Does Disney need to re-think its ride attractions?

[Ambear]

I agree. We've been to Diagon Alley three times. Our admiration has GROWN with each new visit.

They're doing everything right with Harry Potter. However the rest of the parks are... Lacking. So I'm hopeful they'll bring it up to hp's level. Forbidden journey is one of the first rides in a long time I was like, seriously impressed with. I wasn't expecting that quality from US. Now I expect it everywhere lol! Yet the coolest thing about transformers is the Optimus prime statue pointing at clouds.

 

[Zippa D Doodah]

What a very interesting discussion! What keeps drawing me to Disney World is its unique ability to trigger my imagination in an immersive way. Amusement parks and other theme parks don't do this, at least to the consistent winning level that Disney does. That has less to do with technology than it does storytelling. It means something, for example, to be able to walk through Cinderella's Castle and then go meet the Tremaines in the courtyard behind it. New Fantasyland plays this up VERY well.

Storytelling is what catches my attention in other entertainment as well. I love sci-fi and action movies, but I'd rather see an intimate well-told small-scale story such as "Still Alice" (recent movie about a women suffering from Alzheimers) than I would Taken 3 (in which Liam Neeson kicks and fights for 90 minutes but we have no idea what for).

Disney is all about the story. And for my generation, we were indoctrinated into the story in front of our TV sets in the den every Sunday night when Wonderful World of Disney came on. That's where we met Uncle Walt, laughed at Donald Duck, and went on adventures under the sea and into the old west. It was easy to continue the story in a new dimension in the parks. For some reason, my now nearly grown kids have picked up on this same story too. They plug into it best, and their imagination and playfulness soar inside those 51 sq miles of Florida's finest swampland. It just doesn't work like that anywhere else (at least for us).

Disney's challenge is to continue telling the story and telling it well. New Fantasyland encourages me that they "get it". Whatever new technology comes along to aid in telling the story, they would be wise to use it. If that technology would instead be an impediment then they should forego it.

 

[AngiTN]

While I'm one that doesn't want to see significant changes to the way they develop rides or the types of rides they develop I do hope they ramp up the way they maintain rides. While the ride itself is still wonderful and entertaining I am bothered to see fading paint and non-working features. I think they did lack in that department the past few years but from the refurb lists of late maybe they realize this now.

I'm really thinking Diagon Alley saved WDW's numbers last year. It seemed readily clear to us that many visitors were at US to see HP, with a side trip to WDW - since they were in Orlando. Previously, it was the other way around.

Meanwhile, I'm thinking WDW probably lost a lot of folks who don't get to use onsite-guest perks, and those who hate pre-planning in the past year. Going to WDW, and hearing people complaining is a big turn off. We heard lots of complaints.

Gosh, considering how high the crowds seemed last year, even in low crowd times, I'm glad some folks opted out of Disney due to the planning needed. It was plenty crowded as it is.

 

[TT77]

I agree with this and think that a lot of the "I love the old time stuff" folks are losing sight of what the future holds. It is impossible for someone who is 40 years old to put themselves into the minds of a 12 year old. If you are 40 and first went to WDW in 1985 when you were 10, you fell in love with a place that was state of the art and unchallenged in the medium. If you are 12 years old today, this isn't true. If you take 1,000 kids age 12 who have never been to Orlando and take them to all 7 Orlando parks, each for a day, and ask the kids to rank them in order of preference, Disney would not fare as well as many here seem to think. The influence that we as parents have over our kids cannot be overstated. Lots of people here proclaim that they don't go to Universal. Well guess what? That means that the kids don't go there either. But take away that parental influence and study these kids as a "control" group and you will likely find that kids prefer Spiderman to Small World. By a lot. Funny thing is that for all the "WDW shouldn't change" attitude expressed here, the suits at Disney don't share it. Thankfully, they understand that Small World and Dumbo, standing alone, cannot carry WDW for the next 50 years. That really is the whole point of the article I cited to earlier.

I agree that Splash Mountain is pretty much the "perfect" attraction. And Tower of Terror. Great theming, great "length" and the right amount of thrills. Obviously the older, slower rides are more fitting for the "under the height requirement" kids. But that is not a market they need to sell to. They come along because their parents take them. The parents are who they need to sell to. And that market gets captured (emotionally) when they are 12 to 25.

We took two 4 year old girls, who were just slightly over 40 inches tall to WDW last fall and they seemed to like Small World, The Little Mermaid Ride, Splash Mt., Big Thunder Mt., and Star Tours all quite a lot, along with meeting characters and shows ect... we also stayed for 6 nights and didn't get to see everything that is there, and as we were taking the bus back Orlando Intentional Airport the one was crying that we had to leave and wanted to know if we could come back next week.

So I'm having a hard time agreeing with your statistics here. I mean wouldn't the 1000 theoretically controlled 12 year old orphans who think Spiderman is way better than Small World also think that Space Mt is way better than Dr. Seuss-land? None of these parks live or die by any single ride, they all need a variety... and Disney does get rid of the "old time stuff" now and then to make way for new things, they're doing a lot of that right now

 

[Kbee]

We took two 4 year old girls, who were just slightly over 40 inches tall to WDW last fall and they seemed to like Small World, The Little Mermaid Ride, Splash Mt., Big Thunder Mt., and Star Tours all quite a lot, along with meeting characters and shows ect... we also stayed for 6 nights and didn't get to see everything that is there, and as we were taking the bus back Orlando Intentional Airport the one was crying that we had to leave and wanted to know if we could come back next week.

So I'm having a hard time agreeing with your statistics here. I mean wouldn't the 1000 theoretically controlled 12 year old orphans who think Spiderman is way better than Small World also think that Space Mt is way better than Dr. Seuss-land? None of these parks live or die by any single ride, they all need a variety... and Disney does get rid of the "old time stuff" now and then to make way for new things, they're doing a lot of that right now

Your kids are 4 so they are still young enough to appreciate the lack of thrilling technology. Our last trip my dses were 10 and 13. While my 10 year old was still excited by some things, he was so bored with things that he loved in the past. My 13 year old would have rathered we stayed at the resort pool all week. There won't be another visit for them, unless Disney comes up with something with enough wow factor to get them to want to go back. They have lost that fight to Universal.
Now, I'm in no way saying this is true for all kids in this age group, but I bet its true enough that in a decade or so Disney will feel the effects of their keeping the status quo in their parks

 

[Chuckers]

i think the use of tech for the faces like they did in the mine train was awesome. more of that would be amazing. the use of it and in combination with animatronics is very cool. the new cues they are doing are really great i feel.

Actually, I think the digital faces on the Dwarfs are not that great. They don't look real. I LOVE Ursala in the Ariel ride.. that's really advanced audioanimatronics and that's what I would like to see more of in the rides.

They are about to update Peter Pan's Flight in Disneyland with some new special effects, which I guess will come to Disney World at some point but Disney World seems to be the last place to get updates to the classic/original attractions.

Disneyland gets more updates because Disneyland is a "locals" park. They make their money on the locals coming back every month. They have to update things to keep them coming back more often.. which is why they get a new parade every 12-18 months.. a new fireworks show every year.. etc. WDW makes it's money off the true tourist.. who comes once in a lifetime or once every 5 years.. which is why Wishes has been around for over 10 years and they just recently got a new parade. WDW can keep getting rid of things because the 1 time tourist really won't know what he or she is missing. DL needs to keep their park more fresh.

 

[JimmyV]

We took two 4 year old girls, who were just slightly over 40 inches tall to WDW last fall and they seemed to like Small World, The Little Mermaid Ride, Splash Mt., Big Thunder Mt., and Star Tours all quite a lot, along with meeting characters and shows ect... we also stayed for 6 nights and didn't get to see everything that is there, and as we were taking the bus back Orlando Intentional Airport the one was crying that we had to leave and wanted to know if we could come back next week.

So I'm having a hard time agreeing with your statistics here. I mean wouldn't the 1000 theoretically controlled 12 year old orphans who think Spiderman is way better than Small World also think that Space Mt is way better than Dr. Seuss-land? None of these parks live or die by any single ride, they all need a variety... and Disney does get rid of the "old time stuff" now and then to make way for new things, they're doing a lot of that right now

I'm not sure how one can use 4 year olds to argue against what 12 year olds experience. All I can say is to start taking your kids to Universal and Busch Gardens with equal frequency as WDW and see where they come out when they are 12. But this Board skews towards Disney, so few people here will do that. Disney (fortunately) looks at the bigger picture and not just at this demographic.

 

[TT77]

Your kids are 4 so they are still young enough to appreciate the lack of thrilling technology. Our last trip my dses were 10 and 13. While my 10 year old was still excited by some things, he was so bored with things that he loved in the past. My 13 year old would have rathered we stayed at the resort pool all week. There won't be another visit for them, unless Disney comes up with something with enough wow factor to get them to want to go back. They have lost that fight to Universal.
Now, I'm in no way saying this is true for all kids in this age group, but I bet its true enough that in a decade or so Disney will feel the effects of their keeping the status quo in their parks

Well our 4 year olds can use iPhones, and iPads, and play games on X-box and Wii, so I'm not sure what you're talking about in reguards to "appreciate the lack of thrilling technology" but maybe you shouldn't make assumptions about other peoples children, ok?

...and in a year there will be Frozen and a Soarin' upgade at Epcot, in 2 years there a new night show and Avatar at AK, and with in the next decade Star Wars and Pixar at DHS... how is that "keeping the status quo in their parks" ...I mean honestly what are you people talking about

 

[Asellus]

As my kids get older...I admit I am tempted by Busch Gardens in Virginia..so much closer to me and I heard the countries are nice.

Disney really pulls me in with the theming but it really is massively expensive with 3 kids.

 

[TT77]

I'm not sure how one can use 4 year olds to argue against what 12 year olds experience. All I can say is to start taking your kids to Universal and Busch Gardens with equal frequency as WDW and see where they come out when they are 12. But this Board skews towards Disney, so few people here will do that. Disney (fortunately) looks at the bigger picture and not just at this demographic.

I'm not arguing anything, I'm stating facts and you are "still" just proposing hypothetical situations that you seem to feel somehow validate your own personal tastes/opinions

 

[tlmadden73]

They're doing everything right with Harry Potter. However the rest of the parks are... Lacking. So I'm hopeful they'll bring it up to hp's level. Forbidden journey is one of the first rides in a long time I was like, seriously impressed with. I wasn't expecting that quality from US. Now I expect it everywhere lol! Yet the coolest thing about transformers is the Optimus prime statue pointing at clouds.

Ya .. I went to Universal Studios three years ago JUST to see Hogsmeade and was impressed with that one section in Islands of Adventure. Seriously impressed. The queue alone for Forbidden Journey was better than the Haunted Mansion queue. It was practically part of the ride. The rest of the area was awesomely themed. They could easily make a whole park of just Harry Potter stuff with that level of detail. I hope (since AvatarLand was probably made in response to Harry Potter world) that Avatarland is THAT immersive (though I don't feel the Avatar universe is anywhere near as popular).

I enjoyed most of the rides at the rest of the park (though I felt like I entered a time warp into the 80s or 90s (Mummy? Men in Black? ET? Jaws? Twister?) but nothing had the theming of Harry Potter land. Saying that, I would visit again simply because of the addition of Diagon Alley, though I the whole "need a park hopper" for Hogwarts Express is a serious money grabbing turnoff to me.

 

[BrianL]

I totally get how 12 and 13 year old kids would tire of Disney...they are NOT Disney's target audience. Teenagers tend to be more interested in the new and the thrilling and I get that. That's what Uni and other parks cater to more. As they get older though, nostalgic feelings kick in, as well as an appreciation for a wider variety of things. A 12 year old might ride Peter Pan's Flight and think it's pretty boring, but later in life they might realize exactly what makes it a stalwart classic. This is a normal development. It's also why it's great to have different parks that cater to different tastes.

 

[Kbee]

Well our 4 year olds can use iPhones, and iPads, and play games on X-box and Wii, so I'm not sure what you're talking about in reguards to "appreciate the lack of thrilling technology" but maybe you shouldn't make assumptions about other peoples children, ok?

...and in a year there will be Frozen and a Soarin' upgade at Epcot, in 2 years there a new night show and Avatar at AK, and with in the next decade Star Wars and Pixar at DHS... how is that "keeping the status quo in their parks" ...I mean honestly what are you people talking about

I'm talking about the fact they are 4 and not 12. Its not the same experience for those age groups no matter how many i-whatevers your kids use.
Its okay, you don't need to take personal offense that some think WDW has become boring and tired. You can continue to pay for the status quo the rest of us will enjoy the magic at Hogwarts.

 

[Kbee]

I totally get how 12 and 13 year old kids would tire of Disney...they are NOT Disney's target audience. Teenagers tend to be more interested in the new and the thrilling and I get that. That's what Uni and other parks cater to more. As they get older though, nostalgic feelings kick in, as well as an appreciation for a wider variety of things. A 12 year old might ride Peter Pan's Flight and think it's pretty boring, but later in life they might realize exactly what makes it a stalwart classic. This is a normal development. It's also why it's great to have different parks that cater to different tastes.

They might or they may find that their nostalgia lies somewhere else, with different characters, technology and in a different park and take their families there. WDW isn't going to lose, there will always be first timers, the question is can they continue to attract the multi repeat families? Probably, but I think we will find that Universal will be doing much more of that as the current tween/teens become adults with their own families.

 

[IBFW]

The article that came out last week in "Fast Company" explains that Disney execs were fearful that WDW was about one or one-and-a-half generations away from becoming irrelevant, hence the need/desire to add a high tech gloss to the visitor's experience..

Interesting excerpt from that article, and my bet is Disney didn't poll a fan-forum to come to that conclusion. No, I'm sure they had a wealth of input that they tested and retested to make sure they had a high degree of confidence in their conclusion that their flagship park was becoming stale and irrelevant by the day.

Yet instead of injecting capital to offset and displace the staleness, they decided to implement a system that forces guests to endure it. As we heard one young guest sing as she exited the attraction on our last visit: "It's a lame ride after all........"

 

[BrianL]

They might or they may find that their nostalgia lies somewhere else, with different characters, technology and in a different park and take their families there. WDW isn't going to lose, there will always be first timers, the question is can they continue to attract the multi repeat families? Probably, but I think we will find that Universal will be doing much more of that as the current tween/teens become adults with their own families.

Well, they might, which is also fine. They also might grow up and not be interested in theme parks at all, with their family or otherwise. There are lots of interests out there. I was merely highlighting a fairly common cycle which is what creates Disney's target audience. They can't be all things to all people, nor should they try to be. I doubt there will be significant declines in their chosen audience.

 

[TT77]

I'm talking about the fact they are 4 and not 12. Its not the same experience for those age groups no matter how many i-whatevers your kids use.
Its okay, you don't need to take personal offense that some think WDW has become boring and tired. You can continue to pay for the status quo the rest of us will enjoy the magic at Hogwarts.

If you kids enjoy the Hogwarts, Harry Potter, brand of theme park entertainment then go do that and have fun, but there's people who simply like the, Disney brand/characters better

Like this is for example is a store teenagers shop at http://www.hottopic.com/hottopic/PopCulture/Movies/Disney.jsp 15-20 years ago this store didn't carry Disney anything, they wouldn't be caught dead selling Disney stuff 15-20 years ago, but times have changed apparently

So "brands the teenagers like" is one thing and the "technology of the rides in the parks is another". So pretty please with sugar on top, what do you all mean by "status quo in the parks", because all 4 WDW parks have construction walls up everywhere right now building new cutting edge, magical stuff, for you future enjoyment ...what is is that people feel is not be done?

 

[mobocracy]

I agree with this and think that a lot of the "I love the old time stuff" folks are losing sight of what the future holds. It is impossible for someone who is 40 years old to put themselves into the minds of a 12 year old. If you are 40 and first went to WDW in 1985 when you were 10, you fell in love with a place that was state of the art and unchallenged in the medium. [...]

I think as or even more important is that when many older WDW attendees went to the parks they knew the narratives and brought them with them to the park and the park brought those narratives to life in front of them, as interactively as 1970s (1960s, really) electromechanical animation and set staging could accomplish.

I think a larger weakness isn't just the "wow" factor per se but that the rides have to tell a more coherent story because the younger guests don't always know the story ahead of time. It makes it more challenging for the Imagineers and means the rides have to amp up the "wow" factor and have greater depth, a tall order.

I agree that Splash Mountain is pretty much the "perfect" attraction. And Tower of Terror. Great theming, great "length" and the right amount of thrills. Obviously the older, slower rides are more fitting for the "under the height requirement" kids. But that is not a market they need to sell to. They come along because their parents take them. The parents are who they need to sell to. And that market gets captured (emotionally) when they are 12 to 25.

Tower of Terror is a great ride but the length is too short. Even on a less busy day with a fastpass, the queuing is longer than the ride by a factor of more than 2. I think it would be an even better ride if you could make the queuing portion the "slow" part of the ride so that you experienced it more immersively and individually and less as just standing in line with a few hundred strangers. The theming is great, but theming has less intimacy as merely a queue. Maybe you could have a combination ride where an omnimover type ride that set the stage and introduced the narrative was part of the queue and the queuing on foot was just the transfer from omnimover to the strap-in thrill portion. It would make the overall ride longer, add capacity to the larger "ride" experience and make some of the queue experienced sitting down in the air conditioning.

 

[ArwenMarie]

As my kids get older...I admit I am tempted by Busch Gardens in Virginia..so much closer to me and I heard the countries are nice.

Disney really pulls me in with the theming but it really is massively expensive with 3 kids.

Busch Gardens VA is beautiful park and you can have a great vacation in that area. But as far as the park, it's insane coasters balanced out with flat rides for the kiddies and a few shows. Nothing wrong with that, but it's not anything like Disney or Uni.

I totally get how 12 and 13 year old kids would tire of Disney...they are NOT Disney's target audience. Teenagers tend to be more interested in the new and the thrilling and I get that. That's what Uni and other parks cater to more. As they get older though, nostalgic feelings kick in, as well as an appreciation for a wider variety of things. A 12 year old might ride Peter Pan's Flight and think it's pretty boring, but later in life they might realize exactly what makes it a stalwart classic. This is a normal development. It's also why it's great to have different parks that cater to different tastes.

I agree, even when they grow up, they will hit Disney first with their kids if only for the reason that little kids can't ride anything at Universal And nostalgia on some level.

 

[Kbee]

If you kids enjoy the Hogwarts, Harry Potter, brand of theme park entertainment then go do that and have fun, but there's people who simply like the, Disney brand/characters better

Like this is for example is a store teenagers shop at http://www.hottopic.com/hottopic/PopCulture/Movies/Disney.jsp 15-20 years ago this store didn't carry Disney anything, they wouldn't be caught dead selling Disney stuff 15-20 years ago, but times have changed apparently

So "brands the teenagers like" is one thing and the "technology of the rides in the parks is another". So pretty please with sugar on top, what do you all mean by "status quo in the parks", because all 4 WDW parks have construction walls up everywhere right now building new cutting edge, magical stuff, for you future enjoyment ...what is is that people feel is not be done?

LOL, I have a 17 year old who happens to take after me and loves Disney, I'm well aware of HT.
Look its okay if you love WDW and think its all cutting edge and exciting, but "pretty please with sugar on top" stop trying to make this some personal affront to you. Some of us think the park is tired and could use something new and exciting because its been a long time since it has. You may find 7DMT cutting edge and state of the art, that is fine but if you compare that to Universal's HP world well it doesn't come close. As far as construction walls being up, we'll see what there when they come down. I said I hope Avatar is like nothing we've ever seen before, but its not open yet so I am talking about the parks now, and how they have been for the last few years.

Yes, I think Disney needs to step it up in their parks, but you know what if they don't that is okay there are plenty of other parks that have. Besides theres still the Food & Wine fest