The Audio-Animatronic Ride: Extinct?

[Victor]

Hopping onto an omimover and riding through detailed scenery surrounded by audio-animatronic characters used to be a Disney staple. The method of telling a story, a REAL story, trough the use of these figures was something Walt loved. But where have these rides gone?

Sure, the beloved "classics" are still around in Magic Kingdom. But Epcot, which used to reign supreme when it came to audio-animatronic attraction, now pales in comparison to what it once was. Disney's Animal Kingdom has Dinosaur, but most of that is just being flung around in near darkness. I think it's safe to say that the last great AA ride to be built was 'The Great Movie Ride' in '89 at the studios.

The technology has come so far, and so much could be done with it. Just look at Jack Sparrow at PotC, and the Yeti at E:E (and even here we only get to see it for a brief second).

Where have these ride-throughs gone? Is it a matter of budget? Does WDI think we're only interested in thrill rides? Do you think we will ever see something in the scope of PotC, GMR, and almost every classic Epcot attraction, ever again? :veryconfu

 

[napnet]

Well Nemo is of this style and is opening up soon. I'd take a strech and say DINOSAUR is a more advanced type of ride scenic rides... granted its not an omnimover but its got alot of AA and scenes. It is thrilling though.

 

[CoffeeJedi]

Well Nemo is of this style

Yeah, but there's only 1 AA, everything else was basically done on the cheap. Even the projections into the water, while cool, are still just video projections.

 

[Since1976]

Unfortunately, some execs at Disney don't consider AA rides to be "gatebusters", which is why we should feel very fortunate when attractions like MIKE AND SULLY TO THE RESCUE (at DCA) and NEMO at Epcot get made.

I think that warm reception to those new rides may spark a return to the classic AA dark ride in the next decade...

 

[Mister Toad]

Not interactive

AA rides are not interactive.

Society has changed.... people don't want to sit and be told stories as much anymore, they want to be IN the story.

Thus....... goodbye to the AA rides of yesterday where you sit and move through a story, instead you have the Tower of Terror, where you are thrilled to be PART of the story.

In the days of CGI and other computer-amazing stuff, AA, which is very expensive and in the end gives limited imagination, just won't do it.

For reference, see EPCOT circa 1995 or so, before Test Track, when NO ONE WAS COMING TO THE PARK.

Sorry, that's progress for better or worse.

 

[Victor]

AA rides are not interactive.

Society has changed.... people don't want to sit and be told stories as much anymore, they want to be IN the story.

Thus....... goodbye to the AA rides of yesterday where you sit and move through a story, instead you have the Tower of Terror, where you are thrilled to be PART of the story.

In the days of CGI and other computer-amazing stuff, AA, which is very expensive and in the end gives limited imagination, just won't do it.

For reference, see EPCOT circa 1995 or so, before Test Track, when NO ONE WAS COMING TO THE PARK.

Sorry, that's progress for better or worse.

I disagree with you on every point. And, no offense, I'm willing to even say your wrong. I feel like I am more IN a story at PotC than at Test Track or Mission: SPACE or Rockin' Roller Coaster or...well just about every ride that has been built recently. The imagination displayed in Disney's AA rides is 10 times that which has been displayed in the past few years. And by the way, AA could be integrated with "other computer-amazing stuff", it doesn't need to be a completely old school attraction.

I honestly don't buy that people don't want to see these attractions. First and foremost WDW is a place for families. Families enjoy something they can ALL ride together, regardless of height, weight, etc.

AA gives to limited imagination? Limited imagination is making a ride that drops you up and down, or spins you around and makes you sick. Limited imagination is being given a limited budget and the result being the new JITI. I believe eye-candy is the most appealing thing to our senses, and as long as the right budget is given and the right technology is used, you don't need a cheap thrill thrown in, you just need to really WOW the audience. Being thrilled and having an attraction be an immersive experience that burns unforgettable visuals into your mind are two different things, and the latter is much harder to acheive. So to me, the problem is a lack of budget, or a lack of trying. Not the audience.

 

[Victor]

Unfortunately, some execs at Disney don't consider AA rides to be "gatebusters", which is why we should feel very fortunate when attractions like MIKE AND SULLY TO THE RESCUE (at DCA) and NEMO at Epcot get made.

I think that warm reception to those new rides may spark a return to the classic AA dark ride in the next decade...

I don't feel fortunate. Mike and Sully is weak, and I'd much rather have the Living Seas than Nemo. But that's just me. Dark rides, and the AA rides I'm talking about, I think, are two totally different things. Not to mention one is much cheaper to make...hence those lackluster rides.

 

[Mister Toad]

I disagree with you on every point. And, no offense, I'm willing to even say your wrong. I feel like I am more IN a story at PotC than at Test Track or Mission: SPACE or Rockin' Roller Coaster or...well just about every ride that has been built recently. The imagination displayed in Disney's AA rides is 10 times that which has been displayed in the past few years. And by the way, AA could be integrated with "other computer-amazing stuff", it doesn't need to be a completely old school attraction.

I honestly don't buy that people don't want to see these attractions. First and foremost WDW is a place for families. Families enjoy something they can ALL ride together, regardless of height, weight, etc.

AA gives to limited imagination? Limited imagination is making a ride that drops you up and down, or spins you around and makes you sick. Limited imagination is being given a limited budget and the result being the new JITI. I believe eye-candy is the most appealing thing to our senses, and as long as the right budget is given and the right technology is used, you don't need a cheap thrill thrown in, you just need to really WOW the audience. Being thrilled and having an attraction be an immersive experience that burns unforgettable visuals into your mind are two different things, and the latter is much harder to acheive. So to me, the problem is a lack of budget, or a lack of trying. Not the audience.

The proof is in the pudding. Go back to 1995-7ish......... Epcot was dying.

Out with Horizons, Out with World of Motion, Out with Old Figment....... in with Space, Test Track.... you can learn AND be a part of it.

Since then, park visitors are up.

Sorry, numbers don't lie.

 

[Victor]

The proof is in the pudding. Go back to 1995-7ish......... Epcot was dying.

Out with Horizons, Out with World of Motion, Out with Old Figment....... in with Space, Test Track.... you can learn AND be a part of it.

Since then, park visitors are up.

Sorry, numbers don't lie.

I don't need to 'learn' anything. Don't get me wrong, I really enjoy M:S and TT. But they do not offer the experience those previous rides had. I like thrill rides, and I believe you can mix old with new. M:S might have increased park numbers when it first opened, but since then visitors seem to avoid it like the plague. And you seem to be missing my point. I'm not trying to say there's anything wrong with taking down old rides and putting something new up. But why not create a completely new AA-heavy attraction that combined both new technology and classic Disney storytelling? That's my issue. Like I said, it's a lack of trying. The company is too afraid to take a risk, go balls out, spend some money and try and really impress visitors. AA-rides are what MADE Disney. I can go on a freefall ride at any other theme park and some carnivals, and get the same effect as ToT (minus the great themeing). I can feel the same effect of M:S on a Gravitron operated by some carnie. However, I CAN'T experience something like PotC anywhere else.

 

[kcnole]

The proof is in the pudding. Go back to 1995-7ish......... Epcot was dying.

Epcot wasn't dying because the rides were audio animatronic rides, epcot was dying because it had been completely overlooked and was in a sad state of repair and nothing had been updated as it had been promised. The technology was old, it no longer felt like a futureworld so it wasn't fun.

It had nothing to do with the rides featuring animatronics. If animatronics can't draw a crowd anymore how come Pirates, Haunted Mansion, etc... are popular still? You can do animatronics and do them well and people will come. The reason the rides in Epcot were dying is because they stories they told were out of date, people had seen them several times and there was nothing new, Epcot was in a sad state of repair. IMO, they threw the baby out with the bathwater to fix the place. It needed some new stuff but I'm not convinced that the vomit comet, Ellen, and Test Track were the right answers.

Changing out one of them was fine for something new, but killing so many aa rides, and rest assured that SSE would be gone had it been easy to do and replace with something else was not the correct answer. WDI just lacked imagination at the time so they went to the easy thing. Thrills. They believed that "If you thrill them they will come". That kind of thinking bothers me, Walt never believed in talking down to his guests whether they were adults or children. he believed people wanted to reach for more, the WDI who redid Epcot held none of those beliefs.

 

[Victor]

Changing out one of them was fine for something new, but killing so many aa rides, and rest assured that SSE would be gone had it been easy to do and replace with something else was not the correct answer. WDI just lacked imagination at the time so they went to the easy thing. Thrills. They believed that "If you thrill them they will come". That kind of thinking bothers me, Walt never believed in talking down to his guests whether they were adults or children. he believed people wanted to reach for more, the WDI who redid Epcot held none of those beliefs.

Can I hear a hallelujah!?

 

[JimboJones123]

How many Omnimovers did Walt's DL have?

 

[Victor]

How many Omnimovers did Walt's DL have?

None at the time of his death. But the system was being developed while he was still alive, and implemented at The Haunted Mansion and Adventures Thru Innerspace. Not to mention the Magic Skyway at the '64 World's Fair, which was sort of a forefather to the omnimover.

 

[Slowjack]

AA rides are not interactive.

Society has changed.... people don't want to sit and be told stories as much anymore, they want to be IN the story.

Thus....... goodbye to the AA rides of yesterday where you sit and move through a story, instead you have the Tower of Terror, where you are thrilled to be PART of the story.

In the days of CGI and other computer-amazing stuff, AA, which is very expensive and in the end gives limited imagination, just won't do it.

For reference, see EPCOT circa 1995 or so, before Test Track, when NO ONE WAS COMING TO THE PARK.

Sorry, that's progress for better or worse.

I don't get it. You are no more "part of the story" in these other rides than you are in the older rides. Yeah, okay, I guess ToT used to take your picture, but it's not any more "interactive" than Pirates or the Haunted Mansion. Really the only "interactive" ride in any of the parks is Buzz Lightyear, although there are some shows with guest interaction.

Test Track interactive? What the...?

And look at Disney Quest, which was brimming with interactivity, and is now going to close.

Perhaps by interactive you just mean thrill rides? Otherwise your post makes no sense.

 

[TestTrack]

I don't get it. You are no more "part of the story" in these other rides than you are in the older rides. Yeah, okay, I guess ToT used to take your picture, but it's not any more "interactive" than Pirates or the Haunted Mansion. Really the only "interactive" ride in any of the parks is Buzz Lightyear, although there are some shows with guest interaction.

Test Track interactive? What the...?

And look at Disney Quest, which was brimming with interactivity, and is now going to close.

Perhaps by interactive you just mean thrill rides? Otherwise your post makes no sense.

I think what he meant by "interaction" is from a POV sense.

I would consider Horizons, WOM, SSE, Pirates and other rides very "3rd-personish". That's not always bad but you are watching the story unfold in front of you. In most cases, you are not involved in the action itself.

On rides such as TOT and Test Track, they could have taken you through a haunted hotel and watched the story of the hotel unfold or watch the steps to automobile testing as you move from scene to scene/ Instead you ARE the main character...you ARE being subjected to the story/tests.

I am not saying I don't love SSE, Horizons, WOM and all those rides but I do think there is a point to the move they made. Epcot was "Omnimover-ville" until 1995ish and I think it bored many people. I personally loved EPCOT since my first trip...I didn't find it boring.

Anyway, I would like to see a mix of new attractions...some with this "first person" type thrill and some with a more laid back "3rd person" style. For instance, I would love to see JII return as a very slow "3rd person" style of the original. It still accomplished its goal of showing imagination without being sideshow-ish.

Just my 5 cents

 

[Riverone]

'Thrill Rides' is a relative term

Many of us would be much more excited to hear that Great River Expedition was being built than any new thrill ride... How about this, who would rather hear about an additional scene in the Great Movie ride than an additional loop in Rock 'N Rollercoaster?
In many forums I read about what Imagineering 'wants' to build or what Imagineering thinks the public wants. Remember that what Imagineers may want and what is greenlit for development may be very different.
Many fair or amusement park environments exist in which the kids left mom, dad, baby sibling, and grandma on the bench to wait and watch. If I remember correctly, that is exactly the problem Walt Disney said he was reacting to in dreaming up Disneyland.
I think many comments consisting of a "Wish we still had Horizons instead of Mission Space" nature are of a grass-is-always-greener variety. However, I proudly count myself among those who would rather take the whole family on an attraction like Pirates than Test Track. Addressing the "Immersive Environment", wouldn't we all agree that one feels more immersed after 15 minutes than 3 minutes? All things being equal, of course.
Lastly, I'm afraid that on a certain level, the powers that be take for granted that people like us will keep coming back regardless, and that it is the families debating between Six Flags, Busch Gardens and the like that they are trying to woo.
Yeah! Carousel of Progress!

 

[GenerationX]

When I experience an attraction at WDW, I expect to be dazzled. Audio-Animatronics, for the most part, are not dazzling. I rarely look at them in awe.

Not only are AAs generally dull, they represent lazy storytelling. It's easy to tell a story when you're simply building the sets and putting AA characters in them. It's linear, it's concrete, and it takes no imagination whatsoever.

When AAs are used to help (as opposed to dominate) in the telling of the story, they can be very welcome contributors. EE and HM are prime examples of effective use of AAs. AA-heavy attractions tend to need other factors to hold my interest. Splash Mountain works because the story itself is so amusing. Pirates, on the other hand, is not compelling without the special effects. SSE ... dullsville.

I'd rather take the whole family on Test Track, Soarin', or Turtle Talk than sit on an omnimover and watch a bunch of dolls move.

 

[TestTrack]

When I experience an attraction at WDW, I expect to be dazzled. Audio-Animatronics, for the most part, are not dazzling. I rarely look at them in awe.

Not only are AAs generally dull, they represent lazy storytelling. It's easy to tell a story when you're simply building the sets and putting AA characters in them. It's linear, it's concrete, and it takes no imagination whatsoever.

When AAs are used to help (as opposed to dominate) in the telling of the story, they can be very welcome contributors. EE and HM are prime examples of effective use of AAs. AA-heavy attractions tend to need other factors to hold my interest. Splash Mountain works because the story itself is so amusing. Pirates, on the other hand, is not compelling without the special effects. SSE ... dullsville.

I'd rather take the whole family on Test Track, Soarin', or Turtle Talk than sit on an omnimover and watch a bunch of dolls move.

I have set up a new shop in town. We specialize in all sizes of flamesuits. Don't go on any forum without one!

They start at just $50...feel free to paypal me the money

 

[Main Street USA]

When I experience an attraction at WDW, I expect to be dazzled. Audio-Animatronics, for the most part, are not dazzling. I rarely look at them in awe.

Not only are AAs generally dull, they represent lazy storytelling. It's easy to tell a story when you're simply building the sets and putting AA characters in them. It's linear, it's concrete, and it takes no imagination whatsoever.

When AAs are used to help (as opposed to dominate) in the telling of the story, they can be very welcome contributors. EE and HM are prime examples of effective use of AAs. AA-heavy attractions tend to need other factors to hold my interest. Splash Mountain works because the story itself is so amusing. Pirates, on the other hand, is not compelling without the special effects. SSE ... dullsville.

I'd rather take the whole family on Test Track, Soarin', or Turtle Talk than sit on an omnimover and watch a bunch of dolls move.

The fact that you call SSE "dullsville" shows the value of your opinion on this subject.

 

[Victor]

I have set up a new shop in town. We specialize in all sizes of flamesuits. Don't go on any forum without one!

They start at just $50...feel free to paypal me the money

:lol: