I dont like the new "trend" in WDW rides

[Cindy B]

I for one, am very excited about the thrill rides.

I am an "older" person, but my children LOVE LOVE thrill rides. They like them bigger, faster, higher than anything else. But sadly, WDW does need to update to keep up with the increasing larger attendance in other attraction parks like IOA, SW, and USF.

Look at the technology utilized at Islands of Adventure: Hulk, Spiderman (worth the price of admission alone) Seaworld has Kraken, and Journey to Atlantis... Busch Gardens has Montu.


There is a nice, sedate mix at WDW. Attractions like the Haunted Mansion, POTC, and IASW will appeal to all. Same with Toontown Fair, Space Mountain, (this is very slow!), and others. In Epcot, there is Test Track, The Land, World Showcase, Maelstrom , the boat ride in Mexico, Universe of Energy are all sedate. (Test Track is sedate for our family of coaster enthusiats)
MGM has the Great Movie Ride, B&TB, Animation Tour, WWTBAM, many other various shows (Mermaid, Playhouse Disney).. and personally in our family ToT is pretty sedate becasuse it doesnt invert.. Animal Kingdom is pretty sedate all around for us as well.. but we haven't tried Primeval Whirl yet.. have ridden coaster fairly similar..

What I trying to say is that there will always be more sedate rides. There is many degrees to "sedate". In our family Space Mountain is "sedate". But we are two grown adults (32 and 40) with two kids that have loved thrills since they were two.

I personally would love to see more thrills. My kids have gone to USF/IOA recently because to them "Disney" was "boring".. (Thier words, not mine!) Mind you I have a 8 year old and a 5 year old.

It all depends on perspective.

 

[MaryKatesMom]

Face it the "thrill rides" are sexier. They go higher or faster so the press is better.

Another poster was right. Michey's Philharmagic will get, at most a small blurb, when it opens but Mission Space could get a magazine cover.

Not everything is equally newsworthy.

 

[gonga]

I think it's great to have more thrill rides. Epcot needs a shot in the arm, besides Mission Space which will open soon. The only other good ride there is Test Track, which everyone can ride. One of the great things about Disney is while there are changes things still remain the same. Change is good, it keeps you coming back.

 

[erikthewise]

While I sympathize, I'm willing to wait and see how it all settles out. I don't care for rides that make your brains run out your ears, but there really isn't anything yet at WDW that fits that description. IMHO the only real "thrill" rides right now are Space Mountain, Rock n Roller Coaster, and Tower of Terror, and I like the first two. Disney also gets criticized when it builds "tame" rides like Aladdins Carpets or Triceratops Spin.

Compared to the theme parks in Ohio (Cedar Point and Kings Island), WDW is still very sedate and still will be even after the projects mentioned in this thread are completed. And I like it that way.

 

[marty3d]

Let's not forget an important point - Disney is building new rides. One of the criticisms that comes up is that cutbacks are leading to fewer new attractions. I think that if they spend the money to build some more thrill rides to bring people into the park, it will benefit everyone. If attendance increases, there will be more $$ for traditional attractions!

 

[admiral nelson]

Originally posted by shakespear

I like my rides, slow, safe, and educational...

That would be dandy if ONLY you visited the parks. But seeing as they need to attract more people, and they have competition from IOA, etc, they need to appeal to a diverse crowd. I, for one, enjoy both types of rides. I wouldn't consider mission space a thrill ride. What would you like instead, another spaceship earth?

 

[Eeyore2U]

Originally posted by admiral nelson
That would be dandy if ONLY you visited the parks. But seeing as they need to attract more people, and they have competition from IOA, etc, they need to appeal to a diverse crowd. I, for one, enjoy both types of rides. I wouldn't consider mission space a thrill ride. What would you like instead, another spaceship earth?

What facts are you basing your statement it's not a thrill ride on? Do you have inside information?

Can you tell me what's wrong with SE?

IMHO, the only thing worth the price of admission at IOA is Spiderman and there is nothing at US.

 

[shakespear]

What would you like instead, another spaceship earth?

My favorite ride.

I really dont want to see "classic" rides, removed for more stuff I wont ride...

MANY people goto WDW for the old rides...

 

[Eeyore2U]

Originally posted by shakespear
My favorite ride.

I really dont want to see "classic" rides, removed for more stuff I wont ride...

MANY people goto WDW for the old rides...

Well I don't agree with either.

If they can come up with something better, go for it. Better doesn't mean faster or that it has a loops and drops. Better means better. Can the story of communication be told in another way, yes. Was Mr Toad's from a bye gone day, most likely. IS COP outdated, absolutely!!! I just named rides I love/d. Do I miss them? Yes! I like Pooh. To this generation it will be a classic. WDW needs to stay reasonably current and I think that's the bottom line.

 

[DVCPAT]

Disney's continuous effort to improve keeps us going back year after year. I like to see Disney poll visitors after they exit shows/rides. Disney must respond and give the majority of people what they want.

Today's thrill rides will be tomorrows classics. It's sad when one of your favorite rides gets replaced but Disney must keep the revenue flowing.

 

[ScarletIndigo]

I'm on both sides of the fence. I LOVE thrill rides, but the idea of going on nostalgic ones like POTC and having just as much fun is a great feeling as well.

It's very true, you go to Busch Gardens or Six Flags and you're either living it up on the rollercoasters or riding the carousel five times in a row because it's the most "sedate" ride that adults can fit into. WDW is truly unique in that it caters to a much wider population -- from toddlers to seniors. But on the other hand, a "shot in the arm" (as gonga said) seems long overdue in some cases. I was a bit disappointed to hear that WDW was still featuring some of the same attractions that seemed outdated in 1993, which was the last time I visited the World. I am really looking forward to checking out new things like Tower of Terror and Test Track, but even then, they seem to fall into the "thrill" category as well.

Is education + entertainment really a dead equation? I guess when I'm visiting WDW with my future family in another decade or so, it will either be nostalgia or a completely new experience ... Time will tell!

 

[Paris]

I think the thrill ride debate stems from what is taking place in EPCOT where high capacity attractions like Horizons and World of Motion have been replaced by lower capacity yet higher octane rides.

This hasn't happened at MK where If You Had Delta's Dreamflight's Flying Wings (LOL) became Buzz Lightyear and Mr. Toad handed the deed over to Pooh.

What have been the most recent additions at MGM? Rock & Roller & Tower of Terror? No. It was Sounds Dangerous and Who Wants to be a Millionaire (and the Walt exhibit). But the thrill rides at the parks stand out for one obvious reason -- when the rope drops, the running of the bull goes that way. The only exception is Animal Kingdom where it's the Safari that overpowers the Dinoland-Kali thrill side.

So before you condemn Mission: Space or Everest as a shift in Disney's direction, let me pose something different. Disney isn't building more thrilling rides, it's just that it's tamer recent wave of rides and attractions like Aladdin's Flying Carpets and Triceratops Spin are so forgettable that you may not have realized that for every ride with a height restriction over the past 2-3 years there have been twice as many "family" rides and attractions added.

Would it be best if Disney went ahead and built that Villains theme park and load it up on thrill rides -- to drive attendance and cash flow and help upgrade the original four parks with quality family attractions? You bet. But Century is opening up soon, and Sounds Dangerous and carnival spinning mouse coaster isn't going to be enough to fill the rooms.

 

[admiral nelson]

Originally posted by Eeyore2U
What facts are you basing your statement it's not a thrill ride on? Do you have inside information?

Can you tell me what's wrong with SE?

IMHO, the only thing worth the price of admission at IOA is Spiderman and there is nothing at US.

I guess I have my own definition of a "thrill ride", which would agree with the general opinion of most people who like rollercoasters, etc. Furthermore, I didn't say it wouldn't be fantastic, did I?

Your statement on IOA having only spiderman is rediculous. Spiderman is an awesome ride, but not a "thrill ride". Hulk, Dueling Dragons, Dudley Do Right are all awesome and thrilling.

What's wrong with SE? It's BORING. I'm all for informative rides, as well as thrill rides. I enjoy "The Land" 100x's more than I do SE. I think with proper updates to what's inside, it might be more interesting. And note as well, I never said it should be taken down. It's the main symbol of Epcot, and should remain as long as the park stands. My argument was that you need to appeal to the OVERALL opinion. So much for reading my post.

 

[CWIPPERMAN]

I agree with the "Bigger is better" philosophy. Look at McDonalds lately and what they have been trying to do. They have the kids with Ronald McDonald. But what are they going for..... adults with stuff like their salads and expensive burgers. The same pans true for Disney. Sure..... every kid wants to go there. But what happens when they hit the teens? They want to go someplace exciting. And what happens is you have folks going as kids - and then not going back until they have their own kids. I think Disney is just trying to keep folks coming back for those "in between" years.

By adding these rides, you also accomplish the goal of keeping folks on-site. Families with teens may plan a couple days of their vacation off-site so they can take advantage of US, or IOA. But by building these attractions, then they can convince families that there is enough to do that the whole family will be entertained throughout the duration of their trip.

I'm all for it myself. As someone that plans on going to Cedar Point in the next few years (for the thrill rides), and who is trying to figure a way to add a couple of days during my vacation for a trip to IOA.... I'm all for bigger/faster rides.

 

[shakespear]

Whats the breaking point?

What rides are "sacred" and shouldnt be replaced with louder, faster ones?

I dont mind them adding new and faster stuff, just leave the old stuff alone.

The old stuff is the reason I go back.

 

[Planogirl]

I'd personally like to see a good balance between thrill and slow. Of course, everyone's definition of thrill ride is different. I think that Universal has several thrill rides and I don't mean frightening when I say thrill ride. I love their rides but in a different way from the traditional, slower rides at WDW.

I do wish that WDW could have done a bit more adding on instead of replacing but such is life.

 

[Eeyore2U]

Originally posted by admiral nelson
I guess I have my own definition of a "thrill ride", which would agree with the general opinion of most people who like rollercoasters, etc. Furthermore, I didn't say it wouldn't be fantastic, did I?

Your statement on IOA having only spiderman is rediculous. Spiderman is an awesome ride, but not a "thrill ride". Hulk, Dueling Dragons, Dudley Do Right are all awesome and thrilling.

So much for reading my post.

Did you read what I posted? You have no basis to say MS is not a thrill ride. It is being billed as one. And most printed things about it make it to be one.

What I said about IOA is that Spiderman is the only thing worth going. Rollercoasters all seem to meld into one another. Been there, done that!

So much for reading and comprehending my post.

 

[admiral nelson]

Originally posted by Eeyore2U
Did you read what I posted? You have no basis to say MS is not a thrill ride. It is being billed as one. And most printed things about it make it to be one.

What I said about IOA is that Spiderman is the only thing worth going. Rollercoasters all seem to meld into one another. Been there, done that!

So much for reading and comprehending my post.

It's not a thrill ride in the sense that you "fear" for your life on it(i.e. I might fall out)...talk about comprehension. It's a simulator, and probably a damn good one if it's as good as it's being made to be. You talk about reading and comprehending like they are skills you actually possess.

As for IOA, that's your opinion you feel the need for me to agree with. If you talked until you passed out, I still wouldn't agree with you. The original point I was making is that they are trying to cater to a wider audience. Go back and re-read my posts, and perhaps you'll understand that. I'm not going to turn this thread into a 10 page argument with you. To be honest, I don't care what you think, and I'm done with this thread.

 

[NotUrsula]

Marty3d said:

"If attendance increases, there will be more $$ for traditional attractions!"

Well, that's kind of debatable, because it is unlikely that the extra profit will go into creating new "traditional" rides; it is far more likely that the money will go to making up losses in other divisions of the Disney Company. However, that's another topic for another day.

The real question I would have in response to that statement is where will those new traditional attractions go? The thing that makes Disney's high-capacity "traditional" rides difficult is that they almost always require a LOT of space. The majority of the area available for that kind of thing is filled, unless you get into major redesigns, such as new "lands," or start cramming in rides as tightly as they are crammed in at DL, which, IME, does not make for a pleasant atmosphere in a park. (The big joke at DL's Jungle Cruise attraction these days is the point where the guides direct your attention to the "Temple of the Endless Line," because people in the IJ line are clearly visible for a fair part of the JC ride.)

I like simulators, they have lots of "thrill" (as *I* define it) and are fun to ride. However, too many simulators create disastrously long lines, because the load cycle is long and the capacity is low.

I don't care for outdoor coasters, they are one-trick ponies as far as I'm concerned. Either you hit the wall or you don't, either you fall out or you don't, and neither one of those things is ever actually going to happen. So you get to zoom. Zooming is nice, but I like a little plot with my zooming.

WDW's biggest selling point has always been atmosphere. They still outdraw the other parks in the US by a wide margin because of the wide age range covered by the parks experience and variety of rides. In the end, it is the atmosphere that ensures that those multi-generational groups keep coming back, not the rides themselves.

 

[grinningghost]

I'm another who feels that thrill rides are fine - as long as they are creatively themed as only Disney can do. I do feel in some ways that Disney is looking down on those of us that can really appreciate the slower rides - like our opinions don't count for much anymore. Take for instance, COP - they open it periodically, but that doesn't do much for those who can only visit when it's closed. That's a classic attraction that so many people love. The last time I checked, I was the one financing our family trip to WDW, not my teenager. But I guess that doesn't enter anyone's mind in the Disney boardroom.