When Disney is going to open a new park?

[SilentRascal]

Originally posted by temmy3000
So, what about build a park with lots of roller coaster, all villains roller coasters or thrilling rides!! Villains Kingdom!!!

Personally I would love a park like that and I believe a great many others would too. There's by far more people who love thrill rides than those who don't. And by making a thrill park themed by the warm Disney magic, it would do much better than IoA which is rather sloppily put together. What's that some say? "I don't ride thrill rides so I don't think they need a park like that." Well......here's a radical thought......leave the thrill park to those who do enjoy it. Nobody will force you to go there. You'll still have 4 other parks to spend your time in.

 

[Sherm00]

Originally posted by YankeeFan


Personally I would love a park like that and I believe a great many others would too. There's by far more people who love thrill rides than those who don't. And by making a thrill park themed by the warm Disney magic, it would do much better than IoA which is rather sloppily put together. What's that some say? "I don't ride thrill rides so I don't think they need a park like that." Well......here's a radical thought......leave the thrill park to those who do enjoy it. Nobody will force you to go there. You'll still have 4 other parks to spend your time in.

then head over to great adventure. disney is above the cheap thrill in my book. disney is a family park families can do 90% of the rides in disney. if they make a coaster park grandpa jo who is pushing 80 wouldn't have any fun in a park like that. mom who is pregnant isn't going to be able to do anything. in a park like that. disney knows the correct mix for families. now don't get me wrong IOA is a wonderfully themed park and we did have a good time when we went there. posidens fury was great, so was the cat inthe hat and suess land. but it's the little things. it has too many thrill rides and should have more rides that families can go on together. the restrooms at IOA were filthy and nobody ever seems to clean the garbage cans. and the employees don't really seem to be in charector for the ride. and though it was a fun park it was no disney. the themeing is awesome but is more for people that are looking for the cheap thrill while haveing some stuff to try and compete with disney. when we walked through superhero land the music was so loud we couldn't stay very long. disney is much better mainly in service.. I don't know about coasters or mony or how much it costs etc. but I have been to enough parks to know what I like and I thought this whole point of this board was to discuss our opinions. Disney still blows the doors off anything universal is currently doing. as far as I am concerned IOA has too many thrill rides and needs more unique stuff like posidens fury and the cat in the hat. disney knows how to please the majority and if disney dose do a coaster I wouldn't want them to use an off the shelf coaster with some design enhancements. I would want them to do a good theming to it.

 

[wdwmagic]

Originally posted by RobFL

First off, not a single one of you is a designer or a CFO of any major themed design company, so for you to make statements about prices and thrift is ridiculous. You have no basis for your statements, and to just point something out.. Hulk was created by B&M, the biggest of the big names in coasters. Additionally, it was specially designed for the park. Then, proving you wrong again, it uses a launch system unlike any other in the world designed specifically for it. It even has its own generators so that Orlando doesn't brown out every time it launches. Yet, to you, it's cheap.
-Rob

I think the point being made was that B&M will basically create anyone a coaster who will cough up 20 million dollars or so. You then get whatever their latest creation is. Heck, if I got on the waiting list and had that kinda cash, I am sure I could get them to build me their latest and greatest coaster in my yard!

On the flip side of that coin is a Disney attraction that is not buyable at any cost.

It is true to say that a bare coaster is comparitevly cheap. How much did Hulk cost? It couldnt have been more than 20 or 30 million I am guessing. Something like Space MOuntain at Paris was in the 100 million ball park, a considerable difference, and the results are a high quality immersive experience.

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by RobFL
Sometimes you are the biggest bunch of pompus windbags I have ever encountered.

You make broad statements based wholely on your opinion and try to present it as fact.

First off, not a single one of you is a designer or a CFO of any major themed design company, so for you to make statements about prices and thrift is ridiculous. You have no basis for your statements, and to just point something out.. Hulk was created by B&M, the biggest of the big names in coasters. Additionally, it was specially designed for the park. Then, proving you wrong again, it uses a launch system unlike any other in the world designed specifically for it. It even has its own generators so that Orlando doesn't brown out every time it launches. Yet, to you, it's cheap.

Why are coasters in plain sight? Perhaps because the general public does not consider it to be an eyesore. Most people want to watch roller coasters zooming about, even the nonriders. People take pictures by the hundreds every day of the visible sections of a coaster. People enjoy it. Why take it away because you don't think it fits thematicly?

Who are you to say what is proper for theme? Have you studied theme in terms of architectural and enviromental design? Themed design is so much more than "you should never see the ride track" just as much as photography is more than "always center the subject" and art is more than "always use paint."

As a matter of fact, in all three of those statements, it is consdiered by the artists to be limitting and at times entirely the wrong direction to take. If you have a ride system that will leave the guest intrigued by its function, then why not showcase it? Why not paint it dazzling colors and have it careen through the landscape around the guest engrossing them?

Perhaps because your theme is one of pleasentry and warm fuzzy slow moving clouds. Then, perhaps you ought not. In the case of the Hulk, the area is ment to be loud and boisterous, full of chaos, fast moving, intense. It fits perfectly.

Now.. moving to the subject of "nothing to do besides rides." How hard did you look? I spent the day there last weekend and only did three attractions in the entire park and got a full day of it. No, I did not wait in any long lines either.

I went on Cat in the Hat, then proceeded to wander through "If I ran the zoo," past the Zax bypass, listened to a whispermaphone about Truffula Trees, sun bathed on the Sneech Beach, and made sure to toss a few coins in a fishes mouth at McEllegiots pool - a refreshing surprise.

Then, I ventured into Poseidons Fury. Afterward, I wandered about Mythos and examined the statues and the lakeside view, got myself a drink at the Enchanted oak's Alchemy Bar (non aalcoholic for those wondering), saw Merlin running about, talked shop with blacksmith, tried to flip a rat into a cauldron, and then got a palm reading while my best friend bought herself a headdress.

Oh, then we went to Jurassic Park. We watched the splash down of the River Adventure breifly, not riding, and then explored the Discovery Center, detoured to pet a real live Triceratops, and then spent over an hour and a half in Camp Jurassic climbing rope bridges, exploring dark amber mine caves, and just mindlessly wandering about taking it all in.

I feel a bit long winded.. but I'm not embellishing and merely stating each item as encountered. There's obviously more than enough to do at each.

There's still two Islands left to explore, which I did, but I have a feeling you never gave them a chance.

-Rob

The going price for steel coasters is still under $20 million in most cases. You don't have to be an engineer or a director of planning or a park executive (or a rocket scientist) to figure this out. Just look at was is reported as the approximate costs for this kind of attraction. Nobody ever says exactly how much they pay but a lot of amusement parks tend to brag about their new $15 million coaster... When Bush Gardens got Rhino Rally at an estimated cost of $21 million it was a really, really big deal for them because they considered themselves in line with the "big boys" (I assume meaning Disney and Universal). This was in spite of the fact that Bush Gardens Florida has Five adult coasters two of which were built by B&M one of which was the first with the camel back hump and the other which still hold records. For them, $21 million was a MAJOR investment in just one attraction and was actually the most expensive attraction they've gotten to date. (We will overlook the fact that the attraction doesn't really live up to the hype of a thrill ride that they produced before opening and that some aspects of it's safety system seem to be questionable based on the minimal changes made after one of the cars tipped over with guests in it.) The estimated cost of Millennium force as suggested by Cedar Point was in the $30 million range which they described as their most expensive coaster to date. It's a hyper coaster which all seem to be made by companies other than B&M. I could be wrong but I'm unaware of B&M having yet gotten into this market - somebody please correct me if I am wrong. My best guess would be that the Hulk came in well below the $30 million mark. If it did not, Universal really got cheated because that coaster doesn't have near the draw that others a few times it's size that ring in at the high $30+ end have. To use Universal's own attractions as an example, I'll go back to something I've used before: Back to the Future. That attraction when built back in the early 90's cost a little over $70 million. Ok, let me repeat that: $70 million. I'm sorry, did you hear me? Maybe I should say it again: $70 million. This figure is not a stab in the dark for me, at the time of opening, Universal bragged about the cost. With this in mind it is not in any way unreasonable to say that they could have had at least 2 Hulks at today's cost for the price of that single attraction about ten years ago. In fact, it would probably be in line to say that they very well likely could have had 3. Now, the reason I am so stuck on this is that behind Spider Man, the Hulk seems to be the most heavily pushed single attraction in IOA advertising and in terms of Orlando e-ticket attractions, it is EXTREMELY cheap today even by Universal's own standards. Perhaps that's why IOA still has trouble even coming close to touching it's sister park's attendance... There are a few things that seem a little off to me about the Jurassic Park river ride - like the incredibly fake T-Rex at the end which was designed with easy maintenance in mind more than it was realism (if you would like to know what I base that pompous statement on - just ask ) but they at least made a serious attempt at adding a theme to what is otherwise a rather common amusement park attraction. Heck, I'm sure the theme (including building for the lift and drop) probably cost considerably more than the ride system...

As for my picky attitude about theme. Perhaps your idea of a middle ages like "lost continent" includes large amounts of brightly painted heavily machined twisted steel but mine doesn't. I'm sorry, call me picky or crazy or anything else but to me, that doesn't blend so well with retail locations designed to look like open air tents or a castle made of "stone" that's falling apart. Heck, they at least chose a muted color scheme for the kiddie Unicorn coaster and tied twigs around it in area to at least TRY to blend the actual ride into it's environment a little. Likewise, the Hulk which is visible from every "island" in the park, isn't something I would expect to see looming in the background on screen when Jurassic Park 4 comes out. How about you? Seriously, the day I go to IOA and see a height balloon going up for a possible new attraction, I may just faint right then and there... IOA is a relatively young park. In terms of things such as the big wooden doors at the entrance of Jurassic Park or with the exterior of some of the attractions, it is my opinion that they do in fact do a very good job in regards to theme BUT I think that Universal Studios Florida does a much better all around job of it and I honestly think that to at least some degree, Universal lowered the bar a bit on what is considered a "world class" theme park in the Orlando area. The attendance figures from opening year to present, for what Universal expected to become their flagship park seems to back up my belief. Incidentally, Disney seems to be having similar problems with their new California park. Having not been, I can't really comment either way on it but it seems to me that in more than one way, they have things in common with IOA.

 

[jonmar]

I agree

I agree with ROBFL because Hulk was rated the number one roller coaster of 2002. Disney Definatly has to build a roller coaster park. I care what anyone says, but, Universal Studios is starting to become a competitor, believe it or not. Dont get me wrong I am the biggest disney fan ever, but, they really need a roller coaster park or something of that nature to pull even more crowds. As soon as they build a roller coaster park I really believe they will have everything. Also, if you compare MGM to the regular universal, Universal is better with the exception of TOT and Rocking Rollercoaster. Every thing else there is a better ride. But thats not the point. The Point is they can win crowds over by building a lets say "Thrill Ride" Park. All power to them too if they make the rides inside cause they are so much better themed.

 

[RobFL]

I think my biggest "don't be so hard on it" comes from knowing what Hulk was supposed to have been. During the launch, the tunnel was to fill with fog, strobe lights where to flash, and then at the opening of the tunnel, there was to be a "blast" like an explosion every time a vehicle came out. The launch tunnel was original designed to look as though it has been torn apart at the end by the force of the explosion. I need to hunt down the scale model that showed it in this form. It was nifty

-Rob

 

[Katherine]

I agree Disney needs some new rollercoasters. Maybe creating a whole park of them is over kill but they need to put some new ones in some where in the park to get some extra income. I think the could put a new coaster in each park(especially AK & Epcot). AK should definantly put one in(at least) they have the space and some great theming It would be a great addition

 

[Sherm00]

Re: I agree

Originally posted by jonmar
I agree with ROBFL because Hulk was rated the number one roller coaster of 2002. Disney Definatly has to build a roller coaster park. I care what anyone says, but, Universal Studios is starting to become a competitor, believe it or not. Dont get me wrong I am the biggest disney fan ever, but, they really need a roller coaster park or something of that nature to pull even more crowds. As soon as they build a roller coaster park I really believe they will have everything. Also, if you compare MGM to the regular universal, Universal is better with the exception of TOT and Rocking Rollercoaster. Every thing else there is a better ride. But thats not the point. The Point is they can win crowds over by building a lets say "Thrill Ride" Park. All power to them too if they make the rides inside cause they are so much better themed.

I have to disagree on MGM vs Universal studios. MGM is way better. Universal may have a few more rides granted but thats not what a studios park is all about. at universal studios you don't feel like your in a studio, you feel like your in a town, now I know the towns are supposed to be towns out of certian films but no where do they tell you what films. if they did that the park would be better. in MGM you feel like hollywood, like you backstage then in front of the stage. take for example new york street from up close you see the buildings are fake then you walk up and turn around and they aren't so fake any more. also look at the sci fi diner, nowhere in universal is there a resturant like this. you enter backstage in what looks like the backstage of a movie set, then you are taken to your car. heck even at dinner your entertained. look at the 50's prime time. as attractions go millionair is awesome, TOT, muppets, great movie ride, back lot tour, little mermaid, beauty and the beast, indaiana jones star tours are all classics. and lets not forget Rock and roller coaster. it is a roller coaster that would rivel even the hulk. at universal MIB was ok, twister was good but short, earthquake was good but short. back to the future was good, and the horor makeup show was good. the hanna barbara ride and alferd hitchcock was also good. now I am not saying universal is bad, it's not. all I am saying is they have a good start but they have a long way to go before cathing up with disney.

 

[Sherm00]

Originally posted by Katherine
I agree Disney needs some new rollercoasters. Maybe creating a whole park of them is over kill but they need to put some new ones in some where in the park to get some extra income. I think the could put a new coaster in each park(especially AK & Epcot). AK should definantly put one in(at least) they have the space and some great theming It would be a great addition

I never got the idea that if it's a park it must have rides, and it must have rollercoasters. if disney dose put in a coaster it should be themed like space mountain or BTMRR or RNRC in which it isn't visible until you ride it. then it wouldn't be so bad. me I wont ride it, but fact is fact alot of people like it it's a cult thing. but a new park all with coasters, I would never go to it, it would feel too much like great adventure. I have been to great adventure twice, and I will never go again, great adventure is the absoulute worst park ever and I don't want disney to lower their standards to be like great adventure.

 

[jonmar]

I definatly agree with you that Great Adventure is the worst park ever because of theming. I really think that is the biggest point we should talk about when building any kind of attraction from a ride to a 3d show to a show to just walk ways and streets. Six Flags does have great roller coasters and thats it. Everything else about that park is Terrible. The service, the way its run, the way it was designed. The main thing is Theming. Ok, now lets talk about it for a minute. When I say disney should build roller coasters I stand by it. If you dont like it, fine, Its understandable. They dont need like 15 at each park, not saying that, Im saying they really should have at least maybe 3 or 4 at each park eventually, but, they all should have a good theme. Anything built inside has a good theme (Ex. Space mountain spacem, RNR - LA limo, BTM - Haunted Mining tunnel). Great themes, eVen the Hulk believe it or not is a great theme. but ponder on this for now I will write more later

 

[Pumbas Nakasak]

This is the most pointless and repataive subject for a thread. The Universal bashers wont listen and the Pro Universal lobby repeat the same old stuff. Perhaps you should all agree to disagree and bethankful we all have diffrent tastes and likes.

After all it keeps the Qs down..

 

[dreamer]

I hope Disney doesn't abandon ongoing investment in current parks in order to build a new one. The news about the $300 million in upgrades for EPCOT is great. As the world changes, the current parks must change. In 20 years, many of today's great rides will seem lame. The public will be even more technology-hungry. Not to mention that costs for security will only be increasing.

In the current climate of uncertainty -- markets and wars and terrorism -- I would think Disney reluctant to break ground for a new site or new park. They need to shore up what they already have. The fact that people are getting AKLodge rooms for $129 a night tells you something about the market for "magic" right now.

 

[Sherm00]

Originally posted by dreamer
I hope Disney doesn't abandon ongoing investment in current parks in order to build a new one. The news about the $300 million in upgrades for EPCOT is great. As the world changes, the current parks must change. In 20 years, many of today's great rides will seem lame. The public will be even more technology-hungry. Not to mention that costs for security will only be increasing.

In the current climate of uncertainty -- markets and wars and terrorism -- I would think Disney reluctant to break ground for a new site or new park. They need to shore up what they already have. The fact that people are getting AKLodge rooms for $129 a night tells you something about the market for "magic" right now.

agreed, universal has the unique feature of being newer parks. most of the disney parks are over 20 years old except for animal kingdom. that in itself is a huge undertakeing to keep it up to date, yet disney gets bashed if they take out our favorite ride for one reason or another. people of today think diffrently then people of yesterday , and the people of tomorrow will be completely diffrent from the people of today. we need to accept this, and as long as disney keeps up it's standards a coaster done well in disney wouldn't be a bad thing.

 

[MrPromey]

Originally posted by RobFL
I think my biggest "don't be so hard on it" comes from knowing what Hulk was supposed to have been. During the launch, the tunnel was to fill with fog, strobe lights where to flash, and then at the opening of the tunnel, there was to be a "blast" like an explosion every time a vehicle came out. The launch tunnel was original designed to look as though it has been torn apart at the end by the force of the explosion. I need to hunt down the scale model that showed it in this form. It was nifty

-Rob

Rob, knowing what it was supposed to have been and then what it ended up as makes things even worse. It's like saying that some kind of an attempt was going to be made at adding at least more in the way of partial theme and was then dropped. Either way, what's there today is what they are to be judged by when it comes to 99% of people. This isn't a Universal only issue. More than once, attractions have been scaled back at Disney to make things less of what they were originally going to be. It's to my understanding that "Dinosaur" underwent a similar treatment...

And for the record,I have nothing specifically against Universal. I've held AP's for it a few times over the years and for a long time, I'd have said that US was better than MGM as a standalone park but they seem to have been slow to keep up with the times on some things. Maybe it's because the attention was focused on the new park being built but I think they've lost a little ground and MGM has slowly snuck in there (kind of like the way Universal is slowly sneaking in on Disney with Employee attitude and park cleanliness). I do go to IOA. as a matter of fact, my company outing this year will be at Universal and I'm planning to go to IOA instead of US because I do like roller coasters and because I'm a little tired of US. To me, (and I know you know what I'm talking about, Rob) IOA just strikes me as better than Bush Gardens (minus the live animals) but not quite as good as the other Orlando parks. I myself, wouldn't travel across the country to spend time there and would not make it a sure stop on my Orlando trip each year (where I might Universal Studios) I sort of think of it as a Six Flags for Florida. I realize that it's much better than most Six Flags parks (Certainly better if with fewer attractions - which is fine because it's a much younger park) but for most people in various parts of the world, to me (and this is my opinion) the difference in quality is not worth the cost and time of a trip...

Ok, I'm dropping this thread drift now and I hadn't intended to turn the conversation into one. I was just trying to explain what it was that I WOULDN'T want to see done in a Disney park.

P.S. If you ever locate that model picture, I'd love to see it!