Soarin Over the World, percentage of CGI?

[MsAnniee]

I'm sorry, but why the hell is everyone so concerned about CGI's. There were many instances of CGI or manufactured scenes in the original as well. Things like the jets in flying in front of us, or the aforementioned golf ball. Those in the new show were there to actually separate the scenes probably because there were so many complaints about the lack of transition in the original. They are very well done in the new one like the polar bears looking up. The filming would have been done by a helicopter flying over. Don't you think that if that were the case an actual bear would have looked up to see where the noise was coming from and then immediately dive into the water for protection? If that is fake, then kudo's to the folks that did such a great job of duplicating how a bear would react.

All that said, try using you imagination instead of nit picking your way through every scene. I've never been to the Taj Mahal , but every picture I have ever seen of it looks like it did in the movie. Why are we so convinced it is a CGI and, more importantly why is it important. The whole show is us making believe we are in a hang glider for heavens sake. These things are so much more enjoyable if we stop being so "adult" and instead willingly suspend disbelief for a few moments and just enjoy what we are seeing, real or fabricated. It makes going on the ride a whole lot more fun.

Well said. Sometimes I just want to enjoy something at WDW just for the sake of enjoyment. I would rather spend my time there enjoying that being negative.

 

[Epcot_Imagineer]

Does anyone know the guest satisfaction levels for over the world? I'm looking at our insiders... additionally, @lentesta what do your readers say?

 

[epcotisbest]

The new version is straight up garbage. Smells, movement. The whole thing.

While you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I think Soarin' is one of the best attractions in all of WDW. I liked the old one, I like the new one.

 

[lentesta]

Does anyone know the guest satisfaction levels for over the world? I'm looking at our insiders... additionally, @lentesta what do your readers say?

Soarin' Unofficial Guide/TouringPlans Reader Reviews (Past 12 months)

• Pre-school children: 4.0 stars (out of 5.0) from 1,086 votes
• Grade-school children: 4.5 stars on 2,792 votes
• Teens: 4.5 stars on 1,779 votes
• Young adults: 4.5 stars on 1,536 votes
• Over 30: 4.5 stars on 6,609 votes
• Seniors: 5.0 stars on 1,986 votes

I'd be very surprised if Disney's internal numbers were significantly different from ours, given that sample size.

 

[LittleBuford]

Soarin' Unofficial Guide/TouringPlans Reader Reviews (Past 12 months)

• Pre-school children: 4.0 stars (out of 5.0) from 1,086 votes
• Grade-school children: 4.5 stars on 2,792 votes
• Teens: 4.5 stars on 1,779 votes
• Young adults: 4.5 stars on 1,536 votes
• Over 30: 4.5 stars on 6,609 votes
• Seniors: 5.0 stars on 1,986 votes

I'd be very surprised if Disney's internal numbers were significantly different from ours, given that sample size.

Very interesting! How do these figures compare to those collected for the old version of the ride?

 

[lentesta]

Very interesting! How do these figures compare to those collected for the old version of the ride?

Pre-schoolers rated the old version as 4.5 stars (rounding to the nearest 0.5). Every other age group had it exactly the same. I'd call them even.

 

[Kram Sacul]

It can be fixed with a correct camera lens, and it was fixed on other simulators YEARS ago.

It could probably be fixed with software too and why didn't the original Soarin have the same issues? Just the difference in what's on-screen?

Also, the Tokyo Disneyland version I believe doesn't have the Eiffel Tower, but a Tokyo city flythrough where you have Tokyo Tower in the distance which is very similar to the Eiffel tower.

I’m pretty sure there’s no software out there that magically makes a curved screen flat. The bottom line is the screen is curved and the original film was shot better to take this into account.

 

[LittleBuford]

Pre-schoolers rated the old version as 4.5 stars (rounding to the nearest 0.5). Every other age group had it exactly the same. I'd call them even.

Thanks!

It's always interesting to see how the discussions going on in this forum differ from wider public perceptions. I'm somewhat relieved to learn that I'm not crazy in considering the current version of Soarin' a fantastic ride! All those people you surveyed can't be wrong.

 

[LittleBuford]

the original film was shot better to take this into account.

Do you mean the locations chosen were more appropriate, or that they used a different technique of shooting?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think you are right on. For 17 years in a row I enjoyed going to the world. It constantly amazed me watching how attitudes changed. For my only comment to the complainers is GO SOME WHERE ELSE. You are in the happiest place on earth and you complain. Just enjoy Disney for what it is, a magical expression of happiness.

Walt Disney World isn’t the Happiest Place on Earth.

 

[Kram Sacul]

Do you mean the locations chosen were more appropriate, or that they used a different technique of shooting?

The first one.

 

[LittleBuford]

The first one.

I think one of the reasons I like the current version so much is that I'm an architecture person more than I am a natural landscape person. The current balance between buildings and nature is just right for me. Plus I usually ask to sit in one of the B gliders to avoid the distortion, which I admit can detract from the experience, though not so much as to spoil my overall enjoyment.

 

[Epcot_Imagineer]

Pre-schoolers rated the old version as 4.5 stars (rounding to the nearest 0.5). Every other age group had it exactly the same. I'd call them even.

I find that data fascinating. I personally love the old film as does seemingly everyone on these boards... I was wondering why they wouldn't change it back! But numbers don't lie, if satisfaction is identical it makes sense.

 

[Sir_Cliff]

I find that data fascinating. I personally love the old film as does seemingly everyone on these boards... I was wondering why they wouldn't change it back! But numbers don't lie, if satisfaction is identical it makes sense.

I'm honestly a bit surprised in the opposite direction: I imagined the newer attraction would rate more highly simply due to the novelty factor of spotting famous international landmarks. I'm kind of pleasantly surprised the lower key original was just as big of a crowd pleaser.

For me, as soon as you notice that significant parts of the film are CGI the current version loses any sense of drama or majesty. It basically undermines the significant effort I imagine they went to in filming most of the new version as you're unsure what is real and what is fake. Basically, it might as well be Soarin' Over The Lion King.

I also loved the original film. California is such a beautiful place and the film was such a nice showcase for it.

 

[Yert3]

There are a lot of problems with the new soarin’ that keep me from enjoying it. First is the music. The new score lacks the majesty of Jerry Goldsmith’s original. It’s just so generic and uninspired. Goldsmith was so moved by the original that he was in tears when he first rode it and composed the score for free. You could tell his heart was in it. The new music sounds like the composer just wanted to call it a day and get their paycheck.

second is the CGI. It looks terrible. I’ve seen photorealistic cgi and this isn’t it. The Taj Mahal looks mediocre but the Egypt scene is so bad it looks 20 years outdated. I’ve seen video games with better graphics and video games are rendered in real time. It takes you out of the experience.

3rd is the warping. Straight on building shots were avoided in the original because of this limitation. Did the new crew not receive the memo on that?

4th is the finale. Why are fireworks being launched from the parking lot? We should be coming from the parking lot to see fireworks being shot from the lagoon. It doesn’t make any sense.

 

[LittleBuford]

second is the CGI. It looks terrible. I’ve seen photorealistic cgi and this isn’t it. The Taj Mahal looks mediocre but the Egypt scene is so bad it looks 20 years outdated.

I didn't think the pyramids were CGI. Are they? Or are you referring to another aspect of the Egypt scene?

 

[Yert3]

I didn't think the pyramids were CGI. Are they? Or are you referring to another aspect of the Egypt scene?

The entirety of the Egypt scene is CGI.

 

[LittleBuford]

The entirety of the Egypt scene is CGI.

I didn't realise that. Where did you find this out? Do you have a link to a source that specifies which scenes are real and which are fake?

 

[Yert3]

I didn't realise that. Where did you find this out? Do you have a link to a source that specifies which scenes are real and which are fake?

Well, my own eyes are the source, lol. I read somewhere that Disney didn’t go to Egypt because of terrorism threats. Hold on, I’m trying to find where I read that.

 

[LittleBuford]

Well, my own eyes are the source, lol. I read somewhere that Disney didn’t go to Egypt because of terrorism threats. Hold on, I’m trying to find where I read that.

My eyes are seeing it differently, which is why I asked! I can believe they neatened up the scene, removing the crowds one would expect to find there, but the pyramids themselves look real to me.

Someone upthread said the Eiffel Tower was clearly fake, but is that another guess?