Tiana's Bayou Adventure (Now Open) | Page 91 | Inside Universal Forums

Tiana's Bayou Adventure (Now Open)

  • 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.
i just dont understand why they leave spots empty specially in dealing with a replacement ride, specially dealing with a replacement.
(budget)
i understand that maybe the budget for animatronics was limited, i get that, but, they couldnt put statues or anything? static little animals?
Isn't that because the ride in Disneyland is shorter and they modeled it for that ride?
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Lucky Planet
Drew has put so much time and effort into his (great!) coverage of this re-theme, it is like he now has Stockholm Syndrome about this ride. :grinning:
 
  • Like
Reactions: bdubsCEO
I got a better question: How was he able to go on it all of these times when the ride keeps shutting down every five minutes?

Yeah, I gotta say, emphatically claiming the ride is running "flawlessly" when there's ample evidence it *isn't* is a weird look. You can like or even love the ride, sure, but there are plenty of clips/reports showing major show timing/animation glitches in addition to the numerous breakdowns.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nick
oh...... oh no. that makes sense
Does he have a job? I feel Tiana is paying him on the side.
Considering this was a retheme with not the highest budget in the world, Disney probably didn't want to bother with doing a more bespoke version for MK that would better take advantage of the space.

Both points make way too much sense considering Disney's recent business model and MO.
 
It was rather expensive for a ride update that didn’t ultimately change much about the actual ride aside from the set pieces and AA’s, both of which are far fewer now though. I’d bet a large percentage of that money went to the AA’s and redoing the exterior of the mountain/briar patch to a bayou.
 
142 Million for both rides or just WDW?
The article says combined cost....But, I wouldn't give too much credence to this article. Its source quote is a linked in comment and the numbers are kind of contrived since it's based on costs of two unrelated Disney new attractions. Sounds like a clickbait article to me. And, very poor investigative journalism with no 'real' evidence or info as a source.