Originally Posted By barboy What were they thinking? Why on earth are WDW's parks, hotels and entertainment so spread out? Whoever is responsible for that type of asinine planning should be drawn and quartered old England style-- OK, how about tar and feathered a la colonial America then? It has hurt most all of us--- both Disney and guest alike.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo Some people love that aspect of WDW. Not me (I agree with you), but a lot of people. I love the setup of the MK, lagoon, Epcot, Epcot resorts and DHS. That almost works. But yep, I prefer the intimacy of the DL and DLP resorts (and I suspect TDL, but have not yet been). That said, WDW does give a lot of options for on'e leisure time.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I agree with barboy. One thing I find irritating about WDW is how long it takes to get from the resort hotels to the parks.
Originally Posted By barboy Actually I like properties to be workably vast and I'm not asking for the same intimate and clustering setup as DlR in Anaheim but WDW is beyond ridiculous. WDW is way, way overboard. And it unnecessarily costs us(the guest) a great deal of time/energy touring. And It cost Disney a truckload of money per annum too. Running those buses, boats and monorails ain't cheap. If planners would have kept things more centralized we all would have been better off. So.....any viable theories out there as to why Disney went out of their way to keep everything do damn remote and thus silently pissing off the guest(customer).
Originally Posted By barboy What Disney should have done was build so all WDW attractions, hotels and events, except for the golf courses(obviously), are a 'trams ride' away instead of a bus ride away.
Originally Posted By barboy ///Sink holes and unbuildable land abound in WDW too./// Sounds believable but Disney has been filling in, excavating, draining, moving earth by the tons on just about every project 'on property'. Look at the sheer distance from Epcot to MK and MK resorts. Is EPCOT's location the first or closest buildable lot to the MK? If it is then I am being too harsh and I need to stop this rant with those planners but I doubt that is the case since like I said Disney has been doing large scale earthworks from the word 'go'.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I like WDW just as it is, thank you. My favorite thing about it is that it truly seems to be its own world. I like DL and think it is convenient that both parks and the Disney hotels are all within a 10 minute walk of each other. At the same time, you never for a minute forget that you are in the middle of suburban Los Angeles. At WDW, I always feel as if I have truly been transported to a magical land. Not a magical block. A magical LAND!
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << So.....any viable theories out there as to why Disney went out of their way to keep everything do damn remote and thus silently pissing off the guest(customer). >> There's not just theories, but plenty of reasons for how things developed the way they did. The main reason is that the whole WDW concept was unproven when it was first developed back in the 70s. They built what they knew would work first, the Magic Kingdom. When it came to EPCOT, no one was sure how it would go over with the public and it was built a good distance away from MK because no one was confident that it would be a surefire success. If EPCOT failed, it could be quietly closed down and kept out of sight from WDW travelers that still headed to the MK for a day. The Disney Village Marketplace was similarly developed at a distance from the MK -- the idea being that the hotels and shops could be sold off and separated from the rest of the WDW property if things didn't succeed there. Creating distance between venues also helps Disney manage traffic between parks and other offerings. There's other things, like sinkholes and unbuildable land that davewasbaloo mentioned.
Originally Posted By barboy ///My favorite thing about it is that it truly seems to be its own world./// Yes, that does seem to be the prevailing mood but it doesn't really address my complaint. I'm not sure if you get what I was trying to say. It's not the vast square milage of WDW that I find asinine(in fact I welcome its San Franciscon dimensions)it's the distance from Animal Kingdom to Old Key West or the time it takes to park hop from Studios to MK. Disney could have centralized its attractions so much better while still keeping a world all its own within the confines of its huge property. WDW is situated like independent resorts instead of one large one which needlessly frustrates families by the thousands. Dad wants to go to World of Disney to shop, Mom wants to take little one to MK, their teen is looking to get on Tower of Terror while Uncle wants pool time at Old man Island in Port Orleans. How in the world do they meet for lunch without chewing up precious activity time? How does one recover after forgetting sunscreen, contact lenses or a wallet back at the Caribbean Beach when he is already inside AK?
Originally Posted By joe80x86 It is what it is. I get that you don't like the layout but many people do. Lucky for you no one will ever force you to go back. Sorry if I am unduly harsh but I really don't see the point of complaining about something that absolutely can never be changed at this point. There are so many better things to complain about than the distance between Ft Wilderness and Animal Kingdom.
Originally Posted By bobbelee9 People are not spending money while they are in line or riding on buses. Maybe it helps cut back on congestion in smaller parks (DHS) I'm fine with everything being spread out, it helps with transition. While going from one ride to another, it gives you time to talk/laugh about the one you just got off of. I don't want to get out of the HM and get right into Pirates. I want a chance to talk about what we just saw or did. And to change my mindset for the next ride.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Count me in those who like the vastness. I grew up going to DL - and I love the park...but I also love the feeling I am not next to the off ramp at WDW. I bought into OKW because I like the peace and quiet the resort offers after 10-12 hours of entertainment.
Originally Posted By fkurucz I think that its nice that WDW has elbow room. But you can have too much of a good thing. But as been mentioned, if you realize that you left something behind in your room that must be retrieved, you have pretty much flushed 60-90 minutes down the drain.
Originally Posted By NikkiLOVESMickey I am with RoadTrip on this one. I love going to WDW and feeling like I'm in a whole other world. I think you'd lose that feeling if you saw an interstate out of your hotel window.
Originally Posted By barboy /// I think you'd lose that feeling if you saw an interstate out of your hotel window./// True, but again that's not what I'm saying at all. Disney and his guests would have been better served if the individual parks and hotels were closer to each other(thereby eliminating the need for rental cars and buses which do not exactly create the most magical way to move from one end of WDW to the other if you ask me)-- not closer to International Dr, Kississee or I-4. The parks and hotels could have still been positioned deep within the confines of the property with a trams ride way from eah other and one could feel like he is in another magical world. Everybody would have been a winner: Disney saves money and the guests save time and energy while still enjoying a vacation far from 'civilization'.
Originally Posted By dshyates "I am with RoadTrip on this one. I love going to WDW and feeling like I'm in a whole other world. I think you'd lose that feeling if you saw an interstate out of your hotel window." Not having EPCOT 12 miles away from the resrot ceanter doesn't mean that you will see an intersatate exit out your window. I believe that they were captivated with what we can do with their 27 square miles, and not what they should do. Putting the parks closer together has nothing to do with having outside intrusions on prop. As it stands the Disney roads are no better than Dwights vast networks of interstate highways. They could have as easily controlled the visuals and put the parks closer together. As it stands the property is difficult at best to get around
Originally Posted By dshyates That said, I believe that if they were to start over with the Florida project it would be a vastly different product.
