Toy Story Land expansion announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios

[djkidkaz]

I must work at a different wavelength than the average guest. I'm thinking about park operations and guest satisfaction.

What will all those guests coming for Star Wars Land do with the rest of their day? This isn't Disneyland where there are dozens of other rides to go on while you wait around for your Fastpass. And what kind of guest satisfaction numbers do you think materialize when guests wait 4 hours for a ride that they were unable to get a Fastpass for 60+10 days out?

Yes. Star Wars Land will look wonderful. But, they are not doing enough with this park. You need capacity for all of the additional guests that will certainly come for SWL. They aren't producing that capacity.

Oh I agree 100% with that. This park is not going to be able to handle the Guests that are going to arrive for Star Wars Land. Im still holding out hope that there is at least something else in the works that we are unaware of at this point.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

There seems to be some misunderstanding within this thread about the function of concept art -- there won't be any substantial difference between the aerial art and the finished product unless otherwise announced (see Seven Dwarfs Mine vs. Fantasyland Meet and Greets - an announcement was made and art revised to reflect it). Small surface details such as color scheme and placement of props may be altered, but certainly Disney is not intentionally leaving out elements such as theming on the coaster supports to "surprise" guests when it opens. Pieces of art like this are meant to be informational. Elements may be obscured or unclear from the vantage point of aerial art - what's inside the covered queue of Slinky? No idea - but to think they're purposefully excluding the design from the art defeats the entire point of creating it in the first place.

 

[Goofyernmost]

As far as I've seen, everyone agrees it will be better than the Playlands. However, that does not automatically make it good enough. And since when is "good enough" the goal for a Disney project.

It costs too much, takes up too much space, is considered to be too much of DHS's rebirth, and does not truly fulfill any of the park's needs (a dramatic increase in capacity, especially without height requirements). I don't need to see it to feel that way.

Based upon my knowledge of the project, I also feel the theming is below Disney's bar. Bare coaster steel? At least meet the lofty standards set by Gadget's Go Coaster.
View attachment 212442

Considering that it is supposed to represent a toy roller coaster left out in the back yard by a kid, a bare coaster is exactly what it is supposed to look like and completely in theme. Just because you've been spoiled by the mountains doesn't mean that this doesn't have a different way of looking. There will, I'm sure, be a number of small other type toys laying about randomly and that is exactly how it would look in the back yard of a kid. Why constantly try and make a silk purse from a sows ear. It is going to look like it is supposed to look like.

It fulfills many of the parks needs unless for some reason vitamins have been left out of everyone's diets and only people that are less then 40" tall are going to be allowed in that part of the park. And the complaint about it taking up to much land? Seriously? 7DMT was criticized for not taking up enough room and since we personally do not pay for any of the land it sits on, what the hell difference does it make if it stretches all the way to Rte. 192. They weren't going to use that land for anything else anyway. Just because they made the coaster shorter does not in anyway imply that they would have added anything else to the area. It is a compact area with three related attractions connected with Toy Story. Anymore then that and you have a separate theme park, which BTW, would also be complained about using all that land for one IP. There is, honest to god, no way to make people happy.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

I must work at a different wavelength than the average guest. I'm thinking about park operations and guest satisfaction.

What will all those guests coming for Star Wars Land do with the rest of their day? This isn't Disneyland where there are dozens of other rides to go on while you wait around for your Fastpass. And what kind of guest satisfaction numbers do you think materialize when guests wait 4 hours for a ride that they were unable to get a Fastpass for 60+10 days out?

Yes. Star Wars Land will look wonderful. But, they are not doing enough with this park. You need capacity for all of the additional guests that will certainly come for SWL. They aren't producing that capacity.

If you haven't already I highly suggest a trip to Wizarding World of Harry Potter. It has two coasters and one of them is Flight of the Hippogriff. It is a very short, coaster with not much theme to it at all. The main attractions are Escape from Gringotts and Forbidden Journey. They are both, in my opinion, incredible rides. So 4 rides total, one a small low theme coaster, one is the other coaster Dueling Dragons which doesnt have much theme either.

So why do people spend so much time in this park? It is all about the experience. Even people that aren't in love with the Harry Potter world seem to have a blast and can spend a half a day to a full day in there. It is wonderful in its theme, decor, it's "feel". There is an ice cream shop, a quick service style restaurant, and some other shops.

I bring this up for the people arguing that DHS needs more rides to get people onto. I think you discount how much time people will spend wandering both Toy Story Land and Star Wars Land just soaking it up, visiting the shops, etc. I can't say for sure that Toy Story will nail the theme but I think Star Wars is a safe bet. I can easily see people spending a large chunk of time in both of these lands just experiencing them.

Disney is trying to combat Harry Potter and Universals who's visitor numbers are going WAY up while Disneys fell last year below a threshold they had never hit before. Harry Potter on the surface (only 4 rides) sounds like people wouldn't spend more than an hour or two there but many are spending a half day to the better part of a whole day there. I don't think visitor satisfaction can be judged on number of rides anymore. Not with how they are trying to build these lands where the park area itself IS an attraction in an of itself.

 

[danlb_2000]

If you haven't already I highly suggest a trip to Wizarding World of Harry Potter. It has two coasters and one of them is Flight of the Hippogriff. It is a very short, coaster with not much theme to it at all. The main attractions are Escape from Gringotts and Forbidden Journey. They are both, in my opinion, incredible rides. So 4 rides total, one a small low theme coaster, one is the other coaster Dueling Dragons which doesnt have much theme either.

So why do people spend so much time in this park? It is all about the experience. Even people that aren't in love with the Harry Potter world seem to have a blast and can spend a half a day to a full day in there. It is wonderful in its theme, decor, it's "feel". There is an ice cream shop, a quick service style restaurant, and some other shops.

I bring this up for the people arguing that DHS needs more rides to get people onto. I think you discount how much time people will spend wandering both Toy Story Land and Star Wars Land just soaking it up, visiting the shops, etc. I can't say for sure that Toy Story will nail the theme but I think Star Wars is a safe bet. I can easily see people spending a large chunk of time in both of these lands just experiencing them.

Disney is trying to combat Harry Potter and Universals who's visitor numbers are going WAY up while Disneys fell last year below a threshold they had never hit before. Harry Potter on the surface (only 4 rides) sounds like people wouldn't spend more than an hour or two there but many are spending a half day to the better part of a whole day there. I don't think visitor satisfaction can be judged on number of rides anymore. Not with how they are trying to build these lands where the park area itself IS an attraction in an of itself.

If people spend a lot of time in Star Wars land we are going to have the opposite problem, it will be way over crowded.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

If people spend a lot of time in Star Wars land we are going to have the opposite problem, it will be way over crowded.

It will be way over crowded no matter what, it's just too popular of an IP. The benefit though is that it takes people out of other areas of the park, which is a good thing for those not in Star Wars land. Ideally you will have a lot of people just wandering the lands, a lot of people shopping and eating, and then the people waiting for or riding the rides. If it's spread out, it shouldn't be a huge issue once the launch hype dies down.

 

[jt04]

I must work at a different wavelength than the average guest. I'm thinking about park operations and guest satisfaction.

What will all those guests coming for Star Wars Land do with the rest of their day? This isn't Disneyland where there are dozens of other rides to go on while you wait around for your Fastpass. And what kind of guest satisfaction numbers do you think materialize when guests wait 4 hours for a ride that they were unable to get a Fastpass for 60+10 days out?

Yes. Star Wars Land will look wonderful. But, they are not doing enough with this park. You need capacity for all of the additional guests that will certainly come for SWL. They aren't producing that capacity.

Clearly now that all the investments at WDW for infrastructure are finally catching up from
the previous neglect, you will see more and more phases of construction in the parks. We are at the beginning of new attractions not the end.

Is there any corner of any park not at some phase of development?

 

[jt04]

If people spend a lot of time in Star Wars land we are going to have the opposite problem, it will be way over crowded.

Which is a good reason Epcot adds are picking up the pace.

 

[Next Big Thing]

Well, I don't think we will be seeing:

The original plan would've been nicer. But too expensive. At least this concept actually looks like something a child built.

As to your second point, I feel (as I've said) people will be surprised by Slink Dog's height requirement. Beyond this, hourly capacity will be nothing to write home about here (and downright abysmal at A S S for a Florida park).

Mickey will also have lower hourly capacity than GMR. And the two Star Wars rides will have lower total capacity than Backlot Tour and LMA. So...all this money for a net increase of perhaps 1500 guests/hour? Pathetic. The park needs an omnimover or two, a water ride like Pirates, and a new-build Mickey. They are making poor, costly choices that will not increase how successful the park is by enough to justify the obscene cost of this work.

Saucers should be 600/hour based on Junkyard Jamboree, correct?

 

[danlb_2000]

Saucers should be 600/hour based on Junkyard Jamboree, correct?

Vehicle count and capacity should be the same, so the only variable is going to be the ride length which can be any length they desire.

 

[Next Big Thing]

Vehicle count and capacity should be the same, so the only variable is going to be the ride length which can be any length they desire.

I can't imagine it will be much different (Example: All spinner rides have roughly the same ride time).

 

[Jones14]

Saucers should be 600/hour based on Junkyard Jamboree, correct?

It should be!

Vehicle count and capacity should be the same, so the only variable is going to be the ride length which can be any length they desire.

I do wonder what music they'll go with. I really enjoy the opening to Toy Story 2, and Space Ranger Spin has some nice twists on the main theme. I'm also hoping that The Claw grabs down at the vehicles or moves around the ceiling a little; it'd be a shame for it to sit in the center as a decorated set piece.

 

[*Q*]

Can't say I share the sentiment.
Any move away from the blocky, industrial look of the "studios" version of this park, red bricks or no, is a step in the right direction.

What exactly about the Pixar Place approach appealed to you?

I would say for a few different reasons. It was cool having a representation of Pixar headquarters in the park, kind of a cool addition to the whole "how the magic is made" basis of the park. I love the red brick architecture, makes it more of a unique area across all of the parks versus what Toy Story Land will be. And I love the idea of having a bunch of Pixar attractions all collected in one place, especially if it means they're not shoehorned into inappropriate places across the other parks.

It'd be cool if the Pixar headquarters facade was the entryway into a true Pixar Place area (not just Midway Mania) with Toy Story and Monsters Inc.and Incredibles and etc. attractions, with character meet-and-greets for everybody. And then by that same token, it'd be kinda cool if Skywalker Ranch was the facade gateway into Star Wars Land, keeping the "how the magic is made" aspect alive just a little bit.

 

[No Name]

I've been going over the original and the new art and I have to say I've changed my mind. YES before I did used to think the original was better but I realized something that has me very excited. In the original art there is a big shovel and trenches where Slinky goes near or slightly down into and the coaster takes up a vast part of this new land. This has been replaced with walking paths under and around the coaster. It also appears that possibly there are things to do in and around the coaster area that were not available in the first art.

This to me makes the land potentially much more immersive. In the original art the walkable areas are large and quite limited. In the new art there appear to be paths all over the place.

Those paths aren't for guests, fact.

We actually lost a path from the original. The original had a road-looking path that went over and under the coaster.

 

[marni1971]

Those paths aren't for guests, fact.
.

This.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

Those paths aren't for guests, fact.

We actually lost a path from the original. The original had a road-looking path that went over and under the coaster.

Well that's a big letdown. Still going to be optimistic about this. No reason to pass final judgment till the land is much nearer to completion and people are actually experiencing it.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Well that's a big letdown. Still going to be optimistic about this. No reason to pass final judgment till the land is much nearer to completion and people are actually experiencing it.

So we should lock this thread then.

 

[Kman101]

So we should lock this thread then.

Why?

It's like everything else Disney does. Some will be critical, some will eat it up, some will fall in the middle.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

So we should lock this thread then.

Are you aware of what the term "final judgement" means? It means someones opinion of something is definitive, and can't change how they feel because their opinion has been "finalized". Since we're discussing something that is literally a dirt pit at this stage, it's my opinion that it seems hasty to pass final judgement at this point.

Ironically, my post means the complete opposite of locking the thread. Instead, not passing a final judgement obviously opens the door for more conversation.

 

[danlb_2000]

Well that's a big letdown. Still going to be optimistic about this. No reason to pass final judgment till the land is much nearer to completion and people are actually experiencing it.

You are definitely new here.