• ℹ️ Heads up...

    This is a popular topic that is fast moving Guest - before posting, please ensure that you check out the first post in the topic for a quick reminder of guidelines, and importantly a summary of the known facts and information so far. Thanks.

Will VelociCoaster push Disney to build more thrilling rides?

Matt N

TS Member
Favourite Ride
Mako (SeaWorld Orlando)
Hi guys. Disney and Universal are arguably the two biggest names in the theme park industry, and their brand of park is quite a different product to any others on Earth. While many parks seem to have the big coasters as their main selling point, the big 2 aim for a more holistic experience, with the coasters often being sidelined in favour of a greater emphasis on different elements, such as dark rides, shows, and immersive themed environments. As such, these premium parks often don’t tend to build especially extreme coasters, particularly in the case of Disney and particularly in more recent years. Don’t get me wrong, the big players have built thrill rides, but they often don’t tend to be absolute monsters like you’d find in other theme parks, and many of these thrill rides were built some time ago.


However, a new for 2021 ride bucked this trend in quite a big way. Last year, VelociCoaster opened at Universal’s Islands of Adventure in Florida, and it has seemed to go down a real treat thus far. Guests are loving it, and from what I can tell, it packs the lavish theming and experience factors that you’d expect from a premium tier park. However, in a notable departure from other recent coasters built in Disney & Universal parks, it looks to be a pretty extreme ride from a hardware perspective too. It has the dynamic elements, high forces and fast pacing that many more traditional theme park rides have, and at 155ft tall and 70mph, it’s hardly an insignificant ride in terms of size! Guests seem to be loving it thus far, and having such an extreme ride arguably gives Universal a key advantage over Disney, and opens them up to a greater range of guests.


So with that in mind, my question to you today is; do you think that VelociCoaster’s success will push Disney to build more thrilling rides in order to keep up?


Personally, I’m undecided. I could see arguments for both sides of the coin; I see very valid reasons as to why Disney might be spurred to up the thrills a bit, but I can also see very valid arguments for them not bothering and sticking to what they’re doing now.


In terms of why I could see them building more thrilling rides in response to VelociCoaster; even though Disney has gained a reputation among many for being the more family-friendly of the big 2, their previous record suggests that they are not as averse to building thrill rides as you might think. While they haven’t built any massive monsters, I’d argue that the likes of Rock’n’Rollercoaster prove that Disney are not averse to building coasters with elements like intense launches and inversions, and even recent Disney coasters like Guardians and Tron are hardly kiddie coasters; those two look like a notable step up from your Big Thunder Mountains and Seven Dwarfs Mine Trains, for sure. As such, Disney installing something a bit more thrilling to combat VelociCoaster isn’t out of the realms of possibility, in my opinion.


On the flip side, however, Universal has always seemed a bit “edgier” than Disney (for lack of a better word), and has always seemed a fair amount more interested in the thrill seeker market than Disney has ever been. So with that in mind, one does have to wonder whether Disney would be interested in building more thrilling rides. Their current paradigm of mostly appealing to younger families is seemingly working very well for them, so why deviate from it?


But what are your thoughts?
 
Hi guys. Disney and Universal are arguably the two biggest names in the theme park industry, and their brand of park is quite a different product to any others on Earth. While many parks seem to have the big coasters as their main selling point, the big 2 aim for a more holistic experience, with the coasters often being sidelined in favour of a greater emphasis on different elements, such as dark rides, shows, and immersive themed environments. As such, these premium parks often don’t tend to build especially extreme coasters, particularly in the case of Disney and particularly in more recent years. Don’t get me wrong, the big players have built thrill rides, but they often don’t tend to be absolute monsters like you’d find in other theme parks, and many of these thrill rides were built some time ago.


However, a new for 2021 ride bucked this trend in quite a big way. Last year, VelociCoaster opened at Universal’s Islands of Adventure in Florida, and it has seemed to go down a real treat thus far. Guests are loving it, and from what I can tell, it packs the lavish theming and experience factors that you’d expect from a premium tier park. However, in a notable departure from other recent coasters built in Disney & Universal parks, it looks to be a pretty extreme ride from a hardware perspective too. It has the dynamic elements, high forces and fast pacing that many more traditional theme park rides have, and at 155ft tall and 70mph, it’s hardly an insignificant ride in terms of size! Guests seem to be loving it thus far, and having such an extreme ride arguably gives Universal a key advantage over Disney, and opens them up to a greater range of guests.


So with that in mind, my question to you today is; do you think that VelociCoaster’s success will push Disney to build more thrilling rides in order to keep up?


Personally, I’m undecided. I could see arguments for both sides of the coin; I see very valid reasons as to why Disney might be spurred to up the thrills a bit, but I can also see very valid arguments for them not bothering and sticking to what they’re doing now.


In terms of why I could see them building more thrilling rides in response to VelociCoaster; even though Disney has gained a reputation among many for being the more family-friendly of the big 2, their previous record suggests that they are not as averse to building thrill rides as you might think. While they haven’t built any massive monsters, I’d argue that the likes of Rock’n’Rollercoaster prove that Disney are not averse to building coasters with elements like intense launches and inversions, and even recent Disney coasters like Guardians and Tron are hardly kiddie coasters; those two look like a notable step up from your Big Thunder Mountains and Seven Dwarfs Mine Trains, for sure. As such, Disney installing something a bit more thrilling to combat VelociCoaster isn’t out of the realms of possibility, in my opinion.


On the flip side, however, Universal has always seemed a bit “edgier” than Disney (for lack of a better word), and has always seemed a fair amount more interested in the thrill seeker market than Disney has ever been. So with that in mind, one does have to wonder whether Disney would be interested in building more thrilling rides. Their current paradigm of mostly appealing to younger families is seemingly working very well for them, so why deviate from it?


But what are your thoughts?
I'm not convinced as I think it's good that Disney ate catering more for families and children with rides that are not too intense, whilst Universal are catering more for teens and adult groups with high thrill attractions. :)
 
I can't see Disney building a ride like VelociCoaster. Disney don't build "Roller Coasters" They build "Roller Coaster Type Rides" aka. Story driven attractions that can't be admitted to as being a roller coaster without breaking the narrative.
For all the thematic elements of VelociCoaster it is a roller coaster first, story experience second. So I can't see Disney being influenced by it too much, no matter how popular it is.
A ride like Hagrids however would fit the Disney model. I'd see them being more influenced by its success than VelociCoaster.

As for the more general question of if Disney will build more thrilling rides I think they've learnt where their limits are. Mission Space is arguably the most intense ride ever built, and its been a nightmare for them since it opened. Alien Encounter also proved to be too intense an experience for a Magic Kingdom audience, although I wouldn't rule it out for one of the 2nd/3rd gate parks.
But Tower of Terror, Rock and Roller Coaster, Paris's Space Mountain are rides I can see them doing again (literally, they are building Guardians and Tron as I write this).

@Matt N out of interest when you make it out to Europa Park you'll find that like Disney their thrill rides aren't especially intense. Intense rides have a narrow target market (an issue Thorpe Park struggles with) but a thrilling ride that isn't too intense (like B&Ms hyper coasters) tend to satisfy a larger audience. While Europa don't hide their coasters like Disney do (quite the opposite in fact) they are hitting exactly the same thrill levels.
 
Ironically universal and Disney are good for each other, especially in the regions where both resorts are easily accessible during the same trip such as Florida, California etc.

Don't see Disney ever building a true thrill coaster tbh. They simply don't need to.
 
As others have said Disney don't need to add a true thrill coaster they compete in other ways, they haven't in the past when Universal have added thrill rides. While Universal does have some thrilling attractions, the majority of their rides are actual family/ family thrill level. Interestingly back before IOA opened in 1999, dissent where worried what impact it would have on their own parks and did plan a new ride for each park, some with more of a thrill focus. One such attraction was fire Mountain, which was to open in Magic Kingdom and was a villain themed coaster, one rumour at the time was a highly themed Vekoma flying coaster. However the projects where canceled when IOA underperformed and didn't prove any threat to Disney World, plus then the downturn from the sept 11th terrorist attacks, stopped these projects from ever progressing. As we know it took 11 years for Universal to turn IOA performance around with the opening of Harry Potter in 2010.
 
@Matt N out of interest when you make it out to Europa Park you'll find that like Disney their thrill rides aren't especially intense. Intense rides have a narrow target market (an issue Thorpe Park struggles with) but a thrilling ride that isn't too intense (like B&Ms hyper coasters) tend to satisfy a larger audience. While Europa don't hide their coasters like Disney do (quite the opposite in fact) they are hitting exactly the same thrill levels.
Really? I find this very interesting to hear; I always thought that at very least Europa’s big 3 of Blue Fire, Silver Star and Wodan would far surpass the thrill level of anything Disney has to offer!

I’m certainly excited for Europa’s big 3, anyway; in terms of ride types, it exactly parallels my current top 3!
 
Last edited:
Really? I find this very interesting to hear; I always thought that at very least Europa’s big 3 of Blue Fire, Silver Star and Wodan would far surpass the thrill level of anything Disney has to offer!

I’m certainly excited for Europa’s big 3, anyway; in terms of ride types, it exactly parallels my current top 3!
Europa's big 3 are a lot of fun, but I wouldn't say any of them are more thrilling than Rock'N'Roller Coaster or Space Mountain (Paris).
Not that it should concern you. I think we have similar tastes in rides and Wodan and Blue Fire are both my favourite wood and steel coaster respectively. Silver Star is also very good although I do rank Mako higher.
I just find them more fun than Thrilling. None of them come close to the intensity of Nemesis.
 
Ultimately Disney are a business, and they will build what they think’s going to make them money. There was a time when they didn’t serve alcohol. Now they do. We have seen quite big changes in the kinds of attractions that Disney build. Rides like Carousel of Progress and Hall of Presidents are quite different to the kind of attractions they build now. We also know that Disney will ‘answer’ attractions at other parks. E.g. Living with the Seas in response to Sea World, or Animal Kingdom in response to Busch Gardens. Wizarding World of Harry Potter certainly helped to shape the kinds of attractions that Disney build.

Building rides aimed at teenagers isn’t a new thing. Eisner bought in rides like Star Tours and Captain EO because he wanted to keep the brand cool, and didn’t want to lose market share to Six Flags. Disneyland Paris built the first two Disney coasters that went upside down.

The Tron coasters felt like a significant step for Disney, in that you can’t take your bags on with you and leave them in lockers. Building rides that can’t accommodate baggage does have its drawbacks, particularly if you enforce the loose article policy strictly. Universal has metal detectors! But now Disney have taken that step, it does potentially open up new possibilities.

There are challenges with more thrilling rides. Disney don’t want their parks to be filled with the sound of people screaming, or have lots of coaster track affecting sightlines. Thrill rides tend to be taller and faster making them harder to hide. Disney tend to expect higher throughputs from their rides than most parks (although not necessarily compared to Universal). Getting higher throughputs from more thrilling rides can be more challenging, particularly if they have more complicated restraints. The faster the vehicles are going, the harder it is to subtly hide the joins between each block section. If a fast coaster has lots of block brakes it could feel disjointed.

More thrilling rides can also have more wear and tear. Universal have already removed Dueling Dragons and rebuilt Hulk. Disney like to build their rides to last. Until recently there was more of a risk that thrill rides would get rougher over time, particularly when they’re being used 365 days a year, 12 hours a day. But technology has come on.

Nonetheless, if Disney felt they were losing market share to other parks with more thrilling rides, they’d change their strategy. New technology does make it easier to build thrilling rides that are safe, durable and have high throughputs. Magnetic launches are a game changer. They allow you to build fast coasters without needing lots of height, where you’re going to interrupt sightlines. Magnetic launches don’t take time to reset like a hydraulic launch, and they can divide up block sections without bringing a train to a crawl. Over the last 10 years magnetic launches have made thrill coasters more appealing to Disney.
 
Disney is a brand that’s bigger than just theme parks but in the top 10 visited Theme parks in the world Disney got 8 in there. Like even Disney lowest visitors park gets nearly
2 million more visitors Universal studios so I think Disney opening a new attraction across all 4 parks every year will keep the guests flowing though the gates.
Also space Disney can built new attractions without very rarely having to move any attractions where in Universal Studios some attractions have been replaced twice and some ain’t been as good as it’s original.
 
Last edited:
I can see them building something like Velocicoaster. Pretty sure no one would have thought they’d build RnRC, Splash Mountain or even Matterhorn, until they did. And those installations were built as a response/evolution of the changing market and competition. That makes a Disney version of Velocicoaster at least possible.
 
Disney generally look at the story they want to tell and then find the most appropriate hardware. Some attractions I think they do start out wanting a coaster-type ride and go from there, but it feels like Universal decide they want a launched coaster and how can they theme it. Whereas Disney seem to approach in a different way.

Of course there are two rollercoasters currently under construction (Cosmic Rewind and Light Cycles) so Disney does build thrill coasters, but story is still a big part of the attraction.
 
I love universal. Did Velocicoaster several times in early December and it was pretty good. The theming is good. That's it, pretty good, fun but not awesome.

I don't like Disney parks. I feel trapped there. I only go for the sake of my wife who loves everything Disney. I did avatar flight of passage for the first time in December. The theming is awesome, the ride itself is unbelievably awesome. So much so that for the first time in my life a theme park ride had me quite emotional.

That's Disney, it's what they do and they're damned good at it. They don't need big fast thrill rides. Universal is fun. Disney is immersive.

My wife has only seen me cry once and that was at the cinema watching Disney's UP when it was first released. The story of Carl and Ellie meeting as kids, growing up, life together and then her passing. Yes I got sucked in by a animated movie and it made a grown man cry. I hate you Disney but love you too.
 
Top