Post your Toy Story Mania preview ride reports here

[EpcotServo]

Honestly, it's not that TSM is horrible, it's just that aside from a high-technology factor and a decent queue, it lacks the emersion / storytelling / theming / environment / magic of classic Disney attractions like Peter Pan, It's A Small World, Jungle Cruise, etc. Even newer rides like The Seas with Nemo and Friends are head and shoulders above TSM in this regard. It didn't have to be like that.

That's a matter of opinon. I'd say it's WAYYYYYY better than Seas with Nemo and Friends (And Seabase NEMO) and say it's MUCH more immersive than those three. (Maybe not Jungle Cruise, it depends if you're talking about ours or Disneyland's.)

Again, it depends on your point of view.
:wave:

 

[InsideOtherPark]

You really have to play the ride to fully enjoy it.

I 100% agree that on ride videos of this will do nothing.

 

[DisneyAnole]

I have tried it (twice yesterday) -- and truthfully, so has anybody who has played PotC at DQ. And your description is spot on: A ride-thru virtual shooting gallery.

That is NOT D-ticket level. Remember that when Disneyland opened, D-ticket was as high as at went. Throughout the years, things like Peter Pan's Flight, Mr. Toad, Storybookland Canal Boats, the Rainbow Ridge Mine Train, the Mark Twain, and the Jungle Cruise were all classified D-ticket. The Shooting Galleries are somewhere around B-ticket level. But this is a heckuva lot of money and space to chew up for a B-ticket.

Honestly, it's not that TSM is horrible, it's just that aside from a high-technology factor and a decent queue, it lacks the emersion / storytelling / theming / environment / magic of classic Disney attractions like Peter Pan, It's A Small World, Jungle Cruise, etc. Even newer rides like The Seas with Nemo and Friends are head and shoulders above TSM in this regard. It didn't have to be like that.

Whatever you do, don't let WDI hear you. They have low self-esteem. Creative geniuses with an Eeyore complex.

 

[tirian]

I have tried it (twice yesterday)

Oh. Okay. :wave:

 

[hazelrah]

That's a matter of opinon. I'd say it's WAYYYYYY better than Seas with Nemo and Friends (And Seabase NEMO) and say it's MUCH more immersive than those three. (Maybe not Jungle Cruise, it depends if you're talking about ours or Disneyland's.)

Again, it depends on your point of view.
:wave:

I don't mean to keep harping on this (oh, heck, I keep replying, so maybe I do)... I agree with you that whether you find it FUN or not is a matter of opinion. But on the objective level of immersion, opinion doesn't factor in. TSM is literally a dark warehouse with giant tv screens. There are some barebones, extremely minimal transition elements. I'll grant that the queue and loading area are nicely done (well, the queue moreso than the loading area, which essentially a giant painting with some nice Tinkertoy elements).

But an immersive atmosphere within the ride itself? Surely you wouldn't compare it to Pan's nighttime flight over London, to Jungle Cruise's sprawling vegetation, even Nemo's brightly painted coral gardens that frame the various screens.

The only thing opinion counts for is whether you care or not about level of immersion. If it is not a big deal to you, than you might love TSM. If it is a big deal to you (like it is to me), you may find TSM disappointing.

 

[EpcotServo]

I don't mean to keep harping on this (oh, heck, I keep replying, so maybe I do)... I agree with you that whether you find it FUN or not is a matter of opinion. But on the objective level of immersion, opinion doesn't factor in. TSM is literally a dark warehouse with giant tv screens. There are some barebones, extremely minimal transition elements. I'll grant that the queue and loading area are nicely done (well, the queue moreso than the loading area, which essentially a giant painting with some nice Tinkertoy elements).

But an immersive atmosphere within the ride itself? Surely you wouldn't compare it to Pan's nighttime flight over London, to Jungle Cruise's sprawling vegetation, even Nemo's brightly painted coral gardens that frame the various screens.

The only thing opinion counts for is whether you care or not about level of immersion. If it is not a big deal to you, than you might love TSM. If it is a big deal to you (like it is to me), you may find TSM disappointing.

1: Peter Pan is literally a warehouse with buckets hanging from the celing below a cheap model of London.

2: Jungle Cruise is literally a boat in a river surronded by tress and fake plastic animals.

3: Nemo is literally a bunch of fake rocks and screens stuck on one side of a warehouse (Don't look up or behind you!)

You see? When you use the term LITERALLY for Disney attractions, they are ALL themed objects in warehouses. In the world of Imagineering the term literally does not aply. Forbidden Mountain isn't a huge mountain range. It's literally just a big buiding. Pirates isn't a seaside village being ransacked by Pirates. It's literally a big warehouse with boats and AA people. You'll notice Spash Mountain is a literally a warehouse with rocks on the front. That not-haunted room is in a warehouse and it isn't streching. The celing is literally just moving up.

Yes, Toy Story Mania is literally just a warehouse with screens and painted flats. But at Disney, literally everything can be summed up by that. But you don't look at what's literally there do you? You have to use your IMAGINATION. So let me correct all this for the record.

Peter Pan is a magical flight above London in a Pirate ship.

Jungle Cruise is a small boat traveling the dangerous waterways of the world.

You're under the sea with Nemo & Friends.

Forbidden Mountain is a mountain peak in the Himalayas.

It is a small seaside town being ransacked by Pirates.

Splash Mountain is a real magical mountain.

That haunted room IS actually streching...or is it just your imagination, hmmm?

And those Midway game toys are all 1 feet, 7 inches tall and being manned by all of Andy's toys.

And now a MAJOR correction. Look it up, OPINION is NOT selective. I could believe that an Action Figure has great articulation. That would be MY opinion. You could believe that it doesn't. That would be YOUR opinion.

OPINION WORKS FOR EVERYTHING.

You believe that it's not immerisive (Which is something not physical and cannot be proved or disproved. It's a point of view) That's your opinon and you're entitled too it.

I believe it is. That's my opinon, and cannot be dissmissed or disscredited, as it's my opinon. You can't say. "Oops, sorry this is not a valid matter or opinion."

It's like if say, someone thought that there was a god, and his name was Bob, and he's a ghost that wanders around giving people superhero powers.

That can't be proved or disproved, just as "Level of detail and Immersion" and all those fancy words we use to talk about rides, can't be proved.

Well let's say this person met another person who flat out doesn't believe that there's a god. That person can't say. "Well, no because Opinon doesn't factor into this issue."

As CRAZY as the issue is, you can't do that. It's against the rules of discussion. The only way you can use it, is if it's a solid issue, that can be pointed out and proved. You can't point to how immersive it is. It's one way for you, and one way for me. That's the beauty of OPINON.

 

[wdwmagic]

I think one of the issues with how TSM is being judged by some, is that they arent really considering the gameplay and the content shown on the screens. TSM is all about the GAMES. TSM isnt an attraction full of rich detailed physical sets, but it is an attraction that brings the Pixar characters to life in a 3D onscreen environment, and gives one heck of an addictive game.

TSM is a good example to me of how screen technology can be used well. I personally dont like the SSE descent screens at all. My main reason for this is that the content show on the screen is poor in my opinion, and I would much rather see physical sets. With TSM however, the onscreen action is implemented to a very high level, is relevent, and combined with the gameplay, they have a real winner for me.

 

[tirian]

I think one of the issues with how TSM is being judged by some, is that they arent really considering the gameplay and the content shown on the screens. TSM is all about the GAMES. TSM isnt an attraction full of rich detailed physical sets, but it is an attraction that brings the Pixar characters to life in a 3D onscreen environment, and gives one heck of an addictive game.

TSM is a good example to me of how screen technology can be used well. I personally dont like the SSE descent screens at all. My main reason for this is that the content show on the screen is poor in my opinion, and I would much rather see physical sets. With TSM however, the onscreen action is implemented to a very high level, is relevent, and combined with the gameplay, they have a real winner for me.

Great synopsis, Steve...

...and I'm not trying to kiss up to the site's owner.

 

[EpcotServo]

I
TSM is a good example to me of how screen technology can be used well. I personally dont like the SSE descent screens at all. My main reason for this is that the content show on the screen is poor in my opinion, and I would much rather see physical sets. With TSM however, the onscreen action is implemented to a very high level, is relevent, and combined with the gameplay, they have a real winner for me.

:sohappy:

I think one thing is being overlooked too: It's a DARK RIDE. Aside from the amazing games: There's some great classic blacklit dark ride sets. And it's about time! MGM has always needed a good classic family Dark Ride to round out the thrill rides and the shows.

 

[AndyMagic]

I think those that have a problem with this attraction take issue with the fact that it is essentially an interactive 3D-Show rather than a RIDE. The "ride" part is basically just a crowd control measure to get people to the different "games." The experience would be essentially the same if it was just a giant indoor arcade and people just walked up to the 3d-screens. I don't think anyone is saying the ride isn't, "fun," just that it isn't what people normally expect when they hear the word, "ride." Even Buzz Lightyear has show-scenes and transitional scenes to make it an experience for those that don't like video games. I can't imagine Toy Story Mania being all that fun if you don't care for games and just want a nice ride. I'd imagine some are going to be bored to sobs. It's all about expecations and I think Disney has marketed the "amazing technology" in this a bit too much. Remember when this was announced people thought it was Disney's answer to "Spider-Man." What we got was something more like Buzz with screens.

 

[EpcotServo]

I think those that have a problem with this attraction take issue with the fact that it is essentially an interactive 3D-Show rather than a RIDE. The "ride" part is basically just a crowd control measure to get people to the different "games." The experience would be essentially the same if it was just a giant indoor arcade and people just walked up to the 3d-screens. I don't think anyone is saying the ride isn't, "fun," just that it isn't what people normally expect when they hear the word, "ride." Even Buzz Lightyear has show-scenes and transitional scenes to make it an experience for those that don't like video games. I can't imagine Toy Story Mania being all that fun if you don't care for games and just want a nice ride. I'd imagine some are going to be bored to sobs. It's all about expecations and I think Disney has marketed the "amazing technology" in this a bit too much. Remember when this was announced people thought it was Disney's answer to "Spider-Man." What we got was something more like Buzz with screens.

On the contary, I've been surprised to see such postive reactions from non-gamers I've spoke to who've been on. The other day my dad (not in any way a gamer) had a blast, and actually gave me a run for my money score-wise.
:lol:

All I know is that at all five times I've seen nothing but smiling faces coming out.

 

[AndyMagic]

On the contary, I've been surprised to see such postive reactions from non-gamers I've spoke to who've been on. The other day my dad (not in any way a gamer) had a blast, and actually gave me a run for my money score-wise.
:lol:

All I know is that at all five times I've seen nothing but smiling faces coming out.

Again, judging the ultimate quality of the attraction simply by "smiling faces" is a bit short-sighted. Everyone is smiling and laughing coming off of the Mad Tea Party but no one would say that it was a high quality, immersive attraction. No one doubts it is ultimately fun. Ferris Wheels are fun and so are carnival rides.

 

[EpcotServo]

Again, judging the ultimate quality of the attraction simply by "smiling faces" is a bit short-sighted. Everyone is smiling and laughing coming off of the Mad Tea Party but no one would say that it was a high quality, immersive attraction. No one doubts it is ultimately fun. Ferris Wheels are fun and so are carnival rides.

I was not judging the immersion and such off of that. By all means, that's right. But the fact certainly doesn't hurt the case for it.
:wave:

 

[hazelrah]

As CRAZY as the issue is, you can't do that. It's against the rules of discussion. The only way you can use it, is if it's a solid issue, that can be pointed out and proved. You can't point to how immersive it is. It's one way for you, and one way for me. That's the beauty of OPINON.

Listen, you're a smart person, you're a fan of Disney, you like TSM, I can totally respect that. But you're playing semantic games and trying to prove a point with metaphysical rules about truth ... ?

You may be technically correct that my statement about immersion cannot be empirically verified. Okay, fine. It cannot be empirically proven that the Mona Lisa is better artwork than something a kindergardner can draw. Everyone may have an opinion.

But the beauty of common sense is, not everybody's opinion is correct.

If you want to discount what I'm saying, don't break down Peter Pan into its most basic description (buckets from a ceiling in a warehouse). Give me an example of immersion that TSM provides! Once you start pointing out to me how TSM really has something BESIDES tv screens in a warehouse, then we can have a debate about the quality. I will spot you an example: the games themselves have nice environments and are immersive while you play them. They have characters and settings that are charming, imaginative, and well done.

Now, my argument against that is, the games do not coherently go together or in the larger context of the ride itself, other than that they all have Toy Story characters in them and the same basic game mechanics. You play the first one, you've played them all. Sort of like riding over Neverland 5 times in a row and then getting off the ride. The games do not build to a climax, unless you count that bonus target that allows you to pad your stats.

There is nothing that remotely suggests a story, a premise, or experience. All this PR talk about "Toys running a carnival under Andy's bed" is silly, and defies all logic. It's just marketing-speak. And do you know WHY? Because Disney fans EXPECT there to be a story, a theme, an experience. So the PR department has to work extra hard to make us think there's something there. They did the same thing with Dinorama, trying to make it sound like there's an elaborate backstory around a standard carny land. But it's not themed to a carny land. It literally IS a carny land.

Similarly, TSM is not themed to carnival games. It literally IS carnival games. Fun ones? Maybe, sure, whatever. But it's not an attraction in the traditional Disney mold, because it lacks that story / premise / immersive environment. It's a ride-through virtual shooting gallery.

 

[wdwmagic]

On the contary, I've been surprised to see such postive reactions from non-gamers I've spoke to who've been on. The other day my dad (not in any way a gamer) had a blast, and actually gave me a run for my money score-wise.
:lol:

All I know is that at all five times I've seen nothing but smiling faces coming out.

I think what makes it so accesible to even non-game players is the control interface. It isnt like your traditional at home video game that most people think of.

In the same way that Nintendo's Wii interface has made it's games more accessible to non-gamers, I think the same is true of TSM.

 

[wdwmagic]

Similarly, TSM is not themed to carnival games. It literally IS carnival games. Fun ones? Maybe, sure, whatever. But it's not an attraction in the traditional Disney mold, because it lacks that story / premise / immersive environment. It's a ride-through virtual shooting gallery.

Yes they are both carnival type games. The big difference between TSM and Dinorama is that the games you play in TSM are cutting edge, the Dinorama games clearly are not. I cant imagine many guests that will have played a ride through video game on a moving vehicle, on huge high definition screens, big audio, AND IN 3D - with physical effects.

Also throw into the mix a top notch Audio Animatronic, and all of the placemaking of Pixar Studios, and you have a seriously good D-Ticket. I am going ot be astonished if this attraction isnt MASSIVELY popular with guests. I can see people spending a vast part of their day in Pixar Studios.

 

[EpcotServo]

Listen, you're a smart person, you're a fan of Disney, you like TSM, I can totally respect that. But you're playing semantic games and trying to prove a point with metaphysical rules about truth ... ?

Isn't the truth always metaphysical? All I know is that the truth is out there...

Sorry, X-Files diverson, continue...

You may be technically correct that my statement about immersion cannot be empirically verified. Okay, fine. It cannot be empirically proven that the Mona Lisa is better artwork than something a kindergardner can draw. Everyone may have an opinion.

But the beauty of common sense is, not everybody's opinion is correct.

But who's to judge? You? Me? Someone else? God? Therin lies the problem with arguments of opinon; They have no finish. They'll go round and round til' the world ends because nobody's entitled to say who's is the right one.

If you want to discount what I'm saying, don't break down Peter Pan into its most basic description (buckets from a ceiling in a warehouse). Give me an example of immersion that TSM provides! Once you start pointing out to me how TSM really has something BESIDES tv screens in a warehouse, then we can have a debate about the quality. I will spot you an example: the games themselves have nice environments and are immersive while you play them. They have characters and settings that are charming, imaginative, and well done.

Now, my argument against that is, the games do not coherently go together or in the larger context of the ride itself, other than that they all have Toy Story characters in them and the same basic game mechanics. You play the first one, you've played them all. Sort of like riding over Neverland 5 times in a row and then getting off the ride. The games do not build to a climax, unless you count that bonus target that allows you to pad your stats.

Again, it depends on your point of view. For me, I think that each game gets more interesting (Both from a gameplay standpoint, and a visual standpoint) I think it's starts pretty simple...throwing eggs at slow-moving or stationary targets (Very simple) then moves on to the more sensory-based ballon pop (Now the game has changed, it's getting more interesting in both gameplay, and visual cues.) At the baseball game, they throw ALOT more targets at you. And then at the ring toss, they change the rules. Shooting wildly doesn't help as much anymore. And again, I consider the moving shooting gallery a grand finale game.

Now that's how I felt after the first ride. I can understand how you just saw it on different terms, understandable, just telling you how I saw it the first trip around.

And may I point out some details besides the games?

look for Mrs. Potato Head on the mural towards the end of the ride.

Look for Wheezy's Snack Stand.

Look for all the oversized coloring pages Andy drew (My favorite is the one at the very end of the ride of woody. If you look close you can see it was placed there by the toys because it says "So long partners, see you at the next roundup!")

There is nothing that remotely suggests a story, a premise, or experience. All this PR talk about "Toys running a carnival under Andy's bed" is silly, and defies all logic. It's just marketing-speak. And do you know WHY? Because Disney fans EXPECT there to be a story, a theme, an experience. So the PR department has to work extra hard to make us think there's something there. They did the same thing with Dinorama, trying to make it sound like there's an elaborate backstory around a standard carny land. But it's not themed to a carny land. It literally IS a carny land.

I'll give you that the first one may not be very filled out, but it does have a premise (Andy's Toys playing with the new Midway games) and it does offer (more-than-one) experiences (playing said Midway games)

And yet again, I say it's a matter of how you see it. I will agree that now (after years of poor upkeep and fading paint) Dinorama is pretty sad. But I get why it's there. I think it's an important part of the Dinoland story. Back when I was young we used to drive past this place in the middle of nowhere that looked alot like Dinorama. Colorfully painted Dinosaurs strung the interstate for miles building up to a small tacky Dinosaur garden that in hindsight looked very much like Dinorama. Where it was and what happened too it are beyond me, but when I think of Dinosaurs: It's one of the things I think of. Therefore, to me, Dinorama fits well as part of the larger Dinoland (And even larger Animal Kingdom's) story. Again, you (and most people) wouldn't think of that. They'd think about some other Dinosaur story from their childhood. But when I walk past Dinorama and see those tacky signs, my mind drifts off to the only visually interesting things on a long boring drive as a kid.

Anyways, I can't possibly fend off any more attractions though I would say that maybe you should pick another example: I always laugh on Peter Pan at how Neverland is surronded by black walls, and has volcanos made up of TinFoil.
:lol:

I'd say Midway Mania (Even with games not included) is more immerive than Peter Pan.

Similarly, TSM is not themed to carnival games. It literally IS carnival games. Fun ones? Maybe, sure, whatever. But it's not an attraction in the traditional Disney mold, because it lacks that story / premise / immersive environment. It's a ride-through virtual shooting gallery.

I would say that it may not be a traditional Disney attraction, but I would say it's a fine one. I'd say it's the best (And really, only) dark ride that Disney has made in recent years. I'd say it has a good premise and an immersive enviroment, and that I'm very proud of the work Walt Disney Imagineering did on it. And also, it's a MUCH needed addition to MGM Studios.

That's my story, and I'm sticking too it.
:wave:

(Now feel free to tear into DCA's, I have NO idea how Andy's room got under California Screamin'.)
:lol:

 

[hazelrah]

Also throw into the mix a top notch Audio Animatronic, and all of the placemaking of Pixar Studios, and you have a seriously good D-Ticket. I am going ot be astonished if this attraction isnt MASSIVELY popular with guests. I can see people spending a vast part of their day in Pixar Studios.

The AA figure is easily the best thing about the attraction, no doubt about that. And I'm in agreement with you that the attraction will be massively, ridiculously popular. I think one of the first things I said in my review is that I predict it will become the most popular ride in the Studios.

It's just that I don't see it as being a quality D-ticket. I see it as being a quality 3-D shooting gallery, but when I hear D-ticket, I think it should be something more than this.

I guess all we can do is give TSM a few years and see how it has held up. Will it still enchant guests 50 years later, like Peter Pan does? Or will it start to look like a ride-thru Innoventions exhibit?

I think a lot of the enthusiasm is due to the simple fact that it is brand new. It did not replace an old favorite (pay attention to this lesson, Pooh Bear), has some nice technology, and uses beloved characters. Add to it the fact that DHS is sorely short on family rides, and also, after the SSE nightmare, people are desperate for a hit.

We all want to LOVE everything Disney does. Once the new-ness starts to wear off, I'm confident people will begin to notice just how little substance TSM has.

 

[hazelrah]

But who's to judge? You? Me? Someone else?

Me, obviously.

And may I point out some details besides the games?
look for Mrs. Potato Head on the mural towards the end of the ride.
Look for Wheezy's Snack Stand.

See, you're making it sound cooler than it is. But you and I both know that those things are barely even there. Backgrounds painted on a wall, like an insignificant bookshelf in Mr. Toad's Wild Ride.

I'll give you that the first one may not be very filled out, but it does have a premise (Andy's Toys playing with the new Midway games)

You are drinking the kool-aid, my man! There is NOTHING in the ride to suggest that these are Andy's new super-hi-def 3-D miniature Midway games (as there obviously can't be; it's an inexplicable premise). That is pure Disney marketing because the Disney playbook says every ride must have a story, even if it's just a flimsy excuse on which to hang cool technology.

But I get why it's there. I think it's an important part of the Dinoland story.

You know why Dinorama is there? It has nothing to do with a background story, and everything to do with adding cheap capacity for a bare-bones park (no pun intended).

though I would say that maybe you should pick another example: I always laugh on Peter Pan at how Neverland is surronded by black walls, and has volcanos made up of TinFoil.

If you'd just apply the same intensity of criticism towards TSM that you just leveled at Pan, you'd see where I'm coming from. In TSM, not only is Andy's bed surrounded by black walls, but there's no Neverland to distract me from it! And please don't say that we're under the bed. The bed was way the heck over on the other side of the loading area.

(Now feel free to tear into DCA's, I have NO idea how Andy's room got under California Screamin'.)

You're killing me here! You do get that the ONLY reason we (DHS) even have the premise that we do is because it fits in DCA? THAT's where the Midway Game thing comes from. We got the clone, and we got it for CHEAP. The most expensive part of TSM is the technology, and that's already been developed. It's essentially just copying software to install it Florida. But should we try to make it fit into the context of a movie studio theme park? No, let's keep the carny theme. It's cheaper. The Disney fans will accept it...

 

[DisneyAnole]

The AA figure is easily the best thing about the attraction, no doubt about that. And I'm in agreement with you that the attraction will be massively, ridiculously popular. I think one of the first things I said in my review is that I predict it will become the most popular ride in the Studios.

You mean the AA figure that won't be seen by guests in the FP line? That's a good start. The "best thing about the attraction" isn't even visible for a large percentage of guests. Brilliant, simply brilliant.