WDW Answer to Hagrid's/VelociCoaster

[tpoly88]

i have to tell you, went on guardians yesterday, awesome ride and surprisingly longer than Rock'n roller coaster. very unique with the cars spining and was a lot of fun but when i got off, my wife and I had to go sit down for a few minutes. i enjoy a good coaster but i cannot do them like i used to. I think Disney staying middle of the road on these is a good thing. They need a few more good rides that are longer so you can have capacity up. Guardians was loading a full coaster on 2 tracks and just sending them one after the other. 7DMT is too short a ride so there is only 2 cars at a time on the track and Slinky also. Crowd was not terrible at Epcot but the other big 3 rides were 70-80 long (Remy, Frozen and Test track). Soaring was 20 minutes.

 

[MickeyLuv'r]

Disney would do well to some attractions roughly like Hagrid's - about that level of intensity+ storytelling (but not obviously mimicking Hagrid's directly).

HS especially needs something. I am inclined to think it needs something roughly like AK's animal walk-through or Epcot's gardens. Something people can do that doesn't have much of a wait if any.

 

[Jon81uk]

What would be awesome is if they built an indoor coaster like flight of fear at Kings Island. It has 4 inversions and launches 50 mph in 4 seconds.

WDW already has an indoor coaster with three inversions that launches at 57mph.

 

[flynnibus]

Haggrids is a great example of an attraction Disney should have had.

Innovative, diverse, high energy, but not 'extreme'. It's like inbetween BTTM and Everest in intensity.

 

[Andrew25]

WDW doesn't need to compete with SeaWorld/Universal, but they definitely need to build more coasters.

WDW has a total of 8 coasters spread over 4 parks. (+1 for Tron)
UO has a total of 8 spread over 2 parks (+3/4 coming to Epic Universe)

GOTG is a great response to Hagrid, and they continue to build similar coasters at the other parks.

 

[bhg469]

Haggrids is a great example of an attraction Disney should have had.

Innovative, diverse, high energy, but not 'extreme'. It's like inbetween BTTM and Everest in intensity.

One could argue that the original plan for Mine train could have been the in the mix for the better attraction. Obviously its not intense but the plan was for a much longer ride with more show scenes. What we got is laughable

 

[flynnibus]

One could argue that the original plan for Mine train could have been the in the mix for the better attraction. Obviously its not intense but the plan was for a much longer ride with more show scenes. What we got is laughable

The extended version isn't THAT radically different. Mine Train is great for what it is... consider that it's peer really should be something like barnstormer. Now instead of a pure kiddy coaster - we get a Disney level integrated attraction, top notch show elements, and one that is desirable and approachable for all ages. Obviously longer would be nicer... but I don't see it changing the core of what it targeted or would achieve and still is world's better than many other 'family' level coaster experiences. Mine Train to me is short.. but not 'I just got robbed!' short.

No one gets off Hagrids and goes 'oh that was cute...' -- It's a physical thrill - but not solely through extremes. Riding Hagrid's at night through the forest is epic. A ride like BTMRR still looks visually better than Hagrids... but Hagrid's still delivers. Given the choice between something like RnRC and Hagrids.. I'd tell them to build Hagrid's everytime.

 

[UNCgolf]

WDW doesn't need to compete with SeaWorld/Universal, but they definitely need to build more coasters.

WDW has a total of 8 coasters spread over 4 parks. (+1 for Tron)
UO has a total of 8 spread over 2 parks (+3/4 coming to Epic Universe)

GOTG is a great response to Hagrid, and they continue to build similar coasters at the other parks.

I think Guardians shows exactly why Disney doesn't need to rush to build more coasters and should instead focus on other attractions.

It's not attracting guests the way you'd expect from a major new headliner, and that's almost certainly because it's a coaster at WDW -- WDW has too many guests (much more than parks like Universal) that either can't ride relatively intense coasters (and I know Guardians isn't very intense in the grand scheme) or just don't want to. Rise has been open for over a year and is still selling out of ILL purchases before the park opens. Guardians has been officially open a couple of weeks and it has availability for half of the day. Anyone who wants to ride Guardians doesn't have any trouble getting on.

That doesn't mean it was a mistake to build it -- I think it's fine for Disney to have a handful of rides like it -- but doubling down and building several more like it wouldn't help the capacity problems, and might actually make them worse.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney in no way needs to try and compete in the hyper coaster arena. They just need to stick to the themed coasters. They could use 2 more in animal kingdom and 2 in the studios. My number one choice for a new coaster would be a pod racing or speeder bike launch coaster in galaxys edge.

Did I tell you about my animal kingdom master plan?

 

[flynnibus]

That doesn't mean it was a mistake to build it -- I think it's fine for Disney to have a handful of rides like it -- but doubling down and building several more like it wouldn't help the capacity problems, and might actually make them worse

The 'they create more demand' trope is so tired. As long as the parks have capacity for the crowds that shouldn't be an issue. The issue should be 'building low capacity attractions' and failing to keep the rest of the park capacity desirable.

The issue in the citing examples is putting high demand things with low capacity into parks that were already behind in capacity or severely under utilized. The issue isn't the idea of a new attraction - it's 'the wrong thing at the wrong time' because you need a park to be wide appeal.. not singular experience appeal (Like.. DCA v1.0).

Add-ons don't fix other broken experiences.

 

[tired_photog]

Haven't ridden Guardians yet but got to ride Hagrid for the first time back in March and I have to say I think it's the best ride in Orlando. Incredibly themed and just the right level of intensity. I'm hoping Guardians will offer a similar experience.

 

[Jrb1979]

As big of a coaster lover as I am, I don't necessarily think they need more coasters. At the same time I think they need more of a middle ground. Dark rides are great but what's wrong with adding some thrills to more of them. Nothing intense but less Navi River Journeys and more dark rides with drops like Pirates.

 

[tired_photog]

As big of a coaster lover as I am, I don't necessarily think they need more coasters. At the same time I think they need more of a middle ground. Dark rides are great but what's wrong with adding some thrills to more of them. Nothing intense but less Navi River Journeys and more dark rides with drops like Pirates.

Yes! Navi with 2 drops (like DL Pirates) would have made that ride perfect.

 

[UNCgolf]

The 'they create more demand' trope is so tired. As long as the parks have capacity for the crowds that shouldn't be an issue. The issue should be 'building low capacity attractions' and failing to keep the rest of the park capacity desirable.

The issue in the citing examples is putting high demand things with low capacity into parks that were already behind in capacity or severely under utilized. The issue isn't the idea of a new attraction - it's 'the wrong thing at the wrong time' because you need a park to be wide appeal.. not singular experience appeal (Like.. DCA v1.0).

Add-ons don't fix other broken experiences.

I've long pointed out that the "create more demand" argument is nonsense -- attractions essentially never create more demand than the additional capacity they create -- I think you misread my comment.

I shouldn't have put it in the part about potentially making capacity worse because I can see why someone would think that's the argument I was making, though. What I actually meant with that comment was that coasters like this are not the best use of land/resources because they don't have enough overall appeal to the WDW customer base.

If Disney was going to build 10 rides in the next 5 years, then sure, throw in a coaster like this. But if they're only adding one or two rides to a park over 5+ years, these kinds of coasters aren't that helpful compared to other attractions.

They're still better than not building anything at all, of course.

 

[Goofyernmost]

One could argue that the original plan for Mine train could have been the in the mix for the better attraction. Obviously its not intense but the plan was for a much longer ride with more show scenes. What we got is laughable

Just as a slight correction, the mine train had a concept suggestion for a larger track, but it never came close to acceptance. There are always multiple concepts for any attraction, that doesn't mean it was ever taken seriously. Concept and Plan are two completely different things.

 

[flynnibus]

What I actually meant with that comment was that coasters like this are not the best use of land/resources because they don't have enough overall appeal to the WDW customer base.

If Disney was going to build 10 rides in the next 5 years, then sure, throw in a coaster like this. But if they're only adding one or two rides to a park over 5+ years, these kinds of coasters aren't that helpful compared to other attractions.

Sure you don't want to alienate your customers... but rides like Hagrids, BTMRR, etc sure hit a very wide band of the market. Sure Beauty and the Beast doesn't physically alienate wide swaths, but it does in desirability/repeatability.

Disney does well with a range of offers. It's hard to strike gold with attractions like Soarin' which basically had universal appeal and repeatability. I don't think Disney needs to stay away from such extremes (See M:S) it should just make sure it doesn't give up it's identity to get them (and just plop some record breaker down on top of things just to have it).

 

[UNCgolf]

Sure you don't want to alienate your customers... but rides like Hagrids, BTMRR, etc sure hit a very wide band of the market. Sure Beauty and the Beast doesn't physically alienate wide swaths, but it does in desirability/repeatability.

Disney does well with a range of offers. It's hard to strike gold with attractions like Soarin' which basically had universal appeal and repeatability. I don't think Disney needs to stay away from such extremes (See M:S) it should just make sure it doesn't give up it's identity to get them (and just plop some record breaker down on top of things just to have it).

I'm just seeing the BG/ILL numbers for Guardians, and how everyone who wants to ride it can ride it without much difficulty, and thinking it's not drawing the same level of interest that Rise or FoP did when they first opened (Rise is still selling out of ILLs much faster than Guardians, although it's not a one to one comparison since Rise no longer does BGs).

That makes me think it's not the best path forward for Disney in terms of building headliners. Obviously it's not a bad thing that everyone who wants to ride can ride, but considering how much EPCOT is lacking in attractions, it seems hard to believe that Guardians has drawn guests to the park the way Disney would have hoped.

If Disney was building new attractions regularly I don't think I'd feel that way, but I think we all know that EPCOT is unlikely to get anything else new for at least 5 years. The Magic Kingdom likely won't get anything new after TRON for 5+ years either, other than the Splash Mountain retheme.

 

[flynnibus]

I'm just seeing the BG/ILL numbers for Guardians, and how everyone who wants to ride it can ride it without much difficulty, and thinking it's not drawing the same level of interest as Rise or FoP.

It still basically requires doing the VQ dance of being there within seconds unless you plan on spending all day in Epcot to be there for the 1pm drop.

It's also in a park that has firmly established itself as 'being a trainwreck right now' after years of construction. Until the ride goes standby and carries less than a 2hr wait - I think demand is plenty healthy.

Rise is Star Wars.. tough comparison. FoP is a great one for the topic given its accessibility and appeal angles. And no shocker it's so much like the Soarin' example I gave before... the trifecta of experience, access, and all-ages. But you can't just have a resort of those clones everywhere either.

 

[UNCgolf]

It still basically requires doing the VQ dance of being there within seconds unless you plan on spending all day in Epcot to be there for the 1pm drop.

It's also in a park that has firmly established itself as 'being a trainwreck right now' after years of construction. Until the ride goes standby and carries less than a 2hr wait - I think demand is plenty healthy.

Rise is Star Wars.. tough comparison. FoP is a great one for the topic given its accessibility and appeal angles. And no shocker it's so much like the Soarin' example I gave before... the trifecta of experience, access, and all-ages. But you can't just have a resort of those clones everywhere either.

Not if you're willing to spend the money for an ILL purchase -- ILLs have been available for several hours most days. I think they were available until almost 1 PM on Sunday.

And considering people are having issues with park reservations now, aren't most of them going to be going to EPCOT regardless? As in they already have a reservation there to try to get the VQ at 7 AM.

Anyways, some of it is just due to the internal knowledge we have here around costs. If they could build two Ratatouille level rides (even though I'm not a fan of Ratatouille) for the cost of one Guardians, the data we currently have suggests the two Ratatouilles would be a better investment in terms of improving the overall guest experience.

 

[flynnibus]

Anyways, some of it is just due to the internal knowledge we have here around costs. If they could build two Ratatouille level rides (even though I'm not a fan of Ratatouille) for the cost of one Guardians, the data we currently have suggests the two Ratatouilles would be a better investment in terms of improving the overall guest experience.

Flat out - the price tag was ape-#%^ crazy.