News Star Wars: Galaxy's Edge - Historical Construction/Impressions

BrianLo

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I was thinking of rides like Forbidden Journey and Gringotts when I made the comment. Even RSR’s ride experience feels like less than the sum of its parts.

They haven’t built a roller coaster at DLR since 2001. And Disneyland proper since 1979 (not counting Gadgets) Star Wars Land should have had one themed coaster.

But yeah I haven’t been to any of the Florida theme parks so my opinion is based heavily on my experience in Southern California. With that said in the last 10 years, other than FOP, what other attraction built at USO Or WDW has been just good old fashioned fun? Not imagineers throwing a bunch of stuff at you but missing the mark? I’m not a huge fan of FJ. Haven’t heard the best things about Gringotts. Kong looks terrible. Then again not much has been built at WDW in the last 10 years so maybe we should be having this convo at a later date.

They need to get back to moving people through a physical environment again. Old fashioned themed roller coasters are not dead. They are needed and there is still a place for them.

I mean this is what Battle Escape is, moving people back through a physical environment. I understand the roller coaster point from the context of SoCal, Florida's a weird market in the sense that they are going all in on coasters (SDMT, Slinky, Guardians, Tron, 'Gringott's', Potter new).

I wasn't really thinking about Universal though, I admit my context of WDI always stems to Asia, because unfortunately that is where investment actually has been. I can't really judge the state of WDI based on a limited slice of domestic products. Whereas Universal's show force has been Orlando for the last number of years. As you mentioned it isn't good and Gringott's is a great example of something that somehow loses sight of the fact that it should have been fun first and foremost. Fast and Furious the other even more prime example... but Universal has its own set of problems, which are totally unique to Universal Creative. For example I think WDI's biggest problems are budget control and capacity output on modern attractions. Universal Creative I think have totally different (and worse) problems, but they are great at pumping out high capacity, relatively low budget "E-tickets".

I see your and TROR's convo on the coaster aspect, for DLR I agree. I don't know if Star Wars needed to be the one to receive it. That was the original concept and word on the street is that it was less impressive and that's the reason they've gone with what they have instead.

It's too bad the future plans for DLR have been such a mess the last couple of years... because what I think people want and what they would ask for is their own Shanghai Pirates-esque ride. Their own Mystic Manor. Their own Flight of Passage and their own themed thrill coaster.

I actually think those things are coming with time between this project, the Runaway Railway concept and the Avengers E-ticket coaster. The state of fandom would be happier if they just confirmed those additional things.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I mean this is what Battle Escape is, moving people back through a physical environment. I understand the roller coaster point from the context of SoCal, Florida's a weird market in the sense that they are going all in on coasters (SDMT, Slinky, Guardians, Tron, 'Gringott's', Potter new).

I wasn't really thinking about Universal though, I admit my context of WDI always stems to Asia, because unfortunately that is where investment actually has been. I can't really judge the state of WDI based on a limited slice of domestic products. Whereas Universal's show force has been Orlando for the last number of years. As you mentioned it isn't good and Gringott's is a great example of something that somehow loses sight of the fact that it should have been fun first and foremost. Fast and Furious the other even more prime example... but Universal has its own set of problems, which are totally unique to Universal Creative. For example I think WDI's biggest problems are budget control and capacity output on modern attractions. Universal Creative I think have totally different (and worse) problems, but they are great at pumping out high capacity, relatively low budget "E-tickets".

I see your and TROR's convo on the coaster aspect, for DLR I agree. I don't know if Star Wars needed to be the one to receive it. That was the original concept and word on the street is that it was less impressive and that's the reason they've gone with what they have instead.

It's too bad the future plans for DLR have been such a mess the last couple of years... because what I think people want and what they would ask for is their own Shanghai Pirates-esque ride. Their own Mystic Manor. Their own Flight of Passage and their own themed thrill coaster.

I actually think those things are coming with time between this project, the Runaway Railway concept and the Avengers E-ticket coaster. The state of fandom would be happier if they just confirmed those additional things.

I agree, I don't think Star Wars needs to be the one to receive the coaster, but a coaster is needed in DLR. And that is what I hope we're getting with Avengers.

I also agree, WDI needed to prove to fans they can still build a Shanghai Pirates-esque ride in the domestic parks, and that is what we are getting with Battle Escape. However I still think the ride vehicles, while maybe limited in motion, will still bring the "speed" to keep the fast pace of the story WDI is telling.
 

Phroobar

Well-Known Member
Battlestar Galactica got a rollercoaster. Why can't Star Wars?

bsg-human-cylon-fb.jpg
 

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
I was thinking of rides like Forbidden Journey and Gringotts when I made the comment. Even RSR’s ride experience feels like less than the sum of its parts.

They haven’t built a roller coaster at DLR since 2001. And Disneyland proper since 1979 (not counting Gadgets) Star Wars Land should have had one themed coaster.

But yeah I haven’t been to any of the Florida theme parks so my opinion is based heavily on my experience in Southern California. With that said in the last 10 years, other than FOP, what other attraction built at USO Or WDW has been just good old fashioned fun? Not imagineers throwing a bunch of stuff at you but missing the mark? I’m not a huge fan of FJ. Haven’t heard the best things about Gringotts. Kong looks terrible. Then again not much has been built at WDW in the last 10 years so maybe we should be having this convo at a later date.

They need to get back to moving people through a physical environment again. Old fashioned themed roller coasters are not dead. They are needed and there is still a place for them.

I loved Gringotts.

Star Wars Land doesn't really seem to lend itself to an immersive coaster experience. Very rarely have I been on a coaster and forgot it was a coaster. Certain aspects help, like having the track make sense in the world (Gringotts and Big Thunder), but Space Mountain has always struck me as a coaster with space theming around it rather than an immersive ride.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
I loved Gringotts.

Star Wars Land doesn't really seem to lend itself to an immersive coaster experience. Very rarely have I been on a coaster and forgot it was a coaster. Certain aspects help, like having the track make sense in the world (Gringotts and Big Thunder), but Space Mountain has always struck me as a coaster with space theming around it rather than an immersive ride.

You and I rarely agree, but on this we are in agreement.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
I look at it based on the environment of the land around it. Just adding a coaster doesn't make sense in some lands based on the environment around it.

The rumored Ewok coaster was actually a Speeder Bike coaster, not a flight one. Think tron but with speeder bikes. Which would make sense in that environment. For example a X-Wing battle coaster wouldn't make sense for that environment.

In the environment they are building a battle coaster wouldn't make sense to me. But to each their own.

I know. I was using the word “fly” loosely. Yes to each their own.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
I loved Gringotts.

Star Wars Land doesn't really seem to lend itself to an immersive coaster experience. Very rarely have I been on a coaster and forgot it was a coaster. Certain aspects help, like having the track make sense in the world (Gringotts and Big Thunder), but Space Mountain has always struck me as a coaster with space theming around it rather than an immersive ride.

So a purpose built Hyperspace Mountain that TROR describes doesn’t sound fun to you? So we really think that a simulator will simulate flying better than a roller coaster could? Not the visuals , I’m talking about the feeling.

If it were me, I would have gone with Battle Escape, a coaster and import Star Tours from TL.
 

Curious Constance

Well-Known Member
Jr
I’m not sure I agree with that statement actually. Maybe from the lens of Disneyland? Even then I thought the only saving grace amongst some of the DCA rides for people here are that they are fun. Incredicoaster and Mission Breakout included.

Navi River Journey is about the only good example I can think of this decade for your argument. A bit of a stuffy art show piece. But I’d counter it with about ten other rides amongst the limited number Dis built this decade. Some rides that actually have big problems, but are purely saved on the basis they are fun -I.e. Tron. If anything Disney has moved further towards the realm of ‘fun’ via thrills. Barely a single ride in Original Epcot went beyond 3 miles per hour.
Luigi's dancing cars is a perfect example. And the tires before them. I'd even put Mater's and Radiator Springs on the list, but I get that not everyone would.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
I mean this is what Battle Escape is, moving people back through a physical environment. I understand the roller coaster point from the context of SoCal, Florida's a weird market in the sense that they are going all in on coasters (SDMT, Slinky, Guardians, Tron, 'Gringott's', Potter new).

I wasn't really thinking about Universal though, I admit my context of WDI always stems to Asia, because unfortunately that is where investment actually has been. I can't really judge the state of WDI based on a limited slice of domestic products. Whereas Universal's show force has been Orlando for the last number of years. As you mentioned it isn't good and Gringott's is a great example of something that somehow loses sight of the fact that it should have been fun first and foremost. Fast and Furious the other even more prime example... but Universal has its own set of problems, which are totally unique to Universal Creative. For example I think WDI's biggest problems are budget control and capacity output on modern attractions. Universal Creative I think have totally different (and worse) problems, but they are great at pumping out high capacity, relatively low budget "E-tickets".

I see your and TROR's convo on the coaster aspect, for DLR I agree. I don't know if Star Wars needed to be the one to receive it. That was the original concept and word on the street is that it was less impressive and that's the reason they've gone with what they have instead.

It's too bad the future plans for DLR have been such a mess the last couple of years... because what I think people want and what they would ask for is their own Shanghai Pirates-esque ride. Their own Mystic Manor. Their own Flight of Passage and their own themed thrill coaster.

I actually think those things are coming with time between this project, the Runaway Railway concept and the Avengers E-ticket coaster. The state of fandom would be happier if they just confirmed those additional things.

Right it’s moving people back and forth through a physical environment and that is appreciated and I’m sure it ll be ground breaking in many ways. I’m specifically talking about the fun/ repeatability factor. Nothing really has that more than a coaster. So that plus the fact Disneyland hasn’t had a new coaster since 1979, I think SWL was the perfect chance.
 

Disney Irish

Premium Member
So a purpose built Hyperspace Mountain that TROR describes doesn’t sound fun to you? So we really think that a simulator will simulate flying better than a roller coaster could? Not the visuals , I’m talking about the feeling.

If it were me, I would have gone with Battle Escape, a coaster and import Star Tours from TL.

Would it be fun, yes. But would it fit in the immersive land with the story they are trying to tell, not likely. As a space battle coaster wouldn't have fit in the land. And then all your theming purists would have been complaining.... ;):p:cool:

Now if they had made a coaster built off of that monorail storage train from Solo, I could be onboard for it. Because that would have been immersive and fit the smuggler story of the land.
 

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
So a purpose built Hyperspace Mountain that TROR describes doesn’t sound fun to you? So we really think that a simulator will simulate flying better than a roller coaster could? Not the visuals , I’m talking about the feeling.

If it were me, I would have gone with Battle Escape, a coaster and import Star Tours from TL.

Coasters leave me "meh" if I'm not immersed. Sure, the sensations are fun, but I prefer mental thrills. The TOT worked for me because of the storytelling, not the drop aspect. Space Mountain is far from boring, but I'd rather ride almost any darkride at the park.

As for importing Star Tours, the simulator design is very old and I look forward to experiencing the next stage of simulator. Plus, I hate what they did to Star Tours with The Adventure Continues.
 

Professortango1

Well-Known Member
And if the ride doesn't have any thrill or "fun" aspect in the movement of the vehicle itself, then what will people who are indifferent to Star Wars get out of it? Nada. Which is the main reason I dislike Star Wars Land.

I don't care for Song of the South, but I love Splash Mountain. Many kids enjoy riding Mr. Toad without banked turns or an interest in the Disney animated feature Ichabod and Mr. Toad. I love the Guardians films and hate Mission BO. Clearly, what we get out of an attraction depends upon the attraction itself, not the franchise nor thrill aspect. An engaging experience is still an engaging experience.
 

Curious Constance

Well-Known Member
I don't care for Song of the South, but I love Splash Mountain. Many kids enjoy riding Mr. Toad without banked turns or an interest in the Disney animated feature Ichabod and Mr. Toad. I love the Guardians films and hate Mission BO. Clearly, what we get out of an attraction depends upon the attraction itself, not the franchise nor thrill aspect. An engaging experience is still an engaging experience.
Are there no fun or thrilling aspects to Splash Mountain or Mr Toad?
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
Jr

Luigi's dancing cars is a perfect example. And the tires before them. I'd even put Mater's and Radiator Springs on the list, but I get that not everyone would.

I think Maters is a fun little ride for what it is. Definitely agree on Luigi’s. With RSR, I don’t think that the ride isn’t great because they they were too focused on new technologies I jus think they tried to do too much with one ride. The idea of traveling through the country side then to Radiator Springs and finishing with a race is great in theory but something fell a little flat in execution. I think I’ve analyzed why pretty well before but don’t have the brain power at the moment to do so.
 

Curious Constance

Well-Known Member
I think Maters is a fun little ride for what it is. Definitely agree on Luigi’s. With RSR, I don’t think that the ride isn’t great because they they were too focused on new technologies I jus think they tried to do much with one ride. The idea of traveling through the country side then to Radiator Springs and finishing with a race is great in theory but something fell a little flat in execution. I think I’ve analyzed why pretty well before but don’t have the brain power at the moment to do so.
I like the beginning and end, but just have no interest in traveling through Radiator Springs. So I get bored during that part, and it kind of kills the momentum for me.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
And if the ride doesn't have any thrill or "fun" aspect in the movement of the vehicle itself, then what will people who are indifferent to Star Wars get out of it? Nada. Which is the main reason I dislike Star Wars Land.

I think Battle Escape will have some very impressive moments but will lack any reason for me to ride it often. Especially for the first few years when the lines will be too long. I think Falcon will be less impressive but more repeatable/ fun.
 

mickEblu

Well-Known Member
I like the beginning and end, but just have no interest in traveling through Radiator Springs. So I get bored during that part, and it kind of kills the momentum for me.

Yes the beginning feels like Classic Disney. Middle is an E ticket version of a book report ride so people don’t complain as much. Plus we just walked through the “real thing.” Why do I need to see it again on the ride? The end is ... kind of fun. Little bit of a tease for me.
 

Curious Constance

Well-Known Member
I think Battle Escape will have some very impressive moments but will lack any reason for me to ride it often. Especially for the first few years when the lines will be too long. I think Falcon will be less impressive but more repeatable/ fun.
That's exactly how I'm feeling.
I think I'll have fun the first time in Battle Escape. Even I won't hate seeing a life size AT AT the first time. But after the wow wears off, and my Star Wars fatigue kicks in, I'll get bored I think. But I bet "flying" in the Falcon will feel fun so be the ride I enjoy more. I will say that I'll enjoy seeing my son's reaction on both though.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom