News Tron coaster coming to the Magic Kingdom

[SplashJacket]

I think Florida's Pirates is better than the Shanghai version.

The Shanghai version is neat and the ride system is really cool, but there's too much watching a video on a screen in front of you. It does a good job incorporating physical effects with the video, but it's just not as impressive/immersive as being in a space full of physical sets, AAs, etc.

Legitimately could not disagree with a post more.

Shanghai Pirates executes pacing, atmosphere, and a sense of grandeur better than any other ride in the world.

I still consider Shanghai Pirates the best ride in the world, with Rise of the Resistance being the best attraction (total immersion and incredible depth).

Tron, while a great ride (not as good as either Guardians or Hagrid's -- but it was never trying to be), will be a superb addition to the Magic Kingdom and will rejuvenate and invigorate a hole within the Magic Kingdom. Perfection isn't required for a quality addition.

 

[SplashJacket]

I'm not saying there's something wrong with him for liking Shanghai Pirates more. That's fine.

But it's not an objectively better attraction. Florida Pirates is better than Shanghai Pirates to me (and I'm apparently not the only one). Shanghai Pirates could have been fantastic but it suffers from stopping to watch videos. That's not why I ride theme park attractions -- you shouldn't be stopping during the ride to watch a movie play on a screen (there are some exceptions, but mainly attractions where the whole experience is a video isn't really doable in any other way, like Flight of Passage -- and I still generally like those less than other attractions); I can do that at home. Video/projections that are interspersed with other things can work very well, but Shanghai Pirates has a couple of moments where it's literally just watching a video.

It's still a quality attraction, but that really detracts from it.

The fact that you're watching a movie on a screen at all is the problem -- if you're moving during it that doesn't really help. It's the same reason I don't think Forbidden Journey is an especially good ride.

Again, I'm not saying Shanghai Pirates is bad. I would happily see the ride system at WDW. But I don't think it's as good as Florida's Pirates, much less the DL or Paris versions. I don't get why people are unable to accept that not everyone thinks Shanghai Pirates is an absolute masterpiece. It's fine if you love it but that doesn't make it objectively so great that anyone who disagrees is wrong.

I am fairly certain you've ridden Shanghai's POTC, which makes this comment even more deranged than it seems at first glance. At no point does Shanghai Pirates stop moving, and at no point is the primary action of the ride occur on screens. The screens act as a backdrop and world-building but not as the primary focus.

Honestly, reading through your comment, I really don't see how it's possible you've ridden this ride. I think you've done exactly what you say is possible with screen rides, watched a POV at home, and are casting judgments.



Riding Cosmic Rewind feels DRASTICALLY different than we could've expected from leaks, clips, or even a POV. Riding Tron feels DRASTICALLY different than we could've expected from leaks, clips, or even a POV. So while these clips or existing POVs are nice, since some people have ridden Tron, they can attest to their experience.

While I was in Shanghai, I chose to ride its POTC around a dozen times and Tron about four. I believe I rode Roaring Rapids about 3 times, but no other ride captured my attention or time as much as POTC, but Tron was second.

Very solid ride that I'm happy is coming stateside. I wish it were longer, but its ambiance is far more valuable than its on-ride experience, if only the speedway were replaced with an asset.

 

[UNCgolf]

I am fairly certain you've ridden Shanghai's POTC, which makes this comment even more deranged than it seems at first glance. At no point does Shanghai Pirates stop moving, and at no point is the primary action of the ride occur on screens. The screens act as a backdrop and world-building but not as the primary focus.

Honestly, reading through your comment, I really don't see how it's possible you've ridden this ride. I think you've done exactly what you say is possible with screen rides, watched a POV at home, and are casting judgments.



Riding Cosmic Rewind feels DRASTICALLY different than we could've expected from leaks, clips, or even a POV. Riding Tron feels DRASTICALLY different than we could've expected from leaks, clips, or even a POV. So while these clips or existing POVs are nice, since some people have ridden Tron, they can attest to their experience.

While I was in Shanghai, I chose to ride its POTC around a dozen times and Tron about four. I believe I rode Roaring Rapids about 3 times, but no other ride captured my attention as time as much as POTC, but Tron was second.

Very solid ride that I'm happy is coming stateside. I wish it were longer, but its ambiance is far more valuable than its on-ride experience (similar to Journey to the Center of the Earth in Tokyo).

You're right, I haven't been on it -- and that's irrelevant because I don't really care about motion. It's why I find roller coasters mostly a waste of time unless they have a significant story aspect, like Revenge of the Mummy, and why TRON is of little interest to me.

The way a ride FEELS doesn't matter to me. I don't judge it on that basis; that's the least important part of a theme park attraction.

You and others are setting up an arbitrary scale based on what you like and telling me I'm wrong for not enjoying attractions the same way you do. Shanghai Pirates is less interesting to me than Florida Pirates; riding it would make no difference to my complaints about the attraction. It still involves watching things happen on a screen; nothing about the motion of ride has any affect on that.

Is it so important to have your opinions validated that you simply cannot accept that someone looks for something different in an attraction than you do? It's bizarre.

 

[Touchdown]

UNCgolf, you’re entitled to your opinion but you are in a minority. Amusement Parks (a precursor to theme parks) were created because the public loved motion changes. People loved them so much they were willing to pay to experience it. Motion is very much a core theme park experience to this day because of it. It will always be.

 

[J4546]

I'm not a fan of screen based rides either, grongotts was a major disappointment imo. I like soaring amd pandora ride though.

 

[UNCgolf]

UNCgolf, you’re entitled to your opinion but you are in a minority. Amusement Parks (a precursor to theme parks) were created because the public loved motion changes. People loved them so much they were willing to pay to experience it. Motion is very much a core theme park experience to this day because of it. It will always be.

Amusement parks and theme parks are different things. Amusement parks rely almost completely on motion (Six Flags, e.g.); motion is only part of the experience and doesn't have to be the main driver. It's why rides like Spaceship Earth and Haunted Mansion are still among the best attractions anyone has ever built.

Regardless, I know it's a minority opinion. Why does that matter? I've repeatedly pointed out that other people can feel differently; I'm not the one acting personally insulted about other people's opinion of an attraction.

For one last time, it's completely fine to think Shanghai Pirates is the best ride on the planet! I have never suggested otherwise -- I haven't even said it was a bad ride!

 

[SplashJacket]

You're right, I haven't been on it -- and that's completely irrelevant because I don't really care about motion. It's why I find roller coasters mostly a waste of time unless they have a significant story aspect, like Revenge of the Mummy.

The way a ride FEELS doesn't matter to me. I don't judge it on that basis.

You and others are setting up an arbitrary scale based on what you like and telling me I'm wrong for not enjoying attractions the same way you do. Shanghai Pirates is less interesting to me than Florida Pirates; riding it would make no difference to my complaints about the attraction. It still involves watching things happen on a screen in front of you.

Is it so important to have your opinions validated that you simply cannot accept that someone looks for something different in an attraction than you do?

If the way a ride FEELS doesn't matter to you, an at-home POV and on-ride experience should be synonymous. You can watch 360 POVs and strap on a VR headset and that would deliver an identical level of satisfaction.

It's not that you don't like a ride you've never been on that bothers me. It's that your complaints regarding the ride are invalid.

Tron's issues are its unthemed show building, short length, modest capacity, the extreme cost for what you get, unfriendly restraint system (the back rows of the vehicles are accommodating, so not a huge issue), lack of animatronics, lack of storytelling depth, placement in Magic Kingdom, it slows to a crawl entering the show building, and some other complaints you could conjure up. All those are valid complaints.

Arguing about stuff that doesn't exist or happen is a waste of time. Saying Tron's loops are uncomfortable (it doesn't have loops), its show scenes are bad (it doesn't have show scenes), its animatronics look cheap (it doesn't have animatronics), or its preshow is annoying (it doesn't have a preshow) is silly. If you dislike Tron, dislike it for valid reasons.

You're arguing Shanghai POTC is the worst in the world because it stops in front of screens (it doesn't), the primary conflicts of the ride occur on screens (they don't), and screens dominate the ride (they don't).

Shanghai Pirates has far more elaborate, detailed, and grander scenes than any other POTC iteration. Its quantity of enormous scenes may be less, but individually, they win out. However, Shanghai POTC lacks the number of animatronics as the other iterations, so that would easily be a valid complaint.

I'm not trying to gatekeep judgment or opinions on Shanghai POTC, but if you have issues with it, have them be real. We could talk endlessly about Shanghai POTC or Tron (as the last 710 pages of this thread have showcased), but keep the discussions based in reality; there's plenty to discuss without venturing into fairyland.

 

[SplashJacket]

I'm not a fan of screen based rides either, grongotts was a major disappointment imo. I like soaring amd pandora ride though.

Amusement parks and theme parks are different things. Amusement parks rely almost completely on motion (Six Flags, e.g.); in theme parks it's only part of the experience and doesn't have to be the main driver. It's why rides like Spaceship Earth and Haunted Mansion are still among the best attractions anyone has ever built.

Regardless, I know it's a minority opinion. Why does that matter? I've repeatedly pointed out that other people can feel differently; I'm not the one acting personally insulted about other people's opinion of an attraction.

For one last time, it's completely fine to think Shanghai Pirates is the best ride on the planet! I have never suggested otherwise -- I haven't even said it was a bad ride! It's crazy that people are acting like my personal opinion and preference in theme park attractions is objectively wrong and a personal affront to them, though.

I think Gringotts is one of the biggest blunders in recent theme park years, alongside Fast and Furious, due to its parking in front of screens, failure to set expectations properly, ride's substance primarily delivered through screens, and lack of excitement.

That opinion is undoubtedly a minority opinion among the GP, maybe not here, but regardless.

I don't think Shanghai POTC or Tron fail to set expectations properly, which is a HUGE part of whether or not a ride is perceived as good.

Shanghai's POTC entrance is nondescript, lacks a preshow, and delivers a masterclass experience.

While its canopy is far from subtle, Tron's exterior shows it's a fast-moving launching coaster. It delivers the excitement that it should. My ONLY issue with Tron's interior experience (queue, ride, loading, etc.) is its meager length. The experience is so fun and aesthetically cool you want more. Tron isn't a game-changing experience. It attempts to secure the cool and fun factor, and I believe it does very well. If a ride leaves you wanting more, it generally means it's a good ride (in Tron's case, I think it took this a bit too seriously).

 

[UNCgolf]

If the way a ride FEELS doesn't matter to you, an at-home POV and on-ride experience should be synonymous. You can watch 360 POVs and strap on a VR headset and that would deliver an identical level of satisfaction.

It's not that you don't like a ride you've never been on that bothers me. It's that your complaints regarding the ride are invalid.

Tron's issues are its unthemed show building, short length, modest capacity, the extreme cost for what you get, unfriendly restraint system (the back rows of the vehicles are accommodating, so not a huge issue), lack of animatronics, lack of storytelling depth, placement in Magic Kingdom, it slows to a crawl entering the show building, and some other complaints you could conjure up. All those are valid complaints.

Arguing that stuff that doesn't exist or happen is a waste of time. Saying Tron's loops are uncomfortable (it doesn't have loops), its show scenes are bad (it doesn't have show scenes), its animatronics look cheap (it doesn't have animatronics), or its preshow is annoying (it doesn't have a preshow) is silly. If you dislike Tron, dislike it for valid reasons.

You're arguing Shanghai POTC is the worst in the world because it stops in front of screens (it doesn't), the primary conflicts of the ride occur on screens (they don't), and screens dominate the ride (they don't).

Shanghai Pirates has far more elaborate, detailed, and grander scenes than any other POTC iteration. Its quantity of enormous scenes may be less, but individually, they win out. However, Shanghai POTC lacks the number of animatronics as the other iterations, so that would easily be a valid complaint.

I'm not trying to gatekeep judgment or opinions on Shanghai POTC, but if you have issues with it, have them be real. We could talk endlessly about Shanghai POTC or Tron (as the last 710 pages of this thread have showcased), but keep the discussions based in reality; there's plenty to discuss without venturing into fairyland.

Not at all. A VR headset isn't remotely the same as inhabiting a physical space, which is exactly the issue I have with screen heavy attractions in the first place (and no, I don't think Shanghai is a screen heavy attraction compared to others). They never feel as tangible/real as a physical set with AAs etc. and it's a less impressive/immersive experience (I'm speaking in general here, not about Shanghai Pirates specifically). Anyways, it's not that the physical feel is 100% irrelevant -- e.g., the drop in Splash Mountain is a perfect ending/enhancement to that ride, and the unpleasant jerkiness of Forbidden Journey detracts from it (even if FJ was the smoothest ride in existence I still would have found it pretty underwhelming, though); it's just that it matters a lot less than other things for me.

There are absolutely parts of Shanghai Pirates where the main action is happening on a screen. It's not the majority of the ride (and I think I specifically said it wasn't), but there are a couple of times where the main focus is something happening on video, even if it's only for a few seconds. This isn't something new -- it's been discussed here as a flaw before, including by people that have been on the attraction. I'm not just making it up out of thin air so I'm not sure why you're claiming it's invalid. It's absolutely not on the level of something like Gringotts, though, so if you thought I was suggesting it was then I can understand the push back.

Shanghai Pirates looks like a good attraction, and I would happily take the ride system at WDW (even though I don't think it's the greatest in the world, it would still be one of the best attractions they've built at WDW this century if it was here). Just because I don't like it as much as the other POTCs overall doesn't mean I think it's bad -- it has some really impressive scenes. It's just that elaborate physical sets and AAs (and Shanghai has some of this too, just not to the same extent, especially with number of AAs) are more interesting to me than almost anything else on an attraction because they're more immersive/transportive for me. It's why I like NRJ so much more than other people seem to (despite the lack of AAs there).

I'm also not sure it even makes sense to compare it to the other POTCs because it's a completely different attraction. Different ride system, different plot, really even different IP considering the others are just based around generic pirates and not the specific film series (despite the shoehorned Jack Sparrow appearances). That's also why my original comment was in response to someone saying Florida POTC should be replaced with the Shanghai version. I'm certainly not opposed to that ride system, or even the ride itself, going to WDW (put it in DHS!). I just don't think it should replace the current attraction.

 

[Henry Mystic]

You're right, I haven't been on it -- and that's irrelevant because I don't really care about motion. It's why I find roller coasters mostly a waste of time unless they have a significant story aspect, like Revenge of the Mummy, and why TRON is of little interest to me.

The way a ride FEELS doesn't matter to me. I don't judge it on that basis; that's the least important part of a theme park attraction.

You and others are setting up an arbitrary scale based on what you like and telling me I'm wrong for not enjoying attractions the same way you do. Shanghai Pirates is less interesting to me than Florida Pirates; riding it would make no difference to my complaints about the attraction. It still involves watching things happen on a screen; nothing about the motion of ride has any affect on that.

Is it so important to have your opinions validated that you simply cannot accept that someone looks for something different in an attraction than you do? It's bizarre.

You haven't even been on it and are criticizing aspects of the ride that it doesn't objectively have a problem with. It's not using screens to be cheaper like Gringotts or Ratatouille; unlike them, it also never parks in front of them. Besides the Jack Sparrow Davy Jones swordfight scene, there isn't one scene that feels like a cop-out. Every other time, screens are used to enhance scenes. The dozens of screens aren't at all what you're arguing they are.

It's unreal in person.

I'm also not sure it even makes sense to compare it to the other POTCs because it's a completely different attraction. Different ride system, different plot, really even different IP considering the others are just based around generic pirates and not the specific film series (despite the shoehorned Jack Sparrow appearances). That's also why my original comment was in response to someone saying Florida POTC should be replaced with the Shanghai version. I'm certainly not opposed to that ride system, or even the ride itself, going to WDW (put it in DHS!). I just don't think it should replace the current attraction.

Completely agree with this.

 

[dreday3]

I'm sure Shanghai Pirates is a fun ride. And I love a lot of attractions that have screen - Rat, Soarin, etc.

I much prefer animatronics to screen-based rides and that's just a fact for me when it comes to Pirates. I don't want high tech, latest/greatest. I want a hairy leg swinging at me as I float under it. And a drunk man singing with a pig. Sadly, I'd like no reference to the movies at all if I could have it my way.

 

[UNCgolf]

You haven't even been on it and are criticizing aspects of the ride that it doesn't objectively have a problem with. It's not using screens to be cheaper like Gringotts or Ratatouille; unlike them, it also never parks in front of them. Besides the Jack Sparrow Davy Jones swordfight scene, there isn't one scene that feels like a cop-out. Every other time, screens are used to enhance scenes. The dozens of screens aren't at all what you're arguing they are.

I'm not sure you understand what the word objective means.

Regardless, your Sparrow swordfight comment seems like you actually agree with the only point I ever made, so... okay?

 

[UNCgolf]

I'm sure Shanghai Pirates is a fun ride. And I love a lot of attractions that have screen - Rat, Soarin, etc.

I much prefer animatronics to screen-based rides and that's just a fact for me when it comes to Pirates. I don't want high tech, latest/greatest. I want a hairy leg swinging at me as I float under it. And a drunk man singing with a pig. Sadly, I'd like no reference to the movies at all if I could have it my way.

I wouldn't call Shanghai Pirates a screen-based ride; certainly not compared to something like Flight of Passage or even Gringotts. There are a couple of places where it uses screens to its detriment IMO, but the ride has plenty of physical pieces and even has AAs -- it's quite impressive overall. And the screens are used well in places too. It's just not perfect.

 

[dreday3]

I wouldn't call Shanghai Pirates a screen-based ride; certainly not compared to something like Flight of Passage or even Gringotts. There are a couple of places where it uses screens to its detriment IMO, but the ride has plenty of physical pieces and even has AAs -- it's quite impressive overall. It's just not perfect.

Are you arguing with me about my opinion?

I prefer my Pirates ride without screens for the reasons I stated and I think Shanghai is more about the Pirate movies than the original ride is. Doesn't have the charm in my opinion. I wish they never even added Jack Sparrow to the original rides.
No big deal. Just my preference. No I haven't been on it (just watched and quite frankly, saw a lot of screen use), but if we aren't allowed to make assumptions about rides we haven't gone on, then someone better go close that Tiana thread....(and most of this one).

 

[UNCgolf]

Are you arguing with me about my opinion?

I prefer my Pirates ride without screens for the reasons I stated and I think Shanghai is more about the Pirate movies than the original ride is. Doesn't have the charm in my opinion. I wish they never even added Jack Sparrow to the original rides.
No big deal. Just my preference. No I haven't been on it (just watched and quite frankly, saw a lot of screen use), but if we aren't allowed to make assumptions about rides we haven't gone on, then someone better go close that Tiana thread....(and most of this one).

Oh I agree; adding Jack Sparrow to the original attractions was stupid.

I just didn't want anyone to have the impression that Shanghai Pirates is like a simulator attraction that's 100% based on screens.

 

[Buried20KLeague]

I think Florida's Pirates is better than the Shanghai version.

The Shanghai version is neat and the ride system is really cool, but there's too much watching a video on a screen in front of you. It does a good job incorporating physical effects with the video, but it's just not as impressive/immersive as being in a space full of physical sets, AAs, etc.

We…. Disagree GREATLY.

Edit to add: just read you haven’t ridden it. I can’t begin to tell you the experience that is pirates Shanghai.

And if you’re gonna pick a different version of pirates that’s better, you might not wanna go with the absolute worst one. Lol. Shows the favoritism for the home team.

 

[Henry Mystic]

I don't think you understand what the word objective means.

Yes, I do. It's your opinion if you like something or not. However, not all opinions are created equally because they could be based on misconstrued facts. It's your opinion, I can't force you to change that, but it doesn't mean you aren't either misinformed or that you aren't looking at the objective aspects to get to your opinion.

Let's go over some facts, shall we?

Scenes without any screens at all (not counting minor projections):

You're putting words into my mouth. I didn't say all the screens were bad, or that screens in general are automatically a problem in all circumstances. I also never argued that every single screenon Shanghai Pirates was a problem.

What exactly are the screens you have a problem with then? Are these the screens that are a problem to you, the supplementary ones like Na'vi River Journey? Mind you, the ride vehicle NEVER parks in-front of any screen.

Supplementary screens to scenes:

There are only two 'exclusively screen' scenes versus the half dozen or more on the much shorter Ratatouille and Gringotts with much less time spent in them on Shanghai's Pirates. The waterfall-esque thing is a projection before the first screen of you going underwater. The first 'screen' finds us underneath the ocean approaching Davy Jones' Locker.

It's worth noting that the scene that follows is an equally mind-blowing physical set with the Flying Dutchman at the bottom of the ocean:

The second exclusively-screen scene has the vehicle rising to the surface for the physical set pirate ship battle scene (notice how you can't even tell where the water begins and ends? It literally looks like that at times in-person):

To understand why fears about 'screens' on this ride are overblown, these two scenes clock in at a combined ~58 seconds of a 540-second-long ride. While this is subjective, in my opinion, having ridden it, neither scene takes you out of the ride, but actually, enhance the experience. I don't think a non-IMAX screen would be more effective which is why I don't view it as a cop-out. What isn't subjective is that there's only two of them:

Both of these scenes have this eerie realness to them in-person, similar to the screens in Rise's Cannon room. There is depth to them and are very convincing in what they set out to do. Given that you are moving sideways the entire time, it never feels like a simulator or screen-based ride like Gringotts during the two brief scenes (especially compared to the ride's length). Both of these transitional scenes are followed by MASSIVE set pieces that last longer.

Frankly, I don't think these transitional scenes would be improved by making them set-based, that is what's notable here. I genuinely believe, having been on it in person, it is the best execution for the story content it is handling. Mind-blowing doesn't even quite grasp those two 'screen' scenes either, I'm hard-pressed to find anyone that has been on it having a disdain for them. That is my opinion, and you can argue all day that one screen-only scene is too many, but you're acting like that's most of the ride when it's not even a quarter of it. That is what I'm talking about when I say 'objective' here.

If I'm counting right, there are 2 exclusively screen scenes, 1 screen-heavy scene (the screen I discuss next), and 8+ without screens at all or only supplementary ones.

Regardless, you just admitted my opinion about the use of screens in places isn't wrong with your Jack Sparrow swordfight comment, so... I think this is finally a good place to drop it.

No, I didn't 'admit your opinion' because it's a 20-second scene in a 540-second ride. Even if we assume the two transitional 'screen-based scenes' I already talked about are inherently bad (I don't think so, they're actually incredible in person and don't feel like cop-outs at all), that amounts to less than 15% of the entire ride! 3.7% if I was just to say the cop-out swordfight scene is the only one that's weak!

However, and exceptionally notable as it's unlike the other 2 screen-based scenes, this is the only scene on the entire ride where a screen was used in place of what sets could do, akin to Ratatouille, Mickey, Gringotts, FnF, or Kong. While it looks way better in person, as it's nowhere near as out-of-place as this YouTube POV makes it look, this is my single criticism of the entire 8-and-a-1/2-minute ride. A scene that lasts 20 seconds at most in what's a very long ride. JTTCOTE is super short by comparison, so I think Shanghai's Pirates is the more impressive ride overall. The same would go for MK's Pirates or say TRON.

This, in my view, is the only scene that feels like a cop-out on the ride. By comparison, the transition screen-based underwater scenes, in my opinion, enhance the ride. I guarantee that an actual ride on Shanghai's POTC will change nearly anyone's belief that an entirely screen-based scene is always weaker. I'd agree if the entire ride was this way but not for only two scenes; using screens in place of sets is different, and there's no excuse for it, but it's such a minor portion of the ride all things considered that I can't understand anyone thinking that it hurts this ride in a big way:

I'm not arguing that a classic-style Pirates is bad.

DLP's Pirates is literally one of my favorite rides of all time (Orlando's pales in comparison), alongside DLP's Phantom Manor, HKDL's Mystic Manor, TDS' Journey to the Center of the Earth, and Universal's Hagrid's. None have 'screenz'. Those rides can co-exist with rides like Shanghai's Pirates of the Caribbean: Battle for the Sunken Treasure and Rise of the Resistance. They are all incredible in their own ways. My issue with your take on Shanghai's Pirates is that it actually has more in common with Rise of the Resistance than the rides with 'screenz' that you think of (like Gringotts).

Your perception of what this ride is like is inaccurate, NOT because my opinion is different than yours but because you are making Shanghai Pirates out to be something it's not. This is exasperated by the fact you're basing it exclusively on a POV. However, even then, you can still tell the objective metrics I have talked about. It's not remotely similar to screen-based rides like Gringotts for reasons I have already listed such as Shanghai's Pirates not being dominated by cop-outs for physical sets. Since you've said you're not opposed to all screens, I am hard-pressed to figure out what's so bad about this ride to you. I can see why you'd think that, before I rode it, I was concerned too about it being like Gringotts (a ride I'm merely lukewarm to), but I literally am laying out objective evidence to placate your concerns as they are unfounded.

If you don't like supplementary screens which this ride has a lot of, fine, that's your opinion, and I respect it, but this ride isn't objectively dominated by screens like Gringotts, and is more like a Na'vi River Journey meshed with Rise of the Resistance which is what you seem to be implying is bad about it even as you say you like those rides.

For comparison:

I think Florida's Pirates is better than the Shanghai version.

The Shanghai version is neat and the ride system is really cool, but there's too much watching a video on a screen in front of you. It does a good job incorporating physical effects with the video, but it's just not as impressive/immersive as being in a space full of physical sets, AAs, etc.

This is just misinformed in so many ways.

Shanghai Pirates could have been fantastic but it suffers from stopping to watch videos. That's not why I ride theme park attractions -- you shouldn't be stopping during the ride to watch a movie play on a screen (there are some exceptions, but mainly attractions where the whole experience is a video isn't really doable in any other way, like Flight of Passage -- and I still generally like those less than other attractions); I can do that at home. Video/projections that are interspersed with other things can work very well, but Shanghai Pirates has a couple of moments where it's literally just watching a video.

It's still a quality attraction, but that really detracts from it.

This is objectively false and is not about opinions. The ride never ‘stops’ to watch screens like Ratatouille or Gringotts. Not. Once. Think Rise, not Gringotts.

I know this is a TRON thread, but there's always that occasional person in this thread that's like, "I'm so glad we got TRON and not that screen-based rip-off Pirates." Because we have an identical clone of TRON in Shanghai, this ride gets brought up by association too, so I think it's time to settle on what this ride actually is instead of making assumptions.

TRON is fun yet infinitely inferior to another particular ride at Shanghai Disneyland.

 

[Disney Analyst]

Yes, I do. It's your opinion if you like something or not. However, not all opinions are created equally because they could be based on misconstrued facts. It's your opinion, I can't force you to change that, but it doesn't mean you aren't either misinformed or that you aren't looking at the objective aspects to get to your opinion.

Let's go over some facts, shall we?

Scenes without any screens at all (not counting minor projections):
View attachment 685405
View attachment 685391
View attachment 685392
View attachment 685395

What exactly are the screens you have a problem with then? Are these the screens that are a problem to you, the supplementary ones like Na'vi River Journey? Mind you, the ride vehicle NEVER parks in-front of any screen.

Supplementary screens to scenes:
View attachment 685404
View attachment 685406

There are only two 'exclusively screen' scenes versus the half dozen or more on the much shorter Ratatouille and Gringotts with much less time spent in them on Shanghai's Pirates. The waterfall-esque thing is a projection before the first screen of you going underwater. The first 'screen' finds us underneath the ocean approaching Davy Jones' Locker.

It's worth noting that the scene that follows is an equally mind-blowing physical set with the Flying Dutchman at the bottom of the ocean:
View attachment 685401

The second exclusively-screen scene has the vehicle rising to the surface for the physical set pirate ship battle scene (notice how you can't even tell where the water begins and ends? It literally looks like that at times in-person):

To understand why fears about 'screens' on this ride are overblown, these two scenes clock in at a combined ~58 seconds of a 540-second-long ride. While this is subjective, in my opinion, having ridden it, neither scene takes you out of the ride, but actually, enhance the experience. I don't think a non-IMAX screen would be more effective which is why I don't view it as a cop-out. What isn't subjective is that there's only two of them:
View attachment 685402

Both of these scenes have this eerie realness to them in-person, similar to the screens in Rise's Cannon room. There is depth to them and are very convincing in what they set out to do. Given that you are moving sideways the entire time, it never feels like a simulator or screen-based ride like Gringotts during the two brief scenes (especially compared to the ride's length). Both of these transitional scenes are followed by MASSIVE set pieces that last longer.

Frankly, I don't think these transitional scenes would be improved by making them set-based, that is what's notable here. I genuinely believe, having been on it in person, it is the best execution for the story content it is handling. Mind-blowing doesn't even quite grasp those two 'screen' scenes either, I'm hard-pressed to find anyone that has been on it having a disdain for them. That is my opinion, and you can argue all day that one screen-only scene is too many, but you're acting like that's most of the ride when it's not even a quarter of it. That is what I'm talking about when I say 'objective' here.

If I'm counting right, there are 2 exclusively screen scenes, 1 screen-heavy scene (the screen I discuss next), and 8+ without screens at all or only supplementary ones.


No, I didn't 'admit your opinion' because it's a 20-second scene in a 540-second ride. Even if we assume the two transitional 'screen-based scenes' I already talked about are inherently bad (I don't think so), that amounts to less than 15% of the entire ride!

However, and exceptionally notable as it's unlike the other 2 screen-based scenes, this is the only scene on the entire ride where a screen was used in place of what sets could do, akin to Ratatouille, Mickey, Gringotts, FnF, or Kong. While it looks way better in person, as it's nowhere near as out-of-place as this YouTube POV makes it look, this is my single criticism of the entire 8-and-a-1/2-minute ride. A scene that lasts 20 seconds at most.

Add an additional 20 seconds to that previous 58 seconds of 'screenz' for the only scene that feels like a cop-out on the ride. By comparison, the transition screen-based underwater scenes, in my opinion, enhance the ride:
View attachment 685394

I'm not arguing that a classic-style Pirates is bad.

DLP's Pirates is literally one of my favorite rides of all time (Orlando's pales in comparison), alongside DLP's Phantom Manor, HKDL's Mystic Manor, TDS' Journey to the Center of the Earth, and Universal's Hagrid's. None have 'screenz'. Those rides can co-exist with rides like Shanghai's Pirates of the Caribbean: Battle for the Sunken Treasure and Rise of the Resistance. They are all incredible in their own ways. My issue with your take on Shanghai's Pirates is that it actually has more in common with Rise of the Resistance than the rides with 'screenz' that you think of (like Gringotts).

Your perception of what this ride is like is inaccurate, NOT because my opinion is different than yours but because you are making Shanghai Pirates out to be something it's not exasperated by the fact, you're basing it exclusively on a POV. However, even then, you can still tell the objective metrics I have talked about. It's not remotely similar to screen-based rides like Gringotts for reasons I have already listed such as Shanghai's Pirates not being dominated by cop-outs for physical sets. Since you've said you're not opposed to all screens, I am hard-pressed to figure out what's so bad about this ride to you. I can see why you'd think that, before I rode it, I was concerned too about it being like Gringotts (a ride I'm merely lukewarm to), but I literally am laying out objective evidence to placate your concerns as they are unfounded.

If you don't like supplementary screens which this ride has a lot of, fine, that's your opinion, and I respect it, but this ride isn't objectively dominated by screens like Gringotts, and is more like a Na'vi River Journey meshed with Rise of the Resistance which is what you seem to be implying is bad about it.

For comparison:






This is just misinformed in so many ways.

I know this is a TRON thread, but there's always that occasional person in this thread that's like, "I'm so glad we got TRON and not that screen-based rip-off Pirates," so I think it's time to settle it.

TRON is fun, but infinitely inferior to another particular ride at Shanghai Disneyland.

You have laid this out beautifully, but you won't likely convince them.

Some are so against any projection technology, now labelled as "screens" (which I find reductive and dismissive to the many talented artists who work in projection design and technology), that they will never be convinced that projection technology, mixed into a ride, can create impressive results.

Perhaps they have been burned out by many instances of it not being implemented well, but it seems some will dismiss it all now, no matter what.

Projection technology is here to stay, and it all comes down to implementation within an attraction. I truly believe POTC Shanghai gets it right.

 

[TalkToEthan]

Some are so against any projection technology, now labelled as "screens" (which I find reductive and dismissive to the many talented artists who work in projection design and technology),

How do you feel about calling Disney Transports "buses"?

 

[UNCgolf]

I'm baffled reading these responses because they have essentially nothing to do with what I said. That was a detailed and informative post, but it was basically irrelevant to my original point because I never even insinuated Shanghai Pirates was a bad attraction or that the use of screens/projections at all made it bad.

Apparently I think Shanghai Pirates is the worst attraction ever and all of it is garbage. Also that all projections and screens are terrible (which is obviously why I'm one of the few defenders of NRJ!).

I've noticed that happens a lot here, though. People just don't actually respond to what's said, and instead create an amalgamation of things said by 30 different people over the course of a year and decide whoever they are responding to believes all of those things.

It's like I could say, "I think these hot dogs are pretty good but not the best food I've ever had" and that would turn into "You want to murder everyone who eats hot dogs??!!?!!?!"