montyz81
Well-Known Member
I would say if you go upstairs in imagination you could get that sense. The theater cars in UoE give some of that feeling as well. The load area of SSE is another Epcot center feel.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Test Track refurb???
- Thread starter NicNoc12
- Start date
Yeah this was all gm. Had nothing to do with disney. In fact all the good things are because of gm, all the bad things because of Disney.
I was scolded on here for being excited about this, given tdo's recent success with everything it has touched, and now you are all "lathered up like gm fanbois".
janoimagine
Well-Known Member
Seriously? ... wow, you need to check your facts, in this case the praise was warranted to GM.
I have been praising this re-fit since I was given a peek into the war room over a year ago.
Had Ackerson not taken a ride on TT 1.0 a few years ago with his family and saw how out of date the attraction was and wanted change, you would more than likely have a sponsorless pavilion holding on by its fingernails.
GM, whether you want to accept this or not, was responsible for this re-fit. It challenged it's designers to come up with something new and exciting, taking a page out of what they do every year at the Auto Shows, by creating a visual and interactive experience for potential buyers. They literally built their own scale model of TT in one of the design studios in warren and started concepting the attraction. Once funding was approved by the board WDI was brought in to help make it come to life.
HMF
Well-Known Member
At least we got something out of it.
Thrill Seeker
Well-Known Member
Sponsored attractions such as Test Track are very much a baby of the company that sponsors it. GM has sponsored that building since 82 and have been the ones making decisions on it's fate. GM wanted a thrill ride, so the original Track was born. Now they want something they can really show off, and they got it with the new Test Track.
This is one rare case where we can thank the sponsor for putting time and money in to make this a reality. That can't be said about a few other pavilions (Horizons, Imagination, Wonders of Life ex...). I'm still honestly surprised Universe of Energy is still around considering it has been sponsor-less since the early 2000s.
So yes, thank GM for making this happen. They are the ones who deserve the credit.
At the moment, my family are still thinking that they will be more likely to fastpass it in order to ride than stand in the standby queue - standing there designing a vehicle is of no interest to any of us at the moment (although that could change when we get the chance to get back to WDW). I would be all for it if it seemed like it would do anything in the ride itself, but for now it mainly seems to be an interactive queue like HM/Pooh/Space, and something to play around with in the post show. If it was something more than that (for example, I suggested that if they made a new WDW racing game, the car you design at TT2.0 could be imported into the game at home), I would be interested.
People say that it's like "Sum of All Thrills", which we did last trip, but the difference is that in SoAT, the design process affects the ride, in TT2.0, it seems that it won't, or at the most, it will be visual only.
At this point, from what we know, we would rather be stood there watching Bill McKim again!
SirLink
Well-Known Member
Yep you got it in one.
Enchantâmes
Active Member
TDO has a HUGE amount of work to do before they get into anyone's good graces. The Fantasyland expansion and Test Track 2.0 are nice starts but there are still a LOT of problems in the parks that have yet to be addressed.
dreamscometrue
Well-Known Member
The article does say they worked together for 18 months. Sounds right to me, but GM did foot the bill.
EOD K9
Well-Known Member
That is one great looking design studio.I'd say the old-school EPCOT look is 80's future, like the Enterprise-D:
ExtinctJenn
Well-Known Member
Yeah I was reading all the arguing back and forth and I think they key here to remember is, yes GM did foot the bill in general, yes GM is who pushed for the refurb, yes GM essentially did the concept work, but Disney was responsible for bringing their ideas to life. Rather than argue over who was "responsible" for it, it really should be in terms of partnership.
There are lots of people who tend to want to give credit to anyone but TDO and then there are folks who are the opposite and only want to give credit to TDO. Let me tell you, all large companies that are successful are because of partnerships like the ones Disney has with it's sponsors/vendors. McDonald's wouldn't have Happy Meals without the partnership of tons of movie and toy companies for example (maybe a bad one but you get the point). Even companies where it's not so obvious... like the one I work for (one of the largest financial instituions in this country). You'd think everything banking related comes out of that company and that company alone but we rely on partners like Legal Firms that translate IRS regulations etc. If Disney tried to do it all on their own, they may be slightly successful from a shareholder standpoint but from a guest (customer) point of view probably not.
My take on this is GM had some incredible ideas and sold them well and Disney executed it absolutely wonderfully. Go partnerships!
SirLink
Well-Known Member
My take on it: GM had the ideas, GM paid for the ideas, built some of the items themselves and told Disney you better make this work. Therefore if GM had the ideas and didn't want to pay for everything, we would of got another 'value engineered' attraction.
So ....I don't think TDO deserves credit on this one - one could say WDI don't deserve credit either.
So ....I don't think TDO deserves credit on this one - one could say WDI don't deserve credit either.
phi2134
Well-Known Member
Yeah I was reading all the arguing back and forth and I think they key here to remember is, yes GM did foot the bill in general, yes GM is who pushed for the refurb, yes GM essentially did the concept work, but Disney was responsible for bringing their ideas to life. Rather than argue over who was "responsible" for it, it really should be in terms of partnership.
There are lots of people who tend to want to give credit to anyone but TDO and then there are folks who are the opposite and only want to give credit to TDO. Let me tell you, all large companies that are successful are because of partnerships like the ones Disney has with it's sponsors/vendors. McDonald's wouldn't have Happy Meals without the partnership of tons of movie and toy companies for example (maybe a bad one but you get the point). Even companies where it's not so obvious... like the one I work for (one of the largest financial instituions in this country). You'd think everything banking related comes out of that company and that company alone but we rely on partners like Legal Firms that translate IRS regulations etc. If Disney tried to do it all on their own, they may be slightly successful from a shareholder standpoint but from a guest (customer) point of view probably not.
My take on this is GM had some incredible ideas and sold them well and Disney executed it absolutely wonderfully. Go partnerships!
Im not sure I give it Disney any credit on this one....If Boeing designs a new amazing airplane, I am not congratulating the workers in the assembly plant for it.
ExtinctJenn
Well-Known Member
I guess that's where our point of view differs (which is fine - human nature). Me, I always take into account the responsibility and work of the "grunts" who help make something a reality.
SulleyanBoo
Well-Known Member
I want to know too! Im going this weekend!
phi2134
Well-Known Member
My thought on that is the "grunts" are responsible for creating whatever the higher ups demand...If they turned it into a giant toilet bowl that flushes cars, they wouldnt get the credit for it no matter how well it looked.
On second thought, a toilet bowl ride kind of sounds fun....maybe themed to Tangled