Spider-Man Ride Patent for DLR

[Disney Irish]

Because of past history. Patents don't float around. This was not a leak. Every single patent gets published and this is not something new, even for Disney. This would be a big exception to the pattern. Disney files patents for ride systems and doesn't intend to build them. This is nothing new. This is completely normal. Disney filing for a patent and it being part of an unannounced, impending project would be new, would be abnormal.

As an example, the patent related to Mater's Junkyard Jamboree was not filed until 2008. That would be after the Cars Land announcement in 2007.

I think this is where you are incorrect about this situation. While vague during D23 Chapek did announce Spider-Man and Avengers would be the two attractions that are part of Marvel Land. So this is not an unannounced project being discussed.

Yes this particular patent being discussed could be part of something else or even nothing at all. However its not that big of a stretch for it to be used for a Spider-Man themed attraction, especially since Spider-Man is directly referenced in the patent.

 

[Practical Pig]

But what about this?

Oh, who can say why people choose their lawn ornaments?

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think this is where you are incorrect about this situation. While vague during D23 Chapek did announce Spider-Man and Avengers would be the two attractions that are part of Marvel Land. So this is not an unannounced project being discussed.

Yes this particular patent being discussed could be part of something else or even nothing at all. However its not that big of a stretch for it to be used for a Spider-Man themed attraction, especially since Spider-Man is directly referenced in the patent.

I have made no comment regarding any future Marvel attractions at Disney’s California Adventure. I am only saying that getting excited about a published patent is without a basis.

 

[GiveMeTheMusic]

Lots of overlay possibilities floating around WDI these days to try and keep that budget down. Swinging pendulum ride systems are expensive! Much cheaper to make over an existing attraction. Get ready for:

Spider-Man Castle
Mr. Parker's Wild Ride
Peter Parker's Flight
Alice in Spider-Land
Spider-Man Comic Book Canal Boats
Spider Tours
Peterhorn Parksleds
The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Inexplicable Marvel Crossover
Spidey Symphony Swings
Spider-Man Elevator Escape - Mission: Prop Changes!

 

[MisterPenguin]

Is that ADA compliant?

Yes, but only in one direction.

 

[mickEblu]

Lots of overlay possibilities floating around WDI these days to try and keep that budget down. Swinging pendulum ride systems are expensive! Much cheaper to make over an existing attraction. Get ready for:

Spider-Man Castle
Mr. Parker's Wild Ride
Peter Parker's Flight
Alice in Spider-Land
Spider-Man Comic Book Canal Boats
Spider Tours
Peterhorn Parksleds
The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Inexplicable Marvel Crossover
Spidey Symphony Swings
Spider-Man Elevator Escape - Mission: Prop Changes!

#fakenews ....Lol

 

[Disney Irish]

I have made no comment regarding any future Marvel attractions at Disney’s California Adventure. I am only saying that getting excited about a published patent is without a basis.

While yes there has been no confirmation about this particular patent being anything other than a patent filed by Disney. I think however that one can draw some conclusions based on the details within the patent. Especially given the mention of a specific web-slinging Marvel character and the confirmation from Disney at D23 that same said character will be the star of an attraction. However if this particular patent goes nowhere so be it, no harm no foul.

 

[Practical Pig]

Lots of overlay possibilities floating around WDI these days to try and keep that budget down. Swinging pendulum ride systems are expensive! Much cheaper to make over an existing attraction. Get ready for:

Spider-Man Castle
Mr. Parker's Wild Ride
Peter Parker's Flight
Alice in Spider-Land
Spider-Man Comic Book Canal Boats
Spider Tours
Peterhorn Parksleds
The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Inexplicable Marvel Crossover
Spidey Symphony Swings
Spider-Man Elevator Escape - Mission: Prop Changes!

I can only confirm four of these overlays at this time.

 

[mickEblu]

I can only confirm four of these overlays at this time.

View attachment 237205 View attachment 237206
View attachment 237207 View attachment 237208

LOL, the Spider Mermaid is horrifying.

 

[mickEblu]

I have made no comment regarding any future Marvel attractions at Disney’s California Adventure. I am only saying that getting excited about a published patent is without a basis.

It may not be up being this exact ride system but it definitely looks like a Spider-Man attraction is coming to DLR in some form between the D23 announcements and this leaked patent.

The patent was not leaked, it was published by the US Patent Office as is done with all patents. A ride system patent by Disney should really be treated as evidence of nothing coming to the parks. You're getting excited for something with little basis, you might as well go find Twitter's latest fake insider to follow.

But you did ^^^

You I said it should be treated as evidence that nothing is coming to the parks in response to my post where I say that a Spider-Man attraction (in some form) is most likely coming to the parks.

 

[Hatbox Ghostbuster]

I'm treating this patent release as just that. A confirmation that Disney filed a patent for a new ride system. This isn't DSNY Newscast here...trust our insiders and just let the rest of the chips fall where they may. And keep posting 60's spiderman gifs and memes.

 

[lazyboy97o]

While yes there has been no confirmation about this particular patent being anything other than a patent filed by Disney. I think however that one can draw some conclusions based on the details within the patent. Especially given the mention of a specific web-slinging Marvel character and the confirmation from Disney at D23 that same said character will be the star of an attraction. However if this particular patent goes nowhere so be it, no harm no foul.

There is no reasonable basis for drawing conclusions from published patents. They are historically an unreliable source of information.

But you did ^^^

You I said it should be treated as evidence that nothing is coming to the parks in response to my post where I say that a Spider-Man attraction (in some form) is most likely coming to the parks.

You keep conflating the two. You keep using the patent as proof of “something” when it is proof of nothing more than what was patented.

 

[mickEblu]

There is no reasonable basis for drawing conclusions from published patents. They are historically an unreliable source of information.


You keep conflating the two. You keep using the patent as proof of “something” when it is proof of nothing more than what was patented.

And you keep avoiding my direct questions.

 

[disneylandcm]

Lots of overlay possibilities floating around WDI these days to try and keep that budget down. Swinging pendulum ride systems are expensive! Much cheaper to make over an existing attraction. Get ready for:

Spider-Man Castle
Mr. Parker's Wild Ride
Peter Parker's Flight
Alice in Spider-Land
Spider-Man Comic Book Canal Boats
Spider Tours
Peterhorn Parksleds
The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Inexplicable Marvel Crossover
Spidey Symphony Swings
Spider-Man Elevator Escape - Mission: Prop Changes!

Any truth to...?:
The Haunted Spider Man-sion
Great Moments With Peter Parker
Stan Lee’s Enchanted Spider Room

 

[Phroobar]

Any truth to...?:
The Haunted Spider Man-sion
Great Moments With Peter Parker
Stan Lee’s Enchanted Spider Room

I would go see Great Moments with Stan Lee.

 

[Disney Irish]

There is no reasonable basis for drawing conclusions from published patents. They are historically an unreliable source of information.

1. History does not dictate the future.
2. Patents are filed for many reasons, first of all as a basis for a product which will be offered to the public.
3. Patents typically have indicators in them of their uses.

Just because YOU don't want to get excited by this patent doesn't mean someone else shouldn't. What harm is it in some armchair imagineering on how this patent could be used.

You keep conflating the two. You keep using the patent as proof of “something” when it is proof of nothing more than what was patented.

And what if this patent really does turn out to be the ride system used for the announced Spider-Man attraction at DCA, what then? Is there really any issue in discussing it now versus 6 or even 24 months from now?

If you don't want to discuss it, then so be it don't participate.

 

[D.Silentu]

Can you give me examples of rides that you participate in and what that participation entails?

The first attraction that brought this to my mind was Tansformers at Universal Studios. Though you are supposed to be in the world of the ride, dually represented between screens and sets, the ride travels from screen to screen and stops. At most of these stops, the action unfolds onscreen in front of you and though a character may speak to you or some 3D object flies your direction, largely you are only witnessing the action.

Using another 3D ride for contrast, in Star Tours the ride is always reacting to the situations it encounters, making you a participant in that environment. I don’t mean to call attention to the “rebel spy” aspect or anything that's intended to be personally engaging. Just the idea that you are not passively watching something that has no effect on your ride experience. Referring to Transformers again, if truck sized robots were fighting mere feet away from me, I wouldn’t stand still and see how it turned out. However, that’s what you do on the ride. Unfortunately, I can’t speak from experience but it sounds like Mission Breakout and Gringotts take this approach.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

When you look in the mirror at the end of The Haunted Mansion, you see a ghost riding with you.

 

[D.Silentu]

I think I see what you mean. I intended my critique to apply more to the use of screens in attractions. In a tangible environment, like the Haunted Mansion, it's more engaging to be an observer. Screens form a part of daily entertainment for most of us, so I have an expectation that if they are used in a ride that I will be a more involved than the vicarious experience I get watching at home or in a theater.

 

[lazyboy97o]

1. History does not dictate the future.
2. Patents are filed for many reasons, first of all as a basis for a product which will be offered to the public.
3. Patents typically have indicators in them of their uses.

History reveals patterns. Number 2 seems to be the biggest issue that is misunderstood about Disney and it is demonstrated through history. Disney does do research and development outside of plans for a public application. Disney even has Disney Research, a pure research and development group that has no consumer facing business.

Just because YOU don't want to get excited by this patent doesn't mean someone else shouldn't. What harm is it in some armchair imagineering on how this patent could be used.

People get excited because they think there is credibility behind a story. Do you get excited for every supposed attraction regardless of source?

And what if this patent really does turn out to be the ride system used for the announced Spider-Man attraction at DCA, what then? Is there really any issue in discussing it now versus 6 or even 24 months from now?

Then it would be an anomaly.