Well, now that I have my thoughts composed on this...
I am immensely dissapointed in the attraction, although I was already prepared for dissapointment just from getting the usual stuff that the rumor mill churns out. No matter how close you are to the monitor, it doesn't really the fact that you might as well be playing Jedi Starfighter, because the visual part of the experience would remain the same. Pop in a nice surround sound system and now the audio is just as immersive as in Mission Space.
The true joy of flying into outer space (at least how it was described to me) is seeing the Earth move away from you as the stars come into full view outside of your window (which is a hell of a lot bigger than a 19-inch monitor). It is a feeling that no one can take away from you, and it is a feeling that I am immensely dissapointed that Disney will not attempt to recreate in detail.
I really don't care how much G-force induced nausia I am forced to go through on this ride*, but if all the immersion I get from the ride is from motion sickness, a joystick, and a 19-inch monitor display that shows me computer readouts and maybe a few "simulated" images of what I am "supposed" to see outside if it were not a "training" mission, then Space Mountain would have done a better job of re-creating a truly immersive outer space experience than Mission Space**.
One good thing I can say is that at least the pod is ornately detailed, although it has more than a passing resemblence to the
simulators at Wild Arctic in Sea World (it wouldn't be the first time Disney stole an idea from their competition).
>>>Wow such complete silence.
I thought we see a lot bigger response to this.<<<
I honestly wonder if Al Weiss will be uttering these words when Mission Space opens this August/September/October/whenever they have bought up enougy heavy duty pressure washers. Much like Test Track, this wide does not have any of the imagination or whimsy of it's predecessor, and does not invoke any feelings of inspiration within me like Horizons or World of Motion did. On the same token Test Track never actually did much for Epcot's attendance either, it just pulled everyone into one section of the park.
* Now before you say, "why do you like roller coasters then," I should add that on a roller coaster, you are able to see the world hundreds of feet below you as you crest a lift hill, get to hear the roar of a coaster as it travels 60+ mph on it's course, get to feel the wind against your face as you fly through the air, and get the holy hell scared out of you as you duck from "head chopper" elements.
If you're really lucky, a nice company may also build their ride inside of a gigantic building that is an architectural marvel in itself and use all of the senses to their fullest extent to make you think that you are flying in a rocket through outer space. Once you hop into a simulator you lose all of that, and if you don't believe me go ride Space Mountain at the Magic Kingdom and then go check out Cyber Space Mountain at Disneyquest. They are worlds apart.
** Yes, it is true that a real trip into outer space isn't going to
have a giant 30 ft view port out into space, but this is the difference between real life and a theme park attraction. I've always been a supporter of the philosophy that you should re-create the real thing until it gets in the way of fun. In that case, fun wins (any Imagineer that worked on Epcot Center would tell you that they felt the same way). With the attraction taking place 30 some odd years into the future, I think some creative license should have been used. Hell, the original plans for the attraction
called for just that (it also called for a "real" trip into an outpost on a distant moon rather than a simulated training mission here on earth).
