Lego Cuusoo

[1980-Something-Space-Guy]

The Tachikoma had to be reworked because LEGO's brand fit analysis found that they didn't want to associate the LEGO brand with Ghost in the Shell due to the latter's content.

I searched for official Lego comments, but didn't find them on the project page. Were did they state this?

[DLuders]

@ johnnyvgoode: Peter81 already pointed out the Lego Cuusoo Feedback on Mahjqa's project, a few posts back: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/13519#FeedbackTab .

[1980-Something-Space-Guy]

@ johnnyvgoode: Peter81 already pointed out the Lego Cuusoo Feedback on Mahjqa's project, a few posts back: http://lego.cuusoo.com/ideas/view/13519#FeedbackTab .

Whoops. Sorry. I swear that I didn't see any tab labeled "Official Lego comments", hence I was perplex. That's a bad screw-up Lego made there, keeping people's hopes up. I wonder what criteria they use to tell project owners that their projects won't make it, even before reaching 10,000. Oh well, it seems like they don't know it either. I guess that's why it's a Beta phase.

[DLuders]

Two days ago, the third of three articles appeared on the LEGO CUUSOO Blog:

Article 1 (May 14, 2012): "Projects Reaching 10,000 Supporters Will Now Be Reviewed Quarterly"

Article 2 (May 22, 2012): "The Quarterly LEGO Review: How does it work?"

Article 3 (May 30, 2012): "Tips for increasing your project’s chances of passing the LEGO Review with flying colors!"

Tip #2 could apply to some complex Technic models submitted for CUUSOO consideration:

"Your model can actually be too good for CUUSOO. What? Blasphemy! Actually, some advanced building techniques common in the AFOL community aren’t used on official products because it’s too complex for the builder following instructions—even on large models for ages 16+. If your model is a particularly tricky build, our end product could look significantly different—or not pass review at all. LEGO CUUSOO isn’t a place to canonize the best MOCs as official sets, instead, building your CUUSOO model closer to how we design LEGO sets will make it easier to turn your concept into reality. Need help knowing what techniques aren’t allowed? Re-create your model using LEGO Digital Designer."

As ZBLJ knows, LEGO Digital Designer (LDD) is quite awkward to use for large Lego Technic models. Many parts don't even appear in the LDD Parts Pallette....

[Paul Boratko]

"Your model can actually be too good for CUUSOO."

This statement is going to be a key for Cuusoo for dismissing projects that reach 10,000 supports without hurting anyone's feelings, and also making that person feel better about their project than they did before they submitted it...

It's like going to a job interview for a mechanical engineer's position and they tell you that you are over qualified... You leave the interview upset, but with a slight smile on your face...

Edited June 1, 2012 by Paul Boratko

[adventuresinlego]

I've not tried Technic yet, but I do have some (15 haha) projects on Cuusoo, is there a thread somewhere on this site where we can submit our cuusoo designs for people to vote for them?

[Paul Boratko]

I think this new Guideline was purposely put into place with the increase of Technic models being submitted at Cuusoo... And also for a few system built models that are using some odd building techniques...

How do you politely tell someone that you don't think their model fits your guidelines without actually saying that..? Tell them that their model is just too good...

Edited June 1, 2012 by Paul Boratko

[JunkstyleGio]

I really think that builders like Crowkillers, NKdesigner, Sheepo and Mahjqa are able enough to submit a model which can be built in LDD and won't have elaborate buildingtechniques and still will be bumped from Cuusoo...

For that reason: Booooo to Cuusoo...

Still: I hope that we will get a technic-modell from Cuusoo and I will keep supporting them.

[Meatman]

I wouldn't be surprised if every Technic project on Cuusoo got rejected after 10,000 supports claiming that they were just too good.

[DLuders]

On this TechnicBRICKS (TBs) interview with Gauta Munch (GM, responsible for Technology Innovation at LEGO, in this area of research and development), there was this Question and Answer concerning Lego CUUSOO and Lego Power Functions (LPF):

"TBs: Because fans are always eager to give their contribution and suggestions, I'll ask you if the LEGO CUUSOO platform is the most appropriate to raise ideas for potential new LPF elements? Is a widely supported and technically viable new idea for a new LPF element, something that LEGO would consider producing if proposed this way, or is it CUUSOO exclusively targeted for ideas regarding new LEGO sets?

"GM: The investment into making a new LPF component is quite high and we are living with the product responsibility for a long period. Therefore there has to be LEGO products using the component in high volumes over a range of years before we will decide to launch it. The best way of promoting ideas for new LPF components is to make a good component description with model and product ideas and send it through the LEGO Ambassadors. I would actually encourage you to do so. If the idea is good it will become part of our internal “goodies on the shelf” and might find its way to the shelf in the stores."

Note that Jetro is our current Lego Ambassador for the Technic theme.

[allanp]

Speaking of which, remember this post I made last year?

IMHO I think new parts are more valuble to us that new sets. I think you all know what I want by now, if so, then you can skip the rest of this post. If not, then here's a list of my most wanted new parts:

Longer pneumatic cylinder (double the stroke of the standard one, a range of lengths going up to really really long for making telescopic booms/large forklifts would be even better)

PF servo motor (for precise remote control of steering, pneumatic valves, gearboxes, etc)

PF-L motor (between the M and XL motor, this motor could actually have more power than the XL motor, but with NO internal gearing it would have massive speed and not as much torque. Ideal if you want lot's of power or speed or if you like to construct all the gearing down to suit your MOCs needs or if you want to protect geartrains and the motor using the white clutch gear or belt drive or just like the satisfying sight of lots of fast spinning gears an axles)

Synchromesh gears (the dark grey 16t clutch gear) in more sizes for more lifelike, stronger, more intuative and more power efficient gearboxes.

Rotary pneumatic actuator

planetary gear reduction parts suitable for use in steered/suspended wheel hubs

Differencial gear using a 36t double bevel gear for drive (enableing it to be driven by a 12t bevel gear as a bevel gear or a 12t double bevel gear as spur gear, also giving a higher reduction ratio of 1:3. The ability to house 4 internal gears instead of three would also be nice as well as being able to use the 20t bevel gears as the internal ones that drive the wheels, effectively enableing it to handle 3 times as much stress without breaking anything).

Suspention springs with ball sockets on the end that can be pulled apart and reassembled in different configurations and lengths of travel (by using a different length axle and number of springs) allowing the sockets to face any direction with a resolution of 90 degrees

Electrical and pneumatic slip rings to allow the transmission of electrical and pneumatic power though a rotating plane (for example a turn table). The pneumatic slip ring is probably the least feasable of these ideas tho.

Gosh darn it, damb you internal motor gearing!!!!!

Edited July 1, 2012 by allanp