WDW neglected?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by historyguy64

I am always amazed at the wealth of Disney park knowledge in these forums.

I wonder if our proximity to everything WDW affects our perceptions (how could it not)?

I wonder if the majority of park attendees who visit less frequently (every few years or more) know the nuances of the changes/refurbs/additions to various attractions to the extent that our forum does? They are obviously pulled in by new, but are they pushed off by a park not offering enough new experiences from the last trip?

We are familiar with the Main St. Electrical vs. SpectroMagic parade discussions. We know the various iterations of Spaceship Earth and Journey into Imagination. We remember when it was called Countdown to Extinction or we recall the Tarzan musical show. Old Star Tours and Space Mountain. Pre-Soarin', you get the idea. Most of you have a much greater knowledge of these things than I.

I think being so up-close can make us view new development differently than most people wanting a Disney experience. I am not putting down any opinions of the thread, I'm just wondering (and I hope I can express it clearly).

Do you think that less-frequently-attending Disney guests (at any/all parks) consider WDW neglected? Can they walk in to Future World and notice "older" attractions and neglect we're discussing? I certainly think they could in the case of the last days of Wonders of Life.

---

I far away but before college started for my kids we use to visit since they were born at least once a year for 14-16 day trips. I see the improvements over the years and the neglect. I watched the MK not receive paint and the the sidewalks not as clean as they were once were as the parks opened in the morning. Back in the day paint touch ups happened overnight, you didn't see that type of maintenance during guest hours. You didn't see CM's planting flowers, they were just there the next day. Now I saw in April the upswing in the face lift to the MK. Nice to see again.

I remember all Epcot use to offer and is gone as do my children, the oldest especially. We still love the place but do harbor disappointment of what has fallen to the wayside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

Well, let's say they bring in a new E ticket for the land. Let's also say it's an inverted coaster, something that doesin't exist anywhere else on property.

Guess what I' m least concerned with when it comes to an inverted roller coaster?

Story.

Would a new coaster be a bad thing?

---

It best have an E Ticket or why bother. I'm a coaster addict so it would draw my interest. Yet, it would depend on what type of coaster. I can't do Batman type coasters, it messes with my equilibrium and throws me off for the balance of the day. There are many guests like me that can only push the brain slosh so far. So if it is an E attraction coaster, that way too many guests can't experience, I can't imagine that would draw the guest majority to AK. Imagineers are going to have to choose very carefully what type of E attraction they put into the expansion. Mission Space was to be an E Attraction, Disney still likes to think it is, unfortunately way too many guests can't physically take the side effects of that attraction. I have no fear of not being able to ride the Dwarf coaster, my hope is that it isn't to short and isn't too wimpy along with a quicker load speed than Goofy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StewbotTalborg

A new coaster? No, that would be awesome!
A new coaster with a subpar story? No thanks.

---

You're right. Then it'd just be another Space or Thunder Mountain.

This has really become an absurd conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HauntedGabe

It best have an E Ticket or why bother. I'm a coaster addict so it would draw my interest. Yet, it would depend on what type of coaster. I can't do Batman type coasters, it messes with my equilibrium and throws me off for the balance of the day. There are many guests like me that can only push the brain slosh so far. So if it is an E attraction coaster, that way too many guests can't experience, I can't imagine that would draw the guest majority to AK. Imagineers are going to have to choose very carefully what type of E attraction they put into the expansion. Mission Space was to be an E Attraction, Disney still likes to think it is, unfortunately way too many guests can't physically take the side effects of that attraction. I have no fear of not being able to ride the Dwarf coaster, my hope is that it isn't to short and isn't too wimpy along with a quicker load speed than Goofy.

---

Well, Harry Potterville has two inverted coasters. Supposedly, it's a gate buster.

Me, HP so much more tame than a batman type coaster. Not brain sloshing but you will have to decide that one for yourself. I love coasters but some I cannot handle. Even space gives me problems. It isn't so much the thrill it's how it jerks around the track but it is a classic so I did it once this trip.

I have to admit that even though I love coasters, inverted coasters are not my favorite. But, I also have to admit I find no difference between the two in Potterland vs. any of the other inverted coasters I've been on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by weepstah

A few more thoughts on this

2) Whether you like Avatarland or not, they have committed to a major upgrade in AK. Although AK was nowhere in need of what DCA needed it does need a major new area. Even if the whole Avatar thing doesn't pan out, I believe there will be a major expansion there.

---

I wonder if they'll add a new section or of they'll scrap the wasted Camp Mickey Minnie area. Plus, while most of the park is circular, that area dead-ends and you have to back out against the crowds who are heading to the end of the road. Not very well planned out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supernova

I wonder if they'll add a new section or of they'll scrap the wasted Camp Mickey Minnie area. Plus, while most of the park is circular, that area dead-ends and you have to back out against the crowds who are heading to the end of the road. Not very well planned out.

---

I have heard that not only will they scrap Camp Mickey Minnie but also the Rainforest Cafe. The land is going to be pretty massive as they want to have something to keep guest in the front of the park after dark so they can keep it open later in the night and still put up all the animals at a decent hour.

Rainforest Cafe will certainly be no loss. It' amazing how horrid the food there has become over the last decade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StewbotTalborg

I have heard that not only will they scrap Camp Mickey Minnie but also the Rainforest Cafe. The land is going to be pretty massive as they want to have something to keep guest in the front of the park after dark so they can keep it open later in the night and still put up all the animals at a decent hour.

---

Odd about Rainforest. It makes sense that they want to have something towards the front, but that restaurant is RIGHT at the front near the entrance. No lands or anything immediately there, especially before the gates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

Rainforest Cafe will certainly be no loss. It' amazing how horrid the food there has become over the last decade.

---

When it comes to Rainforest, you're being kind with "over the last decade." Atmosphere aside, I honestly cannot recall ever having a decent meal there.

The one in Downtown Disney had really good sandwiches the first time my wife and I went there, around 1998-99.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mo Noyz

You're right. Then it'd just be another Space or Thunder Mountain.

---

I actually enjoy the story on Thunder. It's hard to find, but if you know the story and know where to look, the imagineers really did a great job there IMO.

Space on the other hand, is by far my least favorite ride in WDW. I don't buy the "story" that you're going on a transport through space as part of your day-to-day life in the future. It's just a roller coaster in the dark.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by supernova

And you're being kind with "over the last decade." Atmosphere aside, I honestly cannot recall ever having a decent meal there.

---

Landry's restaurants in general are pretty overrated, I think. Granted I haven't dined at all of their establishments (including Yak & Yeti, which I hear is very good).

Landry's is incredibly spotty. I wouldn't call them overrated, because most folks don't think too highly of them.

They can be truly awful like Rainforest and The Crab House, to excellent like Yak & Yeti and McCormick & Schmick's (and sister M & S Grill).