tissandtully
Well-Known Member
I'm aware and just gonna agree to disagree. Guardians is the most fun coaster I've been on in a long time.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Rumors. Musings. Casual.
- Thread starter pheneix
- Start date
Guardians is the best coaster in WDW and is very fun, but it pales in comparison to other parks offerings. Veliciocoaster is in my personal top ten (and I’ve ridden over 300 coasters) it’s elite. The racing coaster at EU looks very promising. Also Hagrids>Guardians. EU is also going to have a spinning launched coaster in Dark Universe.
It's not a spinning coaster.
Jrb1979
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying it's not fun. What I'm saying is it's not innovative for WDI.
Minnesota disney fan
Well-Known Member
Agreed. I'm probably in the minority around here, but I never did like the Simpson's and avoided that land while at Universal.....
Dranth
Well-Known Member
This.
Guardians if just plain fun and we leave it with a huge smile every time. Hagrid's would be a close second for the central Florida area for me but to be fair, I haven't done VelociCoaster yet.
Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
I’d say Everest might be the best coaster in WDW personally. Probably the most “intense” of their offerings and has some pretty innovative features, particularly from the time it was built.
Uni also is more willing to create intense roller coasters that will appeal to a smaller audience. Not that that’s bad, but any comparison of coasters at each should bear that in mind
Guardians is easily the second or best attraction they have built in Florida in the 21st century. That doesn’t excuse the facts that
- took too long to open even accounting for a global health crisis
- reportedly cost way too much money, especially for how much detail work on the show building was not done
- not the most critically successful attraction to open within the same 365 day window as its closest competition
- to build a credible list of a top 5 attractions in walt disney world, there is no way I am completing it with any attraction that opened between 1999-2005 or 2006-2016.
I’m not even getting into subjective creative complaints over it using a lot of screens or it being in the wrong land. Those 4 points display the kind of hole they have put their business in and have been more than happy to leave it there.
Sectorkeeper71
Well-Known Member
Guardians and hagrids are probably even for me personally. They each do a really good job at what they’re going for. My main knock for guardians is the ugly show building honestly. It doesn’t impact the ride experience, but having a big in themed box visible from around the park isn’t great
neo999955
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Hagrids is probably my favorite coaster in Florida (that I've ridden) followed by Everest, Guardians, VelociCoaster and Space. But this is equally between nostalgia, theming and fun.
I've mentioned The Simpsons several times over the past year and I'll remain firm that I think it's a really smart move. A lot of IPs, including many at Disney, never achieve the popularity/reverence that the Simpsons has achieved. There's no doubt it's been in decline over the past 2 decades, but streaming has reactivated old content the way that Disney re-releases used to do and it remains a treasure to many.
I think a well done Simpsons Land will be a draw for a lot of people and at the very least will sell merch and be attended for years to come. Some of the work Universal delivered was good, but I think we're kidding ourselves if we think that can't be outdone. The ride was a retheme, the food is bad and it all feels a bit plastic-y. There's a lot of areas that would turn an "that's cool" land in Universal into a must-visit land elsewhere. A really strong Simpsons ride could be a massive draw on its own. And, as mentioned, really well-done versions of some of the food/places from the Simpsons would also be a massive draw.
I do see why people don't think it dits at Disney at all, and that's pretty fair, but I think it's a perfectly fine fit in HS and tbh IP fit is a long-lost war.
I've mentioned The Simpsons several times over the past year and I'll remain firm that I think it's a really smart move. A lot of IPs, including many at Disney, never achieve the popularity/reverence that the Simpsons has achieved. There's no doubt it's been in decline over the past 2 decades, but streaming has reactivated old content the way that Disney re-releases used to do and it remains a treasure to many.
I think a well done Simpsons Land will be a draw for a lot of people and at the very least will sell merch and be attended for years to come. Some of the work Universal delivered was good, but I think we're kidding ourselves if we think that can't be outdone. The ride was a retheme, the food is bad and it all feels a bit plastic-y. There's a lot of areas that would turn an "that's cool" land in Universal into a must-visit land elsewhere. A really strong Simpsons ride could be a massive draw on its own. And, as mentioned, really well-done versions of some of the food/places from the Simpsons would also be a massive draw.
I do see why people don't think it dits at Disney at all, and that's pretty fair, but I think it's a perfectly fine fit in HS and tbh IP fit is a long-lost war.
Virtual Toad
Well-Known Member
For clarity, it's not that I look down on Universal. Our family's had APs there the last two years and we've enjoyed ourselves. Primarily for the ease of transportation, hotel amenities, value for price paid and the refreshing feeling of spontaneity. Our boys loved Hagrids and are looking forward to EU. We also have our staple of favorite attractions which we enjoy.
I actually applaud Universal for more-or-less staying true to its identity. But we've never had a transformative experience there on the level Disney used to deliver on a regular basis.
And that's where my concern with the Disney brand lies. Instead of leaning into their strengths, they've cowered, copied and capitulated to their closet competitor.
Disney guests used to expect more and Disney used to deliver. But there seems to be almost an open resentment among some in Disney management that they've had to uphold these standards while the parks up the street can get away with less. The problem now is Universal is attempting to go big with EU while Disney is cutting corners, raising prices and going out of their way to make the guest experience as miserable as possible. They've spent the last couple of decades watering down their own brand and trying to reshape and temper the expectations of their customer base. Delivering less-than-stellar attractions that take forever to build and cramming IP into every facet of the experience. "A Whole New World" is a good song but do I really need to hear it in Muzak form at Disney Springs?
And that's one of the problems with Disney and IP. "More Disney" can quickly turn into "too much Disney." Paying thousands of dollars to have the same over-saturated media properties shoved down our throats tends to sound a lot less appealing, especially when the experience used to mean a whole lot more.
So long story short, I guess I give Universal a pass because they've been authentic to their brand. But Disney seems intent on turning themselves into Universal 2.0 and that's not who they were or who they should be. Bottom line, Disney is not doing the hard work of offering brand consistency or a quality product. Where it all goes from here is anyone's guess.
Last edited:
JD80
Well-Known Member
I completely disagree with everything in this post.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
While I'm personally not convinced it would be a big draw, I'm also not sure how you go about building a good Simpsons attraction.
What is there to really do besides a tour of Springfield? I'm kind of drawing a blank on anything else that would capture the IP. The ride at Universal isn't a tour of Springfield, but it's not very popular and also not very good.
JD80
Well-Known Member
Can make a dark ride/thrill experience with any of the Halloween episodes or Alien abduction themes.
CoasterSnoop
Well-Known Member
Wikipedia and RCDB both disagree. Sure, it's a controlled spin on a profile which is unlike most (but not all) spinners, but the coaster trains still spin.
If we're going to get into these kinds of semantics, we'll have to discuss TOT's status as a drop tower as well. It doesn't drop with gravity like most drop towers, and it drops on a predetermined profile as well. I believe TOT is a drop tower, the prevailing view is that it's a drop tower.
Maybe you don't think so, and that's fine, truthfully this stuff is never 100% agreed upon by everybody.
What is a roller coaster? It can't just be anything with track whose quick maneuvers produce forces on the rider's body, because then Mr. Toad would be a roller coaster. So an element of gravity being the main propeller has to be introduced.
Then, are launch coasters truly roller coasters? Gravity does affect the trains through most of the course, but during the launches it's magnets propelling the trains, so an argument could be made that they're not "true."
What about powered coasters? Maybe not, gravity isn't propelling the trains along, electricity is. What about Blazing Fury at Dollywood? That's a powered coaster, except during the major drops which are entirely dependent on gravity.
It gets muddy when we start adding qualifiers to these things, and it tends to come down to what individuals think. So, the majority opinion is typically what wins the day. If the majority of people see Cosmic Rewind and say, "that's a coaster and it spins therefore it is a spinning coaster," then a spinning coaster it shall be known.
Therefore, the point that Cosmic Rewind's "innovative ride vehicles" as WDI put it are not functionally innovative because at the end of the day, it's a spinning coaster, isn't moot. At least TOT does offer a different ride experience than most drop towers even if you take the theming away.
Versus Hagrid? Take the theming away. How many coasters have 7 launches, a spike, a backwards section, a drop track, and still manage to be family-friendly? That's functionally innovative, the rider can clearly see through the unfolding experience that this is a unique experience without having to do research. Disney should still be able to do better and kill Uni in theming quality.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
I loved Hagrid's as well, only been on it once though cause we currently don't have UO passes, but that will probably change soon.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
It would be good if the projection was better. It's always been really dim and depends on which vehicle you get.
A Simpsons trackless dark ride would be fun.
mickEblu
Well-Known Member
m
The one at USH always has an hour long wait because the park has 6 rides.
The one at USH always has an hour long wait because the park has 6 rides.
UNCgolf
Well-Known Member
That's a fair point.
I've always considered the Halloween episodes as their own separate thing that really aren't connected to the rest of the franchise, but they're definitely famous (and there are people who really only care about the Halloween episodes). While I'm not sure that would really be representative of the Simpsons IP in general (i.e. all the non-Halloween episodes), it would probably work.
Sir_Cliff
Well-Known Member
The Universal ride isn't great, but I think the property is a bit of a blank canvas. Honestly, MMRR is kind of a model of the Universal Simpsons ride turned into a decent attraction if you want to go on the journey through Springfield route.
You could lean into the Treehouse of Horrors halloween episodes if you wanted, make a kind of Haunted Mansion parody in Mr Burn's manor, or just write it as a Simpsons episode where something like an alien invasion occurs. I think there are a lot of possibilities that would suit different ride systems and scales.