Will WDW ever build Big kid thrill rides?

[UpAllNight]

Some people have the wrong idea about thrill rides.

I'd consider Spiderman and transformers thrill rides...at a 40" height limit I saw many kids come off these rides absolutely astonished at what had just happened to them, and it's also thrilling for adults.

Thrills aren't just inversions and speed.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Some people have the wrong idea about thrill rides.

I'd consider Spiderman and transformers thrill rides...at a 40" height limit I saw many kids come off these rides absolutely astonished at what had just happened to them, and it's also thrilling for adults.

Thrills aren't just inversions and speed.

I agree and I'm not at all against more of the Spiderman type attractions. I just don't want to see a bunch of big steel structures sticking in the sky unless they can indeed theme it to be next to unrecognizable as "just a coaster". They were able to do that with Everest because of the enormity of the AK park, RnRC was hidden within a building, but, what the coaster advocates want to see are the tall, out in the open type monstrosities that would ruin the entire ambiance when it is totally unnecessary.

 

[UpAllNight]

I agree and I'm not at all against more of the Spiderman type attractions. I just don't want to see a bunch of big steel structures sticking in the sky unless they can indeed theme it to be next to unrecognizable as "just a coaster". They were able to do that with Everest because of the enormity of the AK park, RnRC was hidden within a building, but, what the coaster advocates want to see are the tall, out in the open type monstrosities that would ruin the entire ambiance when it is totally unnecessary.

Rides could be created utilising the technology in Gringotts to pretty much any of Disneys franchises and make a thrilling for all ages ride experience. Unthemed steel coasters would obviously be ridiculous.

 

[Mouse_Trap]

I doubt it. Because you have people who think splash and thunder mt. are thrill rides, Disney probably doesn't see the need for it. Plus there are real thrill rides at 2 different parks a few miles away.

I'm with you, I would love some big thrill rides BUT we went to Cedar Point a few weeks ago and were noticing the lack of theming. It was really noticeable when you got on the ride. You'd sit down, buckle/harness in, and were off! Which is great for moving the line but there was no "wildest ride in the wilderness"-type speech before any of the rides.

I'd say 3 parks, Seaworld also has far more real thrill rides than all of WDW.

Agree on the theming, but new Universal is showing how you can have great thrill rides in the most immersive spaces possible. Kong is going to be another.

 

[Mouse_Trap]

Remember Walts vision was a park that the whole family could ride attractions together. I think that is one of the big reasons I like Disney. I,m not a super thrill ride person.

I don't think his vision was only to cater to the lowest common denominator.

You might also include the question... Why is Disney having to constantly bail Paris out because it isn't doing enough business to pay it's own way? or Why do people that live in Europe spends massive amounts of money to come to the states to get their Disney fix when they have one right there? I think the answer would be because it isn't what they want out of a Disney Park.

I tend to think that the single park pulling 10m visits a year on its own should be plenty to make a profit. It point to there being many issues, but I don't think you could call 10m poor attendance.
Certainly the reason I come to the US and not Euro Disney, is because for me Disneyland Paris has absolutely no magic about it whatsoever. Some of its rides are much better than in the Magic Kingdom, but theres an entire feel to it thats just missing. Neither am I that keen on France, which is a common thread in Britain.
We also don't really count a trip to a theme park in northern France (and its not very near Paris at all) to be a holiday. It's just a short-duration theme park trip that can be done visiting many of our local parks.

I agree and I'm not at all against more of the Spiderman type attractions. I just don't want to see a bunch of big steel structures sticking in the sky unless they can indeed theme it to be next to unrecognizable as "just a coaster". They were able to do that with Everest because of the enormity of the AK park, RnRC was hidden within a building, but, what the coaster advocates want to see are the tall, out in the open type monstrosities that would ruin the entire ambiance when it is totally unnecessary.

Maybe its me, but I don't see many people serious calling for huge rollercoaster, exposed steel type rides. They're asking for a couple of thrill rides. Heck, they don't have to be the most white-knuckle-rides, but just some genuine thrill rides. WDW used to build thrill rides, think Splash, Space, Thunder, Everest etc, but that was 10-20+ years ago and times have moved on. The problem is they haven't built a thrill ride for over a decade now.

If you look for what Universal is building right now, that's the type of thrill rides people want WDW to build in a special Disney way. Rides like Forbidden Journey, Gringotts, Spiderman, Transformers & Kong etc.

None of them are the most white-knuckle of thrill rides, yet they are all deniable thrill rides; and every single one above the thrill level of any ride at WDW.

 

[Disneyhead'71]

No one is asking for Disney to build a 300' naked steel coaster. Not one parson here has advocated that. So please stop talking to us like we're idiots.

We've all been to WDW, most have been to a Six Flags. And a lot of us remember when WDW was more than The Toddler Kingdom.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I don't think his vision was only to cater to the lowest common denominator.

So those with no desire to litter the place with vomit comets are now considered the lowest common denominator?

Certainly the reason I come to the US and not Euro Disney, is because for me Disneyland Paris has absolutely no magic about it whatsoever. Some of its rides are much better than in the Magic Kingdom, but theres an entire feel to it thats just missing.

You pretty much summed up what I was trying to say. Why doesn't it have the same magic. I submit that it is because it strayed to far away from the mission statement of Disney Parks, which is family. Yes, they do have some nice stuff there but, it is lacking in the spirit that is Disney. Therefore there is no magic, it's just a place to go that is like every other place to go.

Maybe its me, but I don't see many people serious calling for huge rollercoaster, exposed steel type rides. They're asking for a couple of thrill rides.

I guess either one of us could be guilty of seeing things differently. I indeed do see those that insist on thrill rides are talking about high speed, scary thrill rides. Disney already has a number of those tame thrill rides and a few of the more heart stopping ones. That is what it needs for the proper balance and distinction between them and any old amusement park. I like the idea that I have ridden every single ride in WDW and now only chose based on whether or not I wish to do it based on mood. Universal, a park that I also like has a number of rides the you couldn't get me on with a gun to my head. That is the difference. RnRC, Everest, ToT, Space Mountain, and to some degree, Splash Mountain are actual thrill rides unless your idea of a regular day is shooting down a ramp in a log. However, they are also not considered true thrill rides because you are not given the full opportunity to just be out there with nothing around you speeding on a thin rail that you can see every inch off. That is part of the elevated thrill that everyone wants. That can't happen without causing severe damage to the feel that should always be the definition of one of Walt's Parks.

 

[SyracuseDisneyFan]

I don't know.

 

[Matt_Black]

I don't know.

Third base.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Third base.

Who's on first!

 

[Matt_Black]

Who's on first!

Naturally.

 

[Goofyernmost]

Naturally.

Yea, but, who's on first? I don't know the name of the guy on second. What is it?

 

[Disneyhead'71]

Yea, but, who's on first? I don't know the name of the guy on second. What is it?

What's on second. I don't know's on third.

 

[ThemeParkFan]

I don't think it needs a high thrill roller coaster. It has plenty of different types of rides to cater to all kinds of guests. Disney is far more about the experience than the thrills, and I think seeing a giant Cedar Point-esque coaster in the middle of the park would kill some of that experience. It would also take away room from other things that can be enjoyed by a lot more people than a high thrill coaster could. Disney is about catering to families and people that like the magical experience. it is not interested in being 6 Flags.

I'm not saying build frickin Fury 325. I'm saying why can't they build something like Verbolten??

 

[JillC LI]

Now what will happen is that Disney will lose that 7 and 9 year old when they hit their mid teens.

I don't think that's true. Our family of 4 has been going to Disney since our kids were 5 and 7. Both are in their mid-teens now and both are thrill-ride junkies at all theme parks. That said, if you were to ask them what their favorite theme park is, all the parks at WDW would be at the top of both their lists. Would they MIND if some more thrill rides were added to WDW? No. But the joy of Disney is not just about thrill rides for them. And as for me, the only theme parks where I am able to enjoy almost all the rides are the WDW parks because I am quite the chicken so I greatly appreciate being able to spend the whole day with my family at WDW rather than warming a bench at a big thrill ride theme park. That's the Disney magic for us.

 

[righttrack]

I agree and I'm not at all against more of the Spiderman type attractions. I just don't want to see a bunch of big steel structures sticking in the sky unless they can indeed theme it to be next to unrecognizable as "just a coaster". They were able to do that with Everest because of the enormity of the AK park, RnRC was hidden within a building, but, what the coaster advocates want to see are the tall, out in the open type monstrosities that would ruin the entire ambiance when it is totally unnecessary.

This is the point and what differentiates Disney from the rest of the world. At WDW there are four outdoor coasters.

• Big Thunder Mountain is contained and around this mountain structure and themed like a train going around the mountain. It is themed well so that it fits.
• Everest - Ditto
• Goofy's Barnstormer- It's in a part of a park that is more circus-like and it's small
• Seven Dwarfs Mine Train - Again, extremely well themed and looks like mine cars going in and out of a mine to the exterior

What I'm getting at is what you were saying. You just can't achieve the goal of having uniquely themed lands and areas and suspend disbelief that this isn't an ordinary theme park or ride. A giant coaster is just a coaster. I can go on that anywhere. I go to WDW to be immersed.

 

[jbeachboy]

do you want more rollercoasters or adult rides at disney?

 

[Goofyernmost]

do you want more rollercoasters or adult rides at disney?

Getting better, this one is only 4 years old.

 

[jbeachboy]

Getting better, this one is only 4 years old.

you cant post at old forum questions?

 

[Goofyernmost]

you cant post at old forum questions?

Yes, you can but if you go back far enough there is a good chance that many of the previous posters have gone onto other things and will no longer be active so basically you are talking to a wall. The ones that are closer like last year or so will have a better chance of getting responses from the posters. 14 years is a long way back. It is either a dead subject now or someone has started a newer, more, relevant one that can be added too. Or if not, you could always start your own.