Disney reads internet forums for info...

[Homer]

Hey, hey, Disney. Build a 500 foot tall launched B&M inverted at MGM Studios!

 

Trust me, there will never be a B&M at a Disney park.

Is your joke meter broken or somethin, Barry?

[BarryH]

^No, I'm just giving the cold, hard facts, much like the time I was told Robb doesn't love me.

[ginzo]

Of course they read the boards. It's human nature to want to know what people are saying about you. Saying "only at home when they're bored" is a lame comment though. That's like me saying "sure, I eat....but only when I'm hungry." Just admit that people are paid to research feedback. It's what every good company does to stay on top. Although I sometimes feel Disney must practice "selective reading."

 

I think the comment about reading at home when they're bored was to suggest that although they look at Interweb forums it's just one research tool that they use. Disney already has excellent resources to help them manage their parks, like surveys, looking at attraction popularity, focus groups, etc. They ran the parks just fine for 40 years before the Interweb became popular. It's just another tool in their kit, and probably not the most important one.

 

Let's face it- the vast majority of Interweb posts are written by people who can't even spell. It's not a gold mine of new ideas.

 

BTW- I agree with your 10 point list, especially about Mr. Toad.

[Carnage]

^No, I'm just giving the cold, hard facts, much like the time I was told Robb doesn't love me.

 

Unlike Robb's lack of love for you, a B&M at Disney is at least somewhat possible.

 

Highly unlikely yes, but not completely impossible. Disney does have some semi-intense rides, so building a medium intensity B&M isn't totally out of the question.

[BarryH]

^B&M was supposed to build the Rock N Roller Coaster at Disney-MGM. B&M said for Disney to give them the land specs and they will design the coaster. Disney wanted lots more control. B&M said no and walk away from the project.

 

The source is from a VIP tour guide at Universal Orlando. I heard it on a VIP tour.

[Carnage]

The source is from a VIP tour guide at Universal Orlando. I heard it on a VIP tour.

 

That just explains why B&M did not design RRC.

 

That does not make it final that B&M will never work for Disney ever.

[robbalvey]

Anyway, since they need stuff to read tonight when they're bored, I'll quickly summarize (IMHO) what sucks:

 

1. Wand.

2. Hat.

3. "Rockin'" (insert ride here).

4. Epcot losing its identity.

5. Stitch Encounter.

6. Using an abundance of Pixar rides as a crutch for a lack of imagination.

7. Insane ticket prices.

8. Lack of Toad.

9. The latest version of Journey Into Imagination...or whatever it's being called now.

10. Eisner. Yep, he still sucks.

 

I would disagree with you on:

 

1. Wand.

- I personally like it and gives Epcot a "title" if you will.

 

4. Epcot losing its identity.

- If anything I think Epcot has gotten MORE of an identity lately. Future World is more entertaining, and with events like Food & Wine Festival, World Showcase is better than ever.

 

6. Using an abundance of Pixar rides as a crutch for a lack of imagination.

- Pixar movies are the best thing they've done since what, Aladdin/Lion King/Mermaid? What movies should they use? Cat from Outer Space? Million Dollar Duck? They have VERY successful franchises with brand identity with Pixar movies.

 

7. Insane ticket prices.

- Disagree. I think concerts and Broadway shows are INSANE ticket prices, especially if you consider the amount of hours you are entertained versus the amount of hours you can spend at a theme park. Your average concert or show is about 2-3 hours for sometimes DOUBLE what you pay to get into a theme park for what, sometimes 12 hours?

 

10. Eisner. Yep, he still sucks.

- He's gone. Let it go.

 

--Robb "Just wanted to add some reality to those complaints!" Alvey

[jedimaster1227]

I have spoken to Ricky Brigante in the past and he is a pretty nice guy. He is way more into Disney that most people I know, but he isn't the craziest podcaster I have met... That title goes to the kid that runs the 3 or so Everything Disney podcasts. Too bad none of the material he uses is actually his, or used with permission... I caught him using my footage once and that drew the line for me. Some podcasters are really nice, specifically the guys from Coasterradio.com, In The Loop, WDWToday and the Bare Necessities section of the Lets Talk About Disney podcast. I find it interesting that Disney finally announced that they lurk on the boards, considering that most of us knew it was happening (at least on one other forum) for a few years. I think they will be more amused than informed by the comments recieved on different topics, as some comments made just aren't too kind. The Monster's Inc. Laugh Floor is a perfect example of this...

 

10. Eisner. Yep, he still sucks.

 

It wasn't all his fault you know... He actually did some good for the company during his time at Disney...

[robbalvey]

That does not make it final that B&M will never work for Disney ever.

It's true that it does not mean they will *never* work with them, but in one of my many conversations with B&M they said "Disney has more lawyers than we have employees. That makes us nervous!"

 

Although granted, I would assume that so does Universal, so go figure.

 

--Robb

[mcjaco]

I would disagree with you on:

 

1. Wand.

- I personally like it and gives Epcot a "title" if you will.

 

4. Epcot losing its identity.

- If anything I think Epcot has gotten MORE of an identity lately. Future World is more entertaining, and with events like Food & Wine Festival, World Showcase is better than ever.

 

6. Using an abundance of Pixar rides as a crutch for a lack of imagination.

- Pixar movies are the best thing they've done since what, Aladdin/Lion King/Mermaid? What movies should they use? Cat from Outer Space? Million Dollar Duck? They have VERY successful franchises with brand identity with Pixar movies.

 

7. Insane ticket prices.

- Disagree. I think concerts and Broadway shows are INSANE ticket prices, especially if you consider the amount of hours you are entertained versus the amount of hours you can spend at a theme park. Your average concert or show is about 2-3 hours for sometimes DOUBLE what you pay to get into a theme park for what, sometimes 12 hours?

 

10. Eisner. Yep, he still sucks.

- He's gone. Let it go.

 

--Robb "Just wanted to add some reality to those complaints!" Alvey

 

 

1.) I think we've got elite hardcore EPCOT fans (vs. Epcot) that really think the Wand takes away from the beauty and simpleness of SSE. I'm not totally opposed to the Wand, but I'd rather see them put some sort of large sparkly sign over the Ticket area.

 

4.) Future World has, in a sense, lost it's identity. It more about thrilling people, rather than educating through entertainment. Then again, as a society we've kind of dumbed ourselves down, so I'm not sure the "old" Future World still works. So, Disney may be on the right track...it's just not the same for us old school EPCOT fans.

 

6.) We've talked about this before, and I agree with Robb. What has Disney done movie wise that they can pull a themed ride off of? All the movies the kids are crazy about are Pixar created, with the exception of the POTC series. I think they're making a stretch on some of them (Monsters Inc in Tomorrowland??? WTF), but it's Disney's bread and milk right now.

 

7.) For one to two days, yes. Ticket prices suck. After that, the savings start to become immeasurable. $2 additional a day?! That's awesome!

 

8.) Eisner was great when he started. He sucked the second half of his tenure. He dug Disney out of a huge whole, let's give him credit where credit's due.

[robbalvey]

4.) Future World has, in a sense, lost it's identity. It more about thrilling people, rather than educating through entertainment. Then again, as a society we've kind of dumbed ourselves down, so I'm not sure the "old" Future World still works. So, Disney may be on the right track...it's just not the same for us old school EPCOT fans.

Yeah, I can see this. And you're right that I don't think "old school" Future World would work today, but I have to say that, other than Journey, I like today's version of Future World better.

 

As much as I really, really DO miss Horizons, I really like Mission: Space...a LOT! I wish there was a way for those two attractions to live concurrently, but I'm not dissapointed with Mission: Space.

 

Living Seas is an attraction I almost *NEVER* went into, and now it has something appealing in there that I'd give it a visit every couple of trips or so.

 

And while I'm not a big fan of Soarin', I'd much rather ride that than see the old "Food Rocks" show.

 

If anything, I think they need to continue down their path of "upgrades" and bring Energy and Wonders of Life up to par with Seas, Land, Space, and Test Track. And then maybe think about doing something with Imagination!

 

--Robb "But overall, I like Epcot today *MUCH* better than I did 10 years ago." Alvey

[mcjaco]

I was thinking the same thing last week as I walked around with Erik. I really enjoy everything there, except Imagination....and Soarin'.

 

As much as I love World of Motion, Test Track still fits the bill as a great little ride showing off vehicle the rigors vehicles have to go through. So, it's still educational, you just aren't smacked in the face with it.

 

I really have come to enjoy Mission Space. It's no Horizons, but it's an experience like nothing else out there. If they could just get rid of that terrible non themed exit queue.

[Disney Dood]

If some Disney guy is reading this now, I LOVE YOU GUYS YOU RULE! Just bring DisneySea to WDW please!

 

And yes, Future World is beginning to not educate but thrill. And that's a good thing. However, they just need one more true thrill ride, like a coaster or something. Maybe something good will relplace Wonders of Life.

[CK Media]

Maybe something good will relplace Wonders of Life.

Mission: EGG

[ginzo]

That does not make it final that B&M will never work for Disney ever.

It's true that it does not mean they will *never* work with them, but in one of my many conversations with B&M they said "Disney has more lawyers than we have employees. That makes us nervous!"

 

Although granted, I would assume that so does Universal, so go figure.

 

--Robb

 

Maybe Disney draws up crazy overly litigious sounding contracts. I'd imagine it's just a matter of Universal being easier to work with.

 

As I'm *sure* you know, a lot of bigger companies like to play "hard ball" with their vendors: being unrealistic with time lines, expecting the vendor to lose money on deals just to get a "marquee account", taking forever to pay, giving extraordinarily bad contract terms, etc.

 

I deal with a few major enterprise customers at work that are as big as Disney, and I see a lot of this sort of thing.

[BeemerBoy]

^^^ And see, that's the issue I have with Future World. Although upgrades are inevitable, as an "old school" EPCOT CENTER enthusiast, it just feels like such a sellout to "thrill it up" rather than stay true to the original intentions behind building the place.

 

With so many other parks already containing plenty of thrill rides, why does Epcot need to fit in? The only change that made sense was Test Track. It's a great example of an exceptional thrill ride with a tinge of educational value. Also, I enjoyed Soarin', but felt it would be better off at the studios instead.

 

And hey, no one ever gets on Sea World's case for being too educational. Afterall, although the merits of holding whales captive can be debatable, the underlying message throughout the park, and in most of its presentations is one of conservation through education. So education through entertainment does have a spot.

[CK Media]

And hey, no one ever gets on Sea World's case for being too educational.

Yep I learned so much about the tale of Kraken and the lost city of Atlantis.

[BeemerBoy]

and in most of its presentations

 

 

^ Clever. Almost.

[CycloneMan]

I'm wearing the same shirt he wears in the video right now! NOOOOOOOOOOOOO! However, seeing super collectors like him make me feel better about myself that I'm not quite that bad. I'm close, but not that bad.

 

Well, of course they troll the forums when their bored! That's what we do. What would make Disney any different?

 

It's not major news that they troll the forums and sites. They're word of mouth advertising and it only makes sense that they would want to monitor that. I'm sure there is some very useful information that they could gather about experiences on these boards. However, I think the "decisions" made by the information gathered is very small. It would be things like customer service changes, test and adjust things, and the ilk. So the "please bring [insert name of attraction here] back" pleas will fall on deaf ears. Usually those attractions are gone for a reason. That being said:

 

If they read them, then why is Stitch's great mistake still open ? And Disney, if you are reading this, Thanks for Skippy, but we want are Alien back...you can keep Clench!

Hey Disney...Give is Alien Encounter back!

 

Alien Encounter is never coming back. It's a cult classic in every sense of the word. People miss it and hold it on a pedestal now, but when it was around no one rode it. That's why it's gone, it was unpopular.

 

Well, I know there is no way it's coming back. Fir the obvious, one of the Aliens was destroyed for a pin, and the other one is rusting under COP. From what I've been told, it's in such bad condition, it can never be used again.

[rbpia]

Hey, hey, Disney. Build a 500 foot tall launched B&M inverted at MGM Studios!

You forgot Aquatrax!

 

Ron "Every new coaster should be an Aquatrax!" Patton

[robbalvey]

^^^ And see, that's the issue I have with Future World. Although upgrades are inevitable, as an "old school" EPCOT CENTER enthusiast, it just feels like such a sellout to "thrill it up" rather than stay true to the original intentions behind building the place.

Yeah, I see your point, but unfortunatley the park you're an enthusaist about doesn't exist anymore. At least the majority of the GP seem to really like the changes. I hear more and more people say how "Epcot is their favorite park at WDW." 10 years ago, all I heard is how people were bored there.

 

With so many other parks already containing plenty of thrill rides, why does Epcot need to fit in? The only change that made sense was Test Track. It's a great example of an exceptional thrill ride with a tinge of educational value. Also, I enjoyed Soarin', but felt it would be better off at the studios instead.

I would hardly say that the "thrill rides" that Epcot has received are ANYTHING but ordinary rides trying to "fit in." I mean, think about it, the last three Epcot rides: Test Track, Mission: Space, and Soarin' are one of a kinds outside of Disney theme parks.

 

I would see your point if they ripped down Horizons and build an Intamin rocket coaster, but everything that has gone in recently is top of the line family entertainment.

 

And Soarin' is hardly what I'd call a "thrill ride." And where exactly would that fit in at the Studios?!?!

 

And hey, no one ever gets on Sea World's case for being too educational. Afterall, although the merits of holding whales captive can be debatable, the underlying message throughout the park, and in most of its presentations is one of conservation through education. So education through entertainment does have a spot.

You can't compare Epcot to Sea World. They are two completely different kinds of parks. You can draw comparisons between Animal Kingdom and Sea World, but not Epcot. That doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense to try.

 

Oh, and what were two of Sea World's biggest additions in the last decade? Gee...let's see...ROLLER COASTERS.

 

--Robb

[BeemerBoy]

^^^ And see, that's the issue I have with Future World. Although upgrades are inevitable, as an "old school" EPCOT CENTER enthusiast, it just feels like such a sellout to "thrill it up" rather than stay true to the original intentions behind building the place.

Yeah, I see your point, but unfortunatley the park you're an enthusaist about doesn't exist anymore. At least the majority of the GP seem to really like the changes. I hear more and more people say how "Epcot is their favorite park at WDW." 10 years ago, all I heard is how people were bored there.

 

Understood. See, here's the thing. As someone who's visited the park from opening week until today, I've been lucky enough to see the progression. On the same hand, I was 8 on my first visit, and I'm not gonna lie and say that the park turned out to be the thrill-laden place both my brother and I envisioned it to be following the MK. As kids, we were somewhat bored too. But that's what made EPCOT such a ballsy move on Disney's part....it was "different," and even then I think I still appreciated the learning aspect of what we were visiting.

I'm definitely not saying the old EPCOT would survive today, and I'm certainly not opposed to more thrills. All I was trying to suggest was that the direction in which they've headed veers from the original goal of the park in it's early years. Besides Test Track, I just think the "thrills" they've added are for entertainment value only. This obviously works on some level, because as Matt suggested, the "dumbing down" of America contirbutes a bit to it. I just think with Disney's minds, they could've stuck to the original intention of "edutainment" a bit more.

 

With so many other parks already containing plenty of thrill rides, why does Epcot need to fit in? The only change that made sense was Test Track. It's a great example of an exceptional thrill ride with a tinge of educational value. Also, I enjoyed Soarin', but felt it would be better off at the studios instead.

I would hardly say that the "thrill rides" that Epcot has received are ANYTHING but ordinary rides trying to "fit in." I mean, think about it, the last three Epcot rides: Test Track, Mission: Space, and Soarin' are one of a kinds outside of Disney theme parks.

 

I would see your point if they ripped down Horizons and build an Intamin rocket coaster, but everything that has gone in recently is top of the line family entertainment.

 

And Soarin' is hardly what I'd call a "thrill ride." And where exactly would that fit in at the Studios?!?!

 

I wasn't trying to imply that the "thrill rides" were ordinary, or that they themselves were trying to "fit in." It was more of a thought that Disney felt EPCOT needed something to attract the crowds that were starting to go elsewhere. In other words, the park acquired a few new "thrill rides" which only made it seem like it, as a whole, was trying to fit in with what every other park in central florida offers. And as I've said, that's not necessarily bad. In my opinion, I just believe, besides Test Track, that they could've done better with Mission:Space, and rather than drop Soarin' in there, they could've focused on either updating Universe or Wonders of Life.

Yeah, there's no doubt, whether I like 'em or not, those rides are far from ordinary, and even though I'll never *get* Mission:Space, I can't argue with the engineering and ambition that went into it. There's obviously no other company in the world that would attempt it.

 

I am somewhat confused with your thoughts on Soarin' though. With all due respect, if it's not a "thrill" ride in your opinion, what classification does it deserve? Honestly, whatever it is, I enjoyed it. I really did. But I can't help but feel it's nothing more than just a glorified advertisement for the Tourism board of the state of California. I'm not sure it really fit in at The Land pavilion. To me, it just seems a better fit at the studios for some reason. I can't put a finger on why, it just feels better suited over there. I mean, it's really just an IMAX movie on a hanging seat in a sort of simulator ride form....with the great orange smell of course. Brilliantly executed, but in its simplest form, that's really all it is....well, to me, anyway.

 

 

 

And hey, no one ever gets on Sea World's case for being too educational. Afterall, although the merits of holding whales captive can be debatable, the underlying message throughout the park, and in most of its presentations is one of conservation through education. So education through entertainment does have a spot.

You can't compare Epcot to Sea World. They are two completely different kinds of parks. You can draw comparisons between Animal Kingdom and Sea World, but not Epcot. That doesn't even make the slightest bit of sense to try.

 

Oh, and what were two of Sea World's biggest additions in the last decade? Gee...let's see...ROLLER COASTERS.

 

--Robb

 

It wasn't necessarily a comparison of Sea World to EPCOT ride for ride, or attraction by attraction. I was just trying to make a connection between the theories involved with their presentation. The thought was that both parks (well, early EPCOT anyways), try to incorporate a responsiblity to try and teach the public while they have their attention.

 

The fact that Sea World added two coasters actually is what I was trying to get at with EPCOT adding its "thrill rides." What made EPCOT so original and unique was that it bent the rules. It went against what the industry at the time said had to be built to draw crowds. I think that's what the "early EPCOT" purists like myself appreciate so much. Although we don't mind evolution of the place, it'd just be nice to see the brilliant minds of Disney not completely give in to building rides only to thrill and not try and at least convey some sort of educational lesson.

Obviously two schools of thought on why we both love the place so much. I'm just saying that if anyone can pull off the perfect balance to satisfy us both, it's Disney. I just wish they'd try a bit harder at it.

 

 

Sorry to be so longwinded about the response. I really never expected the thread to evolve this way. Maybe we need an EPCOT suggestion box thread intstead.

[saturday97]

Ugh, I have a number of problems with that video and the statements made, but I'll save everyone the boredom that would result if I went off on journalistic ethics and the internet, shoddy TV reporting, and cavalier statements by Disney reps who should know better. Bad PR, bad journalism, etc.

[coastrfreak2000]

So is it possible that someone from Disney could have seen Cerberus's amazing Pride Rock ride concept?