New pavilion coming to Epcot and it's not a real country

[lockedoutlogic]

LOL... I know you have a laundry list of things I should be upset about, But I am not as impatient for new experiences as you. I can still go to WDW and and there are 'old' rides I have never ridden. For the most part, everything I like to do is still there. And I am very excited for the things coming up.

Hmmm... new since 2008: Dwarf Train, FantasyLand etc... not really my thing, but I think it adds to the customer experience. I have not ridden the new dwarf train addition yet. Happy to see changes to Epcot, not matter how nobel the original intent, the park as it is now is not working and I am happy to see more Fantasy coming to WDW. I have been to the real place for many of those countries and the pavilions are a pale imitation, so I agree with adding Frozen... and Alice and Remy and more Mulan. In all honesty I could care less about Anna and Elsa and Frozen, but I don't begrudge those who do.

I am excited that Disney has a global presence and those parks are very cool. I look forward to visiting all the international parks someday. Already making plans for Shanghai to coincide with my daughter's graduation from high school (she goes to a Chinese language immersion school so we want to do a China trip)

Yes I do have lots of faith faith in what is coming down the road... Why not. I like it now. I am very much looking forward to Pandora and the changes to Downtown. I also have hopes to see the evolution of a new era at Hollywood. I have DVC already... don't need more and I am happy with what I got. I don't eat at the parks restaurants besides a treat here or there. I picnic and cook in my 2 bedroom kitchen. Life at the world is very good. Perhaps I am foolishly easy to please.... I will be honest, generally life is a lot more fun when you are.

Ok...

So what you're saying is:

1. You agree with more princess presence in EPCOT
2. And we have mine train... Which is the "net 1" attraction gain in the four parks
3. And your excited for china
4. And you are happy to have bought DVC

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that -
It's not my opinion and I'm not an expert...

But the question I pose is that do you feel you have gotten the experience/ value from what you are paying for at wdw over that time period? Taking into account inflation and Disney cost over inflation?

There's no right answer... But that is my fundamental question... And often is

 

[wallrock]

No... you prove my point...

I am all for discussion and enjoy the conversation.

I rest my case because you essentially proved my point.

Where in any of my correspondences have I called anyone stupid or anything else derogatory? In your response you quote my previous comment which clearly states that folks are free to disagree and you somehow equate that to me calling people names. That's a rather crude deduction.

To go back to the origins of this side conversation an author writes an article expressing displeasure with the way Epcot is going and someone here responds that the substance of said article is stupid, and more or less throws in a direct (or indirect) relationship to those here who share the same opinion. Doesn’t sound like something that encourages different views.

All perspectives are encouraged as they are subjective in nature. All that I and others ask is that our perspectives not be dismissed as blunt hatred for a place (or escape into a false world of personal attacks) that we clearly still enjoy but would like to see improved.

 

[Suger Mag]

Ok...

So what you're saying is:

1. You agree with more princess presence in EPCOT
2. And we have mine train... Which is the "net 1" attraction gain in the four parks
3. And your excited for china
4. And you are happy to have bought DVC

I don't necessarily disagree with any of that -
It's not my opinion and I'm not an expert...

But the question I pose is that do you feel you have gotten the experience/ value from what you are paying for at wdw over that time period? Taking into account inflation and Disney cost over inflation?

There's no right answer... But that is my fundamental question... And often is

To answer your questions:

Yes I don't care about the princesses additons. Does not bother me one way or another. My daughter (14) was never into the princesses... we were always the animal lovers (Lady and the Tramp for me... Lion King for her)... my son (20) also couldn't care one way or another, he just loves DOnald. My husband just endures the whole Disney process and drinks much beer.

I am also looking forward to a bigger Star Wars and Marvel presence in the next few years as these are where more of my interests lie (LOVE these additions to the WDW family).

I AM dissapointed that Muppets might leave, but am hopeful for a revamp.

Overall, yes I am happy with the value I have recieved. If I was not happy with the experience I would not go back. It is easy enough to rent my DVC points, I have done that now a few times to help finance a different vacation option for that year.

 

[Suger Mag]

Out of nowhere, with no one super defending WDW in any way in the previous posts... you come up with this (see below in red) . If I misinterpreted your post then by all means I beg for your forgiveness.

100% agree here.

Those who feel that Disney never fails, or who are quick to attack those who question or criticize Disney practices seldom offer up a compelling argument against the criticism. The answer usually defaults to attaching 'hater' monikers or plain 'stupid' to the commentary. Feel free to disagree, but you can't ignore the rather large chorus who feel Disney ain't what it used to be, and the changes aren't necessarily for the better.

I rest my case because you essentially proved my point.

Where in any of my correspondences have I called anyone stupid or anything else derogatory? In your response you quote my previous comment which clearly states that folks are free to disagree and you somehow equate that to me calling people names. That's a rather crude deduction.

To go back to the origins of this side conversation an author writes an article expressing displeasure with the way Epcot is going and someone here responds that the substance of said article is stupid, and more or less throws in a direct (or indirect) relationship to those here who share the same opinion. Doesn’t sound like something that encourages different views.

All perspectives are encouraged as they are subjective in nature. All that I and others ask is that our perspectives not be dismissed as blunt hatred for a place (or escape into a false world of personal attacks) that we clearly still enjoy but would like to see improved.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

To answer your questions:

Yes I don't care about the princesses additons. Does not bother me one way or another. My daughter (14) was never into the princesses... we were always the animal lovers (Lady and the Tramp for me... Lion King for her)... my son (20) also couldn't care one way or another, he just loves DOnald. My husband just endures the whole Disney process and drinks much beer.

I am also looking forward to a bigger Star Wars and Marvel presence in the next few years as these are where more of my interests lie (LOVE these additions to the WDW family).

I AM dissapointed that Muppets might leave, but am hopeful for a revamp.

Overall, yes I am happy with the value I have recieved. If I was not happy with the experience I would not go back. It is easy enough to rent my DVC points, I have done that now a few times to help finance a different vacation option for that year.

Ok...all fair enough

No marvel in Disney world though... Not gonna happen.

Star Wars is a safe bet...but as always... They're floating a 6+ year rollout...which means that not only adults - but especially children will have a full life cycle passed by the time they "get around to it"

That is sad...but they'll still take reservation without pause...never seems right to me.

 

[pixiegirl131415]

I love the idea of a Frozen area, but it belongs in Fantasyland, not WS. So disappointing. What's next? Adding Atlantis?

 

[Suger Mag]

Ok...all fair enough

No marvel in Disney world though... Not gonna happen.

Star Wars is a safe bet...but as always... They're floating a 6+ year rollout...which means that not only adults - but especially children will have a full life cycle passed by the time they "get around to it"

That is sad...but they'll still take reservation without pause...never seems right to me.

I thought that new stuff was fine... Guardians, Ant Man... Dr. Strange. I know it gets wierd with the Universal contracts. And so much stuff is connected in odd ways. My husband is the more expert in these matters(used to run a comic shop in Berkeley back in the 90's)

 

[gdrj]

I admit, I will probably go over once to ride the Frozen ride when it opens just so I can say how bad it is, because I know it's going to be bad.

But other than that, I am so done with Epcot. I couldn't care less if I ever went over there again. It's just a festival grounds at this point and I don't drink.

I like EPCOT, I would like more updates to Future World and I do like the Countries to represent countries not movie characters. With that said I like festival grounds and I do drink

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I thought that new stuff was fine... Guardians, Ant Man... Dr. Strange. I know it gets wierd with the Universal contracts. And so much stuff is connected in odd ways. My husband is the more expert in these matters(used to run a comic shop in Berkeley back in the 90's)

Not only does it get weird with the contracts...

Why would you "draw" more comparisons between Universal and wdw?

I think they'll be content to leave marvel
Alone and collect the fees.

If there's any desire on Comcast's part to break the license deal...then that's different.

There's really no angle there either though

 

[Planogirl]

There is no clear reason why Universal would break any contracts. They have a pretty sweet deal.

Princesses in Epcot... I wonder if the brief bit of rage I feel when I see that will every disappear. I realize that others will write this off as nostalgia but I LOVED Epcot. The technology and creativity appealed to the engineer side of me. Plus Norway (even a generic Norway) appealed to the Norwegian side of me. I learned things and was able to teach my son things and we had fun. I don't begrudge others having fun so why is it so hard to understand that we all have different ideas of what constitutes fun?

Eh, I shouldn't bother. The only true winner in all of this is Disney and they are laughing and twirling their mustaches all the way to the bank.

 

[Suger Mag]

Not only does it get weird with the contracts...

Why would you "draw" more comparisons between Universal and wdw?

I think they'll be content to leave marvel
Alone and collect the fees.

If there's any desire on Comcast's part to break the license deal...then that's different.

There's really no angle there either though

There is no clear reason why Universal would break any contracts. They have a pretty sweet deal.

Princesses in Epcot... I wonder if the brief bit of rage I feel when I see that will every disappear. I realize that others will write this off as nostalgia but I LOVED Epcot. The technology and creativity appealed to the engineer side of me. Plus Norway (even a generic Norway) appealed to the Norwegian side of me. I learned things and was able to teach my son things and we had fun. I don't begrudge others having fun so why is it so hard to understand that we all have different ideas of what constitutes fun?

Eh, I shouldn't bother. The only true winner in all of this is Disney and they are laughing and twirling their mustaches all the way to the bank.

I don't expect Universal to break any contracts. What I meant is there are Marvel characters that they can use. There are lots of connections between the different characters that make things complicated, but I didn't think there was an total outright Marvel ban at WDW, they just cannot use the ones connected to the Unversal contracts. Like any of the Guardians are fair game (I believe I already saw Rocket stuffies on the online Disney store).

 

[rteetz]

I don't expect Universal to break any contracts. What I meant is there are Marvel characters that they can use. There are lots of connections between the different characters that make things complicated, but I didn't think there was an total outright Marvel ban at WDW, they just cannot use the ones connected to the Unversal contracts. Like any of the Guardians are fair game (I believe I already saw Rocket stuffies on the online Disney store).

The Disney store doesn't matter they could seek avengers stuff on their as well. Disneyland has avengers characters it's very specific to WDW.

 

[clsteve]

I don't expect Universal to break any contracts. What I meant is there are Marvel characters that they can use. There are lots of connections between the different characters that make things complicated, but I didn't think there was an total outright Marvel ban at WDW, they just cannot use the ones connected to the Unversal contracts. Like any of the Guardians are fair game (I believe I already saw Rocket stuffies on the online Disney store).

Think if it was Star Wars. And Universal owned the rights to Luke, Hans, Darth, Yoda, and Chewbacca.

That's kinda we're this whole Marvel thing is. Of course there are other great Star Wars characters and great opps to develop new ones - over time and at a cost.

But, right now - which IP would you rather have? And, wouldn't you just kinda kick back wait for the offer to end all offers (or not) while guests ride your rides and buy your merch?

 

[Reddog1134]

WDW cannot use any character featured at Universal. Nor can they use any of the characters "family" (other characters directly associated with the feature character).

They also cannot use the word "Marvel". Which is probably one of the reasons there is no mention of BH6 being based on a Marvel comic.

 

[rteetz]

WDW cannot use any character featured at Universal. Nor can they use any of the characters "family" (other characters directly associated with the feature character). They also cannot use the word "Marvel". Which is probably one of the reasons there is no mention of BH6 being based on a Marvel comic.

See that's where I think that's weird because they had a guardians of the galaxy preview in DHS. I didn't see the preview but does that mean they didn't use marvel in that preview at all?

 

[wallrock]

I hold to the idea that the bulk of the individuals with this opinion are suffering from over exposure. Give a homeless person my house and they will be feeling surrounded by luxury, but force a very wealthy person into my house and they might kill themselves.......

Most of the feelings of passed grandeur are very likely based on the times when it all was new to us.

Last weekend I was to the world with a good friend who has not been to the parks in 20 years. When we went on peter pan, she was amazed and marveled about how the track under the ride disappears and couldn't find how the ride was supported. I recalled that feeling from when I was 11. It is still the same ride, but the perspective is different.

I see the point and agree with it to a certain level; however I wouldn’t say that I’m suffering from over-exposure as I’ve been riding some of the same attractions for a few decades now, and those attractions are something that I still look forward to visiting on future trips. I believe that the problem lies in being able to witness the gradual decline, especially over the past decade and a half, with those repeated trips. Perhaps the issue is consistent exposure instead…

Bottom line, there are less attractions in Epcot now than at its zenith. The same goes for Hollywood Studios. Despite this Burbank marches ahead with regular price increases that are beyond inflation. We get occasional clouds of smoke promising ‘great things are coming’ and we wait years, perhaps even close to a decade, before some of those promises are fulfilled – if at all. The debate rages here and elsewhere on whether or not Frozen should consume the Norway pavilion when the real debate should be why Wonders Of Life remains vacant from an attraction perspective (and no, special events like Food and Wine are not sufficient replacements). I don’t know what the balance would be on the cadence in keeping some of the old attractions and replacing others with the new, or even just adding the new, but to me it’s more than making a themed bathroom or something that I’ve got to pay for twice to enjoy before I part with that extra money with a smile on my face. That reluctance can always be tempered if the suits were willing to drop prices each time they closed an attraction without providing a replacement, but we all know that ain’t gonna happen.

Expectations are high because Disney set them to begin with. As such my expectations for current and future visits are high. The homeless man in your analogy is blown away by the luxury, but how long would it be before he complained if you were to remove the kitchen and put a fire ring with a dutch oven in the backyard? It's still more than he had to begin with but the bar was set high from the beginning.

 

[beer dave]

I see the point and agree with it to a certain level; however I wouldn’t say that I’m suffering from over-exposure as I’ve been riding some of the same attractions for a few decades now, and those attractions are something that I still look forward to visiting on future trips. I believe that the problem lies in being able to witness the gradual decline, especially over the past decade and a half, with those repeated trips. Perhaps the issue is consistent exposure instead…

Bottom line, there are less attractions in Epcot now than at its zenith. The same goes for Hollywood Studios. Despite this Burbank marches ahead with regular price increases that are beyond inflation. We get occasional clouds of smoke promising ‘great things are coming’ and we wait years, perhaps even close to a decade, before some of those promises are fulfilled – if at all. The debate rages here and elsewhere on whether or not Frozen should consume the Norway pavilion when the real debate should be why Wonders Of Life remains vacant from an attraction perspective (and no, special events like Food and Wine are not sufficient replacements). I don’t know what the balance would be on the cadence in keeping some of the old attractions and replacing others with the new, or even just adding the new, but to me it’s more than making a themed bathroom or something that I’ve got to pay for twice to enjoy before I part with that extra money with a smile on my face. That reluctance can always be tempered if the suits were willing to drop prices each time they closed an attraction without providing a replacement, but we all know that ain’t gonna happen.

Expectations are high because Disney set them to begin with. As such my expectations for current and future visits are high. The homeless man in your analogy is blown away by the luxury, but how long would it be before he complained if you were to remove the kitchen and put a fire ring with a dutch oven in the backyard? It's still more than he had to begin with but the bar was set high from the beginning.

All good points and I don't disagree. Just wondering what the alternative would be--- think of the crowds that would be in a pristine park situation with lower entry fees. If crowds were like christmas time all the time, I wouldn't go any more.

I agree with the idea that people need to put their proverbial foot down, but I hope it doesn't have to be me, ( yeah, I want everyone else to do it for me) and I think no matter what we say here, it isn't going to happen. The casual visitor doesn't catch the slipping conditions, and I believe they are the bulk of the tourists.

 

[MAGICFOR2]

I just hope this means they move A&E to this one location and stop the madness at NFL

 

[lockedoutlogic]

I agree with wall rock...

But the things that I use that really are alarming is the actual reduction of guest areas that had taken place in the last 15 years...

Discovery island, river country, and pleasure island were eliminated. I'm not saying they didnt need to go - but were not replaced.
You can say that they had a separate charge - and that is true - but the sales strategy since the 90's explosion was "all the choices"...and prices were raised across the board because of that.

Now it's "bigger magic kingdom and more princess in EPCOT - it's what you want anyway"
That's frightening...because the dollars on every ticket to pay for the "choices" of the past are still in there...you're still paying for it.
Disturbing.

And as wallrock pointed out... There have been some pretty significant "closures" or near closures in the parks that are being left to drag on.
Wonders of life is offensive to me... Even if it was a mechanical issue...how is health/ medicine/biology not relevant enough today to not have a pavilion?
Imagination is in decay...and that had gone on for over 10 years.
Not a penny of investment - if you want to be honest - beyond the rollercoaster in ak and toy story in MGM - for over a decade...
Even with the avatar development taken into account... Those parks have lost ground in the aggregate.
I'm not saying that every ride should be new... But those parks were NEVER FINISHED.

I guess I can give them a little credit
For finally taking down the skyway and building on the 20,000 leagues lagoon...
You know...12 years later.

It's a severe diminishing return...and only the consumers will be able to slow it or stick up for themselves.

Honestly... Id like to see an "annual pass" boycott for a year or something...not reject the product 100%...but a sign that we lemmings have a functioning ganglion. Burn, baby, burn

And no... Don't blame the tour groups...they'll be disappearing as well as soon as the dial turns south... As it will eventually.

 

[rteetz]

Disney does a lot of times leave things sit. River country and discovery island are still sitting. Pleasure island is finally being replaced with the landing. Epcot has plenty of things that are only used for special events or not at all. DHS now has a closed backlot, American idol building, and movie theater that they use for movie previews.