and therefore... AK IS entirely worth that, and... worth going several times...

Also, I think most agree its not a zoo... and shouldn't be called it, because as I said before... What zoo can you go to 4 times in a week, and not see a single animal, and have as much fun there as you might (may or may not... personal preference) have at MK, or Epcot, or MGM... or other such theme parks... what Zoo offers that? NONE...