Originally Posted By dshyates Screamscape is reporting more info about the rumored DNK. The most interesting thing is the main attraction for the park is going to be a giant physical scavenger hunt mountain. The Kim Possible game in EPCOT was the test for this. It will include rock climbing to the top, zip lining down, and some massive interior caves. <a href="http://www.screamscape.com/html/walt_disney_world_resort.htm#NightKingdom" target="_blank">http://www.screamscape.com/htm...tKingdom</a> This sounds a lot like what they have as one of the major attractions in the Wizarding World of Harry Potter, minus the rock climbing and zip lines. There, you will just have to figure out clues based on the books and movies.
Originally Posted By dshyates I should add that in the HP game, after you figure out the clue, you have you figure out where to find what ever the clue is. There will be losts of going up and down stairs and exploring the Hogwarts Castle to find the stuff. It will run the kids and some adults stupid.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 There were some who "claimed" in previous threads that Disney had stopped planning this because of the fan outrage..... I love when people make stuff up to try and make themselves look better.... Glad to see Night Kingdom is continuing to be planned.
Originally Posted By leobloom Just because Screamscape says it doesn't mean it's true. Besides Spirit probably has better sources than Lance...
Originally Posted By mickeyboy43 Eh, it sounds like a good idea and a direct challenge to Universal/Sea World. Im not sure how many guests will like to scavenger hunt through a mountain though. Is there more info on the KP thing they did at imagination?
Originally Posted By leemac mickeyboy43 - LP had a feature of the playtest: <a href="http://www.laughingplace.com/lotion-view-263.asp" target="_blank">http://www.laughingplace.com/l...-263.asp</a> The technology is actually being rolled out at Fortress Explorations at Tokyo DisneySea later this year.
Originally Posted By mickeyboy43 Thats really wierd, because I was thinking this sounded alot like somehting that would fit into Mount Prometheus. Thanks for the link.
Originally Posted By MPierce I can understand the concept of Kim Possible at Epcot. I just question if it's going to have such an appeal for adults. If NK truly is a high-end experience it's going to take much more than this I think. I'm sure the Imagineers are much smarter than I am, but this just doesn't seem to hold a big enough appeal to base a supposed 5th gate on. I just don't see wealthy people going to WDW to do a little rock climbing, and play an adult version of KP, even if you do get to interact with some live animals. I'm sure I am missing something.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I really want to see how they plan on doing this so that it appeals to a wide variety of folks, and ones who are willing to pay the price for it. The idea of climbing rocks to the top of a mountain to hang-glide back down doesn't really seem like it would appeal to that many folks. Of those that would like it, I'm sure most would realize that they could get a much more authentic experience elsewhere for a much lower cost. I also want to see how they plan on making that ADA compliant. As for capacity, I just have to laugh at the idea of a zip line. Even on the best days with everybody going full speed (nobody freaking out about jumping off a platform to only be held up by a flimsy-looking harness), I've only been able to get about 40 people per hour down a pair of twin zip lines. And I know that there is no way that they will have that many people with out any fear of heights to keep the capacity even that high. They also seem to be going for an extremely narrow demographic. They appear to want people who are adventurous and willing to take on challanges, but not so adventurous that they want the real experience, and who want to go on scripted missions that make them do things in a certain planned out order, instead of going where the wind takes them. They also have to have a lot of money, since it won't be cheap to put something like this on every night of the year.
Originally Posted By WilliamK99 They also seem to be going for an extremely narrow demographic. They appear to want people who are adventurous and willing to take on challanges, but not so adventurous that they want the real experience, and who want to go on scripted missions that make them do things in a certain planned out order, instead of going where the wind takes them. They also have to have a lot of money, since it won't be cheap to put something like this on every night of the year.<< Knowing Disney, they will probably have 2 seperate "missions" a high impact, high energy "mission" and a more family friendly "mission", I also don't think it will be based on Kim Possible at all, it will be it's own distinct storyline that starts at the Adventurer's Club and then branches out inside of the park where you interact with AA's and animals. Sounds like an intriguing idea, and I am hoping Disney works their magic on this one.
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<Just because Screamscape says it doesn't mean it's true. Besides Spirit probably has better sources than Lance...>> I believe I do. And I don't like it when what I say is mispresented. I never said this park wasn't going to happen, just that it was having some major tweaking ... and yes, when you PAY tourists $200 Disney Dollars a pop to watch your presentation and then 9 out of 10 are not impressed, one might say the concept is either inherently flawed or just not right for the current time and place. If Jay Rasulo wants the upper classes $$$, perhaps he shouldn't have WalMarted the parks to begin with, which chased off plenty of the whales he so covets now with everything from DCL to Adventures by Disney to boutique parks.
Originally Posted By Mickeymouseclub I guess the Waldorf Astoria/Hilton/Golf Resort on Disney property will help get some "Whales" back on property. Have you heard any rumors about an adult themed park on property behind Downtown Disney? Is land available there?
Originally Posted By Mr F Ok, I would pay $200 to swim with Dolphins but not to climb a fake rock and explore a fake cave. It sounds just as bad as Disneyquest and the Disney Insitute. Good luck with your next Flop of an idea Disney!
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<I guess the Waldorf Astoria/Hilton/Golf Resort on Disney property will help get some "Whales" back on property.>> That's the idea, along with the Four Seasons. But since those aren't Disney-owned properties they may actually hurt Disney's deluxe resorts because there's no way in hell that even the GF will be able to compete with those places unless Disney changes the whole structure of how it runs its resorts and that's not likely to happen, even when Jay moves on. <<Have you heard any rumors about an adult themed park on property behind Downtown Disney? Is land available there?>> There are all sorts of rumors floating around and most should just be flushed. This would be one of those.
Originally Posted By leemac <<But since those aren't Disney-owned properties they may actually hurt Disney's deluxe resorts because there's no way in hell that even the GF will be able to compete with those places unless Disney changes the whole structure of how it runs its resorts and that's not likely to happen, even when Jay moves on.>> It is highly unlikely that any of these new properties will hurt Disney's deluxe properties. There is still demand for deluxe properties at WDW - the resort ran at 95% occupancy for April and was in the high 80s for most of the second quarter - and although room rates are softening at the value and moderates there is no sign of that happening at the deluxe resorts. To understand why they won't impact WDW-owned properties you have to understand two points: 1) People will always want the Disney difference - to be able to book with Disney, stay on property in a Disney hotel and use the resort benefits. To most guests it is not about having Four Seasons/Ritz-Carlton style hospitality. If you want pampering head to the Maldives, Seychelles or Goa. People still visit WDW primarily for the theme parks and when you are out all day the facilities at your property aren't so key. Most people still choose their hotel based on price point rather than amenities - what can I afford (or more likely what I'm willing to pay) as opposed to what services I'll get for my money. Those hotels won't be the on roster for Disney Travel Company or on disneyworld.com so guests will still be looking at hotels with "Disney" before it. What those resorts do bring is all of those frequent stay program members - Disney look very carefully at what happens at the two Starwood properties (Swan and Dolphin) and they bring a real different guest dynamic to property. I'd expect the same for the Hilton/Four Seasons projects. Think how many corporate travelers will now use their points to take the family to WDW. 2) Disney will still benefit from guests being on-property - spending in the parks and other hotels etc. WDW has been very smart when it comes to their inventory mix - bringing in more value/moderate resorts was the key in the '90s and now it is about widening the guest dynamic.
Originally Posted By plpeters70 This whole Night Kingdom concept really seems to be relying on people wanting to play "make-believe" all night - kind of like those "80's Prom" shows or "Tony and Tia's Wedding". I don't know about the rest of you, but I just really don't have much interest in this kind of thing. I'd much rather just be entertained passively when I'm at the parks - I really don't like all the interactive stuff. And I certainly don't want to have to pretend I'm on some kind of mission or something -- playing "make-believe" stopped being fun around the time I turned 10.
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA The part that confuses me with this, and the Harry Potter thing... If it's interactive attraction, and there's a whole group of people essentially doing the same thing. After one person 'finds the button' to push, doesn't it spoil the fun for everyone else? And after several thousand people move through an attraction, and push a part of a wall, or a button -- won't it be easy to see where to push? Just based on wear and tear? Or should I withhold judgment until 'I see it'? And by the way, is it art?
Originally Posted By Spirit of 74 <<It is highly unlikely that any of these new properties will hurt Disney's deluxe properties.>> Well, we're going to have to wait and see to find out who's right on this if it is that black and white. But there's no doubt that the Four Seasons/Waldorf are going for the same audience that will pay to stay at the GF. Two summers ago, it was possible to stay at the new Ritz Carlton for $199 a night when Disney's moderates were almost that. I just don't believe people with money throw the notion of getting the most for their vacation dollars out the window to be blinded by Disney pixie dust and marketing. <<There is still demand for deluxe properties at WDW - the resort ran at 95% occupancy for April and was in the high 80s for most of the second quarter - and although room rates are softening at the value and moderates there is no sign of that happening at the deluxe resorts.>> I have no reason to doubt those figures. Most of those guests filling those deluxe resorts recently have had decidedly pasty white skin! If the economy in the UK tanks as much as the USA's (the reality, not the Wall Street investment bankers and talking heads), those load levels might drop precipitously. And if Disney thinks all those summer/fall reservations are going to happen with $4-5 a gallon gas, that's just not being realistic. The cost of driving three hours to WDW has tripled for me. That's why I won't be headed up there for Memorial Day weekend as I originally planned. One other thought ... unless things have changed, Disney's occupancy levels are based upon rooms that are in inventory ... that basically means that if Disney decided to mothball half of Dixie Landings or Music, but filled 87% of the other half it would register as 87% occupancy when that clearly isn't the case. That said, I don't believe any large blocks of rooms were taken out of service this past quarter. <<To understand why they won't impact WDW-owned properties you have to understand two points: 1) People will always want the Disney difference - to be able to book with Disney, stay on property in a Disney hotel and use the resort benefits. To most guests it is not about having Four Seasons/Ritz-Carlton style hospitality.>> Today that is certainly the case. <<If you want pampering head to the Maldives, Seychelles or Goa.>> Yeah ... BUT that's the audience that Jay is trying to lure back with higher end offerings. I don't see the average family that saves for three years for a WDW vacation being interested in adding another $350 a head for a boutique animal experience, no matter how nice. <<People still visit WDW primarily for the theme parks and when you are out all day the facilities at your property aren't so key. Most people still choose their hotel based on price point rather than amenities - what can I afford (or more likely what I'm willing to pay) as opposed to what services I'll get for my money.>> Agreed. Of course, it never ceases to amaze me that people pay the rates Disney charges and stay at amazing resorts like WL, DAK Lodge (well, before the DVC plague descended), Poly, BW etc ... and they NEVER use the pools ... they NEVER dine at the hotels except maybe some chicken fingers ... and they never stay more than 6-8 hours in the room. My OPINION is those people are certifiable. If all you want to do is ride ricketty Space Mountain all day, you can easily find a clean, comfortable hotel for under $100 a night that will likely be as close to 1-2 Disney parks as some of the Disney resorts are (especially if you are using Disney transport) <<Those hotels won't be the on roster for Disney Travel Company or on disneyworld.com so guests will still be looking at hotels with "Disney" before it.>> Interesting. Is that something etched in stone? <<What those resorts do bring is all of those frequent stay program members - Disney look very carefully at what happens at the two Starwood properties (Swan and Dolphin) and they bring a real different guest dynamic to property. I'd expect the same for the Hilton/Four Seasons projects. Think how many corporate travelers will now use their points to take the family to WDW.>> I think they're typical guest will be more monied than the Swan and Dolphin (both wonderful resorts in their own right) ... and I can't imagine they'll have the huge amount of conventioners. <<2) Disney will still benefit from guests being on-property - spending in the parks and other hotels etc. WDW has been very smart when it comes to their inventory mix - bringing in more value/moderate resorts was the key in the '90s and now it is about widening the guest dynamic.>> I think WDW has overextended itself and that's why it must constantly discount its product, something that was almost unheard of in the 1980s. They simply built too much, while trying to be everything to everyone (Michael's arrogance, I believe). And as was shown during the 2001-04 period when huge chunks of rooms simply were taken out of service, when things take a turn for the south having to fill and staff 30,000 rooms isn't an enviable position to be in.
