Andrew C
You know what's funny?
There are other things that should receive priority attention. IMO.Why not?
There are other things that should receive priority attention. IMO.Why not?
He asked me, right?Because if it’s bad about the park and not Disney, we ignore it and excuse it of course. Disney does it “ruins the immersion”. Universal does it “people care too much about sight lines” magically.
Agreed on that there atleast, the capacity concerns definitely take priority to make the guest experience better for everyoneThere are other things that should receive priority attention. IMO.
Did you look into any of the windows or buildings? Even without a wand there is kinetic energy everywhere, it's one of my favorite lands ever to just hang out in. It gets even better at night with all the projection and lighting effects everywhere. Shoutout to my favorite little guy:Kinetic? Did you and I go to a different park or something? I did not see many kinetics? Other than the upcharge wand spots which aren't fully "kinetic" in a park of THAT scale
It's not "minor stuff in the windows," it's a large chunk of the land's theming you're ignoring. The other lands you named have rides visibly moving around, if that's the sort of kinetics you're into, but they both lack the sort of smaller details that bring these more immersive lands to life.Uh no, like I said, when I’m walking around, some minor stuff in the windows does not fill the land or make it feel anywhere kinetic like how Tomorrowland or even Toy Story Land
Because if it’s bad about the park and not Disney, we ignore it and excuse it of course. Disney does it “ruins the immersion”. Universal does it “people care too much about sight lines” magically.
Genuinely would be examples of exposed rollercoasters at Disney been accepted/praised in this way?Likewise, if a land at Disney has an exposed rollercoaster, it's valuable "kinetic energy." If Universal has the same, it's "just a rollercoaster" that ruins sightlines.
Like magic.
Both of the lands praised for their kinetics by the poster I was responding to have exposed rollercoasters, Tron being one of them. That same land also has a spinner and an unthemed predecessor to Epic's Yoshi ride.Genuinely would be examples of exposed rollercoasters at Disney been accepted/praised in this way?
All I can think of is Tron mostly getting a free pass for that section of exposed coaster under the canopy. There has been plenty of criticism of it for the sightlines toward the show building from Fantasyland, though.
Slinky dog dashes track is themed.Both of the lands praised for their kinetics by the poster I was responding to have exposed rollercoasters, Tron being one of them. That same land also has a spinner and an unthemed predecessor to Epic's Yoshi ride.
Slinky dog dashes track is themed.
I will say that the settings of London and Paris will always look less natural than a fictional planet because they are cities. I did think with Diagon Alley that there are a lot of height differences and Paris does have a fair amount of gaps and different buildings, particularly in the centre. What's going for Paris' future vs Galaxy's Edge is that there is the massive expansion pad where the Cancelled ride was meant to be, whereas GE doesn't have that much expansion space left for any major expansion besides a Table Service. I do think Wizarding World is the weakest land at Epic when it comes to offerings, but it has the potential to become better built in from the startEverything surrounding the land looks natural, as opposed to an endless unbroken multi-story building of Diagon Alley and Ministry (as in all the buildings are the same height and there are no gaps between them) or literal painted walls of SNW. Also, note that the tree berms surrounding Galaxy's Edge are not just raised land with trees on top, but they appear to be natural formations of the geography, cut through by machinery in some places, untouched in others.
Because if it’s bad about the park and not Disney, we ignore it and excuse it of course. Disney does it “ruins the immersion”. Universal does it “people care too much about sight lines” magically.
Likewise, if a land at Disney has an exposed rollercoaster, it's valuable "kinetic energy." If Universal has the same, it's "just a rollercoaster" that ruins sightlines.
Like magic.
Only when it's not at Disney. I already got someone saying Slinky Dog's track is themed.?? Disney park fans are typically the first to complain about exposed coaster track.
Not quite sure why you are creating this straw man...Or another popular framing of it:
If Disney has bad sightlines it's because they're always making dumb decisions now and their quality is slipping!
If Universal has bad sightlines its because they smartly focused their attention and resources toward other things.
Mind you, the worst sightline possible at WDW doesn't even scratch the surface of how bad some of the sightlines at Epic are.
Genuinely would be examples of exposed rollercoasters at Disney been accepted/praised in this way?
All I can think of is Tron mostly getting a free pass for that section of exposed coaster under the canopy. There has been plenty of criticism of it for the sightlines toward the show building from Fantasyland, though.
I think Disney should start building some of their coasters with exposed track, and not like slinky dog where the theme of the ride is that “it’s a roller coaster”. The main argument against this is that it ruins the immersion but we’ve seen in instances such as hiccups at epic that even exposed coasters can add to the energy and immersion of a themed land. And I think having Disney be able to do something like that would be really cool. What they have with Tron going under the canopy shows that they can do it if they want to, and I haven’t heard anyone complaining about the track being exposed or unthemed.?? Disney park fans are typically the first to complain about exposed coaster track.
I think Disney should start building some of their coasters with exposed track, and not like slinky dog where the theme of the ride is that “it’s a roller coaster”. The main argument against this is that it ruins the immersion but we’ve seen in instances such as hiccups at epic that even exposed coasters can add to the energy and immersion of a themed land. And I think having Disney be able to do something like that would be really cool. What they have with Tron going under the canopy shows that they can do it if they want to, and I haven’t heard anyone complaining about the track being exposed or unthemed.
Hot Take - i don't care about sightlines in either instance. Guardians Coaster Box doesn't bother me because the attraction is top notch, and the sightlines around Epic were practically non-existent. I'm not going to my favorite theme parks looking for issues - it seems that has become the norm?Because if it’s bad about the park and not Disney, we ignore it and excuse it of course. Disney does it “ruins the immersion”. Universal does it “people care too much about sight lines” magically.
Both of the lands praised for their kinetics by the poster I was responding to have exposed rollercoasters, Tron being one of them. That same land also has a spinner and an unthemed predecessor to Epic's Yoshi ride.
I’m honestly confused, are you taking about Peoplemover?
You are confusing ornamentation with theming.
the sightlines around Epic were practically non-existent.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.