The end of the Clones?

[larworth]

This taken from the DLP website DLP

Recent rumours from the theme park division and Imagineering indicate that Jay Rassulo, now in charge of the Disney theme parks worldwide, wants to stop the trend of reproducing successfull attractions from one park at the other theme parks. Instead the emphasize is, according to these rumours, ment to move from clones to exclusive attractions for every resort, creating an incentive for fans to circle the world to visit all the Disney resorts.

There is another rumor that the next major DL attraction (2006?) will also not be a clone.

Maybe the anti-Paul is here after all.

 

[DisneyKidds]

........................and wouldn't something like Forbidden Mountain at AK be a fitting first new ride announced by Mr. R.

Of course, if Forbidden Mountain is announced any time soon it might not be because Rasulo put it in place - but refraining from killing it would still earn him a gold star in my book.

RasulOH!, or Ra$ulo - the jury is still out .

 

[raidermatt]

...creating an incentive for fans to circle the world to visit all the Disney resorts.

Holy Tower of Terror, Batman!

At least give incentive for folks to go to Florida and California. I still haven't been able to figure out how adding Tower of Terror in CA provides ANY incentive for non-locals to go to DLR. If they are fans of ToT type rides, they most likely go to WDW, and adding it in CA does NOTHING for them.

But I guess if Disney management understood this, they wouldn't have built DCA anyway.

Committing to "non-clones" is only a piece of the puzzle, but if true, it offers a glimmer of hope...

 

[Bob O]

This is some great news if it happens!!!!
Each park should be unique and the cloning of the attractions cheapens the experience IMHO. As much as i loved Indy at DL i dont want one at wdw, each should have their own unique attractions to spur visits to each park, if the cloning contuines it will be more like SF parks where they clone many attractions.
So lets hope this does come true!!

 

[WEDWAY100]

I don’t know if this is bad or good. I think we have to wait and see. I don’t think that an absolute should be applied, like never clone any ride ever. In fact, I think some of the basic Disney cloned rides (Pirates, HM, etc) are the reason for the worldwide success.

Also, it would appear to be cheaper to do the R&D on a ride, install it, and if successful, refine and duplicate it. I don’t think every ride should be a clone, but I think they have a place.

If you look at DCA, it just feels like there are too many clones from WDW (Muppets, ITTBAB, Hollywood backlot). Maybe there aren’t too many, rather there are not enough original things. I sure would like to see them clone a couple of the TDS rides for WDW. That seems like a way to keep expenses down and still give the audience top quality.

 

[larworth]

I agree that some cloning is prudent. Especially, if the opportunity is taken to learn from the first instance and create a materially better experience the second time around (SpaceMoutain at DLP may be a good example of a good practice).

My belief is the decision to clone was not coming from a "what is best from the guest" perspective, but what allowed them to shrink WDI to the smallest size possible.

Jay is reported to be a big fan of WDI. I'm taking this as a positive sign that he will be an advocate for maintaining some decent level of competency here and think this shift in strategy is needed at this time.

 

[All Aboard]

I'm in agreement with larworth.

But, I'm a bit saddened if this is true. I want Soarin', Stormrider & Indy in Central Florida. I've thought we had a good chance since all the Imagineering was done, and we only needed construction dollars. I hope this doesn't stall E ticket development down here.

 

[raidermatt]

I agree that some cloning is prudent. Especially, if the opportunity is taken to learn from the first instance and create a materially better experience the second time around (SpaceMoutain at DLP may be a good example of a good practice).

Ok, I can buy that, but even then I think it makes sense to put a different story/theme around the attraction. Dinosaur is an example of this, though not very well executed.

But, I'm a bit saddened if this is true. I want Soarin', Stormrider & Indy in Central Florida.

If the rumor is true, I guess Florida would be out of luck for an exact clone. But it is just a rumor, and therefore doesn't include a lot of details. For instance, if there's any truth to the rumor at all, certainly Soarin' Over California would not show up in WDW. But what about "Soarin' With Dragons" showing up in AK? Or even "Soarin' over <insert favorite geographical area>" showing up in Epcot? Slightly updated ride mechanism, new film, and (hopefully) a new story/show. (DCA's Soarin' has no story, fyi...)

Would those be considered clones? I don't know...

I hope this doesn't stall E ticket development down here.

Good point. But if Rasulo understands the importance of having unique E-tickets in each location, he should also understand the importance of adding new E-tickets on some kind of reasonable timetable, right? Mabye? Hopefully?????

 

[DC7800]

Some basic attractions (parts of Fantasyland, Space Mountain, etc.) should probably form the foundation for any Disney "Magic Kingdom", be it in Florida, California, or even Hong Kong. Otherwise though, I would generally applaud an end to the steady succession of clones built lately (particularly in DCA).

I agree that some cloning is prudent. Especially, if the opportunity is taken to learn from the first instance and create a materially better experience the second time around (SpaceMoutain at DLP may be a good example of a good practice).

I agree. Disneyland's Indy, and several DisneySeas attractions, would indeed be valuable additions to WDW Florida. Rather than exact clones, what should be exported to Disney parks worldwide are enhanced and improved versions of popular attractions. To wrap this "package" around an immersive new story, as Raidermatt suggested, would be better still.

 

[Bob O]

I would agree with the parks using the same ride mechanism ie- a show like Soarin or a ride like Indy. But other than the ride mechanism the theme of the ride should be unique(of course it should be done right which wasnt the case with Countdown to Extinction).
I could see a section of a park having some classics like POTC/HM/SM but we dont need every park to have a Star Tours/Muppets/Its tough to be a Bug/Honey i shrunk the Aud. or even a dumb downed version of TOT.

 

[WEDWAY100]

Originally posted by DC7800
Disneyland's Indy, and several DisneySeas attractions, would indeed be valuable additions to WDW Florida. Rather than exact clones, what should be exported to Disney parks worldwide are enhanced and improved versions of popular attractions. To wrap this "package" around an immersive new story, as Raidermatt suggested, would be better still.

I’m not so sure about changing the story line. Maybe that’s a good thing and maybe not. For the IJA at DL, the technology used in the ride vehicles seems like it was made for that story. In fact, the technology was probably developed with IJA in mind. So taking an existing technology built for story #1 and then applying that technology to story #2 may or may not work. I’m not sure that CTX fails to match Indy because there weren’t enough dollars, time, resources, etc spent. It was an attempt to take the same ride vehicles and track layout, and place another story around it. I would much prefer to have IJA at WDW than CTX.

However, the converse could also be true. For example, if there is no story behind Soarin’, then maybe that would be a better example of a ride to clone the hardware/technology from and overlay a new story. All I’m trying to say is that each ride/attraction should be looked at independently for it’s potential for partial or complete cloning.