Cars area coming to Magic Kingdom

[DrStarlander]

My concern now is that there are things that sound like a good idea on paper but once it gets translated into reality are decidedly not thrilling. Maybe a tracked ride was wishful thinking on my part, but a multi-level, “outdoorsy” equivalent of RSR where you could get up to 25-30MPH on what appears to be the last part of the ride by Tiana/BTM sounds like a way safer bet than what might be no more interesting than riding around on a golf cart.

You can swing and miss on something like Rivers of Light boats working or Harmonious barges - you can’t miss on an E-ticket. But I guess we’ll all see.

I think the golf cart analogy seems spot on. I think there is an equivalent to the "uncanny valley" when it comes to "thrill rides" where the concept promises to be thrilling conceptually but due to the vehicle/system characteristics, fails to quite reach the visceral, gut-response associated with guests being in peril and consequently "thrilled." It results in a semi-deflated feeling leaving the attraction where you feel like you almost got there, but were let down.

Some of this happens when the physics of an attraction are mediated through technologies that diffuse the directness (a typical roller coaster being absolutely direct, for example, but simulator technologies being mediated). Decades ago a company I worked for licensed an entertainment technology to Disney and our version used upholstery foam backs guests would stand on (I won't explain the whole thing) and it was the perfect squishiness and immediate, visceral feedback so guests could adjust their weight to get the result they wanted.

Disney took the concept and re-engineered it so instead of foam it used sensors that measured the guest's shift in body weight and signaled to simulator-type hydraulics to adjust accordingly. So the feedback wasn't immediate and natural, rather it was slightly delayed and jerky. They supposedly did this because "ops" didn't want too replace the several-hundfred dollar blocks of foam every few month so instead spent -- reportedly -- hundreds of thousands of dollars to build the much higher-tech but inferior version. The point of all this is not to criticize Disney -- people there were just doing what they thought was right and smart -- but sometimes these fancy technologies compromise the entertainment, an in particular can undermine a thrill experience.

This trackless ride system is likely to cost hundreds of millions of dollars to develop but is unlikely to be more thrilling (physically) than a much cheaper roller coaster. That is, it may impress the mind more than the gut.

 

[Parkscope Joe]

Maybe a tracked ride was wishful thinking on my part, but a multi-level, “outdoorsy” equivalent of RSR where you could get up to 25-30MPH on what appears to be the last part of the ride by Tiana/BTM sounds like a way safer bet than what might be no more interesting than riding around on a golf cart.

I think what'll set this apart is the suspension and distance to the ground. Test Track is "driving under the speed limit of the highway" but its distance to the ground and the overbanked turn is what adds the thrill. An off roading adventure finishing with an off road race sounds pretty good.

 

[OrlLover]

Well I’m glad it’s not a direct clone to RSR and unique to the Magic Kingdom.

How this translates to actual E ticket attraction we will have to wait and see.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

The only thing in common this will have with Test Track is how much downtime it will have.

In all seriousness, I love Imagineering... but I feel like this attraction is going to be way overengineered. Way too many technical issues still arise from trackless vehicles riding around flat surfaces, now imagine all the issues that will come from traversing over obstacles/hills/etc.

 

[DrStarlander]

The only thing in common this will have with Test Track is how much downtime it will have.

In all seriousness, I love Imagineering... but I feel like this attraction is going to be way overengineered. Way too many technical issues still arise from trackless vehicles riding around flat surfaces, now imagine all the issues that will come from traversing over obstacles/hills/etc.

I couldn't agree more. As I tried to describe in my anecdote above, over-engineering is a systemic/institutional problem at WDI. At the very least, they should pioneer this ride system indoors (e.g., build a jungle, caverns, or other-planet environment) in a show building, to eliminate the weather variable. Then take it outdoors once the ride system has proved reliable.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

I couldn't agree more. As I tried to describe in my anecdote above, over-engineering is a systemic/institutional problem at WDI. At the very least, they should pioneer this ride system indoors (e.g., build a jungle, caverns, or other-planet environment) in a show building, to eliminate the weather variable. Then take it outdoors once the ride system has proved reliable.

Exactly. They can't even run their current lineup of trackless indoor attractions efficiently.

I also think the MK expansion should focus on attractions with significant capacity over attractions with unique capabilities... aka more boat rides/omnimovers/etc. The other 3 parks should be utilized for more unique ride systems.

 

[DrStarlander]

I also think the MK expansion should focus on attractions with significant capacity over attractions with unique capabilities... aka more boat rides/omnimovers/etc. The other 3 parks should be utilized for more unique ride systems.

Great point. Most visitors to Orlando are going to go to Magic Kingdom, regardless. The problem they have to solve there is attraction capacity. Cars is not going to drive more incremental visitation to MK, especially compared to an alternate attraction (say a boat ride) with more capacity. The difference, if at all, would be negligible. And the Cars attraction will probably cost $200-300 million. They could have built two less innovative people-eating attractions for the same investment.

Meanwhile with more competition in the market (Epic) it's important for Epcot, DHS, and DAK (the vulnerable parks) to compete with novelty and innovation and desirable IPs.

 

[OrlLover]

Exactly. They can't even run their current lineup of trackless indoor attractions efficiently.

I also think the MK expansion should focus on attractions with significant capacity over attractions with unique capabilities... aka more boat rides/omnimovers/etc. The other 3 parks should be utilized for more unique ride systems.

While I respect this argument since they are getting rid of something so quintessential MK I believe it’s replacement should definitely be in the innovative one of a kind category.

 

[mccgavin]

While I respect this argument since they are getting rid of something so quintessential MK I believe it’s replacement should definitely be in the innovative one of a kind category.

I'm all for innovation, but trackless technology in particular has proven to be very unreliable. Universal Creative was smart to move away from it after the issues with Kong.

 

[OrlLover]

I'm all for innovation, but trackless technology in particular has proven to be very unreliable. Universal Creative was smart to move away from it after the issues with Kong.

That’s true but we have yet to see the final iteration of this ride system to claim it a failure.

 

[UniversalRBLX]

While I respect this argument since they are getting rid of something so quintessential MK I believe it’s replacement should definitely be in the innovative one of a kind category.

That’s true but we have yet to see the final iteration of this ride system to claim it a failure.

Nobody is saying it's a failure, rather a perplexing choice for MK. I want the parks to innovate, but it's a very risky ride system to choose for a park that needs significant capacity improvements. The other 3 WDW parks, like DrStarlander mentioned, need something unique to pull guests away from MK.

 

[Jake S]

I just think it's too early to comment on this in an informed way, particularly because I'm not convinced what we're seeing will be the finished product.

 

[DrStarlander]

I just think it's too early to comment on this in an informed way, particularly because I'm not convinced what we're seeing will be the finished product.

I respect what you're saying. Indeed, we don't know, maybe it will work perfectly. I certainly hope so.

But speaking for myself, what I'm doing is some risk assessment based on Disney's past innovative ride systems like Indiana Jones, Rocket Rods, Test Track / Radiator Springs, Rise of the Resistance. There's a fairly consistent pattern of problems, and some of these are indoors in much more controlled environments.

Personally, this attraction is interesting because my dad was an engineer for a company called Litton Industries that (among many other things) built vehicles that travelled autonomously (trackless) through factories in the 1980s (e.g., the huge Boeing factory near Seattle). It was really cutting edge stuff then...40 years ago. At the time, as a kid, I thought "this would be cool for a Disneyland ride!" So, I am truly excited by trackless systems, just not sure about the off-road, outdoor application. Fingers crossed!

 

[Jake S]

I think my take is basically these two points:

I'm hesitant to have a take on the ride's anticipated reliability when I'm not convinced they've settled on a final format for the attraction. If it does end up being a trackless ride system operating outside and on dirt, I'll be happy to join in on that speculation.

Every one of the rides you pointed out @DrStarlander (accurately!), with the exception of Rocket Rods, kick ass. So, it's also quite possible that I'm more tolerant of big swings like this (as I've already noted earlier in the thread).

We'll see! Very curious to see how this turns out.

 

[fryoj]

I think, as long as they aren't doing something crazy with the paths, this ride should be an easy swap over to a tracked ride if testing shows it can't hack it. Slap down a guide rail, modify the vehicles, and reprogram the ride.

 

[saint.piss]

 

[DrStarlander]

Full steam ahead I guess. It is going to be interesting to see how this all plays out. I think it hinges on "which Disney/Imagineering" we get for the new Frontierland, the one behind Fantasy Springs, the Haunted Mansion bar on the Treasure, Pandora, Cars Land.... or the the one behind Avenger's Campus, Epcot Communicore, the Haunted Mansion gift shop at Disneyland? As an institution they are capable of greatness, and abysmal failure (and I'm combining the management/budgetary aspect and the creative aspects into one entity rather than blaming one or the other and I don't know the back-story of these projects).

As a side note in all this, I really wonder the most about Liberty Square. It's hard for me to imagine its relevance in the future as a gateway to a land with cars-with-eyeballs. If it wasn't for the Haunted Mansion I'd expect it to be bulldozed to make way for an IP-driven land in the future.

 

[Freak]

I think they are about to make a tragic mistake here. This ride that they’re gonna build is not even going to be functional half the time. If they can even make an overlay of a 30 year old ride work, how are they gonna pull off an off-road dirt path ride work when it rains 75% of the time here??

 

[belloq87]

There's no way it's going to be actual dirt. It will be a paved surface of some kind that is textured and painted to look like dirt.

But even so, it will certainly go down A LOT because of weather. And even more than usual if it's trackless (as some rumors suggest).

 

[TheUniC6]

There's no way it's going to be actual dirt. It will be a paved surface of some kind that is textured and painted to look like dirt.

But even so, it will certainly go down A LOT because of weather. And even more than usual if it's trackless (as some rumors suggest).

While I like trackless dark rides because they have to potential to have a massive scale like rise, this Cars ride doesn't need to be trackless because you are just going around a track. They could have tracked this ride and there probably wouldn't have been much of a difference.