So you're saying the 'early hype' is the problem? The problem with the Yeti was caused by a physicality issue surely? I'm 100% certain that had Joe Rhodes not spoken about it, that we'd still be in the same position we are now with the Yeti. It was 100% a physical problem, rather than hype that created the issue.
As you say "I understand they have next to nothing in common physically", meaning the only thing left to compare is what somebody says about it. As what somebody said about the Yeti had nothing to do with the problems, what's said about this also shouldn't have any bearings on the reliability of it then surely?
I suppose an option would therefore be to not try making any large animatronics because there were problems with another large animatronic built many years previously? That would mean not trying to ever improve because the last time Disney tried that by building the Yeti is eventually failed to deliver what was expected? The problem with that logic is that we'd be stuck without improvements if we never sought to better and improve what went before?
This thread has kind of gone from "There won't be enough animatronics and they won't be as good" to now somehow saying even though they have nothing in common physically and the animatronics look more advanced, that they might not work because Disney has hyped it up which is the only real similarity by your own admission.
It's kind of like saying "The roller coaster will only be impressive if it works", that applies to everything be it coasters or animatronics. If we take away the physical similarities which you just have, all that's left is the hype. Most people were complaining that we didn't know enough about this attraction upgrade, in effect that Disney weren't telling us enough. Now Disney is saying it's great and take a look at these animatronics, it's like that's being turned into a possible negative.
