Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>I think it has far more appeal than a "Beastlie Kingdomme"<< I think it's a lot more easily marketed and conveyed in a bite-sized chunk of information. I'm not sure that it's actually more appealing to a broad audience, many of whom haven't seen the film, or saw it and liked it but forgot about it shortly after To me, the Beastly Kingdom concept has value because it allows a wide variety of future projects to be placed there. It has value because the "animals" there would have been based in earthly folklore (tying it closer to the core message of the park), rather than on a fictional alien planet. It has value because everybody already has a pretty good understanding of what creatures like dragons and unicorns are, without needing a 3-hour backstory. It has value because Disney doesn't have to spend tens of millions of dollars (or more) on a licensing deal with an outside company; they can just use public domain concepts But at this point, it doesn't really matter. The licensing money has been spent, a huge chunk of the construction money has been spent, and the park space has been used. As much as I would like to see a more broad-based theme for that parcel of land and that sort of concept for the park, that ship has sailed. At this point, I'm just hoping that whatever they're building is appealing and a compelling addition to the park Personally, I'm far more excited for Rivers of Light, based on the limited information they've released for it, than I am for Avatar. It seems like that will really complement the park well and return to a non-branded show format
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "10% of WDW Guests is a very, very sizeable number of people in this context," I wouldn't think 10% of anything is really all that sizable in any context. I'd consider that a pretty small minority. Same with 15%. I bet Disney would be pretty happy with that number. "but if you have some rational way to think about the world around you that entirely sidesteps your personal experience, I'd be interested in hearing how you put in practice. I, alas, am fettered by my experiences." You know...science, surveys that sort of thing. But if I don't have anything like that handy, I do know that I shouldn't trust my anecdotal experience too much.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>I wouldn't think 10% of anything is really all that sizable in any context.<< Particularly for attractions, it is fine number. I wouldn't expect either attraction's hourly capacity to be much above 1,500 riders per hour. Assuming a very generous 14-hour day (8am-10pm), that's 21,000 guests per day. DAK's attendance last year was 10.4M, which averages to 28,500 guests per day. Even with the 10% buffer, that's still more guests in the park than can fit on the rides in a day (though of course there are other factors in play, like height limits and intensity) >>You know...science, surveys that sort of thing. << Disney has mastered the art of making surveys say exactly what they want them to say. I wouldn't put too much faith in any of them. Remember when they claimed that they were removing prime rib from the buffets because guests complained that it took up too much room on their plate (in restaurants where you're welcome to have as many plates as you like)?
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn I think fanciful alien beasts, floating mountains, and iridescent gardens would inspire me to pack the kids in the car and drive for nine hours more than unicorns and gargoyles would.
Originally Posted By Yookeroo "Disney has mastered the art of making surveys say exactly what they want them to say. I wouldn't put too much faith in any of them. Remember when they claimed that they were removing prime rib from the buffets because guests complained that it took up too much room on their plate (in restaurants where you're welcome to have as many plates as you like)?" I was talking in general. I don't think II've ever actually seen the results of a Disney survey, so I have no idea how dependable they are.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros I've never seen the results either, but I have taken enough of their surveys that I can typically tell what answers they're looking for. And when there is one specific answer that they're hoping to find, then the survey is already kind of pointless
Originally Posted By dagobert New informations about Avatarland. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://disneyparks.disney.go.com/blog/2015/11/navi-river-journey-adds-music-energy-to-pandora-the-world-of-avatar/">http://disneyparks.disney.go.c...-avatar/</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros That's more or less what I expected for the boat ride, but it sounds like it will be nice. Instead of rehashing the movie's plot (like so many recent attractions), it will be atmospheric and relaxing. Conceptually it seems a lot like El Rio Del Tiempo at Epcot, which also didn't have much of a plot, but was interesting regardless I think it's funny how they keep revealing Avatar stuff at the D23 Expos in Japan. They obviously held this back just so they would have something new to talk about. The text of that article is also among the worst PR babble Disney has had in a while
Originally Posted By Jim in Merced CA I'm confused... Am I to understand that this attraction doesn't have a 'and suddenly something goes wrong' twist?
Originally Posted By utahjosh I'm hoping the "canoes" are getting a water-ride version of the Pooh's Hunny Hunt vehicles in Tokoy
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Yah, I'm not really sure what the "canoes" will be. They've already done a trackless water ride, with Aquatopia. They're also developing some sort of water based omnimover for SDL's Pirates. Or I guess they could be people-powered canoes, but that seems unlikely. It will be interesting to see (my money is on a regular old flooded room flume like Pirates or Maelstrom)
Originally Posted By dagobert >>>They're also developing some sort of water based omnimover for SDL's Pirates.<<< Maybe both attractions will get that system, because they could share development costs.
Originally Posted By dagobert The floating mountains are being installed. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://disneyandmore.blogspot.com/2015/11/avatar-land-pandora-floating-mountains.html">http://disneyandmore.blogspot....ins.html</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Although I'm still not completely in favor of Avatar conceptually, the construction for it looks more and more impressive each day. As an engineer, the stuff they're building is pretty incredible and will surely be fun to explore in person. It's also surprising how big it's getting; I wasn't expecting it to be seen from other areas of the park, but it looks like it will be visible over the trees in parts of Africa It's also interesting that some of the floating rocks are being built in place, and others are being built on the ground and installed later. I'm sure there's a logic to that approach, but it seems like either option would be very complicated
Originally Posted By mrkthompsn No no no... You're not supposed to look at the magicery! The floating mountains actually float! No looking behind Oz's curtain!
Originally Posted By dagobert This looks amazing. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://twitter.com/ORLParkPass/status/665906698805202945">http://twitter.com/ORLParkPass...05202945</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Wow! That's a really impressive photo! It's also fun that it appears to have been taken at the same time as the on-the-ground photos. You can see the crane is lifting the completed mini-mountain into place. What a cool angle to view it from!
Originally Posted By dagobert Avatarland looks really impressive. More helicopter pictures. <a target="blank" rel="nofollow" href="http://orlparkpass.com/2015/11/disneys-animal-kingdom-helicopter-photo-update-pandora-the-world-of-avatar/">http://orlparkpass.com/2015/11...-avatar/</a>
Originally Posted By FerretAfros Very impressive! We obviously don't know a lot about the Shanghai Pirates ride system, but the one shown here looks similar to the MK Jungle Cruise, where the boats are guided through the river by a deep trough. Given how little we know about the new system, I could see this going either way
