Have Action Themes Become Extreme?

[WesternOutlaw]

Over the past 10-15 years, LEGO fans have seen LEGO action themes slowly evolve into high flying, road battling races for everything from world cups to world domination. What started as a pleasant Town sub-theme of Modern Adventure sets with classics like 6444 Outback Airstrip (1997) moving to Extreme Team and Res-Q themes, LEGO continued their extreme action by introducing Island Xtreme Stunts in the early 2000s. Theme upon theme of action assault to Agents and World Racers, has LEGO sacrificed classic and minimalist design to bright/new colors and concept in more recent years? While the theme ideas have been fantastic, simply stated, are the sets any good?

What are your thoughts... Have Action Themes Become Extreme?

[brickzone]

I would say yes. The newer sets are probably far more desirable to the target audience, i.e. they will sell better. Hey, even as an AFOL you can see that the newer ones are more "fun" even if the classic ones to us look cute and pleasant. I think the old style action theme is still represented by certain new rescue/emergency sets, as well as elements in other sets like skateboarder minifigs.

Personally I think the Agents theme was awesome!

[Belchher]

I think "extreme" is a bit over the top to describe where they're at these days, to me that would be more along the lines of something like a Resident Evil line with very high levels of violence.

The sets are, though, definitely progressing into the more modern, I guess you could say, definition of action. I suspect this is a trend we're going to see more of, and lets face it, even if you don't actually like killing things ( and lets hope nobody does ), who doesn't like blowing stuff up? And without meaning to be offensive to anyone, I suspect given the large portion of TLGs sales that the U.S. represents, we're most likely going to see more guns, flick fires and the likes in the future. It wouldn't surprise me if they slowly crept into the City theme some time over the next few years, although I suspect an official Lego modern military theme is still a long way off.

Just to put it in perspective, I bought my kids one SW impulse set, just to see if they where interested. As with all ( or at least most ) SW sets, it had blasters in it, which are now happily toted about by their city police force and the "naughty men", and much pewing has been known to occur ( my kids are only 3 1/2 and 5 lol ). They're also big fans of the so called "technic competition arrows", and the catapult from their single castle set is also used more than it should be for the launching of poor, defenseless mini figs for no real reason.

Personally I don't think its anything to worry about, as with everything it's all there to provide more fun and sell more units, and its up to the parents to make sure they can separate reality from harmless fun.

[legitimatealex]

I think you answered your own question. The sets definitely went from Town Subtheme (with some interesting baseplates and fun little sets) to the XTREME AWESOME ACTION PACKED FACE MELTING LINES of Agents, Res Q, World Racers we have now. Any Town theme that dies is to be mourned but what we gained was decent at best and gimmicky at worst.

I’d rather have the Town theme personally. I’m getting a bit tired with the same old same old ‘Cops, Firemen, Service Workers, and then repeated printings of the minifig torsos’ that come up with every single freaking set. The outdoorsy and random spots that you probably would not have thought of initially were very attractive to me. I regret that they’re gone. I predict that our current ‘World Racers’ will most likely go down as a pretty unremarkable theme for LEGO.

[Aanchir]

If you mean "extreme" as in "cool, flashy, and over-the-top", then yeah, they have. But if you mean LEGO's gone too far, I think that's an overstatement. After all, minimalist design and basic builds have some things going for them, but they're still a major case of "thinking inside the box", which is directly against the image of creativity LEGO tries to present.

As it is, the aesthetic style of modern action themes is a great improvement beyond the simple, ordinary designs of themes like Outback (while still constraining itself to versatile part designs), and the introduction of conflict-based stories provides a great starting point for imaginative play. You can easily introduce conflict into older themes like Extreme Team, but person-versus-person conflicts make for much more exciting role play (at least for kids) than person-versus-nature.

I don't have any World Racers sets, and I can't easily judge them, but as I see it they continue to do their job (just as Agents did) by inspiring action-based roleplay and acting as a jumping point for creative building.

[Algernon]

Over the past 10-15 years, LEGO fans have seen LEGO action themes slowly evolve into high flying, road battling races for everything from world cups to world domination. What started as a pleasant Town sub-theme of Modern Adventure sets with classics like 6444 Outback Airstrip (1997) moving to Extreme Team and Res-Q themes, LEGO continued their extreme action by introducing Island Xtreme Stunts in the early 2000s. Theme upon theme of action assault to Agents and World Racers, has LEGO sacrificed classic and minimalist design to bright/new colors and concept in more recent years? While the theme ideas have been fantastic, simply stated, are the sets any good?

What are your thoughts... Have Action Themes Become Extreme?

Yeah, they have, and LEGO's sales have benefited from it. It's hard to deny the play value of World Racers compared to one of the older, tamer sets you mentioned. And personally, I don't see how you can say that the sets themselves have done anything but improve. The construction is more advanced, cleaner, sleeker, and better looking. I do see the appeal of the older designs (I collect them myself), but you can't really deny that LEGO's sense of aesthetics has improved immensely when it comes to construction.

Of course, you can criticize them for large sticker sheets, "juniorization", etc., and in some cases it might be a valid criticism, but I think the majority of modern LEGO designs are quite good, much better than the older ones.

Of course, you can bring up the old violence debate. Remember when Bionicle was introduced, and LEGO kept insisting that the swords the Toa carried were "tools" and not weapons? LEGO just completely gave up on that a few years later, and now look, Hero Factory has poison gas guns, flame throwers, etc.

It's worth noting though that LEGO has been careful not to completely surrender it's image of playful innocence. Look at Power Miners. The rock monsters are little rocky gremlins easily quelled with a water cannon. LEGO Creator was made for the exact purpose of allowing people to flex their creative muscles. And Space Police 3 is limited to "freeze rays" and jail cells. Yeah, themes like Agents and World Racers might seem surprisingly mature, but they're the exception and not the rule.

[Commodore Hornbricker]

I am really not into this theme much but I tend to buy a fair amount of it! Strange....but it usually has cool special parts and I like a lot of the minifigure heads and hair that have come from this theme. The extreme nature seems to give rise to some cool pieces and facial expressions you just don't see in a normal happy Lego City set.

[prateek]

Yes. Kids these days lack the imagination of past generations and desire more violence.

[ZO6]

Initial thoughts - in recent sets, the weapons seem to becoming the main play features for the models. There are more of the weapon systems on a model, and the way that they function can range anywhere from a flick-fire to something more complex.

In the past, if weapons were featured in sets, they were often just for show and usually did not have any functionality. These older sets would have instead had other functions and play features.

Ex. World Racers vs. the 2000 Race Theme

This example can easily be applied to other themes-

Space Police 3 vs. Space Police

Another angle - modern sets often have two different factions within the same set. There is usually the good guy, and the bag guy. The sets are designed so that the two factions can interact, or battle against one another in a very direct way.

In the past, a set would often just contain the model for a specific faction. The set would have functions of its own, and in many cases the model would be perfectly playable by itself, but often you would need to combine it with a set of the opposing faction so that more fun could be had.

Ex. Atlantis vs. Aquazone Aquanauts & Aquasharks

Again, many more examples of this formula can easily be found.

More thoughts - Over the years, we have received many themes that have extremely obvious influences from earlier sets, but these "remakes" are much more action oriented. Some examples being, old Aquazone vs. Atlantis, Rock Raiders vs. Power Miners, 2000 Race vs. World Racers.

Its seems that older themes seemed to be based more on exploration, discovery, and risk taking. While many newer themes, as mentioned before, are focused on lots of action and explosive (literally) play features.

One of my favorite themes of all time - Adventurers, focused on exploration. These sets were for the most part structures, and they features many tricks and traps. The sets were much more along the lines of man vs nature (well...man vs. temple, or something like that), with the goal of finding treasure. There were of course villains, but they were not the focus of the sets.

Fast forward to say Agents. Most of these sets were vehicle based. They were also strongly good guys vs. bad guys and primarily action oriented. While some other recent themes such as Power Minors or Atlantis try to throw in exploration for crystals or keys, the "bad guys" still have a very strong presence.

I'm starting to forget where I'm going with all of this, so I'll just wrap things up. Action themes have simply just become much more action oriented than they were in the past. Kids like good guys vs. bad guys + explosions, and TLC is delivering.

[WesternOutlaw]

Interesting thoughts.

even as an AFOL you can see that the newer ones are more "fun" even if the classic ones to us look cute and pleasant.

I don't know about that. I actually like the design and style of the Classic sets better. Perhaps you are correct that the "Extreme Action" look and boxart is more appealing to the kiddies though. Perhaps my AFOL eyes are getting old, but the newer sets (esp. Island Xtreme and World Racers just look so much like a 'mish-mash' of pieces and colors.

I think "extreme" is a bit over the top to describe where they're at these days, to me that would be more along the lines of something like a Resident Evil line with very high levels of violence.

I chose the word "Extreme" because it's used in the names of a few of the LEGO Action themes (eg. X-Treme Team, Extreme Stunts). I wasn't really describing the violence level. In fact, there are many more violent LEGO themes, esp. in the License category. I don't have an issue with the violence level as I think it is representative of our modern society, but that's a completely different topic.

To me, "Extreme" means shooting crocodiles and sharks with laser guns, high-speed chases, high action, explosions, etc.

I predict that our current ‘World Racers’ will most likely go down as a pretty unremarkable theme for LEGO.

Yes, I believe you are correct here. And why do you think that is? I think it's because "Extreme Action" is what sells the sets - through marketing, not superior or outstanding design. I doubt that any of these sets will become legends 20 years from now, but quickly forgotten; but then again, that's coming from an AFOL perspective. Kids now adays may have a differing opinion.

If you mean "extreme" as in "cool, flashy, and over-the-top", then yeah, they have. But if you mean LEGO's gone too far, I think that's an overstatement.

Yes - partly. In terms of LEGO "going too far", no, I didn't mean that; but rather, has quality design been replaced by high action marketing?

minimalist design and basic builds have some things going for them, but they're still a major case of "thinking inside the box", which is directly against the image of creativity LEGO tries to present.

Minimalist design can still be incorporated creatively, and I don't think that a poorly designed set with new colors and larger pieces can be considered thinking outside the box to a greater degree.

the aesthetic style of modern action themes is a great improvement beyond the simple, ordinary designs of themes like Outback (while still constraining itself to versatile part designs)

I think that's a matter of perspective. I'd take a Classic Town set like Outback over the majority of any new Action theme set (or at least the majority of them). That's not to say that I don't like the new Action themes though.

but as I see it they continue to do their job (just as Agents did) by inspiring action-based roleplay and acting as a jumping point for creative building.

Action themes are great, but I don't think that Agents or other theme provide any more creativity opportunities than those of Town/City, or any other theme. I believe that any theme can serve as a jumping point for creative building and play, and the less defined that it by LEGO, the greater the opportunity.

I don't see how you can say that the sets themselves have done anything but improve. The construction is more advanced, cleaner, sleeker, and better looking. I do see the appeal of the older designs (I collect them myself), but you can't really deny that LEGO's sense of aesthetics has improved immensely when it comes to construction.

I'm looking at the new World Racer sets (especially the larger set with the semi-truck) thinking, "ouch, it's Island Extreme Stunts all over again). I don't feel that most of the Action themes have improved; but that's just my personal opinion. In fact, I think sets 20-25 years ago were better designed and faced the limitations of square bricks vs. specialized pieces. Sure, a 2010 airplane will look sleeker with a specialized front-nose piece, but how about building one with bricks? Piece count in these new Action themes also make alternate models very limited.

The extreme nature seems to give rise to some cool pieces and facial expressions you just don't see in a normal happy Lego City set.

Yes - cool pieces are a plus (and a negative as well). I do like the colors of some of the newer Action sets, as well as the minifigs.

Kids these days lack the imagination of past generations and desire more violence.

Blame it all on video games. We have created quite a "give it to me now society", play hard, play fast, dispose of it when it becomes old - but that's another topic.

Truly, the thought of Action Themes becoming too violent never crossed my mind when creating this topic. I was really getting at the loss of good design with specialized pieces, new colors, and lots of fancy action boxart that markets to the kiddies like a 30 second fast-flying commercial. Did we lose something in pursuit of Extreme Action?

More comments and thoughts are certainly welcome.

EDIT: Missed your post Z06.

Its seems that older themes seemed to be based more on exploration, discovery, and risk taking. While many newer themes, as mentioned before, are focused on lots of action and explosive (literally) play features.

It's really interesting to read your thoughts ZO6. That's an excellent point you make in regard to exploration of older action themes to the explosions of today; and quite a nice comparison to sum up one of the major differences. LEGO is certainly delivering what the young boys want. I just wish they did so with some better designs and less specialized pieces.

[LuxorV]

Quite simply put, LEGO has to stay on the market, both media and actual vehicles' ones.

With all the recent Live-action films and ever-more-powerful racing cars, the normal kid expects a lot in terms of aggressive design and cool features from the entertainment products.

As for having weapons mounted on the vehicles, after Speed Racer and Death Race (don't let you be fooled by the R rating; we all know kids get to see this stuff quite easily nowadays) films, what do you think kids will want?

If you want to see an excalation, see it in the whole concept of action. What once was almost sci-fi (a car turning into a boat, a boat tutning into a sub, a flying car) is now very real (in

those three examples).

All that said, I'd really like to see old Outback sets in stores once again

[M:tron engineer]

Mabye they havent crossed the line between not to violent and to violent themes, but sure is that line is very thin. im not against some violent theme(to some degree); all space were more or less violent(all those lasers and rockets),wild west had many weapons too,castle, same with ALL licensed products(indiana jones, Star wars, Batman, spiderman), space police 3... Its part of themes, but it does concern me, that themes like agents and now world racers rely mostly on weapons (although its part of playability). I guess that non agressive themes arent so popular anymore.

[brickzone]

Its part of themes, but it does concern me, that themes like agents and now world racers rely mostly on weapons (although its part of playability).

Why is it a concern now? As kids my siblings and I always had great competition for torch-holders and loud-hailers. It's less of a charade to just have at least pseudo-weapons in most action sets.

[beans]

The co-existence of action themes and the City theme leaves me to support Lego's decisions with pushing the 'extreme' factor for their sets. I mean, for every Desert of Destruction there's a City Corner; it's not like one replaces the other.

I guess your description of 'pleasant' sets is just something that's covered in City now. We have passenger planes and transport vehicles in city - Lego would be smart to avoid having too much overlap between the two themes.

Action themes cover the movie-style speed and explosions. And what's the harm in that if it's not treading on other design space?

[M:tron engineer]

its not that big problem for me, but I see this as a kind of promoting violence. Its just like the games; now many children thinks that stealing car isnt so bad because they all played GTA,same with murder or beating someone. Kids are pehenomenaly fast to remember things, things they see, hear. And if you dont explain them soon enough, they'll take this as NORMAL thing. Also is there no way to enjoy in playing even if its not violent? I take its part of our collective thinking...Didnt USArmy tried to recruit even more through game they developed and released?

[blueandwhite]

Honestly, I think LEGO is simply more in tune with what the average kid wants. These extreme themes seem to be a real cash cow for LEGO. Most kids will never build anything particularly complex with their LEGO so bright flashy colours, big wheels, flick-missiles and swept-back windscreens are perfect accessories. I used to be irritated by these themes, but I've come to appreciate that they generate the much-needed revenue for LEGO to develop themes less popular with children like castle. Without the wacky colours, big wheels and crazy minifigs who always seem to be wearing headsets or microphones people like me would probably never have seen the likes of the MMV, so I'm all for LEGO producing another orange and green racecar with a dozen rocket launchers thrown on it for good measure.

Power Miners has lasted several years. Pirates died after being resurrected for a single year. I think it's pretty evident that LEGO knows what they are doing. As long as we AFOLs continue to benefit from more shop@home exclusives and a few traditional product lines (like the Kingdoms line or the quickly defunct Pirates line) I'll be happy.

[hewkii9]

I predict that our current ‘World Racers’ will most likely go down as a pretty unremarkable theme for LEGO.

I agree. It just does nothing new. Lego's been making lines consisting of oversized vehicles and combat for years now. Even the color scheme is nothing new after Power Miners [and red/black is the oldest color scheme ever]. Even Dino Attack, something superficially similar to this, did something new, as it was the first non-licensed line to have anything close to paramilitary minifigs, and the colorscheme was brand new for its time.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

Yes. Kids these days lack the imagination of past generations and desire more violence.

Yes, I agree, I don't get the point of those M rated games where you kill for no reason. Trust me, (real thing happened) it's scary meeting a six year old who plays call of duty! And don't forget I also met a little five year old at a hotel and he says he watches pg 13 movies and has all these action film tatoos on him!!!!!

[Zarkan]

Have lego themes become more extreme? Yes, and I'm loving every moment of it. While I do have fond memories of some earlier lego kits, for the most part I feel lego themes are getting better and better as time goes on, especially in the areas of asthetics and functions. An excellent example of this is Power Miners versus Rock Raiders. The latter theme can be considered part of the classic age, as it was released in the previous decade and lacked much of the features of modern kits. The kits were entirely focused on drilling, and not on combating the monsters. Yet, it's sucessor Power Miners was, IMO, far more interesting, and also arguably less <insert that tiresome argument>. The reason for this is that Power Miners utilized gear-driven functions in a way that had never been done before in lego sets, making many of the sets an absolute blast to play with. Never in the classic age did we get sets like the Granite Grinder (which packed a clever jackhammer function into a 10 dollar kid), the Thunder Driller (which had a drill that spun when driven across the floor), and the Titanium Command Rig (which combined multiple functions into a vehicle that also transformed into a stationary drill). These set designs are far beyond anything in Rock Raiders or any other classic themes, as they utilize the most recent in lego pieces and construction techniques.

To be honest, until recently, lego sets never came close to matching the complexity and ingenuity of AFOL creations. Sure, the sets of old were cute and fun, but they were also extremely simple and rather plain looking. On the other hand, today's sets use many of the techniques that first debuted majorly in MOC's, such as heavy SNOT usage and seamlessly fusing Technic and System. Until the last decade, most lego sets were built in pretty much the same way - by stacking rows of bricks onto each other. Now, most larger sets require building many intricate sub-sections and merging them into one huge vehicle or building, often in ways that forego "studs on top" entirely. On another note, while some people might complain about huge molds, I find that the size isn't as much an issue as how useful it is. TLC has taken many pieces made specially for one specific set (such as the giant airliner pieces) and incorporated them into sets like the Coastguard Helicopter and SP3 Galactic Enforcer. Other seemingly useless molds are used in multiple ways in the same theme, such as the power Miner wheels doubling as drills. In the meantime, standard bricks, plates and slopes are continually appearing in a multitude of colors and shapes - the ever useful cheese-slope, for example, has already been produced in just about every major lego color! I think it's unfair to write off modern sets as being more <insert that tiresome argument> then classic ones - in anything, it's the early sets that are less complex and less detailed than modern ones. An example of this is how, before the modern ages, I don't believer we had ever gotten a flagship set with over a thousand pieces. Now, we have themes like Agents and Atlantis, which contain huge bases and vehicles that dwarf early sets in both size and piece count.

Now, it has to be said that, while more complex, many of the sets these days feel less quaint and cute than sets of the earlier ages? But is that really a problem? Honestly, I wouldn't say it is at all. What is happening is that, like many other toy companies, TLC is not simply making vehicles and buildings that look like toys, but is making toys that look more like real vehicles and buildings. Instead of approaching licensed themes with the mindset of "how can we legoize this theme and make it cute and friendly," they're trying to make licensed themes that closely resemble their counterparts in the movies (hence the switch to fleshies). Again, some would say this is bad, but I'm in the crowd who likes the fact that Lego sets are feeling more like interactive display models and less like pure toys. The lego sets these days are just as fun to build and play with, IMO, but they also have a sophisticated complexity that I feel most early sets lack. This is evident in my display shelves, which mainly feature sets from the last few years. While some of the earlier lines look good on shelves as well, I don't think there's a single line today that doesn't look fantastic when perched several feet above the floor. Maybe it's just me, but I'm not as keen on displaying themes like Alpha Team and Extreme Team.

One more thing: To be honest, I think World Racers is the wrong theme to use as an example of how modern lego has changed from earlier lego. While many of the recent action themes surpass classic themes IMO, World Racers, is a step backwards from almost every action theme released in the last five years. The vehicles aren't as well designed, the minifigures are rather boring, and the color scheme is extremely dull. I was initially excited about having a racing theme that didn't just focus on cars, but the more I look at World Racers, the more dissapointed I feel. World Racers is just simply a mediocre theme, regardless of the year it came out in.

[KotZ]

I think that Action Themes are definitely more "extreme". I don't have any of the old sets, but I have looked at them on Brickset, and they are more "classical" and have more of a "Towny" feel to them. But as the world changes, many things do, too. Like what Capt.JohnPaul said, a lot of kids (and by kids, I mean 10 years old and younger) are playing more and more violent games, i.e. HALO, Call of Duty, Grand Theft Auto, Left 4 Dead, etc. The children are being "desensitized" as all they do are violent videogames, and when real bad things do happen, they either don't care, or think "oh, darn (or swear word of their choice from any of the games I've mentioned...) I wish that could happen in (insert game title)..."

While I do like violent games, they need to have some educational/moral value (rescue hostages, take out terrorists, etc.), minimal swearing, and be fun. Maybe that's why I play Rainbow Six: Raven Shield. but with all the violence that happens nowadays, LEGO has to adjust to their environment. I know LEGO has a "no violence" policy, they do imply it with their Action themes, like Agents, Alpha Team, Rock raiders, etc. But one thing that I am very happy with is that they still allow imagination to run in their new themes. Yeah, sure LEGO may give some figures names, but they still allow kids to change up the story and use their imagination.

Well, of course with kids "imagination" that they have (which I see very little of nowadays, in kids, teenagers, and adults all around me) they still find ways to incorporate their violent video games into the story. I just can't wait to hear a little 4 year old playing with an Agents, World Racers, or some other theme's car and decide to play "Grand Theft Auto IV" and shoot the Agents members... that'll make headlines, and I'll be depressed that this kid plays those games.

So yes, LEGO Action Themes are more extreme, but they are not bad. I like these newer themes, anyway.

Just sayin' that's my 2 cents.

[Algernon]

Yes, I agree, I don't get the point of those M rated games where you kill for no reason. Trust me, (real thing happened) it's scary meeting a six year old who plays call of duty! And don't forget I also met a little five year old at a hotel and he says he watches pg 13 movies and has all these action film tatoos on him!!!!!

Oh boy. I was afraid this would turn into a beard-stroking "back in the good 'ol days" thread in which we shake our heads disapprovingly at the hooligan youths of today.

First I'd like to dispel the illusion that the older generation was more imaginative than the current one. That is just completely baseless and there is no kind of evidence to support it. I'll use myself as an example. I am an audio engineer and have been in that field for three years. Before then, I was into conceptual design and art. Before then I was into creative engineering. Point is, I have always been the artistic type, and I have many friends who are just as (if not more) creatively charged than me. I know some real talents.

Yes, I grew up with LEGO. Want to know what I did with my "tame" LEGO sets of the early 90s? I built them into huge weapons and held bloodthirsty battles of epic proportions between my armies of minifigures. It didn't matter that the early Space Police II sets lacked weapons of any kind- the brick carnage was still terrible to behold. Want to know what I'm probably going to do after I'm done typing this post? Start up my Xbox 360 and pop in Dead Space (if you think Call of Duty is violent, have a look at the trailer for Dead Space 2). And several of my friends will probably join me.

Uh oh! I guess this means I'm yet another troubled youth victimized by a culture that worships violence. I guess it might seems kinda strange, then, that I've never attacked another human being, have a soft spot for animals, spend the ungodly hours of the morning writing music, and still collect LEGOs. I'm also probably the most polite driver you will ever meet.

Actually, it's not strange at all. Because here's the truth of it, kiddies (you may want to sit down). Violence is entertaining. I like beheading a mutant alien zombie with a saw blade. It's intense, the game is creepy, and I have fun when I play it. I actually enjoyed the new Transformers movie. Yes, it was full of stupid and mind-numbing violence, but I still enjoyed every second of it. It also happened to be a box office monster, if that tells you anything.

We live in a culture that enjoys violence because humans are programmed to seek conflict. This isn't new. The Romans used to throw people into a gladiator pit and watch them fight to the death. They even threw lions into the arena with the gladiators. Bloody conflict is part of who we are, and it's not going to change (don't believe the hippies). I enjoy violence because it's entertaining. I don't let it define who I am. After I turn off my Xbox 360 I am still the same human being that I was when I powered it up. I will still hold meaningful conversations with my friends, I will still be a ridiculously safe driver, and I will still be a very artistic individual. My love of violence hasn't hindered my creativity.

LEGO is becoming more violent because it knows that most children won't buy LEGO sets without some sense of conflict and spectacle. It's what we're attracted to. Now that the toy industry is more crowded than ever, LEGO can't afford to risk customer's dollars over a debate that has raged on since the dawn of time. If it bothers you that much, head on over to the LEGO City forum. Most exciting thing that happens there is when the tractor runs out of fuel.

Phew. I'll get off my soap box now. It just really bothers me when I hear people complaining about how violent the new generation is. They are no worse than you, and if you insist that your generation was less focused on violence, I'll be happy to point out that everybody was on a lot of weed when you were growing up.

[The Eye]

Oh boy. I was afraid this would turn into a beard-stroking "back in the good 'ol days" thread in which we shake our heads disapprovingly at the hooligan youths of today.

First I'd like to dispel the illusion that the older generation was more imaginative than the current one. That is just completely baseless and there is no kind of evidence to support it. I'll use myself as an example. I am an audio engineer and have been in that field for three years. Before then, I was into conceptual design and art. Before then I was into creative engineering. Point is, I have always been the artistic type, and I have many friends who are just as (if not more) creatively charged than me. I know some real talents.

Yes, I grew up with LEGO. Want to know what I did with my "tame" LEGO sets of the early 90s? I built them into huge weapons and held bloodthirsty battles of epic proportions between my armies of minifigures. It didn't matter that the early Space Police II sets lacked weapons of any kind- the brick carnage was still terrible to behold. Want to know what I'm probably going to do after I'm done typing this post? Start up my Xbox 360 and pop in Dead Space (if you think Call of Duty is violent, have a look at the trailer for Dead Space 2). And several of my friends will probably join me.

Uh oh! I guess this means I'm yet another troubled youth victimized by a culture that worships violence. I guess it might seems kinda strange, then, that I've never attacked another human being, have a soft spot for animals, spend the ungodly hours of the morning writing music, and still collect LEGOs. I'm also probably the most polite driver you will ever meet.

Actually, it's not strange at all. Because here's the truth of it, kiddies (you may want to sit down). Violence is entertaining. I like beheading a mutant alien zombie with a saw blade. It's intense, the game is creepy, and I have fun when I play it. I actually enjoyed the new Transformers movie. Yes, it was full of stupid and mind-numbing violence, but I still enjoyed every second of it. It also happened to be a box office monster, if that tells you anything.

We live in a culture that enjoys violence because humans are programmed to seek conflict. This isn't new. The Romans used to throw people into a gladiator pit and watch them fight to the death. They even threw lions into the arena with the gladiators. Bloody conflict is part of who we are, and it's not going to change (don't believe the hippies). I enjoy violence because it's entertaining. I don't let it define who I am. After I turn off my Xbox 360 I am still the same human being that I was when I powered it up. I will still hold meaningful conversations with my friends, I will still be a ridiculously safe driver, and I will still be a very artistic individual. My love of violence hasn't hindered my creativity.

LEGO is becoming more violent because it knows that most children won't buy LEGO sets without some sense of conflict and spectacle. It's what we're attracted to. Now that the toy industry is more crowded than ever, LEGO can't afford to risk customer's dollars over a debate that has raged on since the dawn of time. If it bothers you that much, head on over to the LEGO City forum. Most exciting thing that happens there is when the tractor runs out of fuel.

Phew. I'll get off my soap box now. It just really bothers me when I hear people complaining about how violent the new generation is. They are no worse than you, and if you insist that your generation was less focused on violence, I'll be happy to point out that everybody was on a lot of weed when you were growing up.

I loved this and agree with it. Of course people seek conflict, it's unfortunate that so many people don't realize it. There cannot be a story without conflict, violence or no violence. There needs to be some sort of problem for a good story- any story- to take place. I also agree with you about LEGO City- the City sets (no offense to anyone who enjoys City, as I'm simply stating the truth) were intended for a slightly younger audience than the Action Themes Sets. This is why there is less conflict- they know kids will want be able to utilize the simple scenarios of "the bank robber" and the "couch on fire". You will notice that the older children and beyond mostly enjoy both themes. It is the same reason that Creator sells far less sets than the Star Wars line. Not saying that Creator isn't often harder to build, or cheaper. I'm saying that people nowadays seek conflict and it's inevitable. People are drawn to an interesting story, violence or no violence. You can call me an idiot, poorly educated or anything you'd like, but I actually prefer the newer, more action-oriented themes to Lego City.

On the other hand, it's funny how LEGO has made conflict sets that haven't sold as well. This may be due to improper advertising of the earlier years, but still- the X-Treme Team sets and LEGO Island sets sold rather poorly, and included more conflict than the average sets. They tried the same with World City sets, which sold less than the City line of 2005 and onward. I don't quite understand why this happened, and I'm not trying to argue anything in particular, however, I'm just noting that.

This is coming from someone who loves Creator, and believes the usual so-called "age limits" should be made infinite (i.e. 8+), however. If you like City, play with it, but don't come here to complain about too much violence in other themes. Remember that everyone is different and everyone wants something different from their bricks.

[Capt.JohnPaul]

I loved this and agree with it. Of course people seek conflict, it's unfortunate that so many people don't realize it. There cannot be a story without conflict, violence or no violence. There needs to be some sort of problem for a good story- any story- to take place. I also agree with you about LEGO City- the City sets (no offense to anyone who enjoys City, as I'm simply stating the truth) were intended for a slightly younger audience than the Action Themes Sets. This is why there is less conflict- they know kids will want be able to utilize the simple scenarios of "the bank robber" and the "couch on fire". You will notice that the older children and beyond mostly enjoy both themes. It is the same reason that Creator sells far less sets than the Star Wars line. Not saying that Creator isn't often harder to build, or cheaper. I'm saying that people nowadays seek conflict and it's inevitable. People are drawn to an interesting story, violence or no violence. You can call me an idiot, poorly educated or anything you'd like, but I actually prefer the newer, more action-oriented themes to Lego City.

On the other hand, it's funny how LEGO has made conflict sets that haven't sold as well. This may be due to improper advertising of the earlier years, but still- the X-Treme Team sets and LEGO Island sets sold rather poorly, and included more conflict than the average sets. They tried the same with World City sets, which sold less than the City line of 2005 and onward. I don't quite understand why this happened, and I'm not trying to argue anything in particular, however, I'm just noting that.

This is coming from someone who loves Creator, and believes the usual so-called "age limits" should be made infinite (i.e. 8+), however. If you like City, play with it, but don't come here to complain about too much violence in other themes. Remember that everyone is different and everyone wants something different from their bricks.

I agree that stories must have a conflict and you have to have violence to have a resolution, but do we need 6 year olds playing games like this. I also prefer the action oriented themes, but must we have 1rst graders playing games where you shoot and kill people for know reason as in Grand Theft Auto. If your a teen I understand but 6 years old?!

[Aanchir]

I don't know about that. I actually like the design and style of the Classic sets better. Perhaps you are correct that the "Extreme Action" look and boxart is more appealing to the kiddies though. Perhaps my AFOL eyes are getting old, but the newer sets (esp. Island Xtreme and World Racers just look so much like a 'mish-mash' of pieces and colors.

No matter what your argument, Island Xtreme Stunts is not new. It was released about eight years ago. LEGO made a lot of odd decisions back then, and Island Xtreme Stunts was one of them.

Yes, I believe you are correct here. And why do you think that is? I think it's because "Extreme Action" is what sells the sets - through marketing, not superior or outstanding design. I doubt that any of these sets will become legends 20 years from now, but quickly forgotten; but then again, that's coming from an AFOL perspective. Kids now adays may have a differing opinion.

The problem with this statement, though, is it assumes that World Racers is representative of a trend in action themes. This is not the case. Agents, which came shortly before it, had many high-detail models with countless creative action features. I think they're some of the most fun sets there have been in the past decade.

Minimalist design can still be incorporated creatively, and I don't think that a poorly designed set with new colors and larger pieces can be considered thinking outside the box to a greater degree.

You are partly right here. Atlantis uses a lot more large pieces (which you seem to consider a fault) than themes of the 80s and 90s. But realize that many of those pieces did not emerge in action themes: of the two that first came to mind, this one is from Castle and this one is from City.

Power Miners has some large pieces, and some of these were used in Atlantis. this one and this one are similar to this piece from 1989 and this piece in 1990, but more versatile than either could ever hope to be. Furthermore, together with this piece, they form a three-stage drill whose stages rotate in alternating directions. I'd love to see you try to do that with the System and basic Technic of the era you seem to favor.

All in all, you seem to be assuming that any set with large pieces is badly designed, ignoring the play value of the sets and the versatility of the parts. I'm sure a lot of these sets will be remembered by those who gave them half a chance.

I'm looking at the new World Racer sets (especially the larger set with the semi-truck) thinking, "ouch, it's Island Extreme Stunts all over again). I don't feel that most of the Action themes have improved; but that's just my personal opinion. In fact, I think sets 20-25 years ago were better designed and faced the limitations of square bricks vs. specialized pieces. Sure, a 2010 airplane will look sleeker with a specialized front-nose piece, but how about building one with bricks? Piece count in these new Action themes also make alternate models very limited.

You ignore the fact that in a lot of action themes, specialized pieces are used for purposes other than their original intent. Anyone can build a blocky-looking vehicle using standard slopes. In fact, many of the aircraft from years in the past relied on this piece from 1985, which debuted as a specialized part for aircraft noses. It's a far greater challenge to design a submarine that uses wheels from the Castle theme or half-cylinders from a Town-theme cement mixer.

Also, piece count in the current action themes isn't the least bit restrictive. Consider this set from 2008 which had 1,107 parts. This set has some of the most play value of any set I've ever seen. It is able to hold a small buggy, a large buggy, a jet-ski, a dinghy, and an airplane. Open it up and there's a projector that works with a light brick, a wall that blows open when you press a lever on the outside, and a small crane for unloading the small buggy. And note that it, like most sets these days, relies heavily on the smallest, least specialized, and most versatile piece you're likely to encounter in any set besides a 1x1 plate: the 1x1 cheese slope.

As far as play value goes, kids like things that do stuff. That's one of the reasons weapons are so popular in sets. Real-life weapons are dangerous, yes, but more importantly they're flashy. They're noisy. They blow stuff up. There's something magnificent about a tiny gun being able to do so much. And that's not to say I'm a gun fanatic (I've wielded a gun only a few times, at the riflery course at summer camp, and I don't think I'd ever be comfortable holding one without supervision). It's just that they have the same quality LEGO sets have-- a lot of action in a small package.

Blame it all on video games. We have created quite a "give it to me now society", play hard, play fast, dispose of it when it becomes old - but that's another topic.

Isn't that the same thing a lot of people do with books? Read it a few times on the thrill, and then shelve it until you start to forget what happened? Isn't that what people do with movies-- watch them once or twice, and then not watch them again for a long time? There's nothing all that special about video games, besides that they're comparatively very expensive. And for a lot of history, books were the same way. The more things change...

Also, I'm certainly never disposing of my Agents or Power Miners sets. =P

Overall, I don't know why you ever brought in the "Specialized Pieces" topic. It's not a problem that has much of anything to do with action themes, but rather a problem we've had for a long time that really hasn't gotten much better or worse in recent years. After all, isn't this a specialized piece? It came out in 1992. How about this one? It's from 1982-- nearly thirty years ago!

The fact is, there will always be some parts that are more specialized than others, and there's nothing wrong with that. Some are atrocious, like the modern-day airplane nose (although with the new helicopter nose LEGO seems to be learning from that mistake), or the boat hull I just linked to. Others are fairly harmless, like Technic panels (even though I agree that World Racers abuses them to the point of ugliness) or castle wall pieces. And others are completely brilliant, like the Power Miners drill sections or our vast selection of large window pieces. It doesn't make the set designs of today any less intelligent than those of years past, nor does it reflect that kids today are all that different than they were years ago. But LEGO is still changing as they get a better understanding of their audience, their assets, and their liabilities.

Let me conclude by saying that I have a certain philosophy about things, and it's completely incompatible with the idea that everything in the world just gets worse and worse and worse (less so with the myth that things were once much, much, much better). Things do get worse sometimes, but typically they get better. Other things stay almost completely the same for long stretches of time. So I apologize for the blocks of text above-- unless I put my philosophy to the test sometimes, I'm afraid I would lose confidence in it. That said, I'm trying to break the habit of huge blocks of text, but seeing as this topic has rather a lot of that to begin with I suppose my contribution can't do much harm.

[The Eye]

I agree that stories must have a conflict and you have to have violence to have a resolution, but do we need 6 year olds playing games like this. I also prefer the action oriented themes, but must we have 1rst graders playing games where you shoot and kill people for know reason as in Grand Theft Auto. If your a teen I understand but 6 years old?!

I don't see what 6-year olds playing video games has to do with LEGO putting revolvers and lasers in their sets. What video games companies put in their games is up to them, and there are ratings for that. It's up to the parents, responsible or not to decide what is acceptable for their child. But if you mean playing games with LEGO, I don't think LEGO is responsible for influencing people to jack cars and shoot innocents. Most of the violence is against creatures, and judging by the animated movies on the websites, such as having a Rock Monster eat a sulfur crystal and burp, I don't think they mean any harm. None of the weapons are intricate, none really going above or beyond a revolver chamber or trigger. The only real intricacy on a weapon are the gatling guns and silencers, but really, few children view them any different as laser guns. Those that do are inevitable- one child will always be differently influenced than the next. Having weapons on a set doesn't necessarily support that. The gatling guns were from Exo-Force, where humans fought robots. Sure, a child could bring in a city worker from his Garage set and bust a cap in his ABS, but LEGO didn't include anything like that in the initial set to support anything like that. The silencer is on the new Slave I set, on Boba Fett's gun, where they are simply trying to have movie accuracy over violence. The Star Wars sets initially have higher age levels than the City sets.

Regardless of the argument, I still agree with your video game comments- I don't like the idea of adults jumping the ratings systems. They should read the M's and the T's as something their children shouldn't play. I'm just trying to say that LEGO is and always will be for a universal audience, to imagine whatever they'd like. Even if a child views something as a violent weapon, LEGO cannot be held responsible. Thankfully, if a children is able to be creative through playing with LEGO, the company can be held responsible.