Originally Posted By BrianStarr DanYoung: I have agreed with a lot of what you have said in this thread and it truely is refreshing. I'm just personally tired of clicking on the WDW boards and seeing the usual people (you know who you are!) reporting about their "terrible, awful WDW vacations." It's almost like an obsession for them. "The place looked so bad! The customer service was awful!" It's funny because there is ALWAYS a chance you will come across a bad CM (yes, it happens in Disneyland), and it automatically sums up the customer service in WDW's entirely. I've come across many awful CMs, but many wonderful CMs as well. If these people hate it so much....STOP GOING! Move on and go somewhere that will make you happy! It's just unfair to everyone else who actually enjoys WDW and looks at it with the glass half full.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>> If these people hate it so much....STOP GOING! Move on and go somewhere that will make you happy! It's just unfair to everyone else who actually enjoys WDW and looks at it with the glass half full.<<< So what? You don't see us telling people that right gushing reviews of WDW that they are wrong, do you? Funny how this is a one way street for comments like that. And also...I never see people hating WDW. I never see a totally negative review. Sure, some are more negative than others, but opinions are just that, opinions. This is a place to air them. What a concept for a DISCUSSION BOARD. ;-) If you don't like reading about negative WDW experiences, don't read them, seeing that that's the Modus Operandi for these scenarios. LOL.
Originally Posted By leobloom I wrote this in an earlier post: >> It doesn't help that the majority of new attractions that have opened in the past 10 years have been disappointing. Add to that the fact that WDW adds new attractions very sparingly, and you have a recipe for stagnant parks with 'classic,' time-tested attractions and newer, forgettable dreck. << Anyone want to disagree with the general point I was making? How many certifiably 'classic' attractions have debuted at WDW in the past ten years?
Originally Posted By barboy2 Everest should have been a super duper instant classic----possibly the greatest attraction ever built anywhere--- but it fell short with some very, very bad blunders.
Originally Posted By GOB >>> I wrote this in an earlier post: >> It doesn't help that the majority of new attractions that have opened in the past 10 years have been disappointing. Add to that the fact that WDW adds new attractions very sparingly, and you have a recipe for stagnant parks with 'classic,' time-tested attractions and newer, forgettable dreck. <<< Anyone want to disagree with the general point I was making? How many certifiably 'classic' attractions have debuted at WDW in the past ten years?<< I wouldn't call anything built post-1982 a "classic", but in terms of decent rides worthy of being in a Disney park, there are a few of them. I agree with your statement, though. The rides seem to either be "classics" (in your context) or "throw-aways".
Originally Posted By leobloom >> wouldn't call anything built post-1982 a "classic", but in terms of decent rides worthy of being in a Disney park, there are a few of them. << I disagree on your dating. For post-1982 attractions, I'd say all of the following are classics that have proven to hold up for the most part: Splash, TOT, Great Movie Ride, Muppetvision, K. Safari, and probably Test Track (although I say this in the spirit of trying to give WDW the benefit of the doubt--many times when I've visited Epcot I've skipped TT because for me it's skippable, but I imagine most guests don't see it that way). But since 2000...yikes, the new offerings have been kinda weak.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> ...E:E? M:S? I got nuttin'. << I would say Soarin', except it didn't truly debut at Epcot, since it first opened at DCA. Certainly EE coulda been a classic, and I guess a lot of people see it that way. I see the ride itself as large step below Big Thunder. As for M:S, yeah, maybe it is. I dunno. Would there be a big public outcry if Disney announced tomorrow they were scrapping M:S for another new E-ticket? I kinda doubt it.
Originally Posted By leobloom >> Everest should have been a super duper instant classic----possibly the greatest attraction ever built anywhere--- but it fell short with some very, very bad blunders. << Better watch out. You're not allowed to talk that way! The Pixie Police will lock you up and tickle you to death.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<If these people hate it so much.>> None of us hate it. And I see you failed to read anyone's posts in this thread that have criticism, or you would have seen that. <<It's just unfair to everyone else who actually enjoys WDW and looks at it with the glass half full.>> Unfair? Are you serious? There's nothing unfair about criticism. It's what pushes people, companies, and countries further. If you truly believe WDW or Disney is above criticism, you've got problems. It's not a perfect company(nor do I expect it to be, BTW), nor is it a bad company. But the way WDW is currently run is a problem, as demonstrated wonderfully by leemac, who probably knows more than all of us here combine(except maybe Spirit and Lee whosnameiswaytoolongforaninternetforum).
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>I wouldn't call anything built post-1982 a "classic", but in terms of decent rides worthy of being in a Disney park, there are a few of them. I agree with your statement, though. The rides seem to either be "classics" (in your context) or "throw-aways".<<< Why 1982? As Leo mentioned, there have been tons of "classics" added since then. Heck, two whole parks. But not any this side of the Millennium.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Everest should have been a super duper instant classic----possibly the greatest attraction ever built anywhere--- but it fell short with some very, very bad blunders.>> +1 Everest is a good ride with a great queue, but the attraction itself falls short of greatness.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I disagree on your dating. For post-1982 attractions, I'd say all of the following are classics that have proven to hold up for the most part: Splash, TOT, Great Movie Ride, Muppetvision, K. Safari, and probably Test Track>> Exactly, although I don't think Test Track is considered a classic. I think any random thrill ride could replace it and it wouldn't be missed. I think the only reason it's popular is because it's the one "fast" ride in Epcot.
Originally Posted By barboy2 ///Could someone clear up why WDW is so "bad"?/// Well Brian, to us critics WDW is a beloved family member...... ......we want to see it grow and flourish but we're tired of it bringing C's home come report card time when it should be on the dean's list---- we want the place to live up to its potential and deliver excellence. By the way did you ride one of those buses, I mean Disney Transports or shop World of Disney, I mean Main St. on your last trip? How about Pleasure Island---- did you check out that super interesting Aventurers Club...... never mind it closed down.
Originally Posted By EPCOT Explorer >>>......we want to see it grow and flourish but we're tired of it bringing C's home come report card time when it should be on the dean's list---- we want the place to live up to its potential and deliver excellence.<<<< Best way to equate it. LOL. WDW is almost 40 and having a midlife crisis.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Exactly, although I don't think Test Track is considered a classic. I think any random thrill ride could replace it and it wouldn't be missed. I think the only reason it's popular is because it's the one "fast" ride in Epcot.>> I disagree. It is a totally unique ride system... unlike anything else in the world as far as I know. Unlike coasters where after an initial hill or launch you are just in free-fall, Test Track cars are under direct control the entire time at speeds up to 67 mph. That to me is a very impressive engineering feat. In the early years it seemed to break down regularly, but I have not experienced that for at least 5 years now.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<I disagree. It is a totally unique ride system... unlike anything else in the world as far as I know. Unlike coasters where after an initial hill or launch you are just in free-fall, Test Track cars are under direct control the entire time at speeds up to 67 mph. That to me is a very impressive engineering feat.>> Sure, it's an awesome feat of engineering. That's a fact. It's also a fact 99.9% of guests don't give 2 craps about or know about. They just care that it goes fast. Sure, diehards like you or I know about it, but not many others do. <<In the early years it seemed to break down regularly, but I have not experienced that for at least 5 years now.>> Oh, it still breaks down regularly. When I was working at Epcot it broke down almost once a day.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Certainly EE coulda been a classic, and I guess a lot of people see it that way. I see the ride itself as large step below Big Thunder.>> I think most would see it that way if it weren't for one animatronic that doesn't work. Someday I'll figure out where it is even... the ride moves so fast the only Yeti I ever see is the shadow on the wall. Big Thunder may be superior as far as setting goes (although the Everest show building is hard to beat!), but as a roller coaster it is the lamest one that Disney has.
Originally Posted By HokieSkipper <<Big Thunder may be superior as far as setting goes (although the Everest show building is hard to beat!), but as a roller coaster it is the lamest one that Disney has.>> I gotta stick up for Big Thunder here. It's helixes are some of the best around, and the speed of the ride comes from them. As a coaster nut, the design and ride of Big Thunder far outmatches both Space Mountain and Rockin' Roller Coaster. Space is basically an ancient wild-mouse in the dark, and RRC is a 50 second, bland, off-the-shelf Vekoma. The only coaster on WDW property that outmatches Big Thunder is Everest.
Originally Posted By vbdad55 Sure, it's an awesome feat of engineering. That's a fact. It's also a fact 99.9% of guests don't give 2 craps about or know about. They just care that it goes fast. Sure, diehards like you or I know about it, but not many others do. ------------- so who do they build the rides for that do count ? I agree TT should count and I think more people appreciate the 'different' feel of the ride even if they miss the engineering side of it.
