Subsonic Radio

Orange or Green Mission?

subsonic wrote:I stand corrected; I just confirmed with her and she said Mission:SPACE was her favorite... You win

Don't let him win!!!!

I'll just weigh in with my own impressions: Nostalgia isn't really a factor for me when it comes to EPCOT. My visits have been frequent enough since 1985 that I knew on each visit that I was disappointed with certain changes or complete removal. I also appreciated the lack of Disney characters, and enjoying new ones like Figment. My daughter was young on her first visit but thoroughly enjoyed the entire experience, from the Land Pavilion ( especially Kitchen Kabaret) to Horizons and World of Motion. I know it will always come down to $$$, but I don't believe they had to treat EPCOT the way they did. The original was really inspiring; perhaps "educational" isn't the best description, but thought provoking and motivating - absolutely.

DisneySpin: This me clicking the "like button" on your post: *ka-click*

So basically what you are saying is you long for the past of Epcot over modern changes?

If they kept the same plan they did when they opened, it would have probably killed the park. Original content is good, but it is also very difficult to make it work. You can test it, run it by every focus group, have researched everything to the end and the ride can still not garner that much interest.

If they could get sponsors, which they won't because theme park ride sponsorship is a waste of money, I would like to see them gut all the old pavilions and put something that doesn't look old and stale in. They were off to a good start with the removal of horizons and world of motion, but kind of got stuck after the tourism slump.

One thing I don't like is a closed attraction that just sits there. Do something with it (Horizons and Wonders of Life). Even if it is some nicely done shrubbery, do something with the space. Horizons could have been made into a store, restaurant or character greeting place out of the sun.Wonders of Life, mayve show a repeating movie loop or something in the space. It looks so dead.

Wizzard419 wrote:So basically what you are saying is you long for the past of Epcot over modern changes?

You seem to misinterpret our complaints for not wanting changes. In a nutshell, yes; I'd take old EPCOT over Epcot in it's current, mish-mash, state. There's no true theme going on right now. (Also a problem in other parks, Tomorrowland specifically).

That said, contrary to what you think of me (and others), I welcome change, as long as it fits in well. A good example would be Haunted Mansion at DLR. They plussed the effects and such. Like a lot of old stuff, EPCOT definitely needed a face-lift, not a beating.

All those old attractions could still work if they simply had been updated. Thousands of new effects could have been added to Horizons, (newer animatronics, new lightning effects. And later, HD videos, projection mapping, etc...) For more thrills, add in Mission:SPACE into a new spot. However, make it more about REAL space travel/simulation (to also indirectly educate) as opposed to going to Mars. Sure, update Living Seas, make the ride longer, but just talk about REAL possible adventures under seas, not Nemo. World of Motion: Use Test Track technology/ride system but continue to start it out slow with the evolution of transportation. End it with testing / fast stuff or perhaps something like flying cars above a city.

Epcot is now made on-the-cheap...

sfein wrote:One thing I don't like is a closed attraction that just sits there. Do something with it (Horizons and Wonders of Life). Even if it is some nicely done shrubbery, do something with the space. Horizons could have been made into a store, restaurant or character greeting place out of the sun.Wonders of Life, mayve show a repeating movie loop or something in the space. It looks so dead.

I think they should do something with the WoL space but Horizons isn't there. It's replaced with Mission:SPACE. Character greeting: As long as it's not princesses.

When horizons closed they had started on the next ride as well as dismantling the old infrastructure, so it wasn't like how Carousel of progress at DLR was closed for years before it innoventions.

subsonic wrote:

Wizzard419 wrote:So basically what you are saying is you long for the past of Epcot over modern changes?

You seem to misinterpret our complaints for not wanting changes. In a nutshell, yes; I'd take old EPCOT over Epcot in it's current, mish-mash, state. There's no true theme going on right now. (Also a problem in other parks, Tomorrowland specifically).

That said, contrary to what you think of me (and others), I welcome change, as long as it fits in well. A good example would be Haunted Mansion at DLR. They plussed the effects and such. Like a lot of old stuff, EPCOT definitely needed a face-lift, not a beating.

All those old attractions could still work if they simply had been updated. Thousands of new effects could have been added to Horizons, (newer animatronics, new lightning effects. And later, HD videos, projection mapping, etc...) For more thrills, add in Mission:SPACE into a new spot. However, make it more about REAL space travel/simulation (to also indirectly educate) as opposed to going to Mars. Sure, update Living Seas, make the ride longer, but just talk about REAL possible adventures under seas, not Nemo. World of Motion: Use Test Track technology/ride system but continue to start it out slow with the evolution of transportation. End it with testing / fast stuff or perhaps something like flying cars above a city.

Epcot is now made on-the-cheap...

It is easy to misinterpret them when half of the time the comments are "I want {insert old, stale ride here} back", what I was getting at was basically the other comment was saying that they were nostalgic but didn't want to say they were nostalgic.

The huge problem with Epcot's original formula was that it simply didn't work, they needed to fix it to make it work, and doing what they did brought more people into the park.

Simple updates work only in some instances, pirates and HM both had strong interest before and after the updates. The updates made things pretty, they did not make them more popular. Horizons on the other hand was lagging, dated, and told the story at you rather than to you (This is also one of the reasons why little mermaid is a terrible ride). The design was fine for 1980, but it lacks immersion and needed to go. How is the current space training themed ride any less educational than what you are noting? World of Motion, GM wanted to have a thrilling ride with an summary of what goes into testing they got a thrilling ride, they liked it more than WoM so they succeeded.

To say Epcot is made on the cheap is somewhat disingenuous, it costs a fortune to simply run the park, they also cater to mainstream guests, and they aren't complaining. For example, the crappy mermaid ride cost roughly 120 million, it looks like crap, I wouldn't call it cheap by any measure. Even though the fans may spend more and go to WDW more frequently than the average guest, they cannot compete with the volume of guests who go far less. That also goes into why they may let rides go longer at WDW without refurbishment, as the average guest may only come once every several years (or perhaps once and that is it) they do not want to keep anything closed because it will make guests unhappy. At DLR, they can close Big Thunder for the entire summer without as much concern because more of our guests are locals and if they can't ride this trip they will probably be back within a year.

subsonic wrote:but Horizons isn't there. It's replaced with Mission:SPACE. Character greeting: As long as it's not princesses.

Brain freeze on my part. I keep picturing a spot next to Mission Space. Of course Mission Space replaced it. But I stick with the Wonders of Life complaint

The big issue I have with Epcot is that it lost its focus. EPCOT had meaning - and when it was first opened, it was pretty easy to discern the point of the whole thing. Now it's just a mixture of things that seem cool and futuristic but really aren't. The problem with having technology-based attractions is that knowledge is increasing at such a hideously rapid rate (what is the time frame for doubling knowledge now? three years?) that such expensive attractions can't ever hope to keep ahead of it without becoming serious cash hogs. As in, ten times more than current.

And therein lies the rub. To keep the idea of EPCOT alive, things have to be refreshed at least every two years, if not more often, and reimagined. I am not 100% certain because I never directly experienced the attraction, but Horizons is a good example. My best guess based on listening to the tracks here on Subsonic is that Horizons would no longer seem innovative. Much of the technology, with the exception of space travel, is technically possible now, even if it's not financially viable. So, if it was going to stay, it would have had to be updated with the next big thing on the horizon. And, in the absence of a national space program it's pretty difficult to know what that would be.

IMHO, when Disney by necessity did something to financially save EPCOT, they turned it into the mishmash we have now, with no cohesion whatsoever. The Land and The Living Seas kind of go together. But the other side doesn't really. The cohesion is what everyone misses, and while I enjoyed Test Track pre-refurb quite a bit, it doesn't fit in with FutureWorld any more than Ellen's Energy Adventure does. And now that I think about it, EEA is almost as cobwebby as some of the others were.

So, when we say we wish it hadn't been changed, I think we are all looking for that true Futureworld experience - a feeling like we've peered a generation or two into the future (without Kirk and Spock, or Star Wars, tyvm). Frapping some thrill rides in the place of mothbally attractions wasn't the answer any more than leaving things old and poorly attended (ala COP) is the answer.

That is the same reason why tomorrowland can't and won't return to the future aspect, by the time the project opens it will be out of date.

One of the big problems with just refreshing the scenes is that it isn't enough in most cases, you need to update the ride systems as well, and when you get to that point you might as well just build a new ride. Looking at the next generation of pirates ride, it will not be a passive floating ride, they are working on tech to make the boats part of the ride rather than just floating past scenes.

I know a lot of the butthurt out there about Epcot is that the story driven thrill rides were put in over slower paced attractions. Disney did not put them in because they were bored, cheaper, or easier to maintain, they put them in because the guests wanted them and it would entice people to book vacations.

Story driven thrill rides are fine if they stick to the central idea. Mission:Space mostly fits, even though the technology involved is becoming out-of-date. EEA and TT don't fit in a future world at all. And EEA isn't even a thrill ride. It's a little slow for my liking, and I'm an energy nerd.

I remember enjoying the Energy ride when I was a kid but also remember it being a little long. Potentially, a good concept. If it were my choice, I'd knock out WoL to make extra track for Energy, expand the ride a lot with a theme of evolving through forms of Energy. And definitely shorten the movies.