What would you change about the new Fantasyland?

SirGoofy

Member
If people are there for the rides, then why is Epcot the second most visted second-gate and why aren't Six Flags the top theme parks in the world?

:rolleyes:

Ever seen the lines at Epcot? Some of the longest anywhere, not to mention the rides that don't get lines are because they are huge people eaters.

The majority of people go to Disney for the rides. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.
 

_Scar

Active Member
:rolleyes:

Ever seen the lines at Epcot? Some of the longest anywhere, not to mention the rides that don't get lines are because they are huge people eaters.

The majority of people go to Disney for the rides. Anyone who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves.


On Soarin and Test Track? 2 rides with not the best capacity? It isn't saying much. Epcot is lacking in the attractions department.

People go to WDW for much more than rides. Dis provides quality like no other found in and off the rides AND a place for the whole family- well, mostly.

If people wanted the rides, then they'd go to their nearest Six Flags. I'm standing by that statement.
 

plaz10

Well-Known Member
On Soarin and Test Track? 2 rides with not the best capacity? It isn't saying much. Epcot is lacking in the attractions department.

People go to WDW for much more than rides. Dis provides quality like no other found in and off the rides AND a place for the whole family- well, mostly.

If people wanted the rides, then they'd go to their nearest Six Flags. I'm standing by that statement.


I do agree that Epcot is lacking in attractions, BUT it's also lacking in any "disney" theme (classic characters, etc...) and very little actual character meet n greets (aside from character spot and figment) so I don't know if I'd put Epcot and MK in the same category, for I think they have very different agendas. MK is bringing the stories of Disney classics to life. Epcot has no intentions of incorporating characters to the extent of MK. Epcot is a totally different park. People do go there for the rides and food because thats all Epcot has to offer.

People go to MK for the rides, yes...but I think it's the Disney classic theme that brings people there more than any other park. Yes children do enjoy meeting Princesses, but I don't understand why the big hoopla (hoopla!) over the meet n greet as "attractions." Why not just have a small designated spot where the princesses are daily, instead of an elaborate building of sorts which is really just one room with a long queue.

I think a villain ride may not grow really long lines for youngsters, but honestly most of the park is aimed at the young (and young at heart) and this villain ride would be no different. have good prevail at the end. more of a defeating of the villains (fantasmic style). This could include all the favorite heroes defeated said villains. Maybe I'm just dying to see some more villain love (since their loss of a character breakfast, out of parades, less showings of fantasmic)
 

Lee

Adventurer
If people wanted the rides, then they'd go to their nearest Six Flags. I'm standing by that statement.

Oh, please. :rolleyes:
Apples and oranges. People go to Disney for Disney-quality rides, and atmosphere. They go to Six-Flags for thrill rides.
Stop building rides at a Disney park and watch the numbers fall.

The other stuff, meet/greets and such, are just extras. Added little things for the guests, not the main attraction.

plaz10 said:
I think a villain ride may not grow really long lines for youngsters, but honestly most of the park is aimed at the young (and young at heart) and this villain ride would be no different. have good prevail at the end. more of a defeating of the villains (fantasmic style). This could include all the favorite heroes defeated said villains.
Bingo. That was the whole idea behind Villian Village/Mountain. Would have been kinda like a Fantasmic ride. Plus the Villian theme would attract a much broader demographic than what they are gonna get with the current plan.
 

SirGoofy

Member
Oh, please. :rolleyes:
Apples and oranges. People go to Disney for Disney-quality rides, and atmosphere. They go to Six-Flags for thrill rides.
Stop building rides at a Disney park and watch the numbers fall.

The other stuff, meet/greets and such, are just extras. Added little things for the guests, not the main attraction.

You're wasting your time, Lee. :rolleyes:

Bingo. That was the whole idea behind Villian Village/Mountain. Would have been kinda like a Fantasmic ride. Plus the Villian theme would attract a much broader demographic than what they are gonna get with the current plan.

But they can't MARKET it Lee!
 

SirGoofy

Member
Sure they could. And not to just pre-teen girls.
Epic battle of good vs evil. Tie it to Fantasmic. Toys, shirts, a parade float....sky's the limit.

I know. Makes me sad.:(

Just curious, was the ride a water ride? And was Mickey and the gang featured?
 

Lee

Adventurer
I know. Makes me sad.:(
Just curious, was the ride a water ride? And was Mickey and the gang featured?
Water, yes.
Mickey, yes.
Gang, no.
(Last I heard, the Mickey and gang part.)

Plus, Villian Village offered all the cool possibilities for the Halloween parties.
 

_Scar

Active Member
Oh, please. :rolleyes:
Apples and oranges. People go to Disney for Disney-quality rides, and atmosphere. They go to Six-Flags for thrill rides.
Stop building rides at a Disney park and watch the numbers fall.

The other stuff, meet/greets and such, are just extras. Added little things for the guests, not the main attraction.

:rolleyes:

I know rides are important. My point is it isn't all about the rides- obviously. If it were all about the ride count then parks like Epcot and DAK would never get the numbers they're getting and DCA which has quite a bit of rides would have a much higher attendance.

And I agree about the M&G being the extras.
 

EPCOT Explorer

New Member
Water, yes.
Mickey, yes.
Gang, no.
(Last I heard, the Mickey and gang part.)

Plus, Villian Village offered all the cool possibilities for the Halloween parties.

Mickey is VERY marketable, though...Why did THIS fall through?


And last I heard, All Hallow's Eve was set for DHS. :shrug:
 

plaz10

Well-Known Member
Tower of Terror is not marketed towards little girls...and it does extremely well. I'm not saying make the villain ride anymore scary than snow whites scary adventure. basic views of evil but yet good prevails in the end.

Is there any hope for a Villain Village?
(oh please, oh please, oh please...)
 

Figment632

New Member
If people are there for the rides, then why is Epcot the second most visted second-gate and why aren't Six Flags the top theme parks in the world?

I don't get why people think there are now rides in EPCOT:brick:

1.SSE
2.Nemo
3. LWTL
4.SOarin
5. JII
6. TT
7. MS
8. UOE
9. GFT
10. Malestrom
 

lebeau

Well-Known Member
But here's the problem: You will not be bringing new people in with this expansion. You're going to stay with your same old same old. Besides, the Princess merchandise can't be sold at any higher volumes than it already is. There's just no way they're going to make much more than they are now on it. Besides, not every family has girls. You aren't going to have little boys begging their parents to go to Disney to color cards for Aurora.

Now, if they build something that appeals to all demographics, say keep the Little Mermaid ride and Be Our Guest Restaurant, and pair it with a thrill ride in Adventureland or Tomorrowland(ala what their doing in DCA), and you've got something that you can market to the entire family. Something for the boys and older people in the family, and the girls still get their princesses. Seriously makes the most sense.

I would actually argue the opposite. I think that the girl-oriented stuff has a higher chance of bringing in new guests than another thrill ride. There's a lot of princess fans out there. Go to any daycare and look around. But WDW has very few offerings for these princess fans. The big ones are over-priced meals that are very hard to get reservations for. By offering more that appeals to this demographic, Disney may draw in princess fans who didn't think there was enough reason to go.

And the ones who are already there will stay longer and spend more.

I understand that the appeal of princess and fairies isn't there for some, but I don't see how you can argue that WDW currently meets the demand for princesses. Look at how popular those overpiced meals and make-overs are. The fact that people are lining up to plunk down that kind of money should tell you something about the demand. The new FL is going to be packed!

As for marketing, WDW's current marketing focuses on the princesses now and they barely have any princess-themed attractions to back it up. I imagine marketing will be quite happy to tout the new princess attractions. And they'll have Star Tours for the boys. Who knows, maybe they'll announce something else.

I hate talking traditional gender roles, but let's face facts. Most of the attractions at WDW are more likely to appeal to boys than they are to girls. Pirates, cowboys, astronauts, dinosaurs; this is mostly boy territory here. So Disney finally adds a few attractions that are more likely to appeal to girls than boys, and suddenly people are throwing fits.

The new FL won't give you cooties. You'll still have all the pirates, cowboys, astronauts and dinosaurs you want all over the rest of the resort. And Peter Pan will even still be in FL. No one's going to force you to where a tiara if you happen to wander through the Enchanted Forrest. It will all be all right and lots of Disney fans who weren't being catered too will be very happy.

Sigh. That was more of a rant than I meant to post and I'm obviously just repeating myself here. Those who are opposed to making little girls happy just aren't going to get it (j/k). If you don't have a girl who's princess-aged, you have no idea how big the demand is. People will be coming out of the woodwork when this opens.


Bingo. I don't care what anyone says, people are there for the rides first. They don't run to meet and greets when the ropes drop.

Some people. Most people. But I've been to meet and greets at rope drop. If you have little kids, the meet and greets can be a much bigger deal than the rides. We've been to the parks without riding a single ride before.

Again, the demand for meet and greets is not currently being met. That's why Disney is supplying more.

It's not some scheme to ruin your parks. People want to be able to count on seeing certain characters on their Disney vaction. Disney can make a few bucks on autograph books and pictures plus make an attraction on the cheap. It's a win/win, folks.

Just be glad these people are in line to get their picture taken in stead of standing in front of you to ride Splash Mountain.
 

plaz10

Well-Known Member
Just be glad these people are in line to get their picture taken in stead of standing in front of you to ride Splash Mountain.


I agree with that. The more people waiting for meet in greets means less people in lines for rides. But that also means that money that could go towards refurbs and new rides is going to build some elaborate queue for a single character to stand and take pictures in. Am I the only one who doesn't see why a meet and greet can't just be randomly throughout the park and not in a secluded building?
 

Lee

Adventurer
Am I the only one who doesn't see why a meet and greet can't just be randomly throughout the park and not in a secluded building?
I totally agree. It used to be that way, that you would just see a character and go up to him/her.
I dislike the whole m&g situation.

Figment632 said:
If I could have one thing though it would be to kill PH all together and make it a Peter Pan M&G.
That's a good idea. PH is just going to be a glorified m&g anyhow, so why not throw Peter into the mix?
 

SirGoofy

Member
First of all, this is a very good post!

I would actually argue the opposite. I think that the girl-oriented stuff has a higher chance of bringing in new guests than another thrill ride. There's a lot of princess fans out there. Go to any daycare and look around. But WDW has very few offerings for these princess fans. The big ones are over-priced meals that are very hard to get reservations for. By offering more that appeals to this demographic, Disney may draw in princess fans who didn't think there was enough reason to go.

Oh, I' not denying there are a lot of princess fans. But the fact that this expansion only appeals to Princess fans is a mistake. There's plenty of families without princess fans, not to mention long time guests are getting tired of the cartoonification of the MK, and I really think there's a huge risk And the ones who are already there will stay longer and spend more.[/QUOTE]of rubbing a lot of people the wrong way.

And the ones who are already there will stay longer and spend more.

I really, really doubt this. DAK failed to get people to stay longer, I doubt a gaggle of meet and greets will succeed where another park failed.

As for marketing, WDW's current marketing focuses on the princesses now and they barely have any princess-themed attractions to back it up. I imagine marketing will be quite happy to tout the new princess attractions. And they'll have Star Tours for the boys. Who knows, maybe they'll announce something else.

Yea, and I see plenty of people being suckered in and complaining when they wait an hour each for story time, card making, and the Cinerella thing(I actually think Cindy is the only worthwhile one being built, but I still don't see people being happy).

I hate talking traditional gender roles, but let's face facts. Most of the attractions at WDW are more likely to appeal to boys than they are to girls. Pirates, cowboys, astronauts, dinosaurs; this is mostly boy territory here. So Disney finally adds a few attractions that are more likely to appeal to girls than boys, and suddenly people are throwing fits.

And let's face the fact that MK has been around for 40 years, most as the most visited park in the world, without making "attractions" out of meet and greets.

Again, the demand for meet and greets is not currently being met. That's why Disney is supplying more.

It's not some scheme to ruin your parks. People want to be able to count on seeing certain characters on their Disney vaction. Disney can make a few bucks on autograph books and pictures plus make an attraction on the cheap. It's a win/win, folks.

And guess what? You can already meet all these characters at the MK! If the demand wasn't being met, the line for said meet and greets would be 3 hours long and out the door of the Toontown tent. It's not. I just don't agree that the need for M&Gs isn't being met.
 

SirGoofy

Member
Hmmmm...that first paragraph got all kerbobbled...

It should say, "Oh, I' not denying there are a lot of princess fans. But the fact that this expansion only appeals to Princess fans is a mistake. There's plenty of families without princess fans, not to mention long time guests are getting tired of the cartoonification of the MK, and I really think there's a huge risk of rubbing a lot of people the wrong way."
 

Figment632

New Member
I totally agree. It used to be that way, that you would just see a character and go up to him/her.
I dislike the whole m&g situation.


That's a good idea. PH is just going to be a glorified m&g anyhow, so why not throw Peter into the mix?[/QUOTE]

Exactly make it big enough for Tink, Peter, Captin Hook, Smee Wendy ect...
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom