MK Piston Peak and Villains Land Construction Thread

[GordoInTheParks]

People love to acknowledge that when it’s convenient for them.

We all do it sometimes to be fair.

"When it's convenient" is the key part of this. I'm not immune to treating Disney as anything more than just a corporation. I think that there's obviously special interest there, and some of us think that there is or was something truly special, either under Walt, or some other unspecified time after. And that is what brings us all here.

That said, I find the relationship that some have with Disney to be extremely confusing, and possibly a little codependent, if not abusive relationship. The fact that some of the same people who claim that only Disney's terminology is to be used for a swath of dirt, are also the same ones claiming that Disney always lets them down, is just a wild contradiction, to me. I'm an optimist, who also doesn't care what any company uses as terminology for a piece of dirt, in any sense other than how it appears on an official map or signage, and I don't think that either of the two of us saying how arbitrary this title is, are in any way, challenging the official company title.

True but in this case Cars and Villians were both basically announced at the same time and even though individually neither one can be called a true land, combined they are designed, in my opinion, to be a completely separate island, if you will, not having anything to do with Frontier or Liberty Square. For sure an oddity as far as the normal way that Disney usually or originally was set up. I think that as much as I hated the loss of RoA scenery, I think that the outcome of that move will be a help in the crowd problem and really be a better use of that very valuable property, plus will be utilized and enjoyed by far more guests than were being entertained before. In the end, Disney is a business entity as much as we like to not acknowledge that.

This is VERY well stated! There's no precedence for what they are attempting with these two tracks of land "swaths of earth"! They are taking a HUGE swing with these two... "themed places", and they are in fact, connected at their inception, with Piston Peak being part of a change that allows for foot traffic to reach Villains Land, from both directions as one of its main reasons of being.

Only time will tell if this was a worthy change of scenery, and if the end result justified the decision for changing from RoA to PP, but I remain positive, and I really think that the artwork gives me hope, at least in the way that I'm interpreting what I'm seeing!

 

[GordoInTheParks]

I do wonder if they can move the seating for Liberty Square Market into the old Liberty Belle entrance, just to open the pathway a bit better?
View attachment 914125

Excellent observation! That fits right along the lines of what I was thinking, as well. A themed "PPNP Overlook Market" could replace the existing LS Market, and really open up that pathway.

Whatever the case, the inclusion of the structure on both version of the artwork is NOT a coincidence, and they clearly have some sort of plan for it.

 

[eddie104]

The fact that some of the same people who claim that only Disney's terminology is to be used for a swath of dirt, are also the same ones claiming that Disney always lets them down, is just a wild contradiction, to me. I'm an optimist

Certain folks on here can be extremely hypocritical especially when they have a certain narrative to spin.

I try to say as optimistic and positive as possible.

I’m not wasting my energy or time complaining and whining all day over things I can’t change.

I can be critical when necessary but it isn’t something I look forwarded to doing every time I post here unlike some people.

 

[Ayla]

They are at 2 different stages I believe.

If they are spacing the projects a year apart - Tropical Americas 2027
Monsters 2028
Piston Peak 2029

Villians 2030-31 (maybe)

 

[lazyboy97o]

I can be critical when necessary but it isn’t something I look forwarded to doing every time I post here unlike some people.

You can read minds? Or is this the sort of disparaging comment about others that qualifies as “construction talk” because it’s about maintaining a safe space away from criticism of Disney?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I can be critical when necessary but it isn’t something I look forwarded to doing every time I post here unlike some people.

You contradict yourself in this sentence - you are critical of “some people” who post on here. Unless that is one of the extremely necessary times?

 

[BrianLo]

I fail to see how @James Alucobond is spinning a narrative, accuracy may be pedantic, but is accuracy not important? Optimism does not require black and white thinking.

It's an Area or Section of Frontierland. We've answered this already, Disney addressed it.

The Piston Peak National Park is a section of Frontierland much as New Orleans is a section, the Arizona Bluffs is a section or the North Woods is a section. There is no New Orleans land in Magic Kingdom, there is in Disneyland. There is no Carsland coming to Magic Kingdom, there is at DCA.

Piston Peak National Park Tell Story of Cars at Frontierland

Learn how Piston Peak National Park will continue the storytelling tradition in Frontierland as we get ready for Cars at Magic Kingdom.

disneyparksblog.com

I don't mind the conversation because I think it is funny, but if anyone wants it to be over the way to do that is to stop digging in and returning to it.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

Certain folks on here can be extremely hypocritical especially when they have a certain narrative to spin.

I try to say as optimistic and positive as possible.

I’m not wasting my energy or time complaining and whining all day over things I can’t change.

I can be critical when necessary but it isn’t something I look forwarded to doing every time I post here unlike some people.

I think that there is a healthy balance of optimism and criticism, and that middle ground should be more prevalent, but seems to be thrown out the window for some, in the age of social media influence.

It's kind of like how some certain YouTubers have strayed from this healthy balance to an overtly negative one, where their current content always containing toxic undertones (Mickey Views, to name one of the more obvious examples of this change) and I don't know whether this is a conscious effort to gain clicks, is a falling out of interest in what they're covering, or they are simply a victim of their surroundings in this age of negativity for clicks as a selling point. You can see that the comments of those overly negative videos always reflects this same negative tone, so it's definitely a self-fulfilling cycle. Whenever these people are called out as leaning towards toxic fandom, they always say that they've always been critical, and play up the importance of doing so, when it's obvious that there's more going on than a healthy dose of criticism or skepticism, and it makes me think that they have likely lost their passion, since they clearly can't see the forest from the trees.

Here's Disneyland, in Walt's own words:

"The park means a lot to me in that it's something that will never be finished. Something that I can keep developing, keep plussing and adding to—it's alive. It will be a live, breathing thing that will need changes.

I wanted something live, something that could grow, something I could keep plussing with ideas, you see? The park is that. Not only can I add things but even the trees will keep growing; the thing will get more beautiful every year. And as I find what the public likes—and when a picture's finished and I put it out—I find out what they like, or they don't like, and I have to apply that to some other thing; I can't change that picture, so that's why I wanted that park."

It's really the same as it ever was, in many ways. I think that people are so keen to put their own attachment into a box of some kind of untouchable nostalgia, that they have lost sight of what has always been a pretty special concept of an ever-evolving and idealistic place to be, as a form of escapism entertainment.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

You contradict yourself in this sentence - you are critical of “some people” who post on here. Unless that is one of the extremely necessary times?

Being critical of something or someone is more complicated in reality than simply applying an on/off switch.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I fail to see how @James Alucobond is spinning a narrative, accuracy may be pedantic, but is accuracy not important? Optimism does not require black and white thinking.

Especially in a thread that’s supposedly just about the facts of construction. Nothing negative about Disney was actually stated, but accurate information is being framed as a negative attack against both posters and Disney.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

I fail to see how @James Alucobond is spinning a narrative, accuracy may be pedantic, but is accuracy not important? Optimism does not require black and white thinking.

It's an Area or Section of Frontierland. We've answered this already, Disney addressed it.

The Piston Peak National Park is a section of Frontierland much as New Orleans is a section, the Arizona Bluffs is a section or the North Woods is a section. There is no New Orleans land in Magic Kingdom, there is in Disneyland. There is no Carsland coming to Magic Kingdom, there is at DCA.

Piston Peak National Park Tell Story of Cars at Frontierland

Learn how Piston Peak National Park will continue the storytelling tradition in Frontierland as we get ready for Cars at Magic Kingdom.

disneyparksblog.com

I don't mind the conversation because I think it is funny, but if anyone wants it to be over the way to do that is to stop digging in and returning to it.

And yet "New Orleans Square" in Disneyland is not part of Frontierland, and is the given that official name of this "Square", in place of the term "land". What's different over there? Is it that it's an entirely larger themed area, not unlike Piston Peak? ... Big Thunder and Tiana's at MK are literally just themed rides with a terrain facade. If this was just that, I'd see your point, but it's actually an all-encompassing area, and that's why Disney themselves are using the term "Piston Peak National Park", and even putting the National Park sign where you enter this area, that unless it changes, includes a walk-through play area with the geysers and barrel bridges over water, 2 rides, an obligatory gift shop, and probably some type of quick service dining location.

Again, nobody is arguing what Disney is officially calling the area of Piston Peak, but gatekeeping anyone from not using Disney's official terminology is pretty petty. Especially when it's completely surrounded by 3 (soon to be 4) separate lands, and is not called a Square or an Island, but a "National Park". We all know that it's technically officially part of Frontierland... but that doesn't change reality. One where the entrance to this not-land is going to be immediately in front of Haunted Mansion. Are you so stuck in official company terms that you forget that we use the same term "land" here in the real world for the ground beneath our feet, or any independent section on this earth? This whole argument is beyond silly, at this point! I've even stopped calling even a mini land, as that's just too offensive for some people here, even though I never claimed that this was some kind of official Disney terminology.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

Especially in a thread that’s supposedly just about the facts of construction. Nothing negative about Disney was actually stated, but accurate information is being framed as a negative attack against both posters and Disney.

Oh, so I wasn't told multiple times that Disney has a history of under-delivering on what was promised, as a reason why there would not be 2 rides, regardless of the fact that there are 2 rides shown in the concept art and 2 rides were promised? I totally was told that by multiple people here, and some of the same people are circularly arguing about an arbitrary name that Disney officially uses to call their areas, which nobody is even arguing against that official terminology.

 

[James Alucobond]

I’m not attempting to gatekeep anything you’re doing. I only responded because you used the “land” moniker to make an assertion about the number of rides the area must have. I’m not even among the people who ever said the second ride would be cut. But you do you.

 

[lazyboy97o]

This whole argument is beyond silly, at this point! I've even stopped calling even a mini land, as that's just too offensive for some people here, even though I never claimed that this was some kind of official Disney terminology.

You keep going on about and mischaracterizing it.

Oh, so I wasn't told multiple times that Disney has a history of under-delivering on what was promised, as a reason why there would not be 2 rides, regardless of the fact that there are 2 rides shown in the concept art? I totally was told that by multiple people here, and some of the same people are circularly arguing about an arbitrary name that Disney officially uses to call their areas, which nobody is even arguing against.

You weren’t told it would happen. You were told that your inaccurate statements about the status and nature of the project are not reasons it couldn’t or wouldn’t happen.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

I’m not attempting to gatekeep anything you’re doing. I only responded because you used the “land” moniker to make an assertion about the number of rides the area must have. I’m not even among the people who ever said the second ride would be cut. But you do you.

Again, you're being completely reductive and disingenuous about my words, and never once did I claim that 2 rides is the sole reason to call something a land. I was clearly asking for examples of the contrary, and also asking anyone what else to call it, since it fits multiple checkboxes of other lands, squares, islands, or whatever.

Nobody is arguing what Disney is using as their terminology, and yet there are some people yelling at clouds. I find this entire debate rather absurd, and have stopped calling it a "mini land" to appease the gatekeepers, but I keep being dragged into this conversation anyway.

 

[BrianLo]

And yet "New Orleans Square" in Disneyland is not part of Frontierland, and is the given that official name of this "Square", in place of the term "land". What's different over there? Is it that it's an entirely larger themed area, not unlike Piston Peak? ... Big Thunder and Tiana's at MK are literally just themed rides with a terrain facade. If this was just that, I'd see your point, but it's actually an all-encompassing area, and that's why Disney themselves are using the term "Piston Peak National Park", and even putting the National Park sign where you enter this area, that unless it changes, includes a walk-through play area with the geysers and barrel bridges over water, 2 rides, an obligatory gift shop, and probably some type of quick service dining location.

Again, nobody is arguing what Disney is officially calling the area of Piston Peak, but gatekeeping anyone from not using Disney's official terminology is pretty petty. Especially when it's completely surrounded by 3 (soon to be 4) separate lands, and is not called a Square or an Island, but a "National Park". We all know that it's technically officially part of Frontierland... but that doesn't change reality. One where the entrance to this not-land is going to be immediately in front of Haunted Mansion. Are you so stuck in official company terms that you forget that we use the same term "land" here in the real world for the ground beneath our feet, or any independent section on this earth? This whole argument is beyond silly, at this point! I've even stopped calling even a mini land, as that's just too offensive for some people here, even though I never claimed that this was some kind of official Disney terminology.

Again, I've only presented you with the official explanation and description from the company. You are free to refer to it however you wish.

If you are asking if Disney will present this area with its own separate boundaries on parks map like they do the squares, the answer still appears to be no. Part of the reason may be your expectations for its contents are perhaps too generous, there appears to be no quick service location. It really is just a section to house two rides.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

You keep going on about and mischaracterizing it.


You weren’t told it would happen. You were told that your inaccurate statements about the status and nature of the project are not reasons it couldn’t or wouldn’t happen.

I've already claimed that I'm exiting your ongoing discussion of "It's officially Frontierland" / "Old Guy Yells At Clouds", and changed my terminology to "mini land", and then to just "area" or "land-shaped-area", just to appease anyone who is offended by not using Disney's terminology. Yet, it keeps being churned back around, anyway.

The fact that you're still trying to tell me that my statement about it having two rides in Piston Peak is "inaccurate" [your word that you just used] because of some hypothetical scenario, is... interesting. Regardless of what you think is precedence for these two intertwined lands, there's actually been nothing ever attempted that's on this scale in my lifetime, not to mention that we are in a new era of management.

I'm totally fine with being shown that I'm wrong, and have said that OF COURSE, there could be some prevailing economic catastrophe that could happen [which would probably even need to happen earlier in development] so I've learned my lesson to never say never, but I believe that I'm being pretty darn realistic when I say that they aren't dropping the second ride on some sort of cost-cutting wim, and there's nothing substantial from the past that equates to what they're doing now.

 

[James Alucobond]

You said:

What land do you know has only one attraction? Even the Harry Potter land at Epic has the circus as a placeholder until they get their 2nd "E-ticket" built.

To which I responded that it wasn’t a full land, therefore rendering the question moot from the outset. I also gave you examples of full lands with only one ride, thereby rendering it doubly moot. Not sure what else needs to be said or why it has been followed up with multiple paragraphs of persecution complex. If you want to respond to the people who think the second ride will be cut (who aren’t me), you can easily do so separately.

 

[GordoInTheParks]

Again, I've only presented you with the official explanation and description from the company. You are free to refer to it however you wish.

If you are asking if Disney will present this area with its own separate boundaries on parks map like they do the squares, the answer still appears to be no. Part of the reason may be your expectations for its contents are perhaps too generous, there appears to be no quick service location. It really is just a section to house two rides.

Cool beans. I've never been under the impression that the official terminology was anything other than Piston Peak National Park being officially part of Frontierland, and I don't think that anyone takes an issue with what they're officially calling it.

Again, more words are being put in my mouth, as I never said that there would definitely be a quick service restaurant, and my words "probably some type of" that precedes quick service restaurant, is PRETTY CLEARLY implying that I'm speculating on that one, as others were already doing before I mentioned it. I never implied that this is visible on the map, but I still think that it's more likely than not. Granted, a gift shop at the main ride exit or somewhere else in the area is also speculation, but who are we kidding, on that one?

 

[BrianLo]

Again, more words are being put in my mouth, as I never said that there would definitely be a quick service restaurant, and my words "probably some type of" that precedes quick service restaurant, is PRETTY CLEARLY implying that I'm speculating on that one, as others were already doing before I mentioned it. I never implied that this is visible on the map, but I still think that it's more likely than not. Granted, a gift shop at the main ride exit or somewhere else in the area is also speculation, but who are we kidding, on that one?

If you speculate there is probably some type of quick service restaurant I think perhaps your expectations are too generous. I'm really not your enemy here. If you perceive the three of us to be, you'll perhaps not enjoy this community longterm.