I don't think you actually really disagree with me - much of what I was saying, especially earlier in the post was an explanation of what Disney did, not necessarily something that I agreed with.
But to the point of making attractions like Soarin', Test Track and Mission: SPACE as additions to the park instead of replacements - we have nothing to show that Disney would have handled this well. Most fans of EPCOT Center have disapproved with every "evolution" of every original Future World pavilion. I think we both agree what people want out of Epcot:
Nothing to show? How about TL'67. How about FL'83? How about NOS itself? Or how about even the MK itself? In the future, the FLE of MK should prove a valuable addition over the overstayed birthday land.
I don't think there is any reason to settle simply because past efforts have been bad. To settle is simply a downwards spiral where each attempt gets worse than the last.
Disney was no longer HUNGRY in it's park design.. it was 'how do we get by with doing the least'. Investing in a single fancy AA in UoE doesn't offset the horrible reductions in show in all the other theaters.
None of us fans know what this is. We had Ron Schneider on our show last week and the topic came up regarding giving fans what they want. He pointedly said, "No, don't give the fans what they want because if you give fans what they want, they'll ask for more of the same."
While true in what he said - I think you are misapplying the lesson. You don't give 'fans what they want' because why would you give the creative direction to people that aren't the creative driver? When you look at the public in large, they know what they've liked and what they don't like... but they aren't the ones to take that knowledge and build something new. The ones that don't know WHY something works can only clone and duplicate efforts rather than take the KNOWLEDGE and apply it in new directions.
This is why you don't just 'give fans what they want' - the general population as a mob are not the innovators. You never move forward if all you do is duplicate what worked before.
This isn't to say fans aren't a guidance - it means you can't take the fans at a literal value and you can't limit yourself to what the fans already know. Else you are just trapping yourself to simply repeat what has already been done.
Walt didn't build DL absent of knowing what the fans wanted - the difference was he played on what drove those wants rather then simply trying to duplicate previous efforts. He wasn't afraid of going outside of what fans 'said' they wanted (or experts said they wanted) because he was able to see and understand the root causes.. rather than simply try to improve upon existing results.
It's like his resistance to do more Pig cartoons after his first success. Fans wanted more pigs! Walt knew he didn't have to repeat himself to find new successes with the same audience.
Fans know they want to be entertained - they don't need to know how that entertainment should be created to understand that and demand that if they are going to spend their money on it. People flocked to WDW by the millions because it entertained and blew them away. There was nothing like it. Now? There is tons like it nipping at its heels, and large parts aren't nearly as entertaining.
Anyone remember when WDW was a RESORT?? The newspaper thread resonates with that so strongly. If people were actually relaxing on their vacation.. they'd have time to sit down and enjoy the news.
How should the Imagination Pavilion evolved? We're not sure but the current version isn't it.
How should Spaceship Earth have evolved? Well, not Time Racers - that's for sure. They got it 70% right on the most recent refurbishment, but the Jetson's ending and dumbed down narration is what people focus on.
What about The Land Pavilion? I'd argue that while Soarin' isn't the best thematic fit, this pavilion has evolved better than any other in Future World.
The Seas Pavilion desperately needed to evolve and while many dislike the ride, they succeeded in breathing new life into that pavilion with Turtle Talk and the Nemo content.
A fan doesn't need to know how to fix it to know it's broke. You don't need to know how to be a world class cook to know the food you just ate was horrible. The good dive in and understand WHY an effort was not well received, not just say 'we'll never do that again..'.
Disney has gotten so conservative and ROI focused they have gotten into this negative feedback loop that kills ambition and boldness. They build something so big, so costly, that it takes a ton to make it's value back. Meanwhile, because it's so big and costly, they can't take risks on things that aren't 'sure bets' to work. Then, because it will live so long, one can justify spending a ton of money. Because they can't keep it simple and agile, the cycle repeats itself, making thing even more expensive, therefore requiring more investment, and making them even more adverse to risk.
JIY? They could have updated the 80s style of colors and updated the idea you could imagine and the effects in the wrap around film room and I bet the original show would have sustained itself much longer.. maybe even to today. Imageworks stations could be refreshed periodically. Physcial illusions and experiences last a lot longer too. Come on, the pin tables would still be a hit today.
SSE? They got the 'refresh' part right with the scenes in the assention and updating the technology references. But they blew the climax at 180top with really nothing to say or aspire to.. and the prologue is just an ambomination. SSE gets credit for almost balancing out the bad with good. But there really isn't justification for all that bad except for people being unwilling to push.
Seas? A good example of 'if we leave it to rot as long as possible, if we give them ANYTHING, they'll be happy with it'. The refurb leading up to Nemo did not really add any value to the pavilion, it simply removed all references to things that had been abandoned long before. Turtle Talk and Nemo attractions themselves are quite good.. but they are gems sitting in a stink pile. IMO, they should have gotten ride of the whole sea aquarium or invested in reworking the guest areas completely. It's sad when HOTELS have better awe inspiring aquarium interactions then EPCOT has. I think undersea living and exploration is still a futuristic concept that could be explored... but the format used by the Seas has long since surpassed. By putting in rides without saving the pavilions soul.. I think they ensured the pavilion and it's root problems aren't going to be solved anytime soon and instead we will be stuck with rides trying to justify their existence trapped in a dying body.
Land evolved? Maybe you mean 'has been able to tread water the longest'? All we need to is compare how DAK's conservatory stations have surpassed what the Land was. The horticulture topics and research are dated. Maybe if Disney were serious, they would try to really make it a high level research facility like they advocate and partner with true industry onsite.. and then the Land could actually show cutting edge things. The fact you can convert to a static spiel (this applies to the studios too) shows just how stagnant your content really is. If there is no variation going on week to week, do you really believe stuff is happening there? They could have resurrected the garden restaurant to a level to actually be a destination for dining again. Heck, it doesn't even need to show the greenhouse.. make a show about nature, the seasons, environments, and make that the revolving scenes.
I also feel that the Energy Pavilion changed for the better, but that was in 1996. It's an example of something that's just overdue for an update.
I would be interested to find out if Test Track, as a lower capacity attraction accommodates more people than World of Motion did towards the end of it's run. I enjoyed World of Motion, but I think it's safe to say that the masses appreciated this evolution as well.
On to Horizons, count me of the opinion that this should have been given a Spaceship Earth level treatment. Upgrading scenes and technology, modernize the ending and keep it as a marque dark ride. The problem is that Disney made a huge mistake with Mission: SPACE. It was probably the biggest theme park flop in their history. Had Mission: SPACE been a hit, fans would have missed Horizons, but the sting wouldn't have been as bad.
UoE has been stripped of it's awe factor. If it weren't for the prehistoric theater.. the thing would be on the chopping block. All the innovation, cutting edge imagry, effects, and awe inspiring staging has been reduced to just being slightly above ordinary. Short of JIY, its the pavilion that has been neutered the worst in FW.
I was never really a fan of WoM. I get it has large sets, and tons of AAs, but it really just felt like 'one in a crowd' to me. TT is a successful upgrade in my book.
Horizons is missed for the same type of reason CoP is cherished. It's a format uniquely Disney laced with story, effects, and awe. Horizons needed an update BADLY and could not have stayed in it's format. But I don't think M:S was a bad replacement.. I just miss my memories of Horizons. Park Ops misses the crowd chewer.
I definitely agree with this - and it's part of what I was saying as well, capacity in the park has never been an issue, and it's largely why it can survive with the "dead areas". Replacing current offerings with better, more in demand attractions, will help take pressure off Soarin' and Test Track. There is certainly enough space to make new high demand attractions in new (or dormant) areas, but my point has been that it's not necessary to "add" attractions to new space in Future World. However, it is necessary to replace many existing attractions.
It can be done both ways.. but adding attractions doesn't absolve one's responsibility to update the others. If they have enough capacity, they can afford to take major things down without causing chaos. But you can't just put hollow entertainment out there with capacity and expect it to chew up crowds.
I'm of the belief of 'quality over quantity' so I'd rather see a reimagined core.. rather then keep adding to the point where things can't be refreshed because you are spread too thin.