Anyway, on previous trips we felt... more free. I don't know how to describe it, but I am sure even those most ardent FP+ proponent will agree that there have been MANY posts here about how people felt locked in, constrained, etc. The same way FP- detractors talk about how they felt they needed to split up or run or ... whatever (don't mean this dismissively). We still kept our FPs though, we had noticed the increased SB times, it was ... very obvious to us. We recognized that if we wanted to accomplish stuff, well we had to stick to that schedule.
This was our experience, too. And it was strange, because it was September and crowds were low and we had a toddler and I honestly didn't even care if we skipped headliners because I've done them all so many times before (I
was a little disappointed I had to miss my SDMT FP because of an ill-timed toddler meltdown right at the end of my FP window, but that was really the only one I cared much about). But I still missed that feeling of freedom.
I have the App on my iPhone. It works pretty well most of the time, but sometimes it just keeps timing out and I have to use the browser. I end up just canceling a lot of posts, though, b/c once you hit reply that's all you can look at until you hit send or cancel.
That's how the app works for me, too...I heard on this week's podcast that they're about to switch from vbulletin to another platform that will be totally mobile-friendly.
But on to your statement. Well, let me rephrase it perhaps, circa 2010...........
'Then, after having already completed my FP runner duties in the morning to get FP for BTMRR (assume you grabbed FP for Splash when you return for BTMRR ride time) and later Peter Pan (insert whatever rides fit your typical FP/runner pattern) and our whole party had cross-crossed the park several times to use our first 3 FP, and it's already late afternoon because the Peter Pan FP return was so far out, I would run/walk, sometimes literally run (but I guess that was a choice and made out of the stress) to Space Mountain (insert whatever ride fits your pattern) to get a FP, pray pray pray the FP machines aren't covered and that the return time doesn't conflict with dinner (or whatever other plans you might have) because if it doesn't I gotta run to the next FP ride we want, and if the machines aren't covered and the return time works........wait, get to the machine, pray pray pray it spits out the FP (yes, there is a CM there for a reason, because any tech can be glitchy, and FP machines often were), after which we have a lot of time to kill until the return time, and finally head to the FP, and then repeat.'
I hope you get my point. How is FP+ really any different/worse than what you had to do with FP-. Heck, I think the circa 2010 FP story sounds a bit more stressful! While the steps might be different, are the overall processes required under FP+ really all that different? There is a lot of work/stress in either, no?
Yes, the specific steps are different, and with FP+ those steps are forced upon you months in advance, locking you into parks and times for your first 3 FP......but for 4, 5, 6, again....is it really that different?
I hope you don't mind me commenting on this, though I know it was addressed to someone else.
I can totally see how that 2010 experience would have been more stressful for some people. I think familiarity made the old system much less stressful for many, and decreased the need to crisscross and backtrack in many cases. The patterns of FP+, so far, are less clear, but hopefully that will change as time passes and we'll all learn when it is and isn't worth it to run to a kiosk.
That said, I far preferred the uncertainty of walking to TT before dinner in the hopes of scoring a FP-, to the uncertainties of whether FP+s will be available at however many days out I'm planning, and whether we'll actually want to use them at that particular time on a day far in the future. But that's just me. And I really enjoy walking through the parks, so a little extra back and forth never bothered me at all.
We utilized late return for legacy, so we never had to worry about conflicting windows. For me personally, other than the micro-level preplanning (that I detest), FP- with enforced return times only barely edges out FP+.
I might like to explore this crowd based analysis some more.
Would it be fair to say, despite all the varying experiences both positive and negative, we can agree that:
Not sure if your "we" just meant Shaden, or everyone, but hopefully you won't mind some more input.
1. FP+ has some demonstrated benefit to guests during busy times of year.
Agree.
2. During slow times of year FP+ and FP- are somewhat of a wash, as you really don't need either.
Disagree. In slow seasons with FP-, it was easily possible to ride absolutely
everything, and headliners multiple times, with NO pre-merge waits at all. And even though a 10-minute wait certainly isn't bad, a 0-minute wait is even better! So, sure, one didn't
need FP- at all in slow seasons, but that didn't mean it couldn't greatly enhance your touring.
3. Shoulder seasons fall somewhere in the middle, with the FP+ benefit of being able to schedule 3, but FP- may have made it easier to achieve FPs 3, 4, 5, 6.
Agree that FP+ has the benefit of guaranteeing probably at least one headliner (though perhaps not at a time you'd prefer if you make your plans last minute), a clear benefit for anyone who doesn't want to rope drop those rides. Disagree in that FP- DEFINITELY made it easier to achieve FPs 4, 5, 6, etc. And of course whether or not you consider this a worthwhile tradeoff comes down to your subjective experience.
In all of these scenarios, FP+ makes guests think they must adhere to a schedule, that SB lines have increased, and the parks are more crowded.
None of these things may be true. But no matter what anyone says, an individual's experience trumps all. If guests are feeling scheduled and regimented by FP+ then that is their reality. No statistics are going to change that.
What if this could be done just the same, but electronically... would you like it then? Like if say instead of pulling a ticket, you did it by your bands, but could get just as many as you used to. If that was the case, would you prefer FP+ for the purely conservation aspect of not wasting paper?
I would still prefer the old system, because if I could, I would like to ignore my phone and the internet for my entire vacation (and I used to do this). But this has less to do with WDW and more to do with my mixed feelings about phones taking over our lives.
Also, overall we just prefer to make ride decisions *in the park*. We did not find there to be as much flexibility to change times as others have found, and because we had no luck when we DID try to change time/experience, we felt like we *had* to keep the FP+ we made 2 months prior or be stuck in longer lines for those attractions. Keeping the FP+ was the lesser of two evils, but it caused us to do more criss crossing than we did with legacy. It was just much easier to decide *in the parks* - hey, we want to head to this land. let's get a FP for x and then see rides a,b,c while we wait than to plan how we toured teh parks around what our FP+ that were made 2 months prior.
