What's so bad about DCA

[james4023464]

Why do so many people complain about DCA, it looks like a fun park, yes I know the park is not loaded with e-tickets but it looks really fun. You guys have a great simulator, grat river raft ride, great rollercoaster, some awsome shows,, 2 quality 4d attractions, I mean it my not be another Magic Kingdom but I think this park will be top standard in about 10 years if they continue the development this park will be great. Guys just be pacient. Your getting a ToT in about 2 years I think you guys are going to be happy with that. Just give this park some time, just think about it this park looks a lot better than Animal Kingdom.

 

[cruiseman]

I think DCA is very visually appealing. The rollercoaster rocks, soaring rules the shops r neat and when you team that with DL its a pretty cool visit.

 

[DLMAGICDARREN]

I think the bad rap DCA gets, is mostly due to it's over confident feeling the imaganeers had with Paradise Pier. Although most everybody agrees that California Screamin is great, the rest of Paradise Pier is not looked upon so highly.

Maliboomer, King Tritan's Careosel, Jumpin Jellyfish, Orange Stinger, Golden Zephyr, Mullholand Madness, and Sun Wheel total up to eight of the park's attractions and many people consider each one to be nothing more then carnival rides.

8 out of 25 attractions being looked upon as carnival rides bring the ratio of carnival rides to about 1/3 of the park's attractions. Most of the public isx under the false impression that Walt did not like carnivals which is incorrect, but the majority of the public will not read enough about Walt to learn this so they already brush off these attractions.

Then they consider the "films" to also not be attractions, so they don't count Golden Dreams, or Seasons of the Vine, either.

Then they say 3d movies aren't attractions so they brush off Muppet Vision, and It's Tough To Be A Bug.

In other words, they continue to "pretend" half the attractions are not there, and then consider the park to be lacking.

Their analagy always surpries me, because to me, DCA is the eqivilent to Epcot (not in size, but in idea).

Epcot has 5 films, Wonders of China, Le Impressions De France, O' Canada, the Making of Me, & Circle of Life, plus one 3-d, Honey I Shrunk the Audience, but because Epcot scatters these over 300 acres, and DCA did not have that luxery building that park over 55 acres, people rationalize there is nothing to do at DCA. Epcot really only has two strong E-tickets, Test Track, and An American Adventure. Perhaps Ellen's Energy Adventure and Body Wars but I'd call them more of D tickets myself.

An intresting point, is that DCA opened with 3 Etickets, the same number as Animal Kingdom, but well ahead of Disney MGM, who later added all three of their cxurrent E-tickets, Star Tours, Tower of Terror, and Rock N Roller Coaster. Intrestingly enough, when DCA's Tower of Terror opens in 2004, it will be up in Etickets, at every WDW park except the Magic Kingdom.

DCA is not Disneyland, just as Epcot is not Magic Kingdom. People don't grasp that.

Is DCA perfect? Far from it, I feel they did over-do Paradise Pier. All attractions on the north shore of Paradise Bay are lacking to say the least, San Francisco has only one attraction, and not one store or restauurant, just Golden Dreams and restrooms.

But the idea for any park, becoming a resort, is to add a day to the experiance, not out do the more popular park.

I just spent a week at the resort, and didn't do quite a few things in DCA. Hiowever most people will only spend about 2 or 3 days at the resort, so DCA is intended to fill up one of those days. If you do a park, the way they are intended, that is absorb it all in, take your time, and don't just run from E-ticket to E-ticket, the park is quite charming for a day. I'd still rate it the lowest of the 6 Disney US parks, but being number 6 (and that's just my opinion) is still not bad. It still rates better then many other non Disney parks by me.

 

[pheneix]

>>>I think the bad rap DCA gets, is mostly due to it's over confident feeling the imaganeers had with Paradise Pier.<<<

The over-confidence (oh hell, let's call it arrogance) that was felt during the construction of DCA wasn't just there, it was all over the damned place! Everyone that wanted a part of the project all knew that this "new" form of business would work and Eisner would be proven to be a business genius (many ex-Imagineers I've talked to could see this failure coming a mile away. That is why they are ex-Imagineers). Now everyone just feels deep, deep regret, knowing that hundreds upon hundreds of millions will have to be poured upon DCA to make it a successful park, but also knowing that they cannot take the blame for it (I would not be surprised to see more formal executions of DLR executives at the end of the fiscal year). I'll admit it, I am so very happy to see this mode of thinking fail miserably. I do however feel sorry for those that have been forced to be a part of this mess.

>>>Most of the public isx under the false impression that Walt did not like carnivals which is incorrect<<<

Maybe he never went on the record saying that, but it is obvious by his business and creative decisions that he did not want a carnival atmosphere in his park.

>>>Epcot really only has two strong E-tickets<<<

But you're comparing 5 attractions from the Epcot Center of yesterday to the Epcot of today. Back in '82, Epcot Center had loads of E-tickets (Universe of Energy, World of Motion, Spaceship Earth, Kitchen Kabaret, and soon after opening JII. Horizons was also in the works for the following year). That of course is not true today.

>>>An intresting point, is that DCA opened with 3 Etickets, the same number as Animal Kingdom, but well ahead of Disney MGM<<<

That's nothing to brag about.

 

[DCA Fan]

It's the d@mn carnival games. Sorry for the minor cursing, but I didn't go to DCA to see that.

The other thing is the fact that the management isn't taking good care of the park/sponsors.

Also, ppls expectations are higher now than w/ the original Disneyland, which originally started out much like DCA, except that they reached 1 million guests in 7 weeks.

 

[JLW11Hi]

Originally posted by DLMAGICDARREN

Epcot has 5 films, Wonders of China, Le Impressions De France, O' Canada, the Making of Me, & Circle of Life, plus one 3-d, Honey I Shrunk the Audience, but because Epcot scatters these over 300 acres, and DCA did not have that luxery building that park over 55 acres, people rationalize there is nothing to do at DCA. Epcot really only has two strong E-tickets, Test Track, and An American Adventure. Perhaps Ellen's Energy Adventure and Body Wars but I'd call them more of D tickets myself.

An intresting point, is that DCA opened with 3 Etickets, the same number as Animal Kingdom, but well ahead of Disney MGM, who later added all three of their cxurrent E-tickets, Star Tours, Tower of Terror, and Rock N Roller Coaster. Intrestingly enough, when DCA's Tower of Terror opens in 2004, it will be up in Etickets, at every WDW park except the Magic Kingdom.

DCA is not Disneyland, just as Epcot is not Magic Kingdom. People don't grasp that.

Is DCA perfect? Far from it, I feel they did over-do Paradise Pier. All attractions on the north shore of Paradise Bay are lacking to say the least, San Francisco has only one attraction, and not one store or restauurant, just Golden Dreams and restrooms.

But the idea for any park, becoming a resort, is to add a day to the experiance, not out do the more popular park.

I just spent a week at the resort, and didn't do quite a few things in DCA. Hiowever most people will only spend about 2 or 3 days at the resort, so DCA is intended to fill up one of those days. If you do a park, the way they are intended, that is absorb it all in, take your time, and don't just run from E-ticket to E-ticket, the park is quite charming for a day. I'd still rate it the lowest of the 6 Disney US parks, but being number 6 (and that's just my opinion) is still not bad. It still rates better then many other non Disney parks by me.

I think the park lacks the background needed for new, exiting additions to the park. I mean, compared to the other themes at Disney parks, DCA defenetly has the least to work with. Now, you could go on and on about the stuff California has to offer that could be displayed in the park, and we will probably end up seeing most of those ideas in the park sooner or later, but the park just lacks the heart of the other parks, which are devoted to so much more. Don't get me wrong, California is probably the best state to have a theme around, but why this? Why make a park devoted to a single state? You can't tell me the Imagineers didn't have thousands of other ideas that all of us would be ooing and ahhing over more than DCA. I think the parks are just being added nowadays with no rhyme or reason. Lots of people can come up with good "theming" ideas for a Disney park, but I have yet to see something so original as Epcot as an addtion to the Disney resorts besides the Magic Kingdom/Disneyland parks.

I dunno. I lost track of what I was babbling about. never mind. That is the biggest problem, IMO. But besides the whole "theming" issue, I think I and everyone else can live with it!

I think we can all live with DCA. I do think it is cool that you can walk back and forth to each park. I cant wait for my DL vacation!

 

[RobFL]

Aww.. you think we're a D ticket.. I'm flattered

You made my day.

-Rob

 

[DLMAGICDARREN]

>>>Maybe he never went on the record saying that, but it is obvious by his business and creative decisions that he did not want a carnival atmosphere in his park.<<<

I would disagree with that. The only thing that's obvious about the atmosphere is that he didn't want certain aspects of a carnival in his park.

Otherwise why would he have supported the entire Fantasyland theme being one of a carnival? Why did he ok Astro Orbiter? Why did he add the Flying Saucers, and Autopia, which were very carnival-like. Why was he so excited about adding Skyway in 1959?

The only thing we know for sure, is that he wanted a clean atmosphere, a place that adults could have fun as well as the children, and employees that were not rude.

While I still go with my first point, most of Paradise Pier is not the breakthrough in ride technology we expect from Disney, I see nothing but indications from 1955 till his death, that Walt had no problem whatsoever with carnival type attractions, so long as it met certain condistions, which DCA's Paradise Pier does.

<<< But you're comparing 5 attractions from the Epcot Center of yesterday to the Epcot of today. Back in '82, Epcot Center had loads of E-tickets (Universe of Energy, World of Motion, Spaceship Earth, Kitchen Kabaret, and soon after opening JII. Horizons was also in the works for the following year). That of course is not true today. >>>

Where did I compare 5 Epcot attractions from yesterday? You did that. I never brought up Universe of Energy, World of Motion, Spaceship Earth, Kitchen Kabaret, JII, or Horizons. What did the subject matter of Why Does DCA get a bad rap, have to do with an entirely different topic, The Epcot Center of 1982, compared to the Epcot of today? I never stated Epcot is a better park today then when it opened, I was comparing a current park Epcot, to another current park, California Adventure.

<<< That's nothing to brag about. >>>
Who said I was bragging about the statistic that DCA opened with 3 E-tickets, compared to other parks that opened with less? I'd be the first to agree, Disney MGM needed more E-tickets from the start. Something they addresed in 1990, adding Star Tours, and again in 1994 adding Tower of Terror, until the recent addition of Rock N Roller Coaster. Likewise Animal Kingdom needs to add another, but DCA is already in the process of adding it's 4th. That's simply a stat now, not an opinion whatsoever.

 

[Tigggrl]

Well, if you watch the Disneyland DVD, it clearly states that Walt took some of the ideas he saw at the carnivals and amusement parks that he liked, and incorporated them into Disneyland....and I could be wrong, but just last night I was watching a 10th anniversary special with Walt, and If What I saw is correct, Disneyland did NOT open with Pirates, Small World or Haunted Mansion...Hmmmm...
There is always room for more improvement, all around.... I think anyone interested in the history of the company should read "Building A Company" By Roy Disney...maybe you would learn more about the man and men who built this company....I know Darren has ( If Im not mistaken, I was with him when he bought it) And also the Walt Disney Autobiography

 

[pheneix]

>>>Why did he ok Astro Orbiter? Why did he add the Flying Saucers, and Autopia, which were very carnival-like. Why was he so excited about adding Skyway in 1959?<<<

But aren't those attractions themed extensively, and put a unique twist on their respective ride systems (like how AO is 30ft in the air)? The skyway was also a very new ride system if I remember right...

>>>Where did I compare 5 Epcot attractions from yesterday? You did that.<<<

No, you did. You took 5 attractions that opened in a park that had a well balanced attraction mix and compared them to the park of today that does not have many attractions to balance them out. Present day Epcot is not lightyears better than present day DCA, but that is because of Disney's mismanagements too.

>>>Likewise Animal Kingdom needs to add another, but DCA is already in the process of adding it's 4th.<<<

The "Tower of Mild Unease?"

>>>Disneyland did NOT open with Pirates, Small World or Haunted Mansion...Hmmmm...<<<

Disneyland *did* open with the Jungle Cruise, Flight to the Moon, and CircleVision, which were all pretty huge attractions back in 1955. And the examples of Pirates and Haunted Mansion are even more evidence that when Walt had the resources to push the envelope further, he did it and never even thought of turning back.

>>>Aww.. you think we're a D ticket..<<<

I thought Energy was a E-ticket until practically all of the most memorable moments about the attraction (the Radok screen, the finale, and the music) were unceremoniously ripped out for Ellen.

 

[DLMAGICDARREN]

<<<But aren't those attractions themed extensively, and put a unique twist on their respective ride systems (like how AO is 30ft in the air)? The skyway was also a very new ride system if I remember right...>>>>

Just as soon as you choose to explain how Astro Orbiter, and Skyway were more cutting edge, then say Golden Zephyr, I'll be glad to discuss, but you havn't done that yet. So Astro Orbiter is (um ... I mean was... ) 30 feet in the air. Maliboomer is 180 feet in the air so I really don't get your point. Does height of an attraction guarentee sucess? If so Disney has made many sucesses in the last 10 years.

<<<No, you did. You took 5 attractions that opened in a park that had a well balanced attraction mix and compared them to the park of today that does not have many attractions to balance them out. Present day Epcot is not lightyears better than present day DCA, but that is because of Disney's mismanagements too. >>>

Sorry, but please scroll up, and re-read the thread. I didn't mention 5 attractions that opened with the park, if you read what I said it was that I said Epcot has five films, present tense, not past tense. You were the first to ever bring up Spaceship Earth, and many of the others, that I never did. All I brought up were current attractions. I will agree Spaceship Earth is a great attraction, one I shamefully neglected to include, but I didn't include the past ones you seem to think I did, I only compared present tense ones, so again, I don't get your point at all.

For your last comments, since you don't seem to be quoting me at all anymore, I will say this, sure Pirates and many other attractions hit breakthroughs. Nobody ever said Disneyland shut down in new technology after Walt left us. We all know that after Walt's death, still Haunted Mansion opened, Country Bears opened, America Sings, Pinnochio's Daring Journey, Hall Of Presidents, the list goes on and on. Sure many more attractions were made, and will continue to be made.

Some of those happen to be at DCA, for your information!

 

[james4023464]

i really don't mind the carnival rides, disney puts a good twist on them they are themed very nicely. Now if they just threw in a carnival ride with now them I would be e. I think Paridise Pier is buetiful expecially at night. Is it true DCA is getting a Rock'n Rollercoaster in the backlot?

 

[JLW11Hi]

Originally posted by DLMAGICDARREN
<<<But aren't those attractions themed extensively, and put a unique twist on their respective ride systems (like how AO is 30ft in the air)? The skyway was also a very new ride system if I remember right...>>>>

Just as soon as you choose to explain how Astro Orbiter, and Skyway were more cutting edge, then say Golden Zephyr, I'll be glad to discuss, but you havn't done that yet. So Astro Orbiter is (um ... I mean was... ) 30 feet in the air. Maliboomer is 180 feet in the air so I really don't get your point. Does height of an attraction guarentee sucess? If so Disney has made many sucesses in the last 10 years.

Some of those happen to be at DCA, for your information!

I think he meant for their time, they were very creative and cutting edge. We're talking about 1955 here compared to a park made a few years ago. When Disneyland first opened, many of the rides could have been compared to carnival rides, but that was back before they knew anything about what the public would really enjoy. Well, the public did, and still does, enjoy occasional "carnival" rides, and Disney made them nicer, cleaner and safer than those you'd see at an average amusement park. What park back then had a land of tomorrow where kids could fly their own spaceship way up in the air, and control the height of the ship as well? That kinda stuff was like, say, Cat in the Hat nowadays. Pretty cool to all the kiddies.

So jump forward to 2002. Rides like Maliboomer were invented, like, 20 years ago. And this drop-type ride is really no different than the ones installed in any Six Flags park years ago. So comparing the impact the maliboomer has on guests to, say, Starjets did back in 55, I'd say Star Jets wins.

 

[Merlin]

"What's so bad about DCA?", hmmmm.... How much time do you have?

I've given a lot of thought to this question (as many on these forums can attest). Here are my thoughts on what's wrong with DCA:

1. THEMEING: When I heard they were building DCA, I was thrilled. Despite the criticism it got for being a "California" theme IN California, I actually thought that would be a really cool theme and felt they just had a ton of potential concepts with which to work. So then what went wrong? The parts that ARE themed to California aren't done very well (i.e. I think the Golden Gate Bridge at the entrance is embarrassingly silly looking...It looks nothing like the real thing, not even a scaled down version). There are also parts that Disney wants to pass off as being a representation of what California is about, but have never been a huge part of our culture (and certainly not unique to California). Case in point here is Paradise Pier. Yes, it is true that California has a strong "beach culture", but very little of that has ever focused much on midways and amusement rides. (Note: some of you will want to prove me wrong by pointing out Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk, the Pike at Long Beach, and others. But keep in mind that I have not stated here that these areas have never EXISTED. I'm just saying I don't think they are considered a huge part of California culture...or even California "beach culture" as Disney claimed they were celebrating with the creation of Paradise Pier). If they wanted to celebrate California's beach culture, then why not some sort of surfing attraction? "How the heck are they gonna have an attraction about surfing?", you might ask? Well, that's not up to me to create. I'm not the Imagineer. I rely on (and quite frankly, EXPECT) the imagination and magic of Disney to answer that sort of challenge. I think Paradise Pier was added just as an excuse to put in a lot of off-the-shelf amusement rides on the cheap. But the poor themeing didn't stop there. Disney then proceeded to add attractions that have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with California whatsoever. I've stated this already on a couple of other forums, but no one has been able to answer me...What the heck does "Who Wants To Be A Millionaire" have to do with California???? (Before someone rebuts that by pointing out that this attraction is in MGM and what does it have to do with Florida, keep in mind that MGM is not a park that is ABOUT Florida. It is about movies and television, and they acknowledge in the pre-show why it isn't being taped in NY...perfectly acceptable.) And what about Flik's Fun Fair and It's Tough To Be A Bug? How are these attractions about California? They don't have bugs in other states?

2. LACK OF UNIQUE ATTRACTIONS: Several pro-DCA fans seem to think our issue with the park is a lack of E-ticket attractions, and so you make comparisons to other Disney parks which opened with fewer E's. Or you compare it to Disneyland and you say, "Give it a chance. Look how Disneyland started out." I'm not basing my opinion of DCA on what it could be 5 or 10 years from now. I'm basing it on what it is now. I think it is reasonable to have high expectations of a new park despite a small number of attractions in it when it first opens. But the problem is there is very little about this park that is unique. The vast majority of the park are remakes of other Disney attractions or carnival attractions.

3. AN INSULT TO OUR INTELLIGENCE: Shortly before the park opened, I read a Fortune Magazine article about how the park went from idea to reality. Michael Eisner had called a meeting in Aspen with the goal of coming up with a concept for a second gate (since they had decided not to go forward with Westcot). A variety of great ideas were presented, but Eisner chose DCA because it could be built cheaply, could incorporate a lot of already existing attractions, and would still be sure to make money because people would pay to get in because of the Disney name. Other sources confirmed this thinking was, in fact, the basis for the decision to build DCA. I think the company is learning the hard way that people won't buy just because it is Disney. People want quality. People want to visit a park that either is completely unlike any other (i.e. Epcot) or that takes an existing concept several leaps forward (i.e. Typhoon Lagoon). DCA does neither of these things. It is not a labor of love or the result of Disney imagination and magic. It was intended as a way of ______________ money from our wallets. And the public is more intelligent and sophisticated than the company gives us credit for. Walt knew this back in the 40s and 50s. Steven Spielberg understands it. George Lucas understands it. Michael Eisner and Paul Pressler do not.

4. CAN'T DECIDE ON A MARKET AUDIENCE: Disneyland and WDW were brilliantly designed to appeal to entire families. Not only is there something for everyone, but there is ENOUGH of something for everyone. At DCA, they try to attract teens for example. But even the thrill rides really aren't "cutting edge" enough for the average Southern California teenager. People have expressed a desire to see Rock n Roller Coaster at DCA, but I honestly feel it would not be as popular there as it is in Orlando. Despite it's place on the map as the #1 tourist destination, Orlando really isn't a roller coaster haven. Granted, Krakken and the IOA coasters are great, but they're all fairly recent and there aren't many of them. Southern California, by contrast, has had mega coasters and thrill rides for a long time and that market is going to be harder to impress if you're going after the thrill crowd. DL has remained successful because it could give guests excitement by delivering an alternative type of thrill (i.e. Space Mt, Matterhorn, etc), focusing more on the theme than on loops and huge drops. As someone stated earlier in this post, rides like the Maliboomer aren't anything new. That same ride is in at least a dozen parks around the country (including nearby Knott's Berry Farm). On the other end of the scale, they are just now figuring out that they need to add something that is aimed at small kids. What were they thinking?

Those, in my opinion, are the main issues with DCA. Of course, I could easily add to the list, but I would imagine many of my other thoughts on DCA will be expressed by others on this thread.

 

[DLMAGICDARREN]

Originally posted by JLW11Hi


I think he meant for their time, they were very creative and cutting edge. We're talking about 1955 here compared to a park made a few years ago. When Disneyland first opened, many of the rides could have been compared to carnival rides, but that was back before they knew anything about what the public would really enjoy. Well, the public did, and still does, enjoy occasional "carnival" rides, and Disney made them nicer, cleaner and safer than those you'd see at an average amusement park. What park back then had a land of tomorrow where kids could fly their own spaceship way up in the air, and control the height of the ship as well? That kinda stuff was like, say, Cat in the Hat nowadays. Pretty cool to all the kiddies.

So jump forward to 2002. Rides like Maliboomer were invented, like, 20 years ago. And this drop-type ride is really no different than the ones installed in any Six Flags park years ago. So comparing the impact the maliboomer has on guests to, say, Starjets did back in 55, I'd say Star Jets wins.

Actually no we aren't really talking about 1955.

1955 included many attractions, but it did not include many others. Attractions that were not open in 1955 include Pirates, It's A Small World, Haunted Mansion, Enchanted Tiki Room, Space Mountain, Splash Mountain, Indiana Jones, Honey I Shrunk The Audience, Captain E-O, America Sings, Big Thunder, Pinnichio, Mad Hatter Teacups, Submarine, Matterhorn, Monorail, Country Bears, Pirates, and Rocket Rods.

So who says al the classics came in 1955? Skyway came in 1959,
Matterhorn came in 1959, Pirates in 1967, Space Mountain in 1977, Star Tours in 1987, so to say attractions all came from the 1950's is silly.

Of course many did, because that was the era that Walt lived in, but the point is that Walt didn't make any more of a carnvial ride in 1959, when he brought the first steel coaster to America, and then added Tiki Room in 1963, then DCA did opening Soarin Over California, even though it's the same year Jumpin Jellyfish opened.

 

[JLW11Hi]

Originally posted by DLMAGICDARREN


Actually no we aren't really talking about 1955.

1955 included many attractions, but it did not include many others. Attractions that were not open in 1955 include Pirates, It's A Small World, Haunted Mansion, Enchanted Tiki Room, Space Mountain, Splash Mountain, Indiana Jones, Honey I Shrunk The Audience, Captain E-O, America Sings, Big Thunder, Pinnichio, Mad Hatter Teacups, Submarine, Matterhorn, Monorail, Country Bears, Pirates, and Rocket Rods.

So who says al the classics came in 1955? Skyway came in 1959,
Matterhorn came in 1959, Pirates in 1967, Space Mountain in 1977, Star Tours in 1987, so to say attractions all came from the 1950's is silly.

Of course many did, because that was the era that Walt lived in, but the point is that Walt didn't make any more of a carnvial ride in 1959, when he brought the first steel coaster to America, and then added Tiki Room in 1963, then DCA did opening Soarin Over California, even though it's the same year Jumpin Jellyfish opened.

Oh, n/m. I was just talking about your comparison of StarJets to Maliboomer. I don't think all the classics came from the 50s.

 

[mkt]

Merlin,

have you been to DCA?

all I will ever ask you is for constructive criticism, and nothing more. If you're gonna say something stinks, and why it stinks, the please... if you're not gonna say anything good, then offer a suggestion on how to improve it. Disney does in fact read these boards, and any little hint you could drop would perhaps help them get a clue.

 

[pheneix]

>>>So Astro Orbiter is (um ... I mean was... ) 30 feet in the air.<<<

It still is at WDW, where the grip of the big time idiots at Burbank is not as tight.

>>>Maliboomer is 180 feet in the air so I really don't get your point.<<<

It has also been built the EXACT SAME WAY in dozens of parks across the world. Heck, Universal built one and actually made a story to go along with it.

>>>Does height of an attraction guarentee sucess?<<<

No, but I was pointing at how back in the day it was used to made an already "different" ride very exciting.

>>>I don't get your point at all.<<<

Defnitely, so I'm not going to bother with the Epcot example this go around.

>>>Some of those happen to be at DCA, for your information!<<<

Where? The only major new thing DCA is getting is a poor man's Tower of Terror.

>>>then DCA did opening Soarin Over California<<<

Yes, a stunning example of how even the most state-of-the-art technology can be misused (explain to me, how am I supposed to be flying over the beach in the middle of the day, and then in the blink of an eye I am flying over LA at night?).

 

[james4023464]

hey pheniex what do you mean about an old man's tower of terror, are you already insulting the ToT going in DCA.

 

[pheneix]

>>>hey pheniex what do you mean about an old man's tower of terror<<<

No, I mean a "Poor Man's TOT," as in something a poor man can afford.