Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>CyberSpace Mountain was ground-breaking - it isn't just a simulator experience of SM - it allowed you to design your own and then ride it. It was a lot of fun.<< I remember really enjoying it when I did it in Chicago many years ago. It was cool enough that you got to design something and run the test on it, but the simulator chamber was what made it really memorable for me. It was just so unlike anything I had seen before, with all 3 axes of motion. Plus, getting into it felt like you were climbing into a 1960's rocket capsule, which made it that much more fun However, it's basically the same experience as the Sum of All Thrills in Epcot's Innoventions East. Sure, the Kuka arm gives the motion a different feeling (one that I didn't find especially realistic), but it was close enough that I had no problems doing that instead of trekking out to DQ >>DVC sales - particularly out of Japan just haven't been close to the target.<< Is that in any related to the restructuring of maintenance fees that they had to do shortly after opening? I don't remember the details of it, but it sounded like it added considerable expense for potential DVC members. Given that Hawaii isn't easy to get to for anybody, I can see why that sort of thing could easily turn into the straw that breaks the camel's back
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "It's all about having a diverse offering of products - DQ was the fourth after the 4 theme parks, 2 water parks and 2 mini-golf. It just gave folks a different option." Sure, I understand the reasoning, but as a visitor there is very little draw at DQ for me to leave the parks and make the trek across the resort. Basically the whole thing just seemed redundant given the proximity to everything else WDW has to offer. It may have appealed to teens, but teens don't have the final word on how family vacation budgets are spent. "CyberSpace Mountain was ground-breaking - it isn't just a simulator experience of SM - it allowed you to design your own and then ride it. It was a lot of fun." Sure it was, so why not put it in Tomorrowland as a companion to Space Mountain? Again, from the guest perspective it was redundant.
Originally Posted By dagobert At DLP we had Cyber Space Mountain in the Studios Park. Unfortunately I have never experienced it.
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>Sure it was, so why not put it in Tomorrowland as a companion to Space Mountain?<< As with most of the DQ experiences (and Innoventions in Epcot), it had a ridiculously low capacity. Even during my visit to the Chicago location (you know, the one that closed after a couple years because nobody visited it) it had a long wait. There were only about 4-5 simulator pods, and each one only sat 2 guests. If you figure that they were able to cycle it through every 4-5 minutes, that's only 48-150 guests per hour. Additionally, it required a lot of staffing for the various stations that guests proceeded through in the design and ride process In DQ, where everything was low capacity and the individual attractions were all up-charge experiences (I think??), it fit in. In MK, where attractions can regularly handle 2,000+ guests per hour, it would have been a complete joke. Almost like trying to make a headline attraction out of a character interaction, which has very similar capacity. Oh, wait... I assume that it did okay in the Studios in Paris because that park had such dismally low attendance anyway. It seems like it was phased out when they started getting more bodies in there
Originally Posted By leemac <<Sure it was, so why not put it in Tomorrowland as a companion to Space Mountain? Again, from the guest perspective it was redundant.>> I must be missing your point - it is an entirely different experience. It used the SM name as it is recognisable. It had no other linkage so I don't understand why it was "redundant". A lot of the DQ product used existing property like Jungle Cruise and POTC.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Is that in any related to the restructuring of maintenance fees that they had to do shortly after opening? I don't remember the details of it, but it sounded like it added considerable expense for potential DVC members. Given that Hawaii isn't easy to get to for anybody, I can see why that sort of thing could easily turn into the straw that breaks the camel's back>> Jim Lewis' goons overestimated the demand out of Japan. They thought "if we build it, they will come". He had no strategy whatsoever for selling into that market. The decision to take over the old Planet Hollywood in Ikspiari came much later. The Japanese may love Disney and Hawai'i but there was no evidence that they would buy into DVC. The restructuring was just another nail in the coffin for the targets for the project.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Sure, I understand the reasoning, but as a visitor there is very little draw at DQ for me to leave the parks and make the trek across the resort. >> It wasn't competing with the parks - it wasn't included in the base tickets - it was included in the add-on with the water parks. There isn't sufficient activity for guests to do when the weather is inclement and they aren't in the parks. DQ was meant to fill that void. You also aren't a teenager - that was DQ's target demographic (and one of the key reasons that it failed as a concept was that it didn't have a broad enough demographic).
Originally Posted By leemac <<It may have appealed to teens, but teens don't have the final word on how family vacation budgets are spent.>> You obviously don't have teenagers. The choice is to either cave in or handle a miserable and grumpy teenager on vacation. The majority of parents just cave in to kids' demands at WDW.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "It had no other linkage so I don't understand why it was "redundant". " Perception Lee, perception. Maybe DQ was unique and special (I couldn't say since ive never been), but the perception, at least for this customer, was that the experiences inside couldn't compete with the parks and the rest of the activities WDW has to offer. I can't be the only person who felt that way, and in fact, other than Ferret and a few others here I can't think of a single person I know who has ever been to the place.
Originally Posted By leemac <<Maybe DQ was unique and special (I couldn't say since ive never been), but the perception, at least for this customer, was that the experiences inside couldn't compete with the parks and the rest of the activities WDW has to offer. >> You've missed the entire point of DQ. It wasn't designed to compete with the parks - it was a complimentary experience - in addition to the parks. It was another reason to extend your stay. If WDW only offered experiences that could compete with the parks then we would have no water parks, mini golf, Downtown Disney etc. The parks aren't the only reason to be in WDW and stay. They are the main draw but there are plenty of other experiences that draw out the length of stay and encourage guests to fully explore WDW.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip I've never been to Disney Quest. But then the last video game I spent much time playing was Space Invaders on the Atari 2600.
Originally Posted By leemac <<I've never been to Disney Quest. But then the last video game I spent much time playing was Space Invaders on the Atari 2600.>> And therein lies a problem presumably with marketing. The actual number of video games was minimal. The majority of the attractions featured gaming-type activities but presented in a means other than just a screen and a controller. I really liked Treasure of the Incas where you had to control a mini jeep through a maze and Virtual Jungle Cruise where you sat in an inflatable dinghy and had to paddle your way through scenarios. DQ wasn't perfect but it had some incredible experiences that you couldn't experience at home (at the time). The experience needed a better creative execution though. It was just a series of loosely themed "zones" with no connecting story.
Originally Posted By Dr Hans Reinhardt "The majority of parents just cave in to kids' demands at WDW." So many teens were able to persuade their parents to burn a path to DQ from MK, Epcot, AK and The Studios and open their wallets the place is going out of business. Makes sense. "You've missed the entire point of DQ. It wasn't designed to compete with the parks - it was a complimentary experience - in addition to the parks. It was another reason to extend your stay. If WDW only offered experiences that could compete with the parks then we would have no water parks, mini golf, Downtown Disney etc." OK, well then apparently most visitors didn't feel that it complemented the experience (which is just another way of saying that it couldn't compete with the other attractions at WDW, but whatever). "The parks aren't the only reason to be in WDW and stay." Notice how I said, "and the rest of the activities WDW has to offer"?
Originally Posted By FerretAfros >>OK, well then apparently most visitors didn't feel that it complemented the experience...<< DQ's capacity was so low that it didn't need "most" visitors. Even a few hundred people would fill the place up to the brim; in comparison to the tens of thousands of the guests in any of the 4 parks, even a small fraction of them would be adequate to keep DQ's attendance healthy The just did a bad job of marketing it and updating it. When it first opened, I remember it being pretty popular as an alternative choice, and a lot of people were interested in it, even if they didn't actually go themselves. Once the initial allure wore off and they never did anything to keep it fresh, it was only a matter of time before it died on the vine
Originally Posted By trekkeruss I've always wanted to go to DQ, but I haven't been to WDW in ages, and now it's going away.
Originally Posted By CarolinaDisneyDad We went to Disney quest every year. We started when my kids were six and eight. The last time we went my kids were 15 and 17. Overall it was really fun the major attractions were pretty good but took too long to get to.(waiting in line) some would have been better if you could play them enough to get good at them. But over the years the machines declined and never seemed to be fixed. The space combat game became hard to see due to plexiglass deterioration and didn't always work. I always loved to play the old video games from when I was a teen but most of the games were broken and stayed that way year after year to the point that I didn't play much at the end. I think the idea was sound. I mean we did keep going back. If WDW had kept it updated and maintained it could have thrived. Changed out things that weren't getting used updated technology to make existing games work and play better. It could have been great but it would havebeen expensive also because we all know electronics don't last very long especially when getting abused by thousands of kids each day. My family will miss it.
Originally Posted By dixielandings DQ is gonna be missed by my crew,its a great way to give your kids feet a break from hiking the parks
