Toy Story Playland

[wdrive]

Do you think most guests even care what the theme is anyway?

Yes, it's why we don't have the Frozen Jungle Cruise.

 

[marni1971]

The owner of this website has said F! is leaving.

@wdwmagic did?

 

[wdwmagic]

@wdwmagic did?

Ehhh nope. I've said that a replacement has been on the cards several times over the years, but it's never materialized.

 

[marni1971]

Ehhh nope. I've said that a replacement has been on the cards several times over the years, but it's never materialized.

Just checking

 

[ford91exploder]

It's not wrong in EVERY WAY because it's simply my opinion, just like you have yours. You hate the idea of TSPL and will argue against it no matter what. It's not up to you or to me to determine what the park needs but I'm not saying ALL it needs is kiddy rides. It needs those on top of what you listed Disneyhead'71 (An E/D/C). If you add just those rides, then it's new Fantasyland all over again. Yes it adds a bunch of rides but they aren't going to do all that (IMO). You also have to be realistic. I'd love all of what you'd listed. But the park ALSO needs flat rides. IMO. I'm NOT saying that's *all* it needs. If we get JUST that, I won't be a very happy camper.

Nor will I - All the parks need more flat rides, Better still if they are 'people eaters' (purple is an upcharge event).

 

[lazyboy97o]

Do you think most guests even care what the theme is anyway?

When asked, sure, guests wI'll fail to take note of theme and quality. This however does not play out in practice, otherwise other enterprises over the decades would have been far more successful, and in many cases would have survived.

 

[doctornick]

The owner of this website has said F! is leaving.

Wait, what? When was this mentioned?

 

[marni1971]

Wait, what? When was this mentioned?

See my post above.

 

[GoofGoof]

But you really don't see those complaints about the Wizarding World of Harry Potter or even something like Springfield. New Orleans Square is still praised to this day with no new rides since 1969.

True. That's a valid point. Both Potter lands and Carsland were really only 1 headliner and in the case of Carsland 2 C tickets and in the case of WWOHP 2 repurposed rides. In all 3 cases the overall environment was more than enough to overcome the lack of rides added. I think this will apply to Star Wars (hopefully) with this project. I view the Pixar side of the project to be more to add volume. However, if they fail to add at least 1 headliner type ride (D or E ticket) then it will be highly criticized by most fans (including me).

I really think the Springfield area was a nice addition, but if they put that into DHS people would definitely be more critical. It's hard to slam Universal for it when they were building so many other things. They get a free pass from most. I think that if FLE happened in 1995 or if WDW would have been building multiple E-tickets in addition there would have been a lot less criticism.

 

[ToTBellHop]

Ehhh nope. I've said that a replacement has been on the cards several times over the years, but it's never materialized.

Sorry--my bad. Could have sworn--maybe a similarly-named member or maybe I am just seeing things I want to see!

 

[lazyboy97o]

I view the Pixar side of the project to be more to add volume.

This idea has been repeated a few times, but flat rides really do not have stellar capacity. They work as diversions to help thin crowds here and there, not as a viable means of increasing attraction capacity.

 

[twebber55]

This idea has been repeated a few times, but flat rides really do not have stellar capacity. They work as diversions to help thin crowds here and there, not as a viable means of increasing attraction capacity.

do you think WDI viewed DHS as a place with very little kid stuff and added this to alleviate that?

 

[wdrive]

do you think WDI viewed DHS as a place with very little kid stuff and added this to alleviate that?

WDI don't make these decisions that's TDO's or Burbank's decision.

But yes I'd guess that is the reasoning.

 

[GoofGoof]

This idea has been repeated a few times, but flat rides really do not have stellar capacity. They work as diversions to help thin crowds here and there, not as a viable means of increasing attraction capacity.

This is true, but it's also a volume approach. I also think any flat rides added should be double capacity (like Dumbo). They can probably build TSPL with 3 double capacity flat rides for about the cost of 1 dark ride. The original TSPL in Paris cost less than $100M so a double capacity version is probably a little over that. A standard flat ride can handle about 500 riders per hour so 3 double flat rides should in theory absorb 3,000 guests per hour. That's the equivalent of a huge people eater like Pirates or HM or equal to BTMRR and Space Mt combined. A smaller dark ride like Pooh or Pan is in the 800 per hour range. So even 3 single capacity flat rides is roughly the equivalent of 2 smaller dark rides but at a much lower price tag.

 

[lazyboy97o]

do you think WDI viewed DHS as a place with very little kid stuff and added this to alleviate that?

People like to bring up little kids, but outside of gentle spinners like carousels or Dumbo copies most of them do have height limits. The more likely reason is a quick way to pad out numbers and in bulk they become somewhat substantial. It's a strategy seen across the industry. You rarely see Cedar Fair or Six a flags announce the addition of a single flat ride, unless it is a very large one. Instead the common tactic is three flat rides and a refreshed surrounding environment.

This is true, but it's also a volume approach. I also think any flat rides added should be double capacity (like Dumbo). They can probably build TSPL with 3 double capacity flat rides for about the cost of 1 dark ride. The original TSPL in Paris cost less than $100M so a double capacity version is probably a little over that. A standard flat ride can handle about 500 riders per hour so 3 double flat rides should in theory absorb 3,000 guests per hour. That's the equivalent of a huge people eater like Pirates or HM or equal to BTMRR and Space Mt combined. A smaller dark ride like Pooh or Pan is in the 800 per hour range. So even 3 single capacity flat rides is roughly the equivalent of 2 smaller dark rides but at a much lower price tag.

Doubling flat rides means double the equipment to maintain, double the square footage used, increased staffing needs and increased need to convert people that they need to experience this set of attractions.

 

[GoofGoof]

People like to bring up little kids, but outside of gentle spinners like carousels or Dumbo copies most of them do have height limits. The more likely reason is a quick way to pad out numbers and in bulk they become somewhat substantial. It's a strategy seen across the industry. You rarely see Cedar Fair or Six a flags announce the addition of a single flat ride, unless it is a very large one. Instead the common tactic is three flat rides and a refreshed surrounding environment.


Doubling flat rides means double the equipment to maintain, double the square footage used, increased staffing needs and increased need to convert people that they need to experience this set of attractions.

Height restrictions are just minimums set for safety. There are plenty of rides where a kid is tall enough but it's still not appropriate for them. Dinosaur has a pretty low height limit but I found out the hard way that it's not necessarily a good idea for a 4 year old because it scared the heck out of him. Most of the flat rides from TSPL and DCA rumored to be cloned don't have a very high height limit. By age 2 my kids were over 36 inches and by age 4 over 40. Infants and toddlers may end up excluded but most little kids will be fine.

Doubling rides adds more equipment, but it doesn't double the costs and available land is not an issue. You are sharing a queue and an overall area. You also don't need twice the staff since some of the jobs would be redundant. I think after the success of the double Dumbo experiment and the issues with having to go back and add capacity to TSMM and Soarin it would be foolish to not at least consider building double versions of some or all of these rides to increase their capacity. If this project is a success crowds will be bigger.

 

[Next Big Thing]

The Monsters, Inc. Coaster, a Ratatouille themed RR's Cartoon Spin and a Cars themed version of the Rat ride in Paris would give the capacity and bring the Disney Quality. The C, D, E trifecta.

Or we can settle for carnival rides. TDO's choice.

This is a good point, why not flesh out Pixar Place with higher capacity rides. But then where are we, somewhere around 7 actual rides still? Why not add a Maters or the new Luigi's LPS, even say if we aren't talking about TSPL, just in addition to a cars ride or something. Rides like those help to flesh out an area and Maters is a ton of fun.

I'm not saying plop down a carnival, but what i'm saying is that rides like that do help to flesh out areas and add kinetics that weren't there before. When Kang n' Kodos Twirl n Hurl was added at USF, it was praised because of the kinetic energy it brought to the area and along the water.

I see your point that we don't want to turn this into a carnival, but the place does need rides like this.

 

[Fantasmicguy]

Is a bit weak and will be lost on most guests.

It is only weak if they make it weak.

 

[Ignohippo]

True. That's a valid point. Both Potter lands and Carsland were really only 1 headliner and in the case of Carsland 2 C tickets and in the case of WWOHP 2 repurposed rides. In all 3 cases the overall environment was more than enough to overcome the lack of rides added. I think this will apply to Star Wars (hopefully) with this project. I view the Pixar side of the project to be more to add volume. However, if they fail to add at least 1 headliner type ride (D or E ticket) then it will be highly criticized by most fans (including me).

I really think the Springfield area was a nice addition, but if they put that into DHS people would definitely be more critical. It's hard to slam Universal for it when they were building so many other things. They get a free pass from most. I think that if FLE happened in 1995 or if WDW would have been building multiple E-tickets in addition there would have been a lot less criticism.

Jeez. If Disney buit Springfield, the exact same thing would cost $300 mil, would be the only major addition in the entire resort for 5 years after, and would be on every Disney commercial for years.

At Uni, it's just another thing they've done to improve the parks and is hardly even publicized.

 

[ford91exploder]

True. That's a valid point. Both Potter lands and Carsland were really only 1 headliner and in the case of Carsland 2 C tickets and in the case of WWOHP 2 repurposed rides. In all 3 cases the overall environment was more than enough to overcome the lack of rides added. I think this will apply to Star Wars (hopefully) with this project. I view the Pixar side of the project to be more to add volume. However, if they fail to add at least 1 headliner type ride (D or E ticket) then it will be highly criticized by most fans (including me).

I really think the Springfield area was a nice addition, but if they put that into DHS people would definitely be more critical. It's hard to slam Universal for it when they were building so many other things. They get a free pass from most. I think that if FLE happened in 1995 or if WDW would have been building multiple E-tickets in addition there would have been a lot less criticism.

If FLE had the original as designed by WDI SDMT (much longer and more show scenes) instead of the 'value engineered' one approved by TDO the buzz on FLE would have been much better.