Originally Posted By CDF1 I was wondering what the take of Disney and/or posters to this board is as far as the Mission: Space attraction goes - do they consider it a success or a failure? What kind of attendance does the attraction get? It seems like the wait times for the full version aren't very long and even for the softer version - is it a case of a ride that simply is either too confining for claustraphobes or too intense for some people? I don't think it has ever been popular enough to be put on Fastpass, has it?
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom I would call it a failure. MS is an example of spending hoards of money, getting the greatest group of enginers together to create something that in concept is really kewl ( simulated weightlessness). And totally fails since it subjects riders to intense G forces, affecting everyone who rides it in some way. I quess on the one hand if creating a ride that sends people to the hospital is your goal then MS is your ride. Also, I think people are getting tired of Disney dark rides that simulate near death experiences. You'd think by now Disney would come up with a "new" concept. I suppose that is one good thing about the Fantasyland expansion little mermaid and BB restaurant are NOT going to simulate near death experiences.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Sadly, it didn't have a chance to become a success before people started dropping like flies. I think that the intensity of the ride was a little higher then the public expected coupled with the over use of WARNINGS in other rides tended to make folks that otherwise would have avoided it..fatally try it. And some just plan bad luck. Personally I think it is one of the best themed and engineered rides anywhere. Like everyone else, when the problems started even I was drawn in to the sea of doubt and avoided it the first couple of years. Then I just said...well, if I die, I die. Who knows I might get hit by a car walking through the parking lot...let try it out. I was fine, and I thought it was the most awesome ride I had ever experienced anywhere. That stigma still exists even after all these years and it has influenced it's popularity. The green side is no more intense than any of the other motion simulators on site, but still hasn't been able to leap the fear gap. It is to bad because Mission Space is a unique experience that I think rivals anything ever offered at any other theme park. Perhaps the public has a larger wimp factor then they would like us to believe.
Originally Posted By Kennesaw Tom One indicator that it's a failure is that no other Disney park wants one. My understanding is that when it was in it's "concept" stages half the Disney imagineers said build it... the other half said don't build it. And I guess that also matches up with how guests like it some do, many don't. Disney don't even promote it.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer Neither. It's not a fantastic success, it is not a failure. It could be a thousand time better, could be immersive, could be just more than a ride, could be a TRUE space pavilion, but the ride that's there isn't half bad. This, of course, is ignoring what ride SHOULD be standing on that land... under those pretenses, it's a MASSIVE FAILURE. lol
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost Sadly, the ride that was standing on that land ended up to be a massive failure as well, except to a very few. Maybe it's something about the location.
Originally Posted By leobloom It's a simulator, which has been done before and been done better. The launch is far and away the best part of the ride, but everything after that feels unoriginal (especially the flight around Mars). The G forces are a neat novelty, but I've never had the desire to ride M:S more than once on a trip. And it's been years since I've been on it. I imagine many people consider a failure. Although, having said that, I remember someone in management telling me the short lines were indicative of a high ride-capacity, not an unpopular attraction. Sounded like delusional spin to me, but I also don't have the numbers. It was supposed to be one of the park headliners, and I suspect it was supposed to "steal" business from KSC. And yet a couple of years later it was unquestionably overshadowed by a cloned IMAX simulator from DCA. I'd love to know what kind of count it gets -- I bet Test Track and SSE draw more people, too. But, funny enough, someone at that MAGICal place recently claimed M:S is the most technologically advanced attraction on the planet.
Originally Posted By dagobert From a personal point of view, I would consider it a success. Mission space was one of my favorite rides at WDW. It's a fantastic thrill ride.
Originally Posted By ChiMike ^ It was not a massive failure. Factual history bears that out. It was an attraction neglected significantly from 1994 on, when it lost its sponsor. It was an attraction that had a number of plans drawn-up to keep it where it would benefit from significant upgrades/updates, but the decision was made that it would have still been an expensive attraction to operate and that EPCOT needed thrills to compete with a soon to open IOA and other go-go late 90's thrill attempts nationwide. The same would have occurred with SSE, if it wasn't for the pesky showbuilding. Timeracers, or whatever it was called, showed their constant motivation to now have a thrill ride in place of an expensive AA dark ride. It had nothing to do with popularity of the underlying ride itself, well, not until 1994-on when they let it rot away and I didn't even enjoy riding it. -- Now for M:S, it was a very expensive failure. One that did nothing to lighten the load off of Test Track and did not thrill those thrill seeking guests that it was desperately designed for. It did not change EPCOT's target audience at the time, it did not rank up there with Hulk or Kraken. It is painfully obvious that it is a souped up Mission to Mars. Not exactly what any self-respecting thrill-seeker looks for when visiting a theme park. Which is fine, EPCOT shouldn't be placed in a position to deliver those thrill-seeking guests. So that leaves the other guests, who felt it was either A) boring B) only good for a ride once in a while C) too intense. Well, hard to justify its cost when that is the reaction over the older, tamer Test Track. They didn't build it for guests to say, "Oh, rode it last year, don't need to hit it this year" A huge failure, disappointment, and a sign that WDI and TDO were completely out of touch when it came to Disney's guest population, and what makes Disney - Disney.
Originally Posted By ChiMike >>I bet Test Track and SSE draw more people, too. << They both do. So does Soarin'. The lastest ride count I heard that it is 4th or 5th depending on the ebb and flow of Nemo.
Originally Posted By Britain I rode it once. It was fun. I don't need to do it again. I think that means it's a failure, but not an embarrassment (see JIYI).
Originally Posted By Autopia Deb The notion that the line are short because of capacity is ridiculous. We were there the month after it opened and the line was huge. After the negative publicity due to the first death, and the "Green/Orange choice, the line shrank to a fraction of our first time and I am sure they were running fewer simulators. I remember waiting at the front of the line (that I'd practically walked up to) for a good 10 minutes, a sure indicator they weren't running at capacity. I think the attraction might have been a success had no one died on it, but it's never overcome it's rep as a tourist killer.
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost As much as I'd love to agree with you ChiMike, I can't. Horizons (there I said it) had lost it's popularity long before it lost it's sponsorship. It was a nice ride, but in Epcot the dark rides were overdone, and one looked just like the other. It had no pop! I thought it was a nice ride, but never a great ride, IMHO, nostalgia tends to make us all over glorify what is no longer. For quite a few years, it was a walk on all the time.
Originally Posted By davewasbaloo One of Disney's most expensive attractions created. Waited for a fraction of the time we waited for Imagination, Listen to the Land, or Universe of Energy, I think we know the answer to this question. It has dumbo capacity, if it were a hit, I would have thought it would have queues longer than everything else. Sadly I love the concept, but the execution including antiquated graphics did nothing for me.....I did love it's predecessor however.
Originally Posted By ChiMike Goofy, it is down to a matter of interpretation then. So, then, in turn, what I would say is that regardless of who is right about Horizons, M:S was a failure of a replacement and for many an inferior replacement.
Originally Posted By dshyates For me, MS is a "must see" when at Epcot. I think it is pretty cool. And I am not sure that the low numbers are because it is a "tourist killer". Most of the people that I know that don't ride it is because it gives them a horrible case of motion sickness. They don't even want to try the non-spinning side because they are afraid it will make them sick. I am not sure that a ride system designed on an astronaut physical ability test is a great idea for most Americans. But I love it. Then again I love the MASSIVE coasters too.
Originally Posted By gardenrooms I thought the ride was pretty intense and the pre-show was fun. The thing I wish they'd do would to be to complete the experience - here I am in space and I walk out the exit back into Epcot. Don't know if I would have realized that if someone here hadn't pointed it out before I went on the ride, but I do think I would have felt like the experience was incomplete in some way - probably just wouldn't have realized how. (Interestingly, I am a person who had an unknown potentially fatal heart condition which can be brought on by adrenaline and actually manifested itself a month after I went on the ride - I'm glad I didn't become another statistic! I'm sure my adrenaline was flowing - but if something had happened, it would NOT have been the ride's fault! Just bad genetics - now fixed and better than new, happy to say.) I don't see a reason to go on it more than once a trip, but neither do I see a need to go on Test Track more than once a trip. I think it's a fun Disney ride - not great, but not terrible.
Originally Posted By fkurucz When does HP's sponsorship expire? I doubt they will renew it (they inherited it from Compaq). Will anyone pick it up if tha happens?
Originally Posted By Goofyernmost As you say, Chi...it is a matter of interpretation. I liked Horizons but I think that Mission Space is way superior. Bad rap not withstanding! Within a short time from EPCOT Ctr's. opening there were 4 rides that, themed differently, were all the same. There was SSE, Imagination, Horizons and WoM. All slow dark rides and basically the same thing. Then there was Energy which was a coma inducing commercial for Exxon and the land had a slow boat to nowhere. The sea's had a slow and extremely short ride through the aquarium (not much different today) but at least it had the Hydrolaters. Now...say what you will about Ellen, the show is funny and educational. Still a good place to catch a nap and rest the dogs, but better than it was. Mission Space is a simulation of space launch with actual pulled G's, Test Track is OK, I still preferred the humor of WoM, but I do ride it just about every trip. The Land, still has the boat ride to nowhere but with the addition of Soarin, has jumped up many notches. Sea's? With the exception of a couple of cartoon fish, it is not a lot different from my memory of the early years. The plus is that the only Omni-mover rides that are still there are SSE and whatever that abomination called JII, is supposed to be. The second major fault with that place is the at least the HISTA show had imagination with 3D and 4D effects instead of the recycled mess known as Captain EO or what should be named "He's dead let's exploit him" show. The third, of course, is the closing of the second floor. The question of this thread was "Is MS a success or fail? Someone answered "neither"...that is probably pretty close to the actuality. With time it will lose its "death" logo and when discovered will be a success, I believe.
