New FL area will be called Fantasy Forest

[panther726]

Agrred, but it's still sensable to compare two versions of the same ride.:shrug:

I agree. But I think he was referring to the park as a whole.

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

I agree. But I think he was referring to the park as a whole.

Still...a valid point.:shrug:

eh, your perspective vs. mine.

 

[sponono88]

Absolutely.

The difference is like night and day.

But WDI has already been the victim of cutbacks. A themed cover for King Triton's Carousel was ditched. As was an ornate cover for the Funwheel queue. And a beergarden concept for the area with a pizza joint (actually very kewl themed to CAL's surfing culture) and the shuttered in-park McD's will be turned into a Victorian food court type place.

And plans for the Screamin queue as well as what will happen to Maliboomer (a Green Army Men parachute drop attraction was dropped early on, but still exists in the huge model in the Blue Sky Cellar).

Those things are all worrisome because they are Phase I. ... And one wonders what they bode for Phase II.

agreed. would've been nice to see the covered queues and a replacement cover for the carousel.. but they aren't entirely finished with the boardwalk yet so it might still happen in the future? still.. what they've done so far is a step in the right direction and significantly improves the area and atmosphere.

I'll take a bit off (and that's all it is) on Mermaid when you're talking about adding a $120 million E-Ticket immersive attraction.

But my comment WAS SARCASTIC and meant to be taken that way. F-land is a lot more than meet and greets, starting with the Mermaid clone to begin with.

The biggest thing to me is that Temporary Tent Land will die a long-coming death and that true theming will come to this land. The tournament tent 1955 DL-model that still exists in 2009 MK is beyond tired, tacky and simple.

After spending time at DLP and DL back-to-back, it is amazing how much MK sucks both overall in comparison and most especially on the F-land front.

The shops in Paris are more immersive than MK's F-land rides.

WoC is a night spectacular on the bay. I don't think it's theme really is an issue. It will fit just fine.

And to make your point stronger, you do realize that Carsland will actually have THREE toon-themed attractions, right? A spinner and new generation flying saucers are coming are themed to Cars. And let's not forget the Silly Symphony Swings or Mickey's Fun Wheel or Goofy's Sky School.

Do I have to make your point for you?:lol:

There's a whole lotta toons coming to DCA. But I can easily argue they fit so much more than Nemo does at EPCOT or Buzz Lightyear, Monsters and Stitch do in Tomorrowland etc.


I (again, Disney hater here according to a poll of fanbois conducted by FOX News and Propaganda) firmly believe DCA is Disney quality. Now, there are degrees of said quality and I sure wouldn't put it on par with DL or DLP or DAK or TDS when it comes to immersiveness.

But there are many online who compare it to Six Flags and parks of that ilk and that's just laughable. As is the assertion that DCA is lacking in quality attractions.

Right now, DCA has plenty of top shelf Disney quality attractions:
Soarin;
ToT;
Disney Animation (the best of any of these type attractions);
Aladdin (the best theme park show I have ever seen);
Screamin (a great thrill ride that isn't too rough for most ages);
Grizzly River Rapids (I hate these type of rides, but this is a good one);

Those alone would be placed in the E-Ticket type category if it existed.

Then you have stuff like:
TSMM (some would even place this higher);
It's Tough To be a Bug (if you think it's quality in Orlando, it is here too! and IMHO it's the best of Disney's 3D efforts);
MuppetVision (tired, but see above);
Monsters (solid C ticket dark ride);
Mickey's Fun Wheel (love it just for the amazing views);

And as kids areas go, Bug's Land is done very, very well (I even enjoy two of the rides).

That's leaving out food and retail as well ...

Comparing DCA or anything to TDS isn't fair because TWDC isn't going to spend what OLC did. That's just a reality. ... OLC views things so differently it's amazing. I recently read their Annual Report and kept hearing how important guest happiness was (you won't find that in TWDC AP) and while quality was emphasized all the time, I never read the words 'Disney magic' or 'brand' anywhere.

So, you wanna compare DCA to say DAK or TPFKaTD-MGMS or DSP? Go ahead. But TDS just isn't a fair comparison.

And I do think that people need to experience things like theme parks before judging. They aren't the type of thing that you can get a real feel for thru the Internet (just another reason why technology has its bad sides). Theme parks are visceral experiences ... they need to be experienced. Not thru photos or Youtube. Through your senses.

And again, understand who you are talking with ... I am the polar opposite of a management apologist here. But I am fair and balanced.

well said - you summed it up a lot better than I ever could. a good objective way of evaluating the park from someone who's been there, without resorting to ''omg DCA is like six flags!1''

 

[WDW1974]

I have never stepped foot in a Disney park outside of Orlando.

You should. Seriously. You have no idea what you're missing.

However, I don't like it when people compare DLP and DL to MK. MK is one of FOUR Disney parks. The rides at DL and DLP are spread out throughout Disney World. Look at that list of rides. I'm sure if you put them all into MK, you wouldn't have an argument. Disney World spread all of those unique attractions throughout their four parks.

Sorry, I don't agree at all. Before there were four parks there was one and then another ...

I also am not comparing resorts.

I am comparing MK parks around the world. It is a very fair comparison. The bigger is better argument is great PR for WDW, but it doesn't hold up to scruntiny. Many people don't visit all of the parks. And allowing the individual parks to grow stale, which is what Disney has done, under the guise that if people get bored with one they'll just 'park hop' to another isn't a smart way to run a business.

FWIW, in the example I am giving (comparing Fantasylands) the other resorts have the attractions and MK doesn't. They aren't spread out in other parks. And if I compare say the Small World or Peter Pan attractions, that's 100% apples to apples.

I wouldn't compare DL to EPCOT because that's not a fair deal.

But there are five MKs (soon six) in the world and it is very fair to show how they stack up ... and, no, FLA doesn't exactly shine when compared to the others.

Like I said, I have never stepped a foot inside any Disney park outside of Orlando. But it doesn't sound like a fair fight to me.:shrug:

How?

 

[WDW1974]

agreed. would've been nice to see the covered queues and a replacement cover for the carousel.. but they aren't entirely finished with the boardwalk yet so it might still happen in the future? still.. what they've done so far is a step in the right direction and significantly improves the area and atmosphere.

No, anything could happen down the line. But it's my experience with Disney that when things get cut they don't tend to be added back down the line. ... That's why the current nothing rehab of Space Mountain bothers me. Because it really is gonna be a what you see is what you get deal for a very looooooooooong time.

well said - you summed it up a lot better than I ever could. a good objective way of evaluating the park from someone who's been there, without resorting to ''omg DCA is like six flags!1''

Thanks. I try.

I really enjoy DCA (but again I also enjoy HKDL and DSP too). I try and be fair in my criticisms as well.

To read some fanboi posts, you'd think DCA is total crap and it is far from it ... and it wasn't crap on Day 1 either. It just wasn't nearly what it should have been.

 

[_Scar]

Nope. They couldn't have. It's just not that simple.

TWDC couldn't have justified spending that much on a second gate in Anaheim to its shareholders and Wall Street (rightly or wrongly) for starters. The reason Westcot (the worst name for a potential park ever) didn't get built in large part was cost.

Then add in the fact that TDS works as well as it does because it is a park based on sea themes that is ON Tokyo Bay.

Then look at the space in Anaheim. The park wouldn't have fit ... not in its current form.

It wasn't a DCA or TDS debate. It was originally an Anaheim vs. Long Beach (for the Port Disney project, which would have been very kewl but wasn't TDS ... it included everything from animal exhibits to a version of Paradise Pier to a terminal for the DCL) debate.

Then it was a DCA or nothing debate.

I honestly do not know about Disney stock and all that. I firmly beleive that they had the money to do TDS though. Maybe Eisner thought the cost was a bit much, I don't know. I thought DCA was pretty large, and TDS was about the same size... but man was I wrong! DCA is 1/3 the size of TDS! Is DCA as big as Blizzard Beach? I hope not... :lol:

 

[sponono88]

I honestly do not know about Disney stock and all that. I firmly beleive that they had the money to do TDS though. Maybe Eisner thought the cost was a bit much, I don't know. I thought DCA was pretty large, and TDS was about the same size... but man was I wrong! DCA is 1/3 the size of TDS! Is DCA as big as Blizzard Beach? I hope not... :lol:

then you clearly don't know how OLC operates their parks.

you'd be surprised to know DL is only 85 acres big... yet it's considered the best theme park in the world :lol: the size of a park does not indicate how good it is. It's also worth nothing that TDS has a rather large body of water that takes up a big chunk of space.

 

[_Scar]

then you clearly don't know how OLC operates their parks.

you'd be surprised to know DL is only 85 acres big... yet it's considered the best theme park in the world :lol: the size of a park does not indicate how good it is. It's also worth nothing that TDS has a rather large body of water that takes up a big chunk of space.

I never said the bigger the better. I only said TDS would be too small for DLR.

What does this have to do with OLC park operations?

 

[_Scar]

Totally off topic but something has been seen on Orlando's horizon...

Beast's castle... why couldn't you be this grand?

 

[sponono88]

Totally off topic but something has been seen on Orlando's horizon...

Beast's castle... why couldn't you be this grand?

No.. no.. for the first time in a long while you are perfectly on topic *tear* :sohappy:

Now.. the Beast's castle - Do we know if it will it be an actual building, a facade..? Will we be able to walk inside it, or will it be a simple building atop the mountain similar to Cindy's castle in Storybook Land?

 

[_Scar]

No.. no.. for the first time in a long while you are perfectly on topic *tear* :sohappy:

Now.. the Beast's castle - Do we know if it will it be an actual building, a facade..? Will we be able to walk inside it, or will it be a simple building atop the mountain similar to Cindy's castle in Storybook Land?

I've read here, :lookaroun, that it will use perspective to its advantage. So, Cindy's Castle I'm guessing. Still looks nice though, and I hope it's a bit bigger than the Storyland Canal replicas.

 

[The Conundrum]

TWDC couldn't have justified spending that much on a second gate in Anaheim to its shareholders and Wall Street (rightly or wrongly) for starters. The reason Westcot (the worst name for a potential park ever) didn't get built in large part was cost.
.

This is BS. You would think after the sucess of Disneyland, MK, Epcot Center, etc. they could justify whatever they wanted when it came to a second park! DIsney had plenty of money to build a tokyo disneysea calibur park OLC doesn't have anywhere near the deep pockets.

Its pretty funny that they couldn't justify the money back then but they can justify it now. The new rides and theming coming to DCA will match or even eclipse anything offered in Tokyo.

Pretty funny that while California will be enjoying Star Tours II, Carsland, and Little Mermaid lavish e-tickets Tokyo disney will be getting.....a clone of toy story mania and a cinderella diorama

 

[sponono88]

I've read here, :lookaroun, that it will use perspective to its advantage. So, Cindy's Castle I'm guessing. Still looks nice though, and I hope it's a bit bigger than the Storyland Canal replicas.

interesting.. the concept art is a bit tricky. there's something going on on top of the castle, wonder if that is supposed to be people up there

This is BS. You would think after the sucess of Disneyland, MK, Epcot Center, etc. they could justify whatever they wanted when it came to a second park! DIsney had plenty of money to build a tokyo disneysea calibur park OLC doesn't have anywhere near the deep pockets.

Its pretty funny that they couldn't justify the money back then but they can justify it now. The new rides and theming coming to DCA will match or even eclipse anything offered in Tokyo.

funny that while California will be enjoying Star Tours II, Carsland, and Little Mermaid lavish e-tickets Tokyo disney will be getting.....a clone of toy story mania and a cinderella diorama

add Turtle Talk With Crush to that list - just opened at TDS

 

[_Scar]

OHH PLEASE. Tokyo got TDS. Isn't that enough? :lol:

 

[panther726]

You should. Seriously. You have no idea what you're missing.



Sorry, I don't agree at all. Before there were four parks there was one and then another ...

I also am not comparing resorts.
Sorry, guess I misunderstood.

I am comparing MK parks around the world. It is a very fair comparison. The bigger is better argument is great PR for WDW, but it doesn't hold up to scruntiny. Many people don't visit all of the parks. And allowing the individual parks to grow stale, which is what Disney has done, under the guise that if people get bored with one they'll just 'park hop' to another isn't a smart way to run a business.

Yes, but it works for them. Their attendance is stable.

FWIW, in the example I am giving (comparing Fantasylands) the other resorts have the attractions and MK doesn't. They aren't spread out in other parks. And if I compare say the Small World or Peter Pan attractions, that's 100% apples to apples.

I wouldn't compare DL to EPCOT because that's not a fair deal.

But there are five MKs (soon six) in the world and it is very fair to show how they stack up ... and, no, FLA doesn't exactly shine when compared to the others.
I thought there was only one MK.:shrug:


How?

I guess I misunderstood. My perception is that every park is unique, that was the point I was trying to make.

 

[Disneyfan1981]

There are some interesting points here on both sides. Speaking as just a Disney fan who was there for year one of DCA and had no clue about anything that came before it (except for a rumored Epcot water park experience...) I have to say that DCA gets a bad rap, worse than what it deserves but its definitely not a full day experience. I often find myself heading there on the day I arrive in LA to do the half day and then spend the rest of my time at DL. Grizzly River Run is fantastic, much better than Kali River Rapids at AK. I love California Screamin', I even didn't mind Superstar Limo when it was hot and you were trying to escape. Tower of Terror went in and every time I've traveled it still fairly empty, you can still walk onto Tower. You can still do the park in a half a day.

Something about the whole park didn't feel Disney even with the newer additions pushing that vibe. The new stuff has me excited and actually wanting to visit the park again but I would take WDW over DLR every single time. In fact, my wife and I have been saving our money and instead of taking the 6 hour drive to DLR, we just take the 6 hour flight to WDW. I don't think the DCA changes will spark us to spend more time at our home resort but its a step in the right direction.

 

[RSoxNo1]

I really enjoy DCA (but again I also enjoy HKDL and DSP too). I try and be fair in my criticisms as well.

To read some fanboi posts, you'd think DCA is total crap and it is far from it ... and it wasn't crap on Day 1 either. It just wasn't nearly what it should have been.

I'm inclined to agree. To me though, it felt like it felt more like a Universal park than a Disney park. Sure there was theming, sure there was a decent enough roster of attractions (I went in both 2007 and 2009), but it didn't feel like a Disney park, there was a level of disconnect there.

 

[sponono88]

There are some interesting points here on both sides. Speaking as just a Disney fan who was there for year one of DCA and had no clue about anything that came before it (except for a rumored Epcot water park experience...) I have to say that DCA gets a bad rap, worse than what it deserves but its definitely not a full day experience. I often find myself heading there on the day I arrive in LA to do the half day and then spend the rest of my time at DL. Grizzly River Run is fantastic, much better than Kali River Rapids at AK. I love California Screamin', I even didn't mind Superstar Limo when it was hot and you were trying to escape. Tower of Terror went in and every time I've traveled it still fairly empty, you can still walk onto Tower. You can still do the park in a half a day.

Something about the whole park didn't feel Disney even with the newer additions pushing that vibe. The new stuff has me excited and actually wanting to visit the park again but I would take WDW over DLR every single time. In fact, my wife and I have been saving our money and instead of taking the 6 hour drive to DLR, we just take the 6 hour flight to WDW. I don't think the DCA changes will spark us to spend more time at our home resort but its a step in the right direction.

another fair, balanced opinion. Though I don't agree about DCA being a 1/2 day park. at least not anymore - it might have been when it first happened. It's more of a 2/3 day park, or even a full day if you include live shows and walkthrough exhibits like the Animation Studio in addition to the rides :shrug: If you see shows like Aladdin and do every attraction, you can fill out the day with plenty of stuff to do. And with the new nighttime show going into PP.. will be a bigger reason to stay after dark.

--
and here I thought we had moved on from the DCA discussion.. ah well

I've read here, :lookaroun, that it will use perspective to its advantage. So, Cindy's Castle I'm guessing. Still looks nice though, and I hope it's a bit bigger than the Storyland Canal replicas.

Totally off topic but something has been seen on Orlando's horizon...

Beast's castle... why couldn't you be this grand?

anyone want to comment on the Beast's castle? Fantasy Forest? Anyone?

 

[EPCOT Explorer]

then you clearly don't know how OLC operates their parks.

you'd be surprised to know DL is only 85 acres big... yet it's considered the best theme park in the world :lol: the size of a park does not indicate how good it is. It's also worth nothing that TDS has a rather large body of water that takes up a big chunk of space.

And the thing is, they make it all work so well. They have the trifecta over there....Good WDI thought process while building BOTH parks, good managment, and good guests.:ROFLOL:

I'm envious.

Totally off topic but something has been seen on Orlando's horizon...

Beast's castle... why couldn't you be this grand?

Do you know that it won't be? It might turn(prolly will, IMHO) to be very nice, even though it is a secondary castle.

 

[Disneyfanatic!!]

Do you know that it won't be? It might turn(prolly will, IMHO) to be very nice, even though it is a secondary castle.

But the concept art makes it seem as if the restaurant will be located in the mountain part that the castle sits on.:shrug: