disneyland/disneyworld?

[irishkiss]

Is there any differences in the two? We have been to disney world 6 times and were thinking about going to disneyland. Thanks...tina

 

[sonnyjane]

The parks are very different, but maybe that's not obvious to someone that has never been. If you DO in fact come back to read this, this link is very helpful: http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1162599 It's a Disneyland guide for WDW vets.

 

[DLR29]

I second reading the link that sonnyjane posted-invaluable information! Here are the top 3 things (IMO) that are significantly different at DLR (although there are many more):

1. Transportation! Everywhere you go at DLR you walk. The distance between the two parks is like walking from Future World to World Showcase at Epcot. And Downtown Disney is also right next to the parks. There is a monorail, but it really only helps shorten the walk for those staying at the Disneyland Hotel or Paradise Pier Hotel.

2. Hotels. There are very few perks to staying onsite at DLR. The main one posted on here is the "immersion factor". EMH called Magic Morning here and can be obtained without staying onsite. The dining package sucks at DLR so, again, you don't feel obligated to stay onsite. There are many hotels that are actually closer, walking distancewise, to the parks than the Disneyland or Paradise Pier hotels AND are MUCH cheaper...DLR onsite hotels are overpriced.

3. Density. The two parks at DLR are just packed to the brim with rides and attractions. As opposed to the WDW parks which are very spread out (except for maybe DHS but that has few attractions to begin with), the ride concentration is MUCH higher at DLR. Plus there are some awesome thrill rides that WDW doesn't have such as Indiana Jones Adventure, Matterhorn and California Screamin. Similarly, there are some classic dark rides that WDW doesn't have also such as Pinocchio, Mr. Toad, Alice in Wonderland and Roger Rabbit.

I highly recommend checking out the resort at least once. HOWEVER, you should enter into the trip with the mindset that these two resorts are completely different and constantly comparing the two may leave you surprisingly happy sometimes or it can lead to disappointment sometimes too. Keep an open mind!

 

[blackjackdelta]

To the OP, your questions and posts are just as important to the board members as if you have been posting here for along time or the 1st time. Over time I have noted that some folks get frustrated by the repetative nature of the posts and people who do not know how or take the time to search or even read the stickys which are extremely helpful.
I quit this board aways back because I knee jerked to a post from a poster who I consider a friend. I came back after a hugh outpouring of responses.
We have many personalities on this board and I must admit sometimes my posts are misunderstood, but things work out. Just do not leave over one individuals response, you will get your answers.

Jack

 

[Hound 109]

The parks are very different, but maybe that's not obvious to someone that has never been. If you DO in fact come back to read this, this link is very helpful:

http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=1162599

It's a Disneyland guide for WDW vets.

For anyone who stumbles across this thread, sonnyjane is correct.

All WDW veterans who are also DLR newbies, should print & read the essential link posted above.

.

 

[luvgoing2disney]

To the OP and others who read my response last night:

Please accept my apology for my rudeness to the OP last night. It was uncalled for and not at all in my normal character. I let outside things enter into my "Disney World" (pun intended) and I apologize to all who were offended.

 

[Disneyfreak616]

Oh yes, a big difference. DL is much smaller, but as I have been to both, but DW more, I still think DL is definitely worth the trip!

 

[LisainCalifornia]

2. Hotels. There are very few perks to staying onsite at DLR. The main one posted on here is the "immersion factor". EMH called Magic Morning here and can be obtained without staying onsite. The dining package sucks at DLR so, again, you don't feel obligated to stay onsite. There are many hotels that are actually closer, walking distancewise, to the parks than the Disneyland or Paradise Pier hotels AND are MUCH cheaper...DLR onsite hotels are overpriced.

I hate to be disagreeable--especially because I agree with everything else you have said--but I just have to disagree on this point. Every time I read someone who has never been to Disneyland that there is no immersion factor and that it doesn't make any difference whether you stay on property or not I just *cringe*. I cringe because I know for me and many others, it certainly does matter--a whole lot, actually! I worry that people reading that will think that is the the way everyone feels, and I just don't think this is the case. I think it is very important to stay on property when visiting disneyland, especially for a newby to disneyland in general. Once you have been a few times I can see how it may not be as important--but even then, for many it is a big part of the disneyland experience. We have done both, and the times we stayed on property were so much better than staying off.

The reason is that Anaheim in general just isn't that pretty of a place to visit. It is no one's idea of a vacation destination as far as the city itself. The area where many of the walking distance hotels are located is particularly gritty and ugly. It isn't horrible, but it isn't like a vacation spot, either. If you stay on property, not only do you get the Disney hotels with the themeing and Disney Design (sights, sounds, smells of Disney)--but you get it in the insulated bubble of walking through Downtown Disney. It really does matter to some people, and I would hate for someone who is totally new to Disneyland to have their first taste of Disneyland by walking on Harbor after dark each night or staying at the Plaza. It just isn't the same!

I have been to Disney World as well, so I know what that is about--but I think it is just as important to stay on property at Disneyland. Not everyone will agree with me, and we certainly can't afford to do it every time--but when we can afford it I think it makes a huge difference in the overall feeling of our trip to Disneyland.

 

[jlwhitney]

I so agree with you, Lisaincalifornia. Our first trip to disneyland was in june 2009. We stayed off property (mostly to save cost since we had already spent a week in wdw in may of that year). Staying off property defiantly did not give the going to disney feeling that i am used to. It made it feel like going to another theme park. We are going for two nights this may and I am super excited to be staying in the DLH this time.

 

[OrcaPotter]

I had a chance to go out to Disneyland last fall, however, had to miss out because I started graduate school and could not spare the time. I've never been, and am dying to, as I'm a WDW veteran and would LOVE to have a whole new Disney experience! If I can't afford the cruises, DLR might be back as a possibility this summer after I graduate as a celebration. It pays to have a CM best friend and connections for cheap airfare! That post was invaluable and no matter what happens, I'm excited

 

[Always Dream]

I was in your position a little while ago - and took a trip to Disneyland in November.

I had a wonderful time exploring the park, especially experiencing some of the shows/attractions not offered in "the world". Although I missed some things from the Orlando parks (eg Animal Kingdom, mickey's Phillharmagic, Spectromagic), I felt the parks in Anaheim were another experience to cherish.

 

[wannagoback]

I hate to be disagreeable--especially because I agree with everything else you have said--but I just have to disagree on this point.

I thought he was saying that the immersion factor IS the only reason to stay on site. Other than that, there are not many benefits to staying on-site. So, visitors just need to decide if the immersion is worth the extra cost

 

[OrcaPotter]

I was in your position a little while ago - and took a trip to Disneyland in November.

I had a wonderful time exploring the park, especially experiencing some of the shows/attractions not offered in "the world". Although I missed some things from the Orlando parks (eg Animal Kingdom, mickey's Phillharmagic, Spectromagic), I felt the parks in Anaheim were another experience to cherish.

I think I most look forward to the feeling first-timers have visiting WDW -- awe and excitement. I've been going to WDW since I was a baby, having always lived so close, so it's not the same, I'm sure. I'm excited to see the differences, even if the resort isn't as big!

 

[KCmike]

I hate to be disagreeable--especially because I agree with everything else you have said--but I just have to disagree on this point. Every time I read someone who has never been to Disneyland that there is no immersion factor and that it doesn't make any difference whether you stay on property or not I just *cringe*. I cringe because I know for me and many others, it certainly does matter--a whole lot, actually! I worry that people reading that will think that is the the way everyone feels, and I just don't think this is the case. I think it is very important to stay on property when visiting disneyland, especially for a newby to disneyland in general. Once you have been a few times I can see how it may not be as important--but even then, for many it is a big part of the disneyland experience. We have done both, and the times we stayed on property were so much better than staying off.

The reason is that Anaheim in general just isn't that pretty of a place to visit. It is no one's idea of a vacation destination as far as the city itself. The area where many of the walking distance hotels are located is particularly gritty and ugly. It isn't horrible, but it isn't like a vacation spot, either. If you stay on property, not only do you get the Disney hotels with the themeing and Disney Design (sights, sounds, smells of Disney)--but you get it in the insulated bubble of walking through Downtown Disney. It really does matter to some people, and I would hate for someone who is totally new to Disneyland to have their first taste of Disneyland by walking on Harbor after dark each night or staying at the Plaza. It just isn't the same!

I have been to Disney World as well, so I know what that is about--but I think it is just as important to stay on property at Disneyland. Not everyone will agree with me, and we certainly can't afford to do it every time--but when we can afford it I think it makes a huge difference in the overall feeling of our trip to Disneyland.

Totally agree!!!! We stayed offsite on our first time to save money and then went on property and it was a huge difference for us. Now with that being said if the only way you can afford going to DL is to stay offsite then do that. Just go.

 

[HydroGuy]

For those just reading this thread, the first two replies in this thread were apparently deleted by the mods. One DISer replied with an off-hand response and the OP was offended and said it was their first and last post in this forum. Bottom line is I do not think the OP is even reading the responses to this thread and we should probably just let the thread die as it no longer serves any purpose.

 

[HydroGuy]

To the OP and others who read my response last night:

Please accept my apology for my rudeness to the OP last night. It was uncalled for and not at all in my normal character. I let outside things enter into my "Disney World" (pun intended) and I apologize to all who were offended.

I saw your post and the OP's response and frankly would not worry about it. You were a bit flippant but not rude IMO, and the OP showed extremely thin skin. After reading the OP my first response in my head was not very different from what you wrote - something like "Are you seriously asking this question?".

Unless there was an outright flame - which yours was far from - someone like the OP who left a forum after a single post may not be geared to this kind of exchange and is probably better off spending their time in some other way.

OP, if you are still around lurking, I would encourage you to think about how to ask better questions. I think it would have totally changed the nature of the responses you receive.

For example, you could have asked the same thing this way:

"I love WDW and would like to know how it is different from DLR".

That type of question has been known to start a thread that goes on for days or even weeks around here, usually with lots of positive dialog.

The question you chose to ask was very brief and some might have taken it to be a bit unfriendly. I think that influenced the first person who responded (and was since deleted) because my initial reaction was similar.

 

[HydroGuy]

To the OP, your questions and posts are just as important to the board members as if you have been posting here for along time or the 1st time. Over time I have noted that some folks get frustrated by the repetative nature of the posts and people who do not know how or take the time to search or even read the stickys which are extremely helpful.
I quit this board aways back because I knee jerked to a post from a poster who I consider a friend. I came back after a hugh outpouring of responses.
We have many personalities on this board and I must admit sometimes my posts are misunderstood, but things work out. Just do not leave over one individuals response, you will get your answers.

Jack

People who provide invaluable information like do are always welcome Jack.

 

[blackjackdelta]

People who provide invaluable information like do are always welcome Jack.

You know me, a bit off center from most of the group. I have noticed a bit more sarcasim in some of your posts which I really enjoy. I would guess more of a CEO tone. Your analysis of many areas has helped be rationalize a position that works for me amoungst the emotions.

The best,

Jack

 

[HydroGuy]

You know me, a bit off center from most of the group. I have noticed a bit more sarcasim in some of your posts which I really enjoy. I would guess more of a CEO tone.

The best,

Jack

Well I should be more careful about that. I rarely use sarcasm on purpose online as it is so easy to be taken the wrong way. About the only time I would is with people who are regulars here - and then only occasionally.

IRL (in real life) I use sarcasm more as it is safer when people know me and can see my body language. Even so, people who overuse sarcasm IRL turn me off pretty quickly.

 

[blackjackdelta]

Well I should be more careful about that. I rarely use sarcasm on purpose online as it is so easy to be taken the wrong way. About the only time I would is with people who are regulars here - and then only occasionally.

IRL (in real life) I use sarcasm more as it is safer when people know me and can see my body language. Even so, people who overuse sarcasm IRL turn me off pretty quickly.

Retracted