DVDizzy Forum

Why is everyone so objectionable about cloning things at Disney parks?

Because why should people bother going to other Disney parks if the one closest to them has most of what the other parks have?

IMO, the parks all do have unique attractions and restaurants in them, so they're still worth going to, but if a huge chunk of the attractions are the same in multiple parks, it reduces the need to go to multiple parks.

I think it's best for everyone to have most of the same of the best attractions in all the parks, because some people (most people, probably!) can only visit or afford the park closest to them! At least you shouldn't have to leave your own country for the best attractions, you know?

On the other hand...maybe all the parks should be really unique, because things that amazing and great should be expensive and not able to easily obtain anyway...visiting other countries and such...

Ha! I first read the title and I thought they were talking about cloning face members so all the characters look the same. And I thought, "Really? Science is thinking about doing that?"

Anyway, in terms of having the same attraction at each park, it's Amy's explanation. But, like Disney Duster mentioned, a lot of families simply can't afford going to the different Disney parks.

I live in Tennessee, and when I go to a Disney park (or fantasize about going to a Disney park), I go to WDW. So does pretty much everybody that lives here. Until I'm rich and famous and have enough money to take a bath in, I'll never go to Disneyland, and most certainly not Euro Disneyland or Tokyo Disneyland. And honestly, for people like me, going to a Disney park is such a wonderful experience, anyway, that I could care less if I go to the theme park that has "Nemo's Submarine Adventure" or "Twilight Tower of Terror" because I'll be in the happiest/friendliest place in the world!

Attraction cloning brings some of the most popular Disney attractions closer to home for many people. If you're visiting a park farther away than your usual park, then the cloning means that you can focus on visiting those attractions that are unique and be a little less rushed. For example, I don't feel the need to go to Florida's it's a small world attraction since I can see it in CA anytime. That frees up some minutes in my day that I can use for Florida-only attractions or revisiting other old favorites.

UmbrellaFish wrote:Ha! I first read the title and I thought they were talking about cloning face members so all the characters look the same. And I thought, "Really? Science is thinking about doing that?"

Anyway, in terms of having the same attraction at each park, it's Amy's explanation. But, like Disney Duster mentioned, a lot of families simply can't afford going to the different Disney parks.

I live in Tennessee, and when I go to a Disney park (or fantasize about going to a Disney park), I go to WDW. So does pretty much everybody that lives here. Until I'm rich and famous and have enough money to take a bath in, I'll never go to Disneyland, and most certainly not Euro Disneyland or Tokyo Disneyland. And honestly, for people like me, going to a Disney park is such a wonderful experience, anyway, that I could care less if I go to the theme park that has "Nemo's Submarine Adventure" or "Twilight Tower of Terror" because I'll be in the happiest/friendliest place in the world!

I live on the west coast of Canada. I've gone to DL twice and WDW twice. To me I like WDW a lot better. It seems there's a lot more room to walk in WDW than there is at DL.

Disney Duster wrote:I think it's best for everyone to have most of the same of the best attractions in all the parks, because some people (most people, probably!) can only visit or afford the park closest to them! At least you shouldn't have to leave your own country for the best attractions, you know?

On the other hand...maybe all the parks should be really unique, because things that amazing and great should be expensive and not able to easily obtain anyway...visiting other countries and such...

this. Most people aren't Disney maniacs like the people on this forum and thus most likely won't bother go to any of the other parks when they could go to the one most closest to them.

I live in NJ and our family aren't the most richest out there either. We don't bother go all way California just to see few extra attractions available there or newer and superior facades(small world, fantasy land), when we could go to WDW where it's closer and it close to our relatives down there.

I can see it's hard for like DL cloning a park bigger than them but WDW has no excuse. It has much much superior land space and area. This is why i was annoyed with their fantasyland job(before renovation. even that has bit disappointment)