lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
That doesn’t answer anything about designing to scale. It seems we are again at You don’t know, therefore it must not be.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Toy Story Land expansion announced for Disney's Hollywood Studios
- Thread starter wdwmagic
- Start date
phillip9698
Well-Known Member
Really sad that Disney is building rides that most people enjoy. Right?
MrHappy
Well-Known Member
Coming in a little late here. Is the argument that immersion is ruined because there will be a variety of "scales" used throughout? So it's not acceptable/good enough if all the toys scattered throughout are all 2:1 (lets just say), but some are 4:1 and 6:1 and whatever. Perhaps this is done to give greater visual impact vs accuracy which may actually ruin the effect that is trying to be achieved. For example, if a Lincoln log was laying on it's side at 10' high, an Army man next to it would probably by 50' high. Now that's off putting, but accurate. So what are we talking about again?
RSoxNo1
Well-Known Member
Sure it's subjective, but at this point in time I think that park has two E tickets (Tower and RnRC). I'd say Star Tours is a very solid D, bordering an E, Toy Story is a D with E ticket popularity and GMR is a D for 2 more days. I have a hard time calling any "non-nighttime" show an E and I'd probably call Muppets a C and Indy a D (albeit a dated one).
Having said that, DHS is 2+ years away from being a park again, and at that point it's taking a huge step forward. Depending on the Epcot redesign timing, I could see Epcot being the lowest attended WDW park in 2019-2020.
Squirrel Girl spinner confirmed!
Kman101
Well-Known Member
Lol. Read into my posts what you will. It's called my own opinion. I'm so sorry I think they could have done better
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
It boils down to this: look at the existing Toy Story Lands. Do they give the genuine impression that you are have shrunk down and are in a backyard? To me, they do not. Not at all. Instead, they give the impression that you are in a sparsely themed area with fairly random decorations. There is no sense of unity or immersion.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
How charmingly condescending!
Why, with childlike imagination, even Six Flags is wonderfully themed! With childlike imagination, why bother building intricately detailed rides and environments - just rely on the childlike imagination! And the great thing is, its so much cheaper then building theme parks on the level that Disney is known for.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
There's lots of examples of things that aren't literally to scale. We all know about forced perspective on Main Street. The point is to make the guest FEEL that they are immersed, that things are the right size and that the environment is coherent. If the problem with TSL was isolated to two or three objects, it wouldn't be a problem. But this is not the problem with TSL. The problem with TSL is that, based on all evidence, it does not feel like you are in Andy's backyard. It feels like a collection of Toy Story related things scattered around an area. In large part, this is due to the fact that the scale varies - not on one or two elements - but wildly and consistently.
In the past, there has been a general consensus (not held by everyone, but by a majority) that TSL in Hong Kong and Paris is the worst Disney has to offer - and that judgement wasn't based solely on the lackluster ride lineup. It was based on the fact that the areas looked garish and cheap and didn't adequately convey its theme. Now, with TSL coming to WDW - and in the key role of about half of the long-awaited MGM makeover - those opinions are suddenly a lot less popular.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
You don't know so therefore it must suck. All the same with different emotions. It's easy to exaggerate a segment of design and dismiss it as being less then you desired, doesn't make it bad though. But, whatever, if you want to believe it will be awful, for you it will be, I plan on waiting to see how I feel about it and not place standardized expectations on everything that is built. I like to go in with no particular expectations, and judge it when I can actually touch it and experience it.
Goofyernmost
Well-Known Member
I was hoping it would be 'charmingly' condescending, because all I have ever read from your posts are it is crap. Everywhere you look. You may or may not preach being a fan of Disney, if you have said you were, I must have missed it. But, from your posts the only thing you ever add to the conversation is how awful the "current" Disney is. How they are always doing on the cheap. How they design with (gasp) children in mind once in awhile. And how cheap they are. So even if what I said was a compliment I wouldn't expect you to see it any way other then condescending. That said, whatever! Be disappointed in everything, it isn't going to matter to me even a little, so I will end my part in this useless conversation. Maybe I will jump back in when it is completed and I really know what it looks like and feels like. I might even agree with you at that point. So complain away.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
I'm sorry I offended your delicate sensibilities.
Of course I'm a fan of Disney. That's why I post here. And I have posted positive things. But you're correct, I mainly post about my concerns and frustration with the continued deterioration of the parks. Because I really, REALLY love WDW, and it hurts to see what it is becoming.
And if your issue is that I feel Disney has been cheap, I don't know what to tell you. They have. Prior to Pandora, egregiously so. Your issue might be with them, not with people who point it out.
Saying I'm upset because "they design with children in mind once in awhile" is, of course, completely intellectually dishonest. I feel, and have said, they should ALWAYS design with children in mind - and adults as well. That's what Disney's parks are meant to be about. But they - and posters like yourself - frequently use "it's for children!" as a way to deflect criticism of shoddy theming and lousy rides. As though beloved rides like Small World, Peter Pan, Pirates, and Jungle Cruise weren't designed with children in mind.
And it is SO FUNNY how folks like you only have a problem with advanced discussion of an area when its not adulatory. As though you'd be weeping about pre-judgement if I had posted "Man, this looks so awesome!" (which I have about SWL, but not often enough to prove my fan bonafides to your satisfaction.)
MrHappy
Well-Known Member
Ok, will do in 2018 when it opens. Good plan my man.
[purposely ignoring the other TSL's as this one could be better/different. won't know until WDW's opens]
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The critique of scale comes from the two existing lands. They are built and known. Maintaining scale is a basic concept.
MrHappy
Well-Known Member
Did you enjoy the Slinky coaster in the existing lands?
NormC
Well-Known Member
The two existing lands are not Andy's backyard. They are just an assortment of toys from Toy Story. The only thing we have for reference is the concept art and we all know that is just an artist's impression of what we might get.
EDIT: I have been shown marketing docs that say that they are Andy's back yard so I stand corrected. I was wrong.
EDIT: I have been shown marketing docs that say that they are Andy's back yard so I stand corrected. I was wrong.
Last edited:
Are you aware of any official Disney stance that the scale of the land is Green Army Men sized? I don't remember hearing or reading anything official, just folks on the internet claiming that's the case, which it could be, my memory isn't perfect.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The Toy Story Playlands are set in Andy’s backyard. Toy Story Land is not conceptual different from the Toy Story Playlands. Same story/experience, different rides.
Last edited:
HMF
Well-Known Member
I think my very low expectations got even lower.