Here is my take:
First, the narration is a big deal. This is because it is half of the sensory experience. There is nothing to taste, smell, or touch on TTA so the only experiences are sight and sound. The TTA does offer some pretty good views of Tomorrowland, but it also quite bare in some spaces. Given that you can see Tomorrowland from elsewhere, and given that bareness, I think any argument that the TTA is solely about the sights is fundamentally flawed. The sights may be a large component, but the sounds aboard the TTA are a large part of the experience. The sounds consist of the narration, and the area music. The area music also exists all over Tomorrowland, so it isn't necessary to visit the TTA specifically for it. That leaves the few show scenes and the narration as the only truly unique aspects of the TTA, if we reduce the ride to its most basic terms. How can the narration not be essential? The answer is that it is essential.
Moreover, and if you don't buy that argument, it's a Disney Detail. The argument that people shouldn't 'care so much' about the new narration ignores exactly what sets Disney apart from the competition—attention to detail. Do people honestly think guests should not pay attention to details? That basically would sanction Disney building nothing but unthemed rollercoasters a la Cedar Point or Six Flags. Do any fans really want that? I'll ignore the discussion about whether it's the most 'important' thing in Tomorrowland. That argument is misguided. All that matters is that it is important. Given that Disney Details are what separates Disney from the competition, every detail is important. I happen to think this is a pretty important detail; maybe not the most important, but pretty high up on the list. Regardless of where you rate it on the list of importance, you should care about it as it is a detail.
Second, there are those who say this version is better. There are generally two camps as far as this goes: those who don't like it because it was chopped up over the years and/or because they liked the ORAC-1 narration better, and those who just like the new version better. Regarding the former group, I think that's a dumb rationale. So they like the current version not on its merits versus the last version, but because of some other version that doesn't really have a horse in the race? That isn't rationally grounded. I don't care if the current version were chopped up over the years because: 1) I don't remember the preceding versions, and 2) that version definitely isn't coming back. It would be like being okay with the Winnie the Pooh dark ride being replaced with a much worse attraction featuring Stitch, Jar Jar Binks, and Carrot Top. I'm not going to be okay with that simply because I was upset when Pooh replaced Mr. Toad. Mr. Toad, at this point, definitely is not coming back. Pooh getting its “just desserts” is only something I'd advocate if its replacement is superior to it.
The other group, those who just like the new version for its substance, I can understand. At least their reason follows logic. Now, I think it may not be sane to prefer the new version, but it doesn't have a logical flaw like the other arguments I've seen. Of this group, I've seen people say it ties together Tomorrowland better. I don't see how, but whatever. My biggest problem with the new version is the voice, and the lack of anything memorable. The old narration was rife with quotable portions, this new version is mellow and lacks any lasting appeal. I would have been fine with a new narration if they at least made it unique and entertaining. This version simply states what is where—I have no problem with the narrator stating 'what is where'; that makes sense and is fitting of a transportation system, but why not do it in a fun and memorable manner? Insert witty little catchphrases or some sly humor. Do something, anything, to keep it from being dull. This version is dull. Throwing in some references to the “Peoplemover” to appeal to the Disney purists doesn't do a whole lot for me. This isn't all to say that these problems couldn't be ironed out, and some witty references inserted, and I hope they do just that in the test and adjust phase.
Some of us are trying to have a discussion, not mudslinging.
