Does anyone else wish Disney would stop building thrill rides?

[Zoemakes5]

I love the thrill rides, and wouldn't want to get rid of them or have Disney stop doing them, BUT I really think Disney needs to get it's imagineers back up in status and a priority again. Can you even imagine them coming up with a ride with life-long allure like POTC now? Even their fantasyland type rides are second rate compared to many that they did years ago.

 

[dani0622]

That's exactly what I'm saying...I don't think Disney should get rid of the thrill rides...but, the last few "attractions" they have builit have been "thrill" tagged. Can't they, just once in a while, build something "thrill proof". It just seems to me that the newer attractions are all geared to the thill seeking public. I stand by my originial opinion that I would like to see a bit of the "old Disney" come back...attractions that make you think instead of just feel. There is room for both, but I'm afraid that Disney is headed in the direction of IOA. Yes, there is something for everyone. But I would like to see a new attraction that is totally family firiencly, does not make you want to puke, does not make your stomach end up in your head and does not want you to keep your eyes closed for the entire "ride".

Did you read my post? There HAVE been more family based attractions built in the last few years than "thrill" rides

Soarin, Pooh's Playground, Mickey's Philharmagic, Lights, Motor, Action Stunt Show, Stitch's Great Escape, Turtle Talk with Crush, Finding Nemo the Musical and a new addition to the Living Seas.

 

[dani0622]

Can you even imagine them coming up with a ride with life-long allure like POTC now? Even their fantasyland type rides are second rate compared to many that they did years ago.

I would say many people including myself, that Soarin' has a life-long allure. The attraction has become so popular that rumors have it that they are considering building an additional theater to the 2 they already have.

 

[Dopey420]

I don't know about the rest of you, but I miss the "old" Disney. It seems that every time Disney builds a new attraction it's all about the thrills...higher, faster, scarier, etc. With this new death from Mission Space it makes me wonder why we would have to ask ourselves if each new ride will make us dizzy, nauseous, claustrphobic, acrophobic, whatever. We shouldn't have to ask ourselves if the ride is safe to go on.

I wish Disney would bring back some of what it used to be...rides like Horizons (now closed), Spaceship Earth, The Great Movie Ride. These rides were/are entertaining without being scary. I, for one, don't need thrills in order to have fun on a ride. I'm sure the Disney imagineers could come up with something that the entire family could enjoy without having to worry about ride restrictions. I want to have fun, be entertained and maybe even be educated. I don't want to worry about getting sick from a ride.

I do understand that Disney has to be competitive and progressive, but Disney is not a thrill park, it's a theme park. Higher, faster and scarier is not always better.

Just wondering if anyone else felt the same?

I totally disagree. In fact , if Disney does not build more thrill rides, I will quit going. Build a Mega-Coaster, Disney!

 

[yetti13]

OH NO!!! I never wont let them stop building rides. I want them keep on building wich one better or wa they like. Main thing is depend how the ride is about and how scary is the rides is. Wa im saying is different people like scary rides and other people like the ride like winnie the pooh and ect.That all im saying. I kind of like non scary rides like winni the pooh, sumtime. But i like thrill rides like expadetion everest and those rides like that.Its just depend what ppl like the rides about.

 

[kathyg]

to Danii0622....yes, I read your post. I am not talking about "rides" that will appeal to a 5 y/o. I am talking about rides that woud appeal to adults as well as tweeners as well as 5 Y/o. There is a place for everything...I just wish Disney wouldn't focus on the thrill aspect. I wish they would sometimes get back to the "comfort" factor in their attractions. MS and EE are fine for those who are willing to experience it. But, that is not what Disney was about. I hate to see it competing with IOA for those who are only seeking thrills.

 

[Cannot_Wait_4Disney]

Far and away the most attended parks in the United States are.
#1. WDW MK
#2 DLR Disneyland.

Neither of these parks have a single ride beyond the category of intermediate thrill ride. And MK only has 3 of those. They are Splash, Space, and Big Thunder Mountains respectively.
Disneyland has Splash, Big Thunder, Space, Matterhorn, Indy Jones, Pirates (It makes the category here but does not at MK) for a total of 6.

So certainly in their two headline parks, Disney isn't on a thrill ride binge, nor does it need to be.

Now let us analyze the other parks.
There are only 4 rides in the place I would consider beyond an intermediate type thrill ride.
TOT and RnR. Both of these are at MGM.
Everest, the new one at AK
Mission Space at Epcot.
These are fairly new.

Now in the category of intermediat thrill.
We have 2 at AK in kali and dinosaur
We have 2 at Epcot in Test Track and Maelstrom
We have none at MGM.

Now keep in mind all these parks beat out USO and IOA in attendance last year.

Out to California.
DCA has 3 rides I would consider beyond an intermediate thrill ride.
Ca Screamin, TOT, and I think it's the Maliboomer but I'm not sure of the name.
Yet DCA passed up IOA last year I believe.

Now there is an argument that Disney needs to put thrill rides in these parks to capture some of the niche going elsewhere. I would say that's a fair statement. But I don't think they need to go on a thrill ride binge so to speak, to survive. Plus, these 3 parks needed some updates in some cases, more rides in general in others.

So though I am certainly happy for more thrill rides, Everest looks like it's going to be a dandy and stand the test of time much like Space, Splash, and Big Thunder all have. But I don't think Disney needs to, nor should get into an ours goes 110 mph. No our's goes 115. Well ours has 5 inversions. No ours has 7, pissing contest. And it doesn't seem to be the case that they are.

I also don't think Disney is going on an excessive thrill ride binge. Pooh, Buzz, Monster's Inc, Soarin, these are all rides they've done fairly recently and they haven't been thrill rides.

 

[dani0622]

to Danii0622....yes, I read your post. I am not talking about "rides" that will appeal to a 5 y/o. I am talking about rides that woud appeal to adults as well as tweeners as well as 5 Y/o. There is a place for everything...I just wish Disney wouldn't focus on the thrill aspect. I wish they would sometimes get back to the "comfort" factor in their attractions. MS and EE are fine for those who are willing to experience it. But, that is not what Disney was about. I hate to see it competing with IOA for those who are only seeking thrills.

Ok those would be then: Soarin, Mickey's Philharmagic, Lights, Motor, Action Stunt Show, Stitch's Great Escape, Finding Nemo the Musical and possibly the new addition to the Living Seas.

Again, only 2 rides in the last 3 years have been thrill rides- Everest and Mission Space. If you do the math, Disney IS putting in more non-thrill than thrill attractions.

 

[kathyg]

I think, maybe, you are not get what I'm saying....Yes, Disney needs thrill rides to keep competitive in the "market"....But, a ride doesn't have to be scary to be fun. I think Disney is in a class by itself and always has been. The allure of Disney is not that it is an "amusement park" with thrills and chills and a few shopping excursions. It is that that it is a total experience to be enjoyed by the whole family....enteraining and accessible to everyone. All I am saying is that Disney should be true to its roots...Maybe the next attraction they build should be free from the "fear factor" and concentrate more on the ideal that Disney was built on.

 

[Dinosaur33]

I think there's a line between "thrill rides" and "intense rides."
For me its:

Intense rides: Mission space, Tower of Terror, and maybe Splash Mountain
Thrill attractions: POTC, HM, SM, BTMRR, RNRC, EE, I:ROE, Dino, Soarin, ST,and just about every other ride.

For me a thrill attraction is one that makes me feel like I am part of the action and theming.

 

[drogerstn]

I like the mix of the most recent attractions added to WDW parks.

One thing that really impressed me during my 1st visit to the MK was how a 6-yr old could ride all attractions. They have relatively low minimum height requirements so most children can still ride all rides in the MK, including "thrill" rides.

 

[Del]

I agree!

 

[justplaingoofy]

No, I like the variety.. Something for everyone!

 

[LovesHauntedMansion]

kathyg - I agree with you! I want see another ride (not a show) built in which the entire family from nursery to nursing home can enjoy together that has an equal amount of money and creativity put into it as EE, MS, ToT, RnRC, etc. I know that Soarin' has just opened, but there should be more. I know that someone has listed some "tame" rides that are relatively new, but they don't compare. For example, Winnie the Pooh, Primeval Whirl & the other dinosaur ride next to it, & the Magic Carpet ride all put together don't cost what EE costs and it's obvious.

 

[Sleeping Jedi Beauty]

Thrill rides help keep Disney on top of the mountain. As much as daddies love to bring their kids to the parks, they still want to have fun on thrill rides. If Disney stops building thrill rides, I think their attendance will drop, and that could be bad. Disney does a very good job of finding a balance between thrill rides for thrill seekers and plenty of family friendly attractions. Obsessive focus on one aspect or the other will lead to a negative long term effect. As much as Disney wants to entertain us, they also want to make money.

 

[jann1033]

not a ride engineer but i would imagine much of the cost has to do with the ride itself.. look at the ( for lack of a better word) simplicity of say it's a small world( 2 month old- granny ride) you build a building stick in a river ,boats and animatromic dolls and there is your ride...vs ee, engineer the track, the story line, the yeti, the mountain, the waiting area = lots more $$$. i don't necessary think that is because they want to spend more money on the thrill ride, it's just the nature of the beast....and look at all the advertising they've gotten from the TV shows about it...don't think a small world type attraction would generate as much interest.

but look at philharmagic, a great family friendly attraction, buzz light yr, another one that had to cost something to get the guest involved with the ride. not sure what kind of ride some want they they feel they don't have? imo they took out one of the real" thrill" as in chills and thrills ride AE and put a ride about a character no one with kids over the age of 10 has even heard of ,stitch who it seems is basically replacing MM himself park wide ( forget the it all started with a mouse evidently)

 

[battricia]

For those of you saying disney isn't building great family rides: What about soarin? It's one of the best rides I've ever been on! It's totally interesting and AMAZING and fun! Everyone in the theater loved it from child to adult. My dad LOVED it! my mom loved it and she's a total chicken. I loved it and I saw lots of teens and younger kids amazed as they walked off the ride. it was ALWAYS crowded when we went so obviously they did SOMETHING right, and the ride probably cost a fortune, maybe not as much as EE but the machinery alone probably cost a ton to make, let alone building the theaters, etc. It's also the kind of ride that you get off and want to get RIGHT back on. I realize it's only one ride but how many rides can disney build per year?

but my post will probably be thrown to the side like other posters who tried to give hope to the OP. They obviously just don't want to hear it.

tricia.

 

[TDC Nala]

Absolutely not. There is room for all types of attractions.

 

[QueenT]

So though I am certainly happy for more thrill rides, Everest looks like it's going to be a dandy and stand the test of time much like Space, Splash, and Big Thunder all have. But I don't think Disney needs to, nor should get into an ours goes 110 mph. No our's goes 115. Well ours has 5 inversions. No ours has 7, pissing contest. And it doesn't seem to be the case that they are.

I also don't think Disney is going on an excessive thrill ride binge. Pooh, Buzz, Monster's Inc, Soarin, these are all rides they've done fairly recently and they haven't been thrill rides.

Totally agree. The mix of ride types combined with the very high attention to detail & theming is what makes Disney Parks stand out. IOA is the only close competition, IMO, & even there the theming of the rides themselves is not as good as Disney.

 

[DISNEYNUT1230]

I'm with you...I sent Disney and e-mail not too long ago and expressed exactly the same thing you are saying, but I ended the e-mail by saying I was sure that my opinion didn't matter that much...and a customer service person called me and told me that I was wrong...they were very much interested in what people felt and thought about the new attractions. I love the old, now gone attractions, especially World of Motion, which is now the Test Track. They could have kept the original ride and then ended it with the test track! Oh, well....