Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance (DHS) | Page 60 | Inside Universal Forums

Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance (DHS)

  • Signing up for a Premium Membership is a donation to help Inside Universal maintain costs and offers an ad-free experience on the forum. Learn more about it here.
Recent history indicates Imagineers don't give a damn about capacity anymore. ie. FOP, Navii River, 7 Dwarfs,Frozen....even Smuggler Run at 1600 is only average by most standards. The 2000 plus per hour attractions of Disney past is history.
Ya I guess thats a fair point, I've frankly never been on all those rides you've mentioned so I can't speak to that. Id think that for their major E ticket Star Wars attraction that research was done, but who knows. Only report what I hear from the :ears:
 
EDIT - A potential thirteen minute variance in experience length is damn near impossible to operationally plan for, unless you're not loading a pre-show until the area after the shuttle is clear. Walk through attractions have more predictability than that.

Lets look at this a few ways. The basic idea behind the holding area preshows is to pre-corral guests for an experience OR in rare cases transport you to the another part of the show. Thinking about old attractions the first real ride with a holding area preshow was the Haunted Mansion as they needed to move guests from the 1st floor to the basement of the attraction. Afterwards holding area preshows for rides were just copying the execution even if it was not needed. Modern holding area preshows for rides started with Tower of Terror which attempted to tell a more linear plot than prior attractions. The side benefit is being able to improve guest flow through the attraction and prevent locations from overloading.

Of the attractions that have the holding area preshows how many of them don't have some sort of queue set up between the preshow and boarding the ride vehicle? No matter how much Disney calculates the guest flow and theoretical hourly capacity they never hit it and ops would rather have extra guests in a queue to pull from than send out empty seats in a ride vehicle.

Going from the Rey hologram to transit ship to hanger to detention cell to vehicle loading area will have queues and waits. The alternative is to just hold people in confined areas till the prior location clears up which is very very unpopular.
 
If I had to guess, the backups and potential extra queuing will take place in the hallway outside the detention cells, but with proper planning, they can prevent it everywhere else by holding guests before the first pre-show.

It’s the same way that Haunted Mansion usually has a short wait right before the Doom Buggies, but the walk into the Mansion, through the foyer, and into the Stretching Room is only as long as it takes to load everyone in. If the ride breaks down, they just stop letting guests into the Mansion entirely, and then once they get it back up and the backup at the buggies down, they start opening the doors again.
 
Look at the article date.

Ah, that makes sense. I only seen the headline on social media and read it from there.

Recent history indicates Imagineers don't give a damn about capacity anymore. ie. FOP, Navii River, 7 Dwarfs,Frozen....even Smuggler Run at 1600 is only average by most standards. The 2000 plus per hour attractions of Disney past is history.

Capacity is a double edged sword. It always seems to come at some cost of quality, length or fun with modern rides.

Coaster seem to be the exception which is what Universal seem to be doing. F&F has great capacity but it’s a complete dud.
 
Capacity is a double edged sword. It always seems to come at some cost of quality, length or fun with modern rides.

Coaster seem to be the exception which is what Universal seem to be doing. F&F has great capacity but it’s a complete dud.

I don't agree with that at all... And that one example (especially that one) doesn't make that the norm.
 
Why? Most of the recent high capacity rides have been heavily screen based. The better rides aren’t hitting the 2000+ capacity.
Universal seems interested in high capacity rides probably in part because they actually want to be able to get more people into the parks. Disney should have all the money and resources to make every single major ride they build high capacity. They really don't have a reasonable excuse given the way they treat guests now. I think they are just choosing to not care because my magic plus tells them people will still buy tickets and in fact add on more days/upcharges in order to ride something.
 
  • Like
Reactions: youhow2
Why? Most of the recent high capacity rides have been heavily screen based. The better rides aren’t hitting the 2000+ capacity.

That's a separate argument. "The cost of quality, length or fun with modern rides." is not the same as "Most of the recent high capacity rides have been heavily screen based. The better rides aren’t hitting the 2000+ capacity."

Universal seems interested in high capacity rides probably in part because they actually want to be able to get more people into the parks. Disney should have all the money and resources to make every single major ride they build high capacity. They really don't have a reasonable excuse given the way they treat guests now. I think they are just choosing to not care because my magic plus tells them people will still buy tickets and in fact add on more days/upcharges in order to ride something.

:eek:O:
 
Not looking forward to the endless UOR vs Disney discussion/debate in the next week/month.

Hoping for a fairly smooth opening for Rise, but all the recent news and rumors have me nervous.

“I’ve got a bad feeling about this.”
 
That's a separate argument. "The cost of quality, length or fun with modern rides." is not the same as "Most of the recent high capacity rides have been heavily screen based. The better rides aren’t hitting the 2000+ capacity."



:eek:O:
I don’t see the difference.

I don’t really see screen rides recently as a quality addition and most of the screen based rides have been awful, even Disney going back to update Soarin’ made it worse than it what it once was. The only exception is Flight of Passage but because of the way it was built and the problems it has, capacity has taken a hit.

Unless I’m missing the great rides that have been added recently but also have the high capacity that the older riders have.

Like I said, modern rides don’t seem to tick all the boxes for capacity, length, quality and fun.

Capacity doesn’t really bother me anyway. Enough rides are getting built now to balance out the crowds.

To get back on topic, I think Rise is still going to deliver on most of the promises. Capacity and downtime sounds like it’s going to be an issue and the lack of magic hours, suggests that the ride needs more work and Disney are adopting a similar strategy used for getting Hagrid’s to where it needs to be.

@rhino4evr For all the inevitable comparisons that are coming between Rise and no doubt Hagrid’s. They’re a pointless comparison, they’re two completely different experiences it’s apples to oranges. What’s best will probably be down to personal preference. This is the two biggest and best theme park companies playing their A game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andysol
Recent history indicates Imagineers don't give a damn about capacity anymore. ie. FOP, Navii River, 7 Dwarfs,Frozen....even Smuggler Run at 1600 is only average by most standards. The 2000 plus per hour attractions of Disney past is history.
I'm pretty sure SR is about 1800. Does it ever hit that? Probably not, but that's what they can do during a holiday rush time like, say, now.

Why? Most of the recent high capacity rides have been heavily screen based. The better rides aren’t hitting the 2000+ capacity.

Edit: Star Wars: Rise of the Resistance will not be part of Extra Magic Hours
And all of the TRUE high capacity ride from back in the day had almost no screens in them at all. SSE can hit 3000. Peoplemover is the iron giant at well beyond 4000+/hour.

Just because more modern high capacity rides have involved screens doesn't mean that's the only way to do it or the only way it will be done.
 
I don’t see the difference.

I don’t really see screen rides recently as a quality addition and most of the screen based rides have been awful, even Disney going back to update Soarin’ made it worse than it what it once was. The only exception is Flight of Passage but because of the way it was built and the problems it has, capacity has taken a hit.

Unless I’m missing the great rides that have been added recently but also have the high capacity that the older riders have.

Like I said, modern rides don’t seem to tick all the boxes for capacity, length, quality and fun.

Capacity doesn’t really bother me anyway. Enough rides are getting built now to balance out the crowds.

To get back on topic, I think Rise is still going to deliver on most of the promises. Capacity and downtime sounds like it’s going to be an issue and the lack of magic hours, suggests that the ride needs more work and Disney are adopting a similar strategy used for getting Hagrid’s to where it needs to be.

@rhino4evr For all the inevitable comparisons that are coming between Rise and no doubt Hagrid’s. They’re a pointless comparison, they’re two completely different experiences it’s apples to oranges. What’s best will probably be down to personal preference. This is the two biggest and best theme park companies playing their A game.

To paraphrase:

Your argument is just based on your personal preference for ride type.

Regarding the rest:

I don’t see the difference.

Like I said, modern rides don’t seem to tick all the boxes for capacity, length, quality and fun.

Modern rides are not all screen rides. Hagrid's is a modern ride, no? River Journey is not screen-based and has a terrible capacity. As you mentioned, F&F is screen-based and has fantastic capacity. What about Kong? Same capacity and has been received a lot better. Your opinion on Soarin is subjective, and while the new version has been more mixed, the original is considered a modern classic by many. FoP is has also been received very well and has standard capacity. Slinky Dog has pretty rough capacity and has been received positively with not a single screen used. Using an older non-screen ride as an example... Splash Mountain has an HRC 1,600-1,700 or so? I would consider that to be ticking all those boxes you listed except the 2K+ capacity.....

There's just no correlation. Some work. Some don't. Just too many different variables that can impact each. Which goes back to:

Why? Most of the recent high capacity rides have been heavily screen based. The better rides aren’t hitting the 2000+ capacity.

That's not entirely true based on the evidence. Only 2 heavy-use screen rides are in the Disney's Top 10 of hourly high capacity, Soarin and Midway Mania - which both just added a 3rd theater to help increase capacity.
 
I wonder if Universal will ever build a water ride in USF or IOA again

Recent history indicates Imagineers don't give a damn about capacity anymore. ie. FOP, Navii River, 7 Dwarfs,Frozen....even Smuggler Run at 1600 is only average by most standards. The 2000 plus per hour attractions of Disney past is history.

They don't want you on more than 3 or 4 rides per visit anyway so this will fit the bill. Make guests wait in lines for 4 or 5 hours per visit....add in 1-2 meals plus $100/guest on their way through the shops as they leave and voila......buy Disney stock!
 
That's not entirely true based on the evidence. Only 2 heavy-use screen rides are in the Disney's Top 10 of hourly high capacity, Soarin and Midway Mania - which both just added a 3rd theater to help increase capacity.
To be fair, that list is all sorts of jacked up - any top 10 list that completely whiffs on #1 (as in, doesn't include #1 anywhere from 1-10) probably goes in the "don't believe everything you read on the internet" bucket. Peoplemover being 4K+ is hilarious.

While neither Falcon or RotR hit 2,000 like E's of the past like Mansion/Pirates/IaSW/BTM, they were designed to be slightly above average compared to what's been built over the last 10-20 years. Reality is obviously TBD.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andysol
To be fair, that list is all sorts of jacked up - any top 10 list that completely whiffs on #1 (as in, doesn't include #1 anywhere from 1-10) probably goes in the "don't believe everything you read on the internet" bucket. Peoplemover being 4K+ is hilarious.

While neither Falcon or RotR hit 2,000 like E's of the past like Mansion/Pirates/IaSW/BTM, they were designed to be slightly above average compared to what's been built over the last 10-20 years. Reality is obviously TBD.

to be fair, it still doesn’t negate the overall point....
 
to be fair, it still doesn’t negate the overall point....
That's true... I'm just saying, neither of them should be in that list.

The people mover is indeed 4K+. Believe it or don’t believe it. I’m speaking in facts.
Lol, okay.

Sorry, I'll be less dismissive than that - I can see how you think it's 4K+, but actual THRC's aren't always just seats per vehicle x number of dispatches per hour. The ... hmm, how do I put this ... very official number I've seen accounts for the moving belts up and down. You can't theoretically put 4k+ people per hour through that load and unload setup. The THRC to OHRC stepdown then takes into account people per party/pauses/etc.

But I digress... back to RotR.
 
Last edited:
That's true... I'm just saying, neither of them should be in that list.


Lol, okay.

Sorry, I'll be less dismissive than that - I can see how you think it's 4K+, but actual THRC's aren't always just seats per vehicle x number of dispatches per hour. The ... hmm, how do I put this ... very official number I've seen accounts for the moving belts up and down. You can't theoretically put 4k+ people per hour through that load and unload setup. The THRC to OHRC stepdown then takes into account people per party/pauses/etc.

But I digress... back to RotR.
I didn’t say the people mover is putting through 4K every hour. I’m saying it’s capable of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SeventyOne
I never said/claimed/thought that you said it was carrying 4K/hour, but you went right past my point: technically the bottleneck is the rubber moving belt. Move the ride to ground level and I'm happy to agree with you, but the ramp area can't handle 4K/hour (let alone 4,885) and that's part of the attraction.

Didn't mean to derail the thread and I admit I jumped in at a weird juncture, but that list as "evidence".... just no.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Andysol