Thrill Park at Disney

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 7:30 am

okay..so I completely understand that Disney is geared towards the family experience...but dont you think they could cement the teen and older crowd if they would add a rollercoaster/thrill park in the wdw resort area? Basically putting universal studios islands of adventures out of business?

99Soulz · Post by **99Soulz** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 11:41 am

No, in no way should this happen. If they did that it would totally separate families (or groups) that have a range of ages. The best thing about Disney is the concept that it's enjoyed by everyone at all ages and having an entire park dedicated to thrill rides that would exclude anyone say under 52" would create separation that would last the entire day for families. Unless of course everyone in your group is over 52" but I still think it would lose the magic of appealing to everyone which is what Disney does like no other.

Just my 2 cents of course and since our family ranges in the ages and some of the best memories (if not all) have come from experiencing it all together.

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 12:10 pm

Well I see the points you are making. And there are a lot of people that would agree with you, but I think you can make a thrill park that is still entertaining to children. For instance, I am use to live in Ohio. There is a park there called Cedar Point. It is the best thrill park in really the entire world..but well just say the U.S. for sure. three quarters of the park is dedicated to high speed thrill rides...but there is a section (and a relatively good sized section) that is geared towards little kids. There are kiddie rides, less intense roller coasters, midway games, camp snoopy, etc. etc.

I honestly think that Disney Imagineering could pull off something just like this. Im not saying that it has to break all sorts of world records for roller coaster speed and height (even though that would be nice since I dont live by cedar point anymore)...I think too many people fear the things you metioned..without remembering that its been done before..in fact almost all thrill parks have family oriented things for this exact reason. I guess Im just not a big fan of Busch Gardens or Islands of Adventures because I feel that they are sub-par amusement parks. In fact I literally live 5-6 minutes from Busch Gardens..and I have only been there once (and will probably never go back again).

Again, I think it makes sense...I have seen it work in places like Cedar Point..and putting a disney spin on it would make the experience that much better. Like you, just my thoughts.

MadEye · Post by **MadEye** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 1:02 pm

Peerless83 wrote:Again, I think it makes sense...I have seen it work in places like Cedar Point..and putting a disney spin on it would make the experience that much better. Like you, just my thoughts.

I've been so Cedar Point and while it is a great coaster park, in no way, shape, or form is it anywhere near the caliber of any Disney (or even Universal) park!!!!

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 1:20 pm

Plus it may motivate those stubborn teens that are "too cool" for disney...to give it a try. This is Disney's way of lending itself to a new demographic...make believers out of non believers...I look at it this way...WDW is losing money to places like Universal studios and islands of adventure because it offers things that disney doesnt offer...well if disney had these things..more people would stay on property..more people would go to the parks..more people would spend money...stock price goes up...bob igers compensation package would get larger...but instead they are thinking about making some $200 a day beastly kingdom..or night kingdom..whatever its going to be called...this is, in my opinion, the wrong direction because it alienates a large % of disney's customer base who cant afford to take a family of 4 or 5 to a $200 a day park. Now unfortunately, I am not an insider of the company..so maybe they are seeing something that I am missing...but if disney opens a "fifth gate" and charges more than 80-90 dollars for it...I will never go to it...and I am sure a lot of families will never go.

But now im starting to ramble on and on...so I will leave it at that.

purple figment · Post by **purple figment** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 1:24 pm

While I think it would be interesting (as a Michigan native, I, too, know Cedar Point--but it isn't such a thrill now that I am older), I think Disney would have to be very careful to maintain their high level of storytelling excellence. (Alright, so sometimes they forget this in their current parks...)

What makes the other parks so much less interesting, is that they don't incorporate stories and scenes in their thrills. Think about how cool Expedition Everest is. It has a storyline and an interesting queue. I can't imagine that it would be easy to make a whole park of thrill rides that were as engaging as Expedition Everest. I am not sure that they could pull it off well.

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 1:37 pm

You may be right...they might not be able to...but I think Disney imagineers are geniuses..and if they are allowed to think outside the box..and are given the right amount of resources, aka, capital, then I think it could be done.

but I am sure this will never happen...so in the meantime...add some more countries to world showcase...build that infamous roman hotel that has been lost over the years...and I guess I will be happy with those

Mr.ToadWildRider · Post by **Mr.ToadWildRider** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 1:43 pm

The problem is, although I have never been to Cedar Point, I would imagine that while they have sections of the park "available" to the younger crowd, that it still separates the family. It happens at IOA and IOA isn't even that intense of a "thrill park." You don't see nearly the amount of young children in IOA and if they are they are generally in Seuss Landing and parts of the Toon Lagoon and JP; and I'm sure that gets old fast, even for the kids (never mind the parents).

Just look at DHS. When you venture down Sunset Blvd. to ToT & RnRC the demographics shift. Sure there are the younger kids who just make the cut (usually, my estimate is in the 8-9 y/o+ range) but you start to see the strollers vanish. I think Disney screwed up DHS' layout in this critical way, and that's just a section of the park let alone an entire "thrill park" with designated "family zone" cordoned off somewhere.

I think what Disney needs to do is simply expand where they can, add thrilling rides to existing parks where they can be afforded. I'm in some ways loathe to recommend this as Future World is now basically an example of what happens when Disney tried to infuse "thrill" into what many considered a "boring" park. I don't want "thrill" to replace substance in the name of adding thrilling content. I just think Disney needs to look at areas of the parks where they can expand; either extending the borders and infrastructure of the current parks or replacing only content that at this point makes no sense to maintain (again, refering to that latter option I am afraid to throw my support fully behind it as instead of removing the real-estate gobbling, lack luster attractions like Indy Speed Way, the remnants of a rather sad backlot tour, and a now dead WoL pavillion they remove 20k, the majority of future world, etc.).

All that and the fact that I feel like it'd be hard to Disney-fy a ride like Kingdaka or whatever it's called. A lot of real "thrill rides," i.e. the big steel coasters with handfuls of inversions, extreme speeds, and giant drops are very difficult, if not impossible to "theme." Look at Hulk and DD at IOA, the queue to DD is amazing, but once you board it's just another steel coaster, and as fun as Hulk is it doesn't even theme it's queue like DD. Disney created a real feat w/ RnRC as it has a lot of elements of the newer thrill rides, but still maintains a themed ride feel- something that seems impossible to reproduce several times over in a new park.

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 1:54 pm

haha I would like to see Disney...."Disney-fy" a ride like Beast..or Son of Beast...buuut again..I see what youre saying..and I agree...I guess Im just the type of person that likes to experience a rush from time to time..and would like to see my favorite place build something that could give this to me...i guess im being selfish

Maybe what you said...replace some of the God awful attractions like Indy car speedway...or pirates of the carribbean....haha im just joking with that...but indy car definitely...and put in some better themed, more exciting attractions...I could live with that

purple figment · Post by **purple figment** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 2:02 pm

VERY well thought out answer, Mr. Toadwildrider! I agree!!

I hadn't even noticed the DHS situation, but you really made me think about it.

As an adult, although I love thrill rides, I am not terribly enthused about going to places like Cedar Point any more. I wonder, if they did build a thrill park, what sort of demographics it would appeal to, being that WDW already has 4 other gates? I mean, would people with younger kids even go, if they had a choice like MK nearby?

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 2:11 pm

thats the million dollar question figment...If disney felt that families would go..and it would be profitable..im sure it would get a more serious consideration. The problem..well one of the many problems...but a problem with a thrill park...is the huge capital outlays it would cost the company. See in all of disney parks..they have similar rides..just rethemed. Use Aladdins carpets..and dumbo..and the flying dinosaur ride...all the same ride...using similar technology...and costing the company virtually nothing to build. Now putting in a group of roller coasters that not only have different theming..but different ride tracks...would be a huge expenditure to the company. So, it makes me wonder if they dont consider a thrill park because they fear popularity..or they fear the huge price tag? I just dont know...I think people would go to it...maybe the wrong kind of people..maybe thats why they are avoiding putting in a thrill park.....I just think it would be a good idea (maybe because im younger..with no kids..and only have myself to look out for).

I will tell you this..and I think all of you would agree with me on this...I would love to pick Bob Iger and Tom Stagg's brain for about an hour...just to get some of these questions answered.

Post by **js3901** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 2:20 pm

a thrill park would not be well-received by Disney fans. it goes against everything that Disney was about. While he wanted to be on the cutting edge, Walt wanted to build a place where parents and kids can enjoy themselves together. He didn't want attractions where only the parents could go, or only the kids. a thrill park would exclude people.

Peerless83 · Post by **Peerless83** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 3:41 pm

It may exclude people...so are you saying if Disney decides to go forward with the much rumored night kingdom...and charges $200 per person...would you be against this as well? Because this would exclude people.

Or are you against how much it costs to go to a Disney park today...$74.00? Because does this kind of exclude certain groups of people as well?

My point is..Disney has already done a lot of things that would make Walt turn in his grave...you cant please everyone...and if executives see that it could be profitable...wouldnt it make sense to go forward with it? Because you said it wouldnt be well received by Disney fans...well Im a huge Disney nut..and I would love to see it...and i cant imagine that I am the only one that thinks this (well maybe in this forum anyway).

theBIGyowski · Post by **theBIGyowski** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 3:58 pm

I think this is something that could have worked at DCA...but not really something that would fit at WDW. One reason is that I think it would take away from the thrill rides already in the 4 existing parks. Those rides are awesome because of the parks they are in, just as much as they are awesome because of the thrill. Space Mountain is great because it's in Tomorrowland in the MK. ToT and RnR are awesome because they feed off of Hollywood and entertainment. Test Track, Mission Space, and Soarin' are awesome because of where they are in Epcot. And Everest is awesome because you think you are in Asia far before you get to the foot of the mountain. Could they add more thrill rides? Yes...and I think they will...but they will be more centered on a theme than the thrill itself. Example is Dinosaur...with the lights on it is not scary at all...but the atmosphere scares you to death. I think a thrill park is great...just not for Disney.

secondstar · Post by **secondstar** » Mar Thu 19, 2009 4:12 pm

I absolutely do not want Disney to gear itself toward attracting the "teen" crowd and I believe Disney does not want to either. Take a look at the recent changes at Downtown Disney. I think they were unhappy with the teenage crowd at Pleasure Island and so they've made changes to gear things more for families. I love being able to bring my DD5 to parks without worrying about rowdy teenagers upsetting our "Magical" day.