This brings up the debate between the two Space Mountains, and, frankly, I'm a little concerned here. The lack of audio was actually something I preferred about Space Mountain East. I understand I'm in a minority, but I like the quiet of Space Mountain. It's eerie, it's contemplative and it gives you no indication of where the track is going or where it would be ending. Audio isn't going to stop me from riding, and I'm sure most would love it, I'm just more intrigued than I am excited. Further, trackside audio doesn't seem to offer the same potential as on-board audio. So, of the ideas they've brought over from Anaheim's Space Mountain, they brought the one I was the least interested in and don't seem to have brought it over very well. If everyone likes it (and early reports are they do), okay then.
But count me as one of those who doesn't prefer Disneyland's, even if there are things I'd bring over. I enjoy the single-file, close-to-the track cars. I enjoy having drops. I enjoy having two, distinct tracks. I enjoy having a coaster that is more than just a series of right hand turns. To say nothing of the vastly superior pre and post show in Orlando. Star Tunnel alone is reason for me to love the Orlando version.
Would I like Disneyland's improved projections and light shows at night? Absolutely! Would I like an improved, less-rickety track with banked curves? Probably, if similar ride vehicles could continue to be used. I really like the ideas others have brought up of having a "thrill" coaster and a more traditional-styled coaster under the same roof; there's more than enough room for both.
So, no, Orlando's Space Mountain isn't where I'd like it to be. But neither is Anaheim's, and I reject the notion that one is objectively superior to the other. It's a matter of preference, and, unlike Pirates of the Caribbean or the Tiki Room, I continue to prefer the one in Florida.
Something else cool is this nifty retro-futuristic poster being used to promote the audio. This is sweet.
No comments:
Post a Comment