- Feb 28, 2015
- 3,830
- 7,352
The contract has no weight in California and it never ones stipulates screen dependence.
A classic ride with just screens sounds really boring and does not well with the audience. More importantly, the 1994 contract disallows any Marvel character that is featured in a simulator ride in Japan and United States east and west of the Mississippi River by any other theme parks that are within the designated legal distances of any Universal theme park, since after all, screens are always used for simulator rides just because they're cheap and less innovative. A Marvel ride at any Disney park that falls under the restricted geographic clause must be consisted of practical sets and animatronics with screens only adding to the story rather than having the guests partaking in the action.
I take complete issue with this statement. It's just not factually accurate. Both places have attractions that are completely screens, attractions that are mixed, and attraction that have none. Disney has more screen based attractions in Epcot alone than in all of Universal Orlando. And almost every major attraction built in the last decade at Disney relies heavily or completely on projected media. I'm sorry to derail this conversation but I'm not going to sit by and let back handed factually inaccurate comments like this go.I would be fine with this. Disney doesn't rely on screens as a creative crutch like Uni does. They'll like use screens as a tool to enhance the story rather than focus on just that.
Here, have a Snickers bar. You're not you when you're hungry.I take complete issue with this statement. It's just not factually accurate. Both places have attractions that are completely screens, attractions that are mixed, and attraction that have none. Disney has more screen based attractions in Epcot alone than in all of Universal Orlando. And almost every major attraction built in the last decade at Disney relies heavily or completely on projected media. I'm sorry to derail this conversation but I'm not going to sit by and let back handed factually inaccurate comments like this go.
My mistake. But even then, at least Disney relies more on practical than screens when it comes to their stuff. Compare Frozen to Gringotts. Compare River Journey to Kong. Compare Flight of Passage's queue and loading to Fallon. They use more practical that UO has been recently. Supercharged isn't going to be any better.But this is an IOA thread.
The contract has no weight in California and it never ones stipulates screen dependence.
Um... there's nothing that says anything about screens, and Disney can do whatever they want in California with Marvel.
I believe the Marvel Action Universe referred to in that clause is a Location-based family entertainment concept Marvel was trying to license, and does not apply to theme parks. The Guardians ride in Epcot can use screen based simulation (just like DCA one does)..
Screens can be used at Tokyo Disney, Disneyland, and Disney World, but they cannot be associated with a simulator rode, as screen are famous to being incorporated into such technology. That means, these Disney parks must not use anything that resembles a simulator ride like Spider-Man ride at IOA and Soaring over the World at DCA and Epcot are.
- Restrictions as to the geographic location of The Marvel Action Universe in areas where [Comcast] has exclusive rights hereunder.....iii.Within the ADI market of the city containing a Universal Theme Park (even to the extent such ADI exceeds a 60 mile radius) there shall not be a Marvel themed simulator ride.
Except use the name "Marvel."Um... there's nothing that says anything about screens, and Disney can do whatever they want in California with Marvel.
I believe the Marvel Action Universe referred to in that clause is a Location-based family entertainment concept Marvel was trying to license, and does not apply to theme parks. The Guardians ride in Epcot can use screen based simulation (just like DCA one does).
What is SFX?I'm in no way or shape saying both are happening, FWIW. Just speculating. So far nothing fits the alleged sale of an SFX coaster in Orlando
What is SFX?
I guess the argument will be what defines a simulator.
A simulator ride is where guests are shown a screen while their seats or vehicle corresponds to the action on screen. The clear cut example would be the Amazing Adventures of Spider-Man ride at IOA and USJ. When the Electro from the screen attacks the real-life guests with an electric plug, the vehicles shakes uncontrollably when he does that. That's an example of a simulator ride. Think as if the guy from the screen actually does that out of the screen and into real life to attack you.
Now lets look at Guardians of the Galaxy Mission Breakout at DCA, it's not a simulator, but rather a tower drop that is rethemed from the Hollywood Tower of Terror. You see the Guardians going into action, but the elevator does not correspond with the screen, since you're rarely taking any action in it. You just clearly watch what they do, not partaking any action with the screen.
Ok, I'm not a lawyer, but if I was one I'd point out that section IV.B.4 of the MCA/Marvel contract defines "The Marvel Action Universe" as a "planned Retail concept which may include interactive elements as a major or minor element" such as "one or more virtual reality and/or simulator ride using Marvel characters". All of the restrictions on simulator usage in the contract (including that they can have a max capacity of 20 guests) are contained within that specific Marvel Action Universe shrinkages clause, and do not apply in any way to Disney's theme parks.
I appreciate your attempt at defining "simulator" but (even if it were applicable) there's nothing in the contract that legally supports your definition.
I would argue that any ride that synchronizes a moving vehicle to a projected image is a simulator. That would cover everything from Star Tours to Gringotts to Guardians, since the gantry moves in sync with the squinching on the screens.
Furthermore, you could narrow the definition of simulator to say that the vehicle must remain within its original footprint and simulate the distance travelled instead of progressing through a show building. Under that definition, Spider Man would be a dark ride with 3D screens, but GotG-M:B would be closer to a true simulator.