LOVE or HATE FP+ Anyone's mind been changed ??

[Laketravis]

I only limited myself because you limited your claim of the most popular rides to only those 6..

No, I didn't. I actually listed 7, not 6 and note the "etc...." after the last entry in my original and unedited post #1191 indicating not limited to:

It's hard to dispute what the most popular rides are at WDW:

Tower of Terror
Rock 'n Roller COASTER
Big Thunder Mountain
Space Mountain
Expedition Everest
Dinosaur
Test Track
etc....

Based on recent and current conditions I think it's safe to say a very large number of paying customers would like to see more of those types of attractions.


.

.

 

[Shaden]

And it doesn't just apply to Disney. I see it everywhere I go. Everyone is "ME ME ME", only cares about themselves and no one else.

When you are paying for something, damn right that's all I care about. I don't pay to stand in line, I don't pay so YOU can ride rides or see attractions, I pay so I can, so my MY family can.

This isn't about being entitled in the negative sense ie: where you want something for yourself but have done nothing to earn it. At Disney you have earned it, its part of the transaction, I pay them thousands of dollars, not so I can stand in line, but so I can do the things in the parks I want to do.

 

[Laketravis]

You said more for less and bolded it.
If that wasn't a reference to your planned excursion, I stand corrected.

Nope. Post #1193 - I said as long as people were willing to pay more for less and I did not bold anything. So no, it wasn't a reference to me in any way.


.

 

[cakebaker]

No, I didn't. Note the "etc...." after the last entry.

Nice way to try and divert what your intent was.

Etc...is not a list. You chose what attractions to list by name and they were all more of the "thrill" type genre than the ones on my list. Between the attractions you listed and the ones I listed, mine are all more popular. Why would you choose to list the less popular attractions over more popular ones ? Could it be because those are the types of attractions that fit your theory? You also said this...

"Based on recent and current conditions I think it's safe to say a very large number of paying customers would like to see more of those types of attractions."

You mean more types of etc...????? What does an etc... ride look like?

Why is admitting you're wrong so difficult?

And finally, you will concede, won't you, that none of the attractions you listed by name are as popular as the ones I listed?

 

[JimmyV]

I'm guessing a lot of things that aren't

I wouldn't count on that. Remember that Avatarland right now is slated to have one....ONE attraction. I don't think that Disney is going to build 5 Star Wars attractions, 2 of which are more exciting, (I don't use the word "thrill" when it comes to Disney) and 3 of which are not. I think you are likely to see something more in line with Diagon Alley, which is a large themed area that has exactly one ride. SW might bring us 2 attractions. But more likely, it will be a themed area like the Beauty and the Beast area at the MK. Shops. Restaurants. Bar. Attraction. Maybe two. But neither are going to be Dumbo-style attractions with spinning A-Wing Starfighters. They have to be careful to make sure and build something that every little Jedi in training can ride. But the ride will still likely be exciting.

 

[Robo]

I wouldn't count on that. Remember that Avatarland right now is slated to have one....ONE attraction. I don't think that Disney is going to build 5 Star Wars attractions, 2 of which are more exciting, (I don't use the word "thrill" when it comes to Disney) and 3 of which are not. I think you are likely to see something more in line with Diagon Alley, which is a large themed area that has exactly one ride. SW might bring us 2 attractions. But more likely, it will be a themed area like the Beauty and the Beast area at the MK. Shops. Restaurants. Bar. Attraction. Maybe two. But neither are going to be Dumbo-style attractions with spinning A-Wing Starfighters. They have to be careful to make sure and build something that every little Jedi in training can ride. But the ride will still likely be exciting.

You've also basically described "Cars Land" at DLR.
A VERY successful addition to DCA.

(photo from internet search)

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Nope. Post #1193 - I said as long as people were willing to pay more for less and I did not bold anything. So no, it wasn't a reference to me in any way.


.

Aaaah--you did not. The post you quoted had a bunch if bolded, threw my eyes off.

Still an interesting choice of words.

 

[FLchick415]

When you are paying for something, damn right that's all I care about. I don't pay to stand in line, I don't pay so YOU can ride rides or see attractions, I pay so I can, so my MY family can.

This isn't about being entitled in the negative sense ie: where you want something for yourself but have done nothing to earn it. At Disney you have earned it, its part of the transaction, I pay them thousands of dollars, not so I can stand in line, but so I can do the things in the parks I want to do.

But standing in line at Disney (or any theme park, for that matter) isn't a new concept. I've done it before FPs ever existed, during FP-, and now during FP+. You're GOING to stand in line for SOMETHING. If you go expecting to NEVER wait for ANYTHING, you're going to be disappointed.

 

[MrInfinity]

I don't need an econ lesson. When you say everything goes up, and have gas as an example and it is less than half of the cost it was at its peak point. That would be an incorrect statement!

It's still 10x the cost it was in 1970, even being 1/2 the cost at its peak. This chart stops at 2011. You have to envision the subsequent rise to $4.50 and new fall to $2.50. Disney tickets have gone up by about the same 10x in the same time. Really up until this latest fall from its peak for gas, Disney prices increases had actually been less than gas. Interesting. I would not have thought that.

 

[JimmyV]

I would take it one step further. For me at least, it's not about building more thrill rides. It's about Disney building rides the "wow" me. It's about Disney doing something nobody else is doing. If you look at Disney's "big" Thrill Rides rides. Test Track and Tower of Terror. Even today, nobody is making rides like that. The classic Disney dark rides Haunted Mansion, POTC were built on an Epic scale that regional theme park can't touch. In my mind, the last truly innovative ride at WDW was Mission Space and maybe Expedition Everest. Both of which were plagues with problems. But after a string of successes with RnR, Test Track, Soarin', Dinosaur (yes I know some of those were transplants from DL). Since then, WDW for the most part has "played it safe". We seem to get "that's nice" instead of "wow". And it doesn't need to be thrill rides. Instead of the Little Mermaid ride we got, what if it had been built like Mystic Manor at DLHK. They could have build a "wow" dark ride instead of a "that's nice".

This! I don't care about "trhill" nearly as much as I care about innovation. I love Soarin'. But I don't want or need it repeated with an Avatar skin or a Star Wars skin. It may be too late for Avatarland, but I am really expecting Disney to up its game when it comes to Star Wars. Universal has a pretty good track record with Spiderman, Mummy, Transformers and Gringott's in terms of innovation. I would expect Disney to reach those levels with Star Wars. In 2020.

 

[cakebaker]

I wouldn't count on that. Remember that Avatarland right now is slated to have one....ONE attraction. I don't think that Disney is going to build 5 Star Wars attractions, 2 of which are more exciting, (I don't use the word "thrill" when it comes to Disney) and 3 of which are not. I think you are likely to see something more in line with Diagon Alley, which is a large themed area that has exactly one ride. SW might bring us 2 attractions. But more likely, it will be a themed area like the Beauty and the Beast area at the MK. Shops. Restaurants. Bar. Attraction. Maybe two. But neither are going to be Dumbo-style attractions with spinning A-Wing Starfighters. They have to be careful to make sure and build something that every little Jedi in training can ride. But the ride will still likely be exciting.

I don't disagree- I include lots of things as attractions that aren't actually "rides". I loved the Harry Potter stuff, but rode nothing there outside of Hogswart Express. Yet I was entertained for several hours with other things. It doesn't have to be a "ride" to be an attraction. So no, I don't disagree with you at all.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I find it interesting when folks say they don't pay to wait in line. I don't think anyone ever pays to wait.

But what is interesting is that you also do not pay to NOT wait in line. There are places where such a feature seems to be available, however, it is falsely misunderstood that you are paying not to wait. Rather, you pay to decrease your wait.

Since Disney does not sell such a feature, it is flawed to claim you don't pay to wait. You pay to ride, but you must wait your turn with everyone else within the existing available parameters.

Complaining that this is somehow an issue, I still stand that people today seem to be extremely unwilling to wait their turn. This is not a business problem. This is a personal problem as though any one person is entitled to no wait.

 

[Cormoran]

But standing in line at Disney (or any theme park, for that matter) isn't a new concept. I've done it before FPs ever existed, during FP-, and now during FP+. You're GOING to stand in line for SOMETHING. If you go expecting to NEVER wait for ANYTHING, you're going to be disappointed.

never mind

 

[Laketravis]

And finally, you will concede, won't you, that none of the rides you listed by name are as popular as the ones I listed?

I think you are trying to make something out of nothing. Did you notice this comment?

.....I certainly agree that the ones in your list are popular as well (so why not add more of those?)....

If it would help to calm you down then I will gladly say that the ones you listed are "more" popular but then some of the ones you listed aren't "rides" now are they?

But let's run with your concept, because I have no problem with it at all and if you want to be the authority on what the most popular rides at WDW are then that's fine with me. In fact, if it would make your day then by all means let's just use your list and pick up the discussion where it left off - which is why not add more?


.

 

[JimmyV]

Really up until this latest fall from its peak for gas, Disney prices increases had actually been less than gas. Interesting. I would not have thought that.

I would. As someone who has gone annually for...well....forever, I can say that Disney prices have really risen quite modestly in comparison to almost any other entertainment option. I used to look at a day at WDW in the same vein as I would a day on a great golf course of a day at a major ski area. Those latter two are now way, way more expensive than a day at WDW. I have no issue with Disney's price increase, and in fact, could withstand a greater price increase in an effort to balance out crowds.

 

[Laketravis]

Aaaah--you did not. The post you quoted had a bunch if bolded, threw my eyes off.

Still an interesting choice of words.

Good grief.



.

 

[cakebaker]

I don't think anyone ever said they didn't want to stand in line. We stand in lines everyday of our lives, that's the reality.

Was it you who said your limit for standing in line was 20 minutes? Maybe not, but I have read that somewhere. An over-riding complaint here on the boards is waiting longer in line now - when the increase might be 10-15 minutes, if that. This discussion is not created in a vacuum, and complaints of not being able to get a FP+, likening it to the inability to be able to ride, are a constant drum beat on this forum. People act as though if they have to do standby, they're locked out of a ride.

 

[MrInfinity]

I'm pretty sure you are the one who keeps characterizing the top list as "thrill" rides. I'm not sure I'd call any of them that, some of them coasters maybe because one even includes that in it's name. I certainly agree that the ones in your list are popular as well (so why not add more of those?) but are you telling me the ones I listed are not among the most popular attractions at WDW?

Well, you said. It's hard to dispute what the most popular rides are at WDW: and you listed several rides, then someone proceeded to dispute it, and you later agreed, and changed to reflect that your list was only a subset, and while yes your list did belong on a list of the most popular lines, it was easy to dispute that your list as you stated it was the most popular rides at WDW. I think that was the point.

I would have described your list as the most thrilling rides at WDW. And even if you started it with "It's hard to dispute that of the rides at WDW, these have the highest thrill level..." that probly would have met no dispute.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

This! I don't care about "trhill" nearly as much as I care about innovation. I love Soarin'. But I don't want or need it repeated with an Avatar skin or a Star Wars skin. It may be too late for Avatarland, but I am really expecting Disney to up its game when it comes to Star Wars. Universal has a pretty good track record with Spiderman, Mummy, Transformers and Gringott's in terms of innovation. I would expect Disney to reach those levels with Star Wars. In 2020.

Is Avatar supposed to be an Avartar-themed version of Soarin'?

Trying to understand what you mean by Avatar skin and mentioning that along with Soarin'.

On to Universal with the simulator/3D attractions...aren't they inherently the same concept with different "skins"?

I have only been on Spiderman and due to a variety of factors (related to my vision), it is unlikely I will ride it again. So I am curious about the other rides.

 

[Laketravis]

I would. As someone who has gone annually for...well....forever, I can say that Disney prices have really risen quite modestly in comparison to almost any other entertainment option. I used to look at a day at WDW in the same vein as I would a day on a great golf course of a day at a major ski area. Those latter two are now way, way more expensive than a day at WDW. I have no issue with Disney's price increase, and in fact, could withstand a greater price increase in an effort to balance out crowds.

You can count me among those who would like to see WDW charge much more for admission. There's a reason those green fees have risen as much as they have.

(B..B..B...Buy Bushwood?!?!)


.