WDW and Universal. Who wins?

[Smugpugmug]

i think that's a fair and measured comment. I just don't enjoy when people go out of their way to bash Dis, i'm not in love with everything they do either but when everything that is mentioned is negative (on things that on a whole are seen as a positive) it makes me wonder why you would even want to be on a fan site it seems like trolling on a personal level which is just odd to me

I think some people gravitate here as the fan pages are super shill-y - as in you'll get banned if you're too negative but I don't think you can please some people. WDWMagic is genuinely terrible to navigate through because some people are blatantly trolling. They even admit it themselves so I'm not making that up.

I just like having a place where people can express their opinion even if I disagree. The constant bootlicking is too much sometimes lol

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

I think some people gravitate here as the fan pages are super shill-y - as in you'll get banned if you're too negative but I don't think you can please some people. WDWMagic is genuinely terrible to navigate through because some people are blatantly trolling. They even admit it themselves so I'm not making that up.

I just like having a place where people can express their opinion even if I disagree. The constant bootlicking is too much sometimes lol

I don't disagree, i'm just going to chirp back if i disagree. especially if someone is throwing things into the wind that are overblown or blatantly wrong.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

It is completely fair and valid to criticize a company like Disney and the state in which they're running the parks. I tend to ignore the "criticize Disney no matter what they do" crowd as they're not arguing in good faith but neither are the shills that defend Disney no matter what. Those people are all over Disney fan pages so it feels nice to have a space where that isn't the case.

Also for the record, none of the announcements from D23 outside of Cars really bothered me. That may change with Monster's Inc if they decide to bulldoze Muppetvision but I digress.

I doubt most would have much to complain about if it was net additions especially in the last 10 years when they started to ramp up doing stuff, sure maybe a discussion on what type of ride or show was put in, but it's mostly the removal of stuff to put something in its place. It plays into how people end up feeling when they are there at the parks when they want more stuff to do or more things to spread out the crowds.

Cars I think in particular is getting a lot of heat because of what it is replacing and IMO it's not going to help hide away people like Tom Sawyer Island did, sure maybe not a ton of people were visiting but it hid away the ones that did.

Universal is well known for this but they've been this way for forever and they've had much less space to work with to begin with. Someone going to those parks knows nostalgia lives and breathes in merch only

 

[Smugpugmug]

Universal is well known for this but they've been this way for forever and they've had much less space to work with to begin with. Someone going to those parks knows nostalgia lives and breathes in merch only

Hey, I would be mad if they ever got rid of ET. It's one of like, 3 actually good rides in that entire park.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Hey, I would be mad if they ever got rid of ET. It's one of like, 3 actually good rides in that entire park.

Oh E.T. is like a do not touch ride to me as well, it's one of the few rides I can ride and by gone it it's so cheesy cute but alas Universal is not the park to hold nostalgia for. The fact that they did a light refresh it recently got gives me hope!

 

[lowlight]

I don't disagree, i'm just going to chirp back if i disagree. especially if someone is throwing things into the wind that are overblown or blatantly wrong.

Was there someone doing that in this thread? I think most people were relatively timid in voicing their distaste for a few questionable decisions by Disney. Personally, I have no desire for a villains land, but it’s something new and plenty of people are excited for it. Monsters land sounds great, but not at the expense of Muppets. Cars land sounds great, but not at the expense of RoA and the Liberty Belle. Indy sounds great, but Dinoland could have been something and Dino is a decent ride.

Can any of these decisions be defended logically outside of “it’s cheaper and makes more money short term”? I think that’s why Disney had their fanbase turn rabid, they were always about money, but did a better job hiding it.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Can any of these decisions be defended logically outside of “it’s cheaper and makes more money short term”? I think that’s why Disney had their fanbase turn rabid, they were always about money, but did a better job hiding it.

Pending how this image posts if you want to expand in the slightly darker green areas (listed as marginally unsuitable) north of the current ROA/BTMRR or behind HM/Be Our Guest you’re going to need large enough egress paths to the east of BTMRR and west of HM. The width of the river at most gets to around 60 feet or so and the liberty Belle goes down and takes up about half of that width. That leaves you about 20 feet on the side of either one at most to build a path at most. However you also have to take into consideration clearance requirements for the pathways away from the Liberty Belle which cuts into how much space you have for pathways. Also you have to make it so you have either a drawbridge or a heightened cross way to pass over the Liberty Belle so it can have maintenance access.

Basically, in order to expand further beyond at a later time, logistically it makes the most sense to fill in the Rivers of America. Whether you agree with the decision or not is subjective.

 

[Tatebeck]

I doubt most would have much to complain about if it was net additions especially in the last 10 years when they started to ramp up doing stuff, sure maybe a discussion on what type of ride or show was put in, but it's mostly the removal of stuff to put something in its place. It plays into how people end up feeling when they are there at the parks when they want more stuff to do or more things to spread out the crowds.

Cars I think in particular is getting a lot of heat because of what it is replacing and IMO it's not going to help hide away people like Tom Sawyer Island did, sure maybe not a ton of people were visiting but it hid away the ones that did.

Universal is well known for this but they've been this way for forever and they've had much less space to work with to begin with. Someone going to those parks knows nostalgia lives and breathes in merch only

I don't have actual numbers of course but I can almost guarantee that there will be more people on/in line for the 2 cars rides at a given time than the number of people on Tom Sawyer's Island and the Liberty Belle. As long as the theming for the "Wilderness" around the cars rides is done well and sight lines are taken into account, I think that it could keep the area looking nice, hide away even MORE people, and increase the number of good attractions in the area. I have hope for it after seeing the art for it as they will be using elevation with mountains, trees, etc. The only thing that really concerns me is if they remove all of the water, then the area may be warmer. But it looks to me like there may be some water still remaining in the concept art so I am hopeful!

One thing that I love that it is doing is keeping the two coasts different. They are for now keeping the Rivers and the boat at Disneyland but removing them for a Cars ride that is different than at the Disneyland parks. I am all for doing things that have unique experiences on both coasts.

Hey, I would be mad if they ever got rid of ET. It's one of like, 3 actually good rides in that entire park.

Oh E.T. is like a do not touch ride to me as well, it's one of the few rides I can ride and by gone it it's so cheesy cute but alas Universal is not the park to hold nostalgia for. The fact that they did a light refresh it recently got gives me hope!

This just goes to show that you cannot please everyone lol. I saw the movie when I was a kid, but found it a bit boring. When we went to universal the first time and I rode it, I thought it was probably one of, if not THE worst ride at any of the Universal/Disney parks that we went on, and we did ALL of the parks on that trip. I really was hoping it would be completely redone or demolished for something else as it seemed like it had such low production value and was just a waste of time when I could have re-ridden one of the rides I personally liked better.

Is it just nostalgia for the movie/ride? I hear people talking about how they love the ride but I just cannot ever understand it, lol.

 

[lowlight]

View attachment 886690
Pending how this image posts if you want to expand in the slightly darker green areas (listed as marginally unsuitable) north of the current ROA/BTMRR or behind HM/Be Our Guest you’re going to need large enough egress paths to the east of BTMRR and west of HM. The width of the river at most gets to around 60 feet or so and the liberty Belle goes down and takes up about half of that width. That leaves you about 20 feet on the side of either one at most to build a path at most. However you also have to take into consideration clearance requirements for the pathways away from the Liberty Belle which cuts into how much space you have for pathways. Also you have to make it so you have either a drawbridge or a heightened cross way to pass over the Liberty Belle so it can have maintenance access.

Basically, in order to expand further beyond at a later time, logistically it makes the most sense to fill in the Rivers of America. Whether you agree with the decision or not is subjective.

That is a good argument, but that’s for marginally unsuitable. What’s wrong with suitable or marginally suitable? And they can’t go under or over? I’d like to think this wasn’t just the cheapest option, but not convinced.

 

[HokieRaven5]

That is a good argument, but that’s for marginally unsuitable. What’s wrong with suitable or marginally suitable? And they can’t go under or over? I’d like to think this wasn’t just the cheapest option, but not convinced.

Most of what’s left of expansion pads in MK at this point is what they would consider is either Marginally Suitable or Marginally Unsuitable. Thats just a difference in cost to get the land ready to be built on. The one spot they could probably do something in at some point is the Marginally Suitable Land back behind the Pirates building, but that’s likely something Moana themed in the future.

But for the expansion pads above the river that are marginally unsuitable, the only way to even start to develop them is to have the water removed from the area and reassess it after the fact.

I agree that the decision to put essentially 2 lands within an already developed space absolutely has revenue behind the decision.

It also expands the accessible space of the park that’s available to guests at all hours of operation vs the current available times for ROA/TSI.

 

[Keladry84]

This just goes to show that you cannot please everyone lol. I saw the movie when I was a kid, but found it a bit boring. When we went to universal the first time and I rode it, I thought it was probably one of, if not THE worst ride at any of the Universal/Disney parks that we went on, and we did ALL of the parks on that trip. I really was hoping it would be completely redone or demolished for something else as it seemed like it had such low production value and was just a waste of time when I could have re-ridden one of the rides I personally liked better.

Is it just nostalgia for the movie/ride? I hear people talking about how they love the ride but I just cannot ever understand it, lol.

I'm not an ET fan at all, and absolutely love the ride. For me, it is the real physical sets and the atmosphere created inside. It is quiet, comfortable and cool, as well as and takes you slowly through many visual aspects that I still notice something new each time.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I don't have actual numbers of course but I can almost guarantee that there will be more people on/in line for the 2 cars rides at a given time than the number of people on Tom Sawyer's Island and the Liberty Belle.

Well by hiding I more meant that people aren't out crowding the area. Like you can get the capacity of the boat, but the land itself different (I'm sure there's a capacity somewhere but not truly my particular point). But by putting in a ride in place of two attractions, one of which people could choose to do either or both but not simultaneously it takes away from hiding it. Tom Sawyer Island in particular also was/is a place where you have a bit of spreading out room. People talked a lot on the Boards (which I hadn't thought of before joining here) having their snacks or lunches/dinners over there.

Then there's how often people will talk about how far out of a given queue people are standing and one of the things I wondered is would this make the area more crowded with people. The way it is now eh you don't really have that issue. So I guess I wasn't necessarily talking about a crowd eater, more just where can blobs of people in MK (which can get so very crowded) go that end up helping the park have more breathing room and feel less crowded in that immediate area.

One thing that I love that it is doing is keeping the two coasts different.

I like that too, it was a bit fun for us to compare DLR to WDW although it did make us bummed like we liked Pirates a lot more over at DLR. We'll compare in October how Tokyo does.

This just goes to show that you cannot please everyone lol. I saw the movie when I was a kid, but found it a bit boring.

The movie wasn't really on my high list of favs so my personal feelings aren't tied to the film itself. But it helps to know who the characters are/slight backstory for riding it.

Is it just nostalgia for the movie/ride? I hear people talking about how they love the ride but I just cannot ever understand it, lol.

It's a slow, low-thrill, quirky, cheesy, cute attraction. The smell, while slightly overpowering at times, in the queue instantly recognizable. The way they do the names (sorta tedious depending on one's patience that day) cool for your ride, it also has a wheelchair accessible ride vehicle. I'm certainly not defending the film at the beginning of the ride with such outdated Spielberg but in some ways that just makes it more charming??

Nowadays it's the only attraction left from opening days of the Studios IIRC so that ups the nostalgic factor.

 

[Jrb1979]

I'm not an ET fan at all, and absolutely love the ride. For me, it is the real physical sets and the atmosphere created inside. It is quiet, comfortable and cool, as well as and takes you slowly through many visual aspects that I still notice something new each time.

I will say your post goes along with how Universal uses IP. I'm not a Harry Potter fan at all but I didn't feel I needed to know the movies to enjoy the attraction. It was the part of the video I posted.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I'm not an ET fan at all, and absolutely love the ride. For me, it is the real physical sets and the atmosphere created inside. It is quiet, comfortable and cool, as well as and takes you slowly through many visual aspects that I still notice something new each time.

Me too! Last time I really wanted to take a better look around. My husband indulges me on the ride but yeah when you need a break it's great for that, when you want to spend a few moments looking less at screens and big flashy things (which to be fair Disney is doing that as well) and more at simpler stuff, it's great for that. The queue really starts off that vibe.

 

[Keladry84]

I will say your post goes along with how Universal uses IP. I'm not a Harry Potter fan at all but I didn't feel I needed to know the movies to enjoy the attraction. It was the part of the video I posted.

My other favorite ride in the parks is Forbidden Journey (the sets in that are just awesome!) and Diagon Alley is my favorite part just to hang out in and walk through. The detail and theming is spot on. I'm a huge Harry Potter fan, but I agree with your perspective - I think I'd enjoy both of those still even if I knew nothing about the IP.

 

[Keladry84]

Me too! Last time I really wanted to take a better look around. My husband indulges me on the ride but yeah when you need a break it's great for that, when you want to spend a few moments looking less at screens and big flashy things (which to be fair Disney is doing that as well) and more at simpler stuff, it's great for that. The queue really starts off that vibe.

The queue (inside part, not outside) is one of the few that I've been in that I could probably hang out in forever It's so peaceful and feels like you are outside in a forest at night.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Was there someone doing that in this thread? I think most people were relatively timid in voicing their distaste for a few questionable decisions by Disney. Personally, I have no desire for a villains land, but it’s something new and plenty of people are excited for it. Monsters land sounds great, but not at the expense of Muppets. Cars land sounds great, but not at the expense of RoA and the Liberty Belle. Indy sounds great, but Dinoland could have been something and Dino is a decent ride.

Can any of these decisions be defended logically outside of “it’s cheaper and makes more money short term”? I think that’s why Disney had their fanbase turn rabid, they were always about money, but did a better job hiding it.

My issue with that logic is that people have no idea why Disney chose what they did. There may be engineering/ site issues that prevent them from moving into another area, at least at this time.

I would also say if you’re on a public forum voicing your displeasure that is the opposite of timid.

I tend to have more of an issue when people speak about how many people they know who are also Dis biggest fans who are not at all happy with the additions. It seems to be the same song and dance, Disney never does anything, they can’t keep pace with universal. Disney makes a major announcement, and it turns out it’s at the expense of all the fans of the parks. Then back up all your displeasure by backing it up with pseudo facts and get frustrated when someone calls you out for overstating or flat out making something up

It just gets old.

 

[lowlight]

My issue with that logic is that people have no idea why Disney chose what they did. There may be engineering/ site issues that prevent them from moving into another area, at least at this time.

As the PP mentioned, it may very well be site feasibility issues. Which likely translates into “money” in some way down the line, ie the land could be built there, but it would be 2x as expensive. Disney has chosen money as their guiding principle the past 4 years, so it’s still a safe bet, pseudo fact or not.

 

[HokieRaven5]

As the PP mentioned, it may very well be site feasibility issues. Which likely translates into “money” in some way down the line, ie the land could be built there, but it would be 2x as expensive. Disney has chosen money as their guiding principle the past 4 years, so it’s still a safe bet, pseudo fact or not.

Just to clarify what I said is they can’t even get to building back there without first re-developing Rivers of America. So even if Disney wanted to spend to build on those potentially more expensive areas they would still have to do something akin to what they have presented now.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

As the PP mentioned, it may very well be site feasibility issues. Which likely translates into “money” in some way down the line, ie the land could be built there, but it would be 2x as expensive. Disney has chosen money as their guiding principle the past 4 years, so it’s still a safe bet, pseudo fact or not.

I won’t argue the money part, they’re a business so being about the money is all they’re about. To keep making money they do need to provide a product that they believe their customers will want. It’s a vicious cycle, but money drives service companies (like Disney in this case) to strive to provide a good experience for their customers. No sense in being cheap just for the sake of it.

they don’t just build things to mess with their customers