Just because you may not like a park doesn't mean others don't.
I never said I didn't like the park...it's very intricate and detailed, and what is has is very well done. But would I spend $65, or whatever it costs these days, to visit it if it were not apart of WDW and one of my discounted multi-day park hopper tickets? That's the question for me and how I judge it. And honestly, I don't think either AK or MGM Studios would even be in the top 10 attended amusement parks if they were standing alone next to a Universal or SeaWorld.
Yes, you might be able to spend a day there, and even come back for another portion of a day, but would you be as excited relegated to AK if for the same amount of money you could be at MK or EPCOT? It's an add-on park, complementary to the whole WDW experience, like the individual lands in MK, but not something I would travel to see if it weren't already there.
Both MGM and AK give me the sense that Disney, Inc., was in the let's-build-the-minimal-amount-of-park-possible-to-see-what-the-public-will-pay-to-visit mindset at the time, causing them to play catch up ever since. And if they add a 5th or 6th half-parks with that same mindset, they might as well not even sell single day passes at the gate as the only people visiting them will be those with park hoppers or "Tickets to the World" passes.
E-ticket rides are nice, and make for great headliners, but where are the A, B, C, and D-ticket rides that can be enjoyed together as a family? The carausels, the WEDWay people mover, the dark rides, etc.? For every E-ticket ride at MK there are 4 or 5 non-thrill rides to complement them, and I don't think Walt designed it that way by accident or because he didn't have the money to build a park full of E-rides (though Roy would have killed him). For humor's sake, what ratio is there at AK or MGM?
I guess we'll see when I'm there with my 4yo in September....
R