News Remy's Ratatouille Adventure coming to Epcot

ToTBellHop

ToTBellHop

Well-Known Member
Mickeyboof said:
The vehicles do move. Ever so slightly. It’s like a slight bump.

The vehicles need more degree of motion to actually simulate anything happening in the projections.

Terminator, Spider-Man and Fast and the Furious (not a good ride at all, but it does move!) rides all move in a dramatic manor that matches the projections.

The rat ride does not- as much. For example, when you “fall,” the vehicle slightly tips forward, but it feels like an accident and you can barley feel the vehicle settle back down for the “landing.”

The movement and falling and scurrying in the videos are big and bold- fast turns and darting around the place. The vehicle barley moves to match this.

Soooo... yes! More movement and less visible seams between the screen and, well, nothingness would be absolutely beneficial.
Click to expand...
But they wanted to avoid the 40” height requirement.
 
Kman101

Kman101

Well-Known Member
dreday3 said:
I haven't been on Hagrid's yet, so just from watching the video - I think Hagrid's wins on coaster length, twists/turns, speed, etc.,...but animatronics? In my opinion, no way does it beat Mine Train's animatronics. I reserve the right to change my mind once seeing it in person, but at this point those animatronics on Hagrid's are actually kind of a let down from what I was expecting.

Again, video probably isn't helping my opinion.
Click to expand...

Well, there's a few ways to look at it. And I agree they don't seem as impressive as I would have expected. Yes the mine train ones seem better. But that's not really my point. You're focusing on the animatronics but I'm talking about the whole package as presented. It makes Mine Train and Slinky, while serving a slightly different theme park demographic, pale in comparison and I think tells folks ... they could have done a LOT better. And we know they could have. The main complaint about both is that they're too short. They had a lot of theming cut from around the track of Slinky. Speed and maybe not getting a good view of things around the track isn't a good reason to cut them. Hagrids goes like 50 mph ... But this is the Rat thread so I guess ... moving on ... and I'm drifting and not even sure what the point was ... I need coffee ... but I do get what you're saying. They are better. I wasn't really even trying to debate which were better, lol, just saying the 'overall package' is impressive.

Anyway ... would be nice if they upgraded our Rat ride but again, they do the bare minimum ... I'm sure it'll still be a fun time and Epcot needs anything it can get at this point.
 
larryz

larryz

I'm Just A Tourist!
Premium Member
Mickeyboof said:
The worst aspect, beside the ride vehicles having little to no simulator ability is the awful seam between screen and black shiny floor.

The YouTube videos all cut out this seam, but with human eyes you see it. The whole time. You physically can’t not see it.

The screen doesn’t wrap around, and the glasses do not act as a frame. It’s just a real shame.

I am so so hopeful that Disney will improves on the ride, blurring this seam as well as providing ride vehicles that actually have motion to them when stuck flat in front of the many many many projector screens.

To sum it up, I didn’t understand why we sat in front of a screen, then moved through brief moments of still, plastic scenery only to be plopped in front of another screen (which projected boring chasing sequences) Why did we move. Why wasn’t this just a big simulator. Why are we moving through the space?
Click to expand...
You don't seem to understand that after the decades of relative non-development at Epcot, people would line up to be run over by that runaway Roman chariot that escaped from Spaceship Earth.
 
Bender123

Bender123

Well-Known Member
Mickeyboof said:
The vehicles do move. Ever so slightly. It’s like a slight bump.

The vehicles need more degree of motion to actually simulate anything happening in the projections.

Terminator, Spider-Man and Fast and the Furious (not a good ride at all, but it does move!) rides all move in a dramatic manor that matches the projections.

The rat ride does not- as much. For example, when you “fall,” the vehicle slightly tips forward, but it feels like an accident and you can barley feel the vehicle settle back down for the “landing.”

The movement and falling and scurrying in the videos are big and bold- fast turns and darting around the place. The vehicle barley moves to match this.

Soooo... yes! More movement and less visible seams between the screen and, well, nothingness would be absolutely beneficial.
Click to expand...

I get the feeling that you are trying to put far too much on a ride that was never designed to be super headliner...Its a ride that is closer in scale to a Snow White Scary Adventure or Little Mermaid than one that is even trying to be at the scale of a Spiderman/FoP/Etc...

Yeah, we could armchair design improvements all day, but that not what it is trying to be. Its trying to be a kid friendly ride in a part of the park that has almost nothing to offer a child.
 
Bender123

Bender123

Well-Known Member
lazyboy97o said:
It’s cost and size would disagree.
Click to expand...

Its installation in Paris and many rides disagree on your point. Its just not that type of ride, no matter how much we want it to be. Its very tech heavy, making it expensive, but its not a a high speed thrill ride, nor is it made to be height restricted.

Its just a futuristic upgrade of the old school dark rides. Cost/size is irrelevant here, what is relevant is scale and scope, which is limited and medium, placing it solidly into a c/d range.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Bender123 said:
Its installation in Paris and many rides disagree on your point. Its just not that type of ride, no matter how much we want it to be. Its very tech heavy, making it expensive, but its not a a high speed thrill ride, nor is it made to be height restricted.

Its just a futuristic upgrade of the old school dark rides. Cost/size is irrelevant here, what is relevant is scale and scope, which is limited and medium, placing it solidly into a c/d range.
Click to expand...
Height restrictions and speed are not directly related to scale and scope, nor are they what make a marquee attraction. Cost and size are much, much more related. This was supposed to be a big marquee attraction. What it delivers doesn’t change what was intended.
 
Castle Cake Apologist

Castle Cake Apologist

Well-Known Member
Bender123 said:
Its installation in Paris and many rides disagree on your point. Its just not that type of ride, no matter how much we want it to be. Its very tech heavy, making it expensive, but its not a a high speed thrill ride, nor is it made to be height restricted.

Its just a futuristic upgrade of the old school dark rides. Cost/size is irrelevant here, what is relevant is scale and scope, which is limited and medium, placing it solidly into a c/d range.
Click to expand...

I'm fairly certain this was meant to be a headliner when it was built. They even constructed an entire mini "land" around it.

Disney will definitely be marketing this as a major new addition to Epcot.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
DisneyExpert said:
I'm fairly certain this was meant to be a headliner when it was built. They even constructed an entire mini "land" around it.

Disney will definitely be marketing this as a major new addition to Epcot.
Click to expand...
It also had to be approved by the banks that held Euro Disney SCA’s debt. What banker is going to approve a C-Ticket that costs too much? This was supposed to be the park’s Space Mountain.
 
Bender123

Bender123

Well-Known Member
DisneyExpert said:
I'm fairly certain this was meant to be a headliner when it was built. They even constructed an entire mini "land" around it.

Disney will definitely be marketing this as a major new addition to Epcot.
Click to expand...

Its not like we don't have five years of knowledge of the ride...We know exactly what it is. On the other side of marketing, yeah...its a big addition, just because its the first real addition to WS since Maelstrom. We have had two rethemes, but this is the first actual new thing to do.
 
HauntedPirate

HauntedPirate

Park nostalgist
Premium Member
If anyone was wondering what @marni1971 was talking about as far as the “old FP system” was...

382278


:D
 
Horizons '83

Horizons '83

Well-Known Member
In the Parks
No
Oh wow, so Paris has 30 minute windows? I kinda like that idea. I can't quite remember that well but I feel like WDW always had 1 hour windows, even with the legacy system.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom