SSE has CM previews (it's done)

Originally Posted By magnet

>>>I don't think any fansite represents public opinion. Fansites represent fan opinions. There's nothing particularly wrong with those opinions, but sometimes they seem reflect the mindset of not seeing the forest for the trees.<<<

I think everything you said here is exactly what any exec at Disney who doesn't "get it" believes.

The ultimate goal is to make a profit, and if the easiest route to that end means alienating the people who care about the place, then so be it. That's not what you said, but that's essentially what it means not to "get it."

The trouble is, if you only aim to satisfy someone who couldn't care less if he was at Disney or Universal, you'll eventually end up with something less than universal.

 

Originally Posted By Sport Goofy

<< The ultimate goal is to make a profit, and if the easiest route to that end means alienating the people who care about the place, then so be it. >>

I wouldn't necessarily consider adding interactive screens and all the software engineering involved in that process the "easiest route." It's also probably not the cheapest route either, so your comments are way off mark. Someone could have probably very easily pleased the "fans" by just freshening up the robots and dialing up the Tomorrow's Child music with some more sparkly lights at the end.

 

Originally Posted By mousermerf

A note - in the original we traveled to space, to view the earth from a space station, before returning.. all very nice and well explained.

And the folks who keep claiming SSE only had sparkley lights at the end are forgetting the whole global neighborhood sequence. You had the news from around the world, virtual classroom, videophone vignettes, the crystal city, and the whole deep and meaningful narration as you went down the final descent through the sparkley lights, and past finally past SSE - where it was asking you to reflect on yourself and your purpose in the world.

 

Originally Posted By Sport Goofy

^^
Yes, I remember all that. It was very cheesy.

 

Originally Posted By mousermerf

RoadTrip - though you dont want to believe it, Horizons ending was nothing like how SSE ends now.

In Horizons you visited 3 distinct locations: Mesa Verde, Brava Centauri, and Sea Castle. That's desert, space, and sea. Your choice to return home was through one of those locations. So, it was tied to the rest - which SSE's ending is not.

Second, it was a single choice and the whole vehicle voted, majority rule. SSE's ending is taylored to one person's choices, despite being presented to two people. The questions are NOT something two people would agree upon.

Third, the finale in Horizons was projected on an Imax screen as drifted sideways, your visible area matching your choice. It was massive and enveloping. The ending on SSE takes place on a small screen, surrounded by nothingness.

Finally, the ending of Horizons was fast paced and exciting. It was action-filled and a little thrilling to watch. Not coaster thrilling, but thrilling none the less. It got the juices flowing. SSE on the other hand rpesents you a mildly boring, slow paced, and somewhat tedious exploration of a completely dull future with crazy-stepford wife faces on the characters.

Finally, Horizons involved the longest stop-motion fly-through sequences ever created until that point. They were a special FX marvel in their own right, much in the way the original Universe of Energy film was a feat of animation. It was special - not an eSurance commercial minus the witty pink-haired girl.

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

<<So why do the myriad Horizon's worshipers always think it was such a wonderful way to wrap up that voyage?>>

I dunno, Trippy, but to me (and many at WDI) it was by far the weakest part of the attraction.

A very lame ending to a terrific attraction.

 

Originally Posted By mousermerf

If folks cant tell the difference between watching an fly-through action sequence on an imax screen from watching a tiny tv showing you poor quality animation then there's no helping them.

 

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

<<Third, the finale in Horizons was projected on an Imax screen as drifted sideways,>>

That little thing in front of you when the shutters (blinders?) came up to block your view to the sides was an IMAX screen? Either I'm remembering wrong (perfectly possible) or I got screwed and just saw the miniature version.

And yes, much of Horizons was fantastic. The ending just seemed cheesy to me then, and it seems cheesy to me now.

 

Originally Posted By FerretAfros

"I wouldn't necessarily consider adding interactive screens and all the software engineering involved in that process the "easiest route."

While I agree that adding in all the screens probably was far from cheap, I doubt the software was all that expensive to create. With my 1 semester of computer programming (a 2 unit class) I'm pretty sure I could write a program that does about the same things as the SSE one, and you get to choose if you want it in C or Fortran, too! I guess it might be a little difficult to sync it up with the right spot in the ride, but I doubt that would be any worse than getting the lights in the button on Mission: Space to start flashing at the right time. I think the touch screens have a lot of potential, and I'm glad that they added them because of that. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like they are living up to that potential. Hopefully they can be periodically updated (you know, like Star Tours, the 3D films, CircleVisions, and Soarin' get updated) to keep it fresh, and possibly even a little more relevant. The good thing about this installation is that it really does open the doors for a lot of great possiblities. Unfortunately, they didn't take any of those for this refurb.

 

Originally Posted By mousermerf

You're probably remembering videos of the ending, which make it look like you're watching a small screen.

Tell me this - how big was the projection sequence in the middle of the ride?

The ending an it should be about the same size.

 

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

<<and you get to choose if you want it in C or Fortran, too!>>

Cool. I get my choice of two dead computer languages.

 

Originally Posted By FerretAfros

I believe the IMAX screen was near the middle of the attraction, where it showed the space shuttle launching. I'm not positive of the details of it, but it consisted of two domes connected in the middle to form the main screen. I don't believe the screens at the end were anything particularly special.

 

Originally Posted By magnet

Well, I don't really understand your need to rebut my comment because it actually had very little to do with what you said anyway, and besides it's just a fan opinion. I wasn't targeting you, Goof, anyway -- so what's it to you? Or are you some kind of Disney operative?

In saying what I did, I'm not aiming at the SSE refurb specifically, but more at the idea of only trying to please an audience with the lowest expectations. Pleasing them will always be easier than pleasing those who care about WDW and expect the most from it. So now who's not seeing the forest for the trees?

 

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

<<I believe the IMAX screen was near the middle of the attraction, where it showed the space shuttle launching. I'm not positive of the details of it, but it consisted of two domes connected in the middle to form the main screen. I don't believe the screens at the end were anything particularly special.>>

That is exactly the way I remember it.

 

Originally Posted By Spirit of 74

^^Ok, your brain isn't completely frozen over. You recall correctly.

 

Originally Posted By FerretAfros

Here's a page with some brief information about how they did the projections at the end, along with a couple comments (not very insightful for this debate at least) about the Omnimax screens:

<a href="http://tinyurl.com/2wxyjn" target="_blank">http://tinyurl.com/2wxyjn</a>

 

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

<<In saying what I did, I'm not aiming at the SSE refurb specifically, but more at the idea of only trying to please an audience with the lowest expectations. Pleasing them will always be easier than pleasing those who care about WDW and expect the most from it.>>

That is really a biased and egotistical viewpoint. To claim what you like is factually better than what anyone else likes is a little over the edge to my way of thinking.

Plus, there are some of us who love WDW very much who realize that Disney is not going to hit it out of the park with every new attraction they open.

There are going to be some really great E tickets, some mediocre E tickets, and a whole bunch of fair to very good B's, C's and D's.

To expect the absolute best Disney is capable of on each and every attraction is just plain unrealistic.

And don't tell me that Walt was able to do it, because I can think of a bundle of early Disneyland attractions that weren't any better quality than Stitch.

 

Originally Posted By magnet

oh, can it. I made no such claim.

It is easier to please people who expect less. That's all.

 

Originally Posted By RoadTrip

<<It is easier to please people who expect less. That's all.>>

So what didn't ya just say so in the first place??

;-)

 

Originally Posted By leobloom

I see your point, magnet, and I think it makes sense.

Roadtrip, are you suggesting that Disney attractions in 2007 shouldn't be more ambitious/advanced/successful than attractions in 1955 when WED was pioneering the field of Imagineering?

Seems to me like you've lowered your expectations quite substantially already. Maybe you're offended by magnet's comment because it hit a little too close to home.