Jump to content


Some weird set ideas?


24 replies to this topic

#1 Fallenangel

Fallenangel

    Posts: 2469
    Joined: 10-January 09
    Member: 4964
    Country: 미국

Posted 29 January 2010 - 01:29 AM

Posted Image
While many of the more recent UCS and large-scale sets look fantastic and are packed with play features, I have to admit sometimes I don't know why TLC chose to make UCS versions (or at least really expensive renditions) of certain sets.

Take, for example, the UCS AT-ST and the UCS TIE Advanced. The way I see it, Ultimate Collector's Series sets are  usually instantly recognizable and very iconic. In this case, the UCS X-wing, Star Destroyer, Tantive IV, and the minifig-scale Millennium Falcon (the $500 one) would all make sense. But the AT-ST isn't really recognized - not only that, the design is sloped and the angles are difficult to pull off in LEGO.
And for the TIE Advanced - I honestly don't think the average Joe would hold Darth Vader's TIE particularly highly - it was only in one scene and was flung into space at the end of it for that matter. Not exactly memorable in my opinion. These two ships just don't really scream "Star Wars" or even "iconic".

This peculiarity in set choice could also be said for one of the more pricey sets of 2009 - the AT-OT and LAAT/c. I'm not sure what role either of those ships play in the new Clone Wars series (by the way, I hate it and I think the '03 series was better), the AT-OT was only in one scene in Revenge of the Sith - the one on Felucia where Aayla Secura is shot by her troops. And I only remember seeing one LAAT/c on Geonosis - just one. In other words, these two are pretty obscure. (And a bit odd-looking.) So why include relatively obscure ships as part of the current children-oriented line that we've been seeing lately (I mean the Clone Wars sets - come on, the flick missiles!)

And for that matter, the Republic Cruiser as well... sure, it was the first Star Wars-related thing we saw in nearly 20 years but... it was destroyed in the first scene and we never see it again (unless you count that transport from Attack of the Clones.) I'm sure new Qui-gon and Obi-wan figures could be released with Anakin's pod or something rather than a big, pricey limited edition set.

Expanded Universe sets too! While the TIE Defender was a great idea, I honestly thought LEGO would make something more recognizable and easier to design, like the Outrider, rather than EU TIEs and an Imperial Landing Craft. (One scene - and only in the 2002 Special Edition - in the very top left corner, really small. They decided to make a set from that?)

That being said, I really don't hope LEGO decides to make more big sets of obscure ships again. It being the 10th anniversary of Empire Strikes Back, I honestly hope LEGO would release a 6211-scaled Nebulon-B or a minifig-scaled AT-AT rather than more "new" snowspeeders. (Unlikely, I know, but a guy can dream, can't he?) Yoda's hut would make an excellent playset (and opportunity for reusing Yoda's head), I wonder why LEGO hasn't thought of that yet.
And of course a midi-scale Slave I would seem perfect.

What do you all think of this?

#2 Brickus

Brickus

    Posts: 918
    Joined: 17-July 09
    Member: 6717
    Country: Australia

Posted 29 January 2010 - 01:48 AM

I think you have valid reasoning in your argument, but I disagree with the comment of Darth Vaders Tie, the scene it was in, was one of the most iconic scenes from ANH. Also it could be argued that the Slave 1 is an obscure model as we mainly see it from behind, we never get many close ups of it, apart from the scene where Han is being loaded onto it. What we really need to see is Vaders Super Star Destroyer in UCS, now that would be awesome.

Edited by Aussie Tahu Nuva, 29 January 2010 - 01:52 AM.


#3 Big Cam

Big Cam

  • A good mood, too.


    Posts: 13999
    Joined: 02-April 09
    Member: 5701
    Country: USA

Posted 29 January 2010 - 02:03 AM

I think this will sparck some great discussions but in general, I disagree.  Depending on who you are, these may or may not be recognizable to you.  But for me they are all very recognizable.

#4 The Legonater

The Legonater

  • Can NOT Ctrl + Alt + Delete the Past


    Posts: 4538
    Joined: 09-December 09
    Member: 8515
    Country: Canada.

Posted 29 January 2010 - 02:08 AM

 fallenangel327, on Jan 28 2010, 07:29 PM, said:

While many of the more recent UCS and large-scale sets look fantastic and are packed with play features, I have to admit sometimes I don't know why TLC chose to make UCS versions (or at least really expensive renditions) of certain sets.

Take, for example, the UCS AT-ST and the UCS TIE Advanced. The way I see it, Ultimate Collector's Series sets are usually instantly recognizable and very iconic. In this case, the UCS X-wing, Star Destroyer, Tantive IV, and the minifig-scale Millennium Falcon (the $500 one) would all make sense. But the AT-ST isn't really recognized - not only that, the design is sloped and the angles are difficult to pull off in LEGO.
And for the TIE Advanced - I honestly don't think the average Joe would hold Darth Vader's TIE particularly highly - it was only in one scene and was flung into space at the end of it for that matter. Not exactly memorable in my opinion. These two ships just don't really scream "Star Wars" or even "iconic".

This peculiarity in set choice could also be said for one of the more pricey sets of 2009 - the AT-OT and LAAT/c. I'm not sure what role either of those ships play in the new Clone Wars series (by the way, I hate it and I think the '03 series was better), the AT-OT was only in one scene in Revenge of the Sith - the one on Felucia where Aayla Secura is shot by her troops. And I only remember seeing one LAAT/c on Geonosis - just one. In other words, these two are pretty obscure. (And a bit odd-looking.) So why include relatively obscure ships as part of the current children-oriented line that we've been seeing lately (I mean the Clone Wars sets - come on, the flick missiles!)

And for that matter, the Republic Cruiser as well... sure, it was the first Star Wars-related thing we saw in nearly 20 years but... it was destroyed in the first scene and we never see it again (unless you count that transport from Attack of the Clones.) I'm sure new Qui-gon and Obi-wan figures could be released with Anakin's pod or something rather than a big, pricey limited edition set.

Expanded Universe sets too! While the TIE Defender was a great idea, I honestly thought LEGO would make something more recognizable and easier to design, like the Outrider, rather than EU TIEs and an Imperial Landing Craft. (One scene - and only in the 2002 Special Edition - in the very top left corner, really small. They decided to make a set from that?)

That being said, I really don't hope LEGO decides to make more big sets of obscure ships again. It being the 10th anniversary of Empire Strikes Back, I honestly hope LEGO would release a 6211-scaled Nebulon-B or a minifig-scaled AT-AT rather than more "new" snowspeeders. (Unlikely, I know, but a guy can dream, can't he?) Yoda's hut would make an excellent playset (and opportunity for reusing Yoda's head), I wonder why LEGO hasn't thought of that yet.
And of course a midi-scale Slave I would seem perfect.

What do you all think of this?


I dissagree completely. The TIE advanced was one of the most memorable ships in the original movies. It gets a decent amount of screen time, and is in a VERY memorable sceane. The AT-ST is also fairly memorable, and is in two movies, unlike most OT vehicles. It plays a very big part in Return of the Jedi- without it Endor would be cake.

Although- yes, neither the AT-OT or LAAT/c were the most famous vehicles, a decnt fan would want them badly. And I fail to see how they are odd-looking.

Now, EU is fairly tricky buisness. When deciding when to make things that are only in books or games some people have probly never heard of, it's tough. Personally, the TIE Defender is more recognisable than the Outrider. To add to that, people are always looking to build of their TIE collection, and this is an excellent addition. The same goes for the Landing Craft. Although not neccesrily rocognisable, it is definatly similar to other things people have seen, and included some rare figs.

And, as I've said before, the Slave 1 is hardly iconic. It's in 2 sceanes for VERY brief moments. besides, making two of the same ship in the same year is just strange to me.

Memory is the Key

A Christian and not ashamed.

Posted Image
Dyric Rone, Assassin of the Light

Level 28 1/3 Assassin

Theodor Legion, 73 year old ex-Bonaparte in Cruel Angel's Thesis


#5 sok117

sok117

  • Grammer and Speling Professorr


    Posts: 2223
    Joined: 21-July 09
    Member: 6766
    Country: canada

Posted 29 January 2010 - 02:29 AM

Like many others I disagree with your points.  It is a pleasure for Hardcore Star Wars fans to see even the most obscure sets released by TLC.  The AT-OT and LAAT were awesome (though I did not pick them up) and other vehicles from the EU are very cool to see made into official sets.  As for Darth Vaders Tie advanced, That is one of the most memorable ships from ANH it's right underneath the x-wing because Darth Vader was the pilot, whats not to remember?  To want TLC to make a Nebulon B, but not make a Tie advanced  :wacko:, the Nebulon B had even less screen time then the Tie advanced, remember Lego is directed at Kids, why would they make a ship like the Nebulon B instead of Darth Vaders ship.  Don't get me wrong I would love a nebulon B, but It just doesn't seem possible... yet.  And a midi scale Slave 1 is really unlikely because they are making a new one this year so it would be the third Slave 1 in 4 years, again not very likely.

Although your ideas are very good, I disagree with your choice of "unrecognizable" ships.
~Sok117

#6 Brickus

Brickus

    Posts: 918
    Joined: 17-July 09
    Member: 6717
    Country: Australia

Posted 29 January 2010 - 02:49 AM

Also I have no idea what the Nebulon B is, but I might know by picture reference, also other fans have no idea of some of the names of the ships.

#7 Darth Legolas

Darth Legolas

  • Oh boy vomit brick!


    Posts: 2217
    Joined: 15-December 08
    Member: 4695
    Country: Well umm....

Posted 29 January 2010 - 02:51 AM

I disagree. everything in the Clone Wars is obscure. :tongue:  I wouldn't mind the show so much if it weren't for the fact that the people who make it create a new ship everyday. In a recent episode, they invented 3 new ships with the exact same purpose as a Venator, a Nu Shuttle, and a Cruiser.

Plus, the TIE Advanced is definitely an important ship, I have to say that there's no argument against that.
...I have a Death Star...

#8 Fallenangel

Fallenangel

    Posts: 2469
    Joined: 10-January 09
    Member: 4964
    Country: 미국

Posted 29 January 2010 - 03:13 AM

I apologize for my comment on Vader's TIE. It's just that with the prequels they just tried to cram so many new vehicles and starships into three movies that they really don't have much character and I get used to ignoring them. To think I forgot that Darth Vader makes the TIE advanced iconic, and so does the Death Star trench run... please excuse me. I am sincerely sorry.

The reason for my suggesting a midiscale Slave I is not because it's iconic. I never said it was iconic. It was more because I recall the fact that Boba Fett as well as his "father", (At least after 2002) Jango, proved widely popular... I know very many Boba fans. And Jango's Slave I did get a lot of screen time...
And the Slave I is around the same size as the Falcon, so I thought using the same scale would be convenient. (I'm sorry to any 4504 lovers, but I don't favor sets which are excessively out of scale or disproportionate to itself.)
And from what I've seen of the 2010 Slave I, I'm actually a bit disappointed... new minifig molds are great, but not if they jack up prices like they're doing now. And more thorough redesigns would be much appreciated. The new ARC-170 looks like a mod of the original.

If I remember correctly, the Redemption did get a significant amount of screen time in both the final scene in Empire Strikes Back as well as battle scenes in Return of the Jedi, and a number of video games and comic books... probably as much as the TIE Advanced, if not more.
And another reason I suggested a 6211-sized Nebulon B is because UCS sets are aimed at a more dedicated group. In other words, a group for which it would be a pleasure for "even the most obscure sets released by TLC". Next to the Star Destroyer, the Nebulon-B is the best candidate for a LEGO capital-ship type model. And it doesn't have to be big... I'd be happy with a 50-stud long Redemption model as long as it was accurate to the film.

By obscure TIEs I meant the TIE tank. Of course the TIE Defender is recognizable.

#9 Darth Legolas

Darth Legolas

  • Oh boy vomit brick!


    Posts: 2217
    Joined: 15-December 08
    Member: 4695
    Country: Well umm....

Posted 29 January 2010 - 03:19 AM

Okay, first off the Nebulon-B is one of the most famous Rebel Ships... not ever mentioned by name, but the entire end of Episode V takes place aboard it. Sorry for the double post, but here's some evidence about the Clone Wars random ships:

We have our Nu-Class Shuttle, so why do we need this?

Posted Image

And this thing is just ugly!

Posted Image

I agree with you, the Prequel Trilogy has a lot of random ships, but they are there, so why not make money from them?

Edited by Darth Legolas, 29 January 2010 - 03:20 AM.

...I have a Death Star...

#10 Brickus

Brickus

    Posts: 918
    Joined: 17-July 09
    Member: 6717
    Country: Australia

Posted 29 January 2010 - 03:22 AM

Plus none of those ships are seen after the Clone Wars, so it seems a bit redundant even designing them anyway.
The good thing about the Prequels is that you saw the ships slowly change into their imperial forms from the OT, these hardly resemble their supposed later forms.
I wouldn't want to see any of these make it into LEGO sets.

Edited by Aussie Tahu Nuva, 29 January 2010 - 03:32 AM.


#11 midiscale33

midiscale33

    Posts: 33
    Joined: 24-November 09
    Member: 8317

Posted 29 January 2010 - 04:23 AM

I am signifigantley younger than everyone in the forum, my excuse for watching clone wars :wink: , and I hate how every week it's new vehicle after new vehicle, it's kind of sad really :tongue:
I think considering all the TV I watch clone wars is the most pitiful show of them all

#12 CELESTRIAL

CELESTRIAL

    Posts: 82
    Joined: 20-December 09
    Member: 8652

Posted 29 January 2010 - 06:09 AM

This is indeed a rather interesting discussion topic.

I would have to say the sets that have come out recently are really top notch and quite necessary !
First off, the AT-ST i would say, is very memorable. Who can ever forget the " battle of endor " when Chewy over takes one ? i own the UCS AT-ST myself and i think that nailed it perfectly !
and the Tie advance is a good one to turn UCS. my only " eye brow raiser " is why they made a UCS tie interceptor first over a normal Tie fighter ( even though the Tie interceptor IS my favourite Tie ship  :tongue:  )

and as far as the CW animated series and EU, its always great to span on your army or battle scene, so i think creating these ships is a really good idea ( especially the Tie defender ). If anything, id say TLG would be saving all the most awaited releases in till the later years, go off with a bang ( such as the Nebelun-B, which is probably my favorite star cruiser ship ), and the line up for the end of the year is tremendous to !

so personally, id say the choices of sets being made is a good move and is certainly creating holes in my pockets  :tongue:
Posted Image
Check out my artwork at - http://celestrial-ha...deviantart.com/

#13 prof1515

prof1515

    Posts: 94
    Joined: 15-December 08
    Member: 4692
    Country: USA

Posted 29 January 2010 - 06:36 AM

Quote

While many of the more recent UCS and large-scale sets look fantastic and are packed with play features, I have to admit sometimes I don't know why TLC chose to make UCS versions (or at least really expensive renditions) of certain sets.

Take, for example, the UCS AT-ST and the UCS TIE Advanced. The way I see it, Ultimate Collector's Series sets are  usually instantly recognizable and very iconic. In this case, the UCS X-wing, Star Destroyer, Tantive IV, and the minifig-scale Millennium Falcon (the $500 one) would all make sense. But the AT-ST isn't really recognized - not only that, the design is sloped and the angles are difficult to pull off in LEGO.
And for the TIE Advanced - I honestly don't think the average Joe would hold Darth Vader's TIE particularly highly - it was only in one scene and was flung into space at the end of it for that matter. Not exactly memorable in my opinion. These two ships just don't really scream "Star Wars" or even "iconic".

If they only did iconic ships from the Star Wars films, there'd really only be the Millennium Falcon, the X-Wing, the TIE Fighter, the Star Destroyer and the Death Star.  None of the rest really rest in the minds of non-Star Wars fans the way those ships do.  A case could be made for the AT-ST and Darth Vader's TIE as secondary vehicles of modest recognizability.

Quote

This peculiarity in set choice could also be said for one of the more pricey sets of 2009 - the AT-OT and LAAT/c. I'm not sure what role either of those ships play in the new Clone Wars series (by the way, I hate it and I think the '03 series was better), the AT-OT was only in one scene in Revenge of the Sith - the one on Felucia where Aayla Secura is shot by her troops. And I only remember seeing one LAAT/c on Geonosis - just one. In other words, these two are pretty obscure. (And a bit odd-looking.) So why include relatively obscure ships as part of the current children-oriented line that we've been seeing lately (I mean the Clone Wars sets - come on, the flick missiles!)

They're not iconic ships but it's really a no-win scenario between obscure vehicles or remakes of vehicles already released.  Fact is, Lego has exhausted the Star Wars line of any original, worthwhile models.  Obscure vehicles and rehashes of existing ones are all that's left.

Quote

And for that matter, the Republic Cruiser as well... sure, it was the first Star Wars-related thing we saw in nearly 20 years but... it was destroyed in the first scene and we never see it again (unless you count that transport from Attack of the Clones.) I'm sure new Qui-gon and Obi-wan figures could be released with Anakin's pod or something rather than a big, pricey limited edition set.

It's no more obscure than the Tantive IV or Slave-1.

Quote

Expanded Universe sets too! While the TIE Defender was a great idea, I honestly thought LEGO would make something more recognizable and easier to design, like the Outrider, rather than EU TIEs and an Imperial Landing Craft. (One scene - and only in the 2002 Special Edition - in the very top left corner, really small. They decided to make a set from that?)

Why is the TIE Defender a "great idea"?  You can't complain about Lego creating obscure vehicles and then praise something like that or any other EU garbage.  Millions upon millions of people have seen the AT-ST or the Republic Cruiser.  Only Star Wars fanbois know what the TIE Defender or Outrider are.

Quote

That being said, I really don't hope LEGO decides to make more big sets of obscure ships again. It being the 10th anniversary of Empire Strikes Back, I honestly hope LEGO would release a 6211-scaled Nebulon-B....

You just contradicted yourself.  The Nebulon-B isn't an iconic ship like the Falcon or X-wing.  If Lego were to offer a "6211-scaled Nebulon-B" that would be a perfect example of one more of the "big sets of obscure ships".

Quote

...or a minifig-scaled AT-AT rather than more "new" snowspeeders.

They've already released TWO system AT-ATs.  While I agree that we don't need more snowspeeders, a minifig-scaled (if by that you mean like the UCS Millennium Falcon) AT-AT would be a very large and expensive set of a vehicle that's already been released before.  Talk about redundant!

Quote

Yoda's hut would make an excellent playset (and opportunity for reusing Yoda's head), I wonder why LEGO hasn't thought of that yet.

They have thought of that.  I suggest you spend several hours looking over Brickset's lists of sets.

Quote

And of course a midi-scale Slave I would seem perfect.

One of the most obscure ships imaginable, why do we need ANOTHER Slave-1 regardless of scale.  There have almost been more versions of the Slave-1 released than it has SECONDS on-screen in the original trilogy.

I hope Lego just lets the license die next year.  They've dipped into the well too many times; it's dry.  Find other licenses or, god forbid, create new ORIGINAL themes again.  Lego likes to tout imagination and creativity.  Building the third version of something seen in 30 year-old movies isn't either.

Edited by prof1515, 29 January 2010 - 06:40 AM.


#14 TheBrickHitHouse

TheBrickHitHouse

    Posts: 528
    Joined: 28-June 08
    Member: 3427

Posted 29 January 2010 - 07:03 PM

I want a Lego set of everything!

Do people really want Lego just to do key vehicles and thus just have 200 version of the X wing?

I want an Outrider!
It's all part of the plan....

#15 Big Cam

Big Cam

  • A good mood, too.


    Posts: 13999
    Joined: 02-April 09
    Member: 5701
    Country: USA

Posted 29 January 2010 - 08:17 PM

 midiscale33, on Jan 28 2010, 09:23 PM, said:

I am signifigantley younger than everyone in the forum, my excuse for watching clone wars :wink: , and I hate how every week it's new vehicle after new vehicle, it's kind of sad really :tongue:
I think considering all the TV I watch clone wars is the most pitiful show of them all
If it's pitiful and you don't like it then don't watch it. :sceptic:


I think Lucas has a huge imagination and this is a vehicle for his vehicles to come to fruition (no pun intended).

#16 sok117

sok117

  • Grammer and Speling Professorr


    Posts: 2223
    Joined: 21-July 09
    Member: 6766
    Country: canada

Posted 29 January 2010 - 10:10 PM

 prof1515, on Jan 29 2010, 01:36 AM, said:

If they only did iconic ships from the Star Wars films, there'd really only be the Millennium Falcon, the X-Wing, the TIE Fighter, the Star Destroyer and the Death Star.  None of the rest really rest in the minds of non-Star Wars fans the way those ships do.  A case could be made for the AT-ST and Darth Vader's TIE as secondary vehicles of modest recognizability.



They're not iconic ships but it's really a no-win scenario between obscure vehicles or remakes of vehicles already released.  Fact is, Lego has exhausted the Star Wars line of any original, worthwhile models.  Obscure vehicles and rehashes of existing ones are all that's left.



It's no more obscure than the Tantive IV or Slave-1.



Why is the TIE Defender a "great idea"?  You can't complain about Lego creating obscure vehicles and then praise something like that or any other EU garbage.  Millions upon millions of people have seen the AT-ST or the Republic Cruiser.  Only Star Wars fanbois know what the TIE Defender or Outrider are.



You just contradicted yourself.  The Nebulon-B isn't an iconic ship like the Falcon or X-wing.  If Lego were to offer a "6211-scaled Nebulon-B" that would be a perfect example of one more of the "big sets of obscure ships".



They've already released TWO system AT-ATs.  While I agree that we don't need more snowspeeders, a minifig-scaled (if by that you mean like the UCS Millennium Falcon) AT-AT would be a very large and expensive set of a vehicle that's already been released before.  Talk about redundant!



They have thought of that.  I suggest you spend several hours looking over Brickset's lists of sets.



One of the most obscure ships imaginable, why do we need ANOTHER Slave-1 regardless of scale.  There have almost been more versions of the Slave-1 released than it has SECONDS on-screen in the original trilogy.

I hope Lego just lets the license die next year.  They've dipped into the well too many times; it's dry.  Find other licenses or, god forbid, create new ORIGINAL themes again.  Lego likes to tout imagination and creativity.  Building the third version of something seen in 30 year-old movies isn't either.

I was agreeing with you up until the part where you said to discontinue Star Wars.
~Sok117

#17 gotoAndLego

gotoAndLego

    Posts: 1051
    Joined: 09-January 10
    Member: 8984
    Country: USA

Posted 29 January 2010 - 10:25 PM

Considering I just bought both the Tie Adv and ATST, having found good prices on them, I have to disagree about them, and the Tantive, being obscure and here is why.

The Tantive is THE ship that opened the main trilogy so its cemented in my mind, and I have to say, my minifg one is still together and has resisted the scavenging for bricks that most of my other models have suffered.

The Tie Adv, however briefly featured was the ship taking out XWings down in the trenches.

The ATST...Ewoks, two tree trunks, and squish. Need I say more. :D

Edited by gotoAndLego, 29 January 2010 - 10:29 PM.

-----
Please support my Lego Cuusoo projects:

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

FLICKr

#18 prof1515

prof1515

    Posts: 94
    Joined: 15-December 08
    Member: 4692
    Country: USA

Posted 29 January 2010 - 10:44 PM

gotoAndLego said:

The Tantive is THE ship that opened the main trilogy so its cemented in my mind, and I have to say, my minifg one is still together and has resisted the scavenging for bricks that most of my other models have suffered.

People remember the massive star destroyer that followed but not the little ship that first went overhead.  The seemingly endless procession of the star destroyer across the screen caught people's attention because of its size and that's what sticks in their mind.

Just to test, I called my mom and asked her what she remembered about the 1977 release of Star Wars (I was only 3 at the time so I didn't see it until one of its re-releases a couple years later).  She remembered the star destroyer but completely forgot there was another ship before it.  I also quizzed a bunch of friends over AIM and FB.  Aside from a rabid Star Wars fan, none of my friends knew the name Tantive IV (or even the name Rebel Blockade Runner) and while they remembered a ship before the star destroyer they couldn't describe it other than to say it was smaller.

Quote

The Tie Adv, however briefly featured was the ship taking out XWings down in the trenches.

I subjected this to the same test as the Tantive IV.  It fared even worse in some regards because many didn't realize Vader's ship was any different than a regular TIE fighter.

Quote

The ATST...Ewoks, two tree trunks, and squish. Need I say more. :D

This vehicle did the best because of its extensive screen time in ROTJ.  Aside from my avid Star Wars fan friend and a couple of the others, most didn't realize the AT-ST was in Empire Strikes Back (after all though (blink and you'd miss it) but they did all remember the AT-STs in the third film though the most prominent vehicle (aside from the Falcon, X-Wing, TIE fighter and Star Destroyer) from ROTJ was the second Death Star.

#19 Defi

Defi

    Posts: 32
    Joined: 24-April 09
    Member: 5884

Posted 29 January 2010 - 11:21 PM

I think it's fantastic that they're doing more Expanded Universe sets. Personally, I've gotten more into Star Wars because of the more obscure ships. I know several friends who are the same way, and not just with Star Wars. They see obscure, but visually pleasing, figures or sets and they are intrigued to find out more about them.  There's probably enough balance that Lego would continue releasing newer sets in the same vogue, after all.

As for thinking that the re-releases show the lack of originality by the Lego group, I have to completely disagree. I own every Snowspeeder and every Minifig Slave I released so far, and I can say that there are enough differences in design and function that they are still more than worth the purchase. That being said, however. I would still like a nice mixing of updated sets and new models.  I'd like to see an Ebon Hawk or a KOTOR related subtheme, but that's for another topic  :wink:

#20 simonjedi

simonjedi

  • PT Jedi are the BEST!


    Posts: 1812
    Joined: 14-September 07
    Member: 1965
    Country: UK

Posted 29 January 2010 - 11:43 PM

Quote

Expanded Universe sets too! While the TIE Defender was a great idea, I honestly thought LEGO would make something more recognizable and easier to design, like the Outrider, rather than EU TIEs and an Imperial Landing Craft. (One scene - and only in the 2002 Special Edition - in the very top left corner, really small. They decided to make a set from that?)

It depends on how much of a fan you are. I spent a large portion of my childhood playing X-wing/Tie fighter/Alliance, so i know about the tie defender, Neb B.

While i would like an outrider, i'd say its more obscure than the Tie defender . I think it only appeared in SoTE (afaik).  Although the outrider was one of the minifig Star destroyer alt models. I think the instructions were on the lego website.

Quote

Also I have no idea what the Nebulon B is, but I might know by picture reference, also other fans have no idea of some of the names of the ships.

It was the medical ship where luke got his replacement hand in the last 5 minutes of ESB. Forum members who have played Rogue leader on the gamecube probably hate it.

Posted Image

Edited by simonjedi, 29 January 2010 - 11:44 PM.

Posted Image

| 7674 V19 Torrent Starfighter Review |

[*] Dr. Ben Elegnem, head of medical staff in INFECTED (Killed Night 2) (Not Infected)

[*]Jimmy Palmer (Gas Station Attendant) in Prohibition Mafia (Scum)


#21 sok117

sok117

  • Grammer and Speling Professorr


    Posts: 2223
    Joined: 21-July 09
    Member: 6766
    Country: canada

Posted 30 January 2010 - 12:16 AM

 simonjedi, on Jan 29 2010, 06:43 PM, said:

It depends on how much of a fan you are. I spent a large portion of my childhood playing X-wing/Tie fighter/Alliance, so i know about the tie defender, Neb B.

While i would like an outrider, i'd say its more obscure than the Tie defender . I think it only appeared in SoTE (afaik).  Although the outrider was one of the minifig Star destroyer alt models. I think the instructions were on the lego website.



It was the medical ship where luke got his replacement hand in the last 5 minutes of ESB. Forum members who have played Rogue leader on the gamecube probably hate it.

Posted Image

All though that would be cool, that would be a pain to build...
~Sok117

#22 Fallenangel

Fallenangel

    Posts: 2469
    Joined: 10-January 09
    Member: 4964
    Country: 미국

Posted 30 January 2010 - 02:32 AM

 prof1515, on Jan 29 2010, 06:36 AM, said:

If they only did iconic ships from the Star Wars films, there'd really only be the Millennium Falcon, the X-Wing, the TIE Fighter, the Star Destroyer and the Death Star.  None of the rest really rest in the minds of non-Star Wars fans the way those ships do.  A case could be made for the AT-ST and Darth Vader's TIE as secondary vehicles of modest recognizability.



They're not iconic ships but it's really a no-win scenario between obscure vehicles or remakes of vehicles already released.  Fact is, Lego has exhausted the Star Wars line of any original, worthwhile models.  Obscure vehicles and rehashes of existing ones are all that's left.



It's no more obscure than the Tantive IV or Slave-1.



Why is the TIE Defender a "great idea"?  You can't complain about Lego creating obscure vehicles and then praise something like that or any other EU garbage.  Millions upon millions of people have seen the AT-ST or the Republic Cruiser.  Only Star Wars fanbois know what the TIE Defender or Outrider are.



You just contradicted yourself.  The Nebulon-B isn't an iconic ship like the Falcon or X-wing.  If Lego were to offer a "6211-scaled Nebulon-B" that would be a perfect example of one more of the "big sets of obscure ships".



They've already released TWO system AT-ATs.  While I agree that we don't need more snowspeeders, a minifig-scaled (if by that you mean like the UCS Millennium Falcon) AT-AT would be a very large and expensive set of a vehicle that's already been released before.  Talk about redundant!



They have thought of that.  I suggest you spend several hours looking over Brickset's lists of sets.



One of the most obscure ships imaginable, why do we need ANOTHER Slave-1 regardless of scale.  There have almost been more versions of the Slave-1 released than it has SECONDS on-screen in the original trilogy.

I hope Lego just lets the license die next year.  They've dipped into the well too many times; it's dry.  Find other licenses or, god forbid, create new ORIGINAL themes again.  Lego likes to tout imagination and creativity.  Building the third version of something seen in 30 year-old movies isn't either.

prof1515, I would have to disagree with you on several of these points.

There are many, many much more prominent iconic starships than the Millennium Falcon, the X-Wing, the TIE Fighter, the Star Destroyer and the Death Star.
To name just a few, the snowspeeder and the AT-AT.
I do not believe in the no-win scenario. LEGO has released two Millennium Falcons as well, but the Truescale and midiscale versions seem to sell just fine. I believe that a LEGO starship in a new scale is as novel as a completely new ship. I also think that the AT-AT was just as iconic as the Star Destroyer as a symbol of Imperial strength. And you're forgetting that LEGO has not released Padme's yacht, Anakin's customized Jedi Starfighter from the 2003 Clone Wars,  or any of the larger rebel ships from the Battle of Endor other than the Home One playset.

The TIE Defender was a great idea BECAUSE Star Wars fanboys, or at least anyone who's played the X-wing video games, would instantly recognize it. And as far as I know, just as many non-Star Wars fanboys as fans have played Shadow of the Empire for the N64. And I hardly think EU is "garbage".
The Nebulon-B isn't really that obscure, as some members have pointed out. And a 6211-scaled Nebulon-B would be less than a quarter of the size of 6211. In other words, not really that big. I actually wish LEGO would just release big ships in a smaller scale without minifigures... ships like the Venator, Acclamator, and even the separatist frigates from the prequels would work well in 6211-scale.
And I have seen no sign of Yoda's hut except in the Dagobah X-wing. I meant as an individual playset. The small size and Yoda fig would make it a good candidate as a set by itself...

And I don't mind rehashes - as long as they look like rehashes and not releases. They add variety to the collection and they often look better too.
Examples of rehashes that look too much like rereleases would be the "new" snowspeeder, X-wing, ARC-170 (looks like a mod of 7259 IMO) and the preliminary images of the 2010 Slave I.

I apologize, those of you who said it are correct in that Slave I is a very obscure ship...
And even if it's not the Slave I, large ships like the LAAT/i, the Lambda-class shuttle, and even the Rogue Shadow would work well in midi-scale. (Though I guess the Rogue Shadow would be closer to 6211-scale...)

#23 prof1515

prof1515

    Posts: 94
    Joined: 15-December 08
    Member: 4692
    Country: USA

Posted 30 January 2010 - 04:13 AM

fallenangel327 said:

There are many, many much more prominent iconic starships than the Millennium Falcon, the X-Wing, the TIE Fighter, the Star Destroyer and the Death Star.
To name just a few, the snowspeeder and the AT-AT.

The AT-AT could qualify as iconic but I'm not so sure about the snowspeeder.  To be iconic, it needs to be recognizable even by people who aren't intimately familiar with Star Wars.  Take my ex-girlfriend N for example.   She finally saw the Star Wars trilogy about five years ago.  She could identify (not by name probably) the AT-AT as "that was in Star Wars" but something like the snowspeeder might not ring a bell "Is that from your Star Trek?" might be her response (she doesn't watch Trek either).

Quote

I believe that a LEGO starship in a new scale is as novel as a completely new ship.

I was referring to re-releasing new versions in the same scale such as what they're doing (yet again) with the landspeeder, snowspeeder and Slave-1.

Quote

...you're forgetting that LEGO has not released Padme's yacht, Anakin's customized Jedi Starfighter from the 2003 Clone Wars,  or any of the larger rebel ships from the Battle of Endor other than the Home One playset.

I'm not forgetting it at all.  I have repeatedly said that they should release Amidala's starship.  Every time they come out with a new version of the snowspeeder, Slave-1 or obscure stuff from the Clone Wars I ask why there hasn't been a single attempt at Amidala's starship.  Every time they offer some no-name, unimportant background character like this year's lot of Jedi thrown haphazardly into set after set, I ask why we haven't yet seen Padme in her Queen regalia or the white jumpsuit or any other version of her.  Hell, we haven't even seen her in the outfit they originally offered (back in the yellow-figure days) in 1999 in the new flesh tone.

As for the rest of the rebel ships, they're barely on-screen in any capacity that makes them worth the price of a large set.  They'd have been fine in the old mini scale treatment but to do them in any other scale would result in $120+ (since it's pretty clear Lego is upping costs, I doubt we'll ever see a ship like the Star Destroyer for less than $120 again) sets of ships that to call obscure would be to give them too much credit.  Additionally, look at the complaints received about the Venator being "too small" or "too expensive for what you get".  To make something like a Nebulon-B in such a fashion would elicit more complaints about the lack of playability because it'd be pretty fragile and would have very little internal space.  They might do it as a small playset in the form of Home One but aside from the medical bay, we don't see any of the inside of it.  That scene at the end of TESB is not exciting.  How's Lego going to market it?  "Kids can make Luke sit up in bed!  Luke and Leia can look out the window!"  At best, it'd be another Vader Transformation set without the "playability" since nothing really happens in the scene.

A much better offering would be a playset of Grievous' starship from Episode III.  Like Home One it could consist of two sections: a bridge and the room where Palpatine was held "prisoner".  If they felt obligated to add a vehicle, they could toss on a skimpy hangar with a Jedi starfighter (after all, we've haven't gotten enough versions of that, have we? [/sarcasm])

Quote

The TIE Defender was a great idea BECAUSE Star Wars fanboys, or at least anyone who's played the X-wing video games, would instantly recognize it. And as far as I know, just as many non-Star Wars fanboys as fans have played Shadow of the Empire for the N64. And I hardly think EU is "garbage".

Not everyone who buys Star Wars Lego are die-hard fans, as you point out.  I'm a Star Wars fan but not a fanboi.  I appreciated the original trilogy though I'm more critical of them now that I'm older and more experienced with film.  The prequels weren't very good by comparison and the Clone Wars was atrocious.  I've watched a bit of the animated series and while it's probably better than most animated shows on TV now that's not saying much.  Lego's free to create whatever they want but there will be a larger market for sets that are more identifiable to a larger audience.  In other words, I'm talking about sets based on the movies.  Otherwise, why pay a lot of money for obscure Clone Wars (or even obscurse trilogy) sets when you can get equally unrecognizable sets in their Space Police line?

To release sets based off of video games or the like but not sets like the aforementioned Amidala's Starship is sort of like a restaurant serving a plate with nothing more than the parsley garnish.  Then they toss on some sides of stale offerings like rehashes of the snowspeeder.

Quote

And a 6211-scaled Nebulon-B would be less than a quarter of the size of 6211. In other words, not really that big.

And hence it wouldn't be big enough to fit minifigures inside.  So why do it like 6211?

Quote

I actually wish LEGO would just release big ships in a smaller scale without minifigures... ships like the Venator, Acclamator, and even the separatist frigates from the prequels would work well in 6211-scale.

6211 isn't really "in scale".  It's an attempt to make a system set out of a vehicle too large to represent in scale to other system sets.  They'd be better off doing accurate versions in mini-scale.  By that, I mean ships like the Venator scaled to ships like 4488 instead of their 20007 version.

Quote

And I have seen no sign of Yoda's hut except in the Dagobah X-wing. I meant as an individual playset. The small size and Yoda fig would make it a good candidate as a set by itself.

Lego has repeatedly ignored the potential for sets without vehicles.  Yoda's hut has to contain an X-Wing, the cantina has to have a landspeeder, Home One has to have an A-Wing and so on.  That seems to be their thinking.  They did well with Cloud City but the only other time they didn't add a vehicle, they had some hair-brained stick-control crap (Ultimate Jedi Duel).

Edited by prof1515, 30 January 2010 - 04:17 AM.


#24 Defi

Defi

    Posts: 32
    Joined: 24-April 09
    Member: 5884

Posted 30 January 2010 - 05:15 AM

 prof1515, on Jan 29 2010, 10:13 PM, said:

Lego has repeatedly ignored the potential for sets without vehicles.  Yoda's hut has to contain an X-Wing, the cantina has to have a landspeeder, Home One has to have an A-Wing and so on.  That seems to be their thinking.  They did well with Cloud City but the only other time they didn't add a vehicle, they had some hair-brained stick-control crap (Ultimate Jedi Duel).

Probably because they don't sell very well. We get playsets only so often because they won't have as much appeal to the younger audience. Look down an action figure aisle, and you won't see many playsets, and even fewer that don't come without a vehicle of some sort.  As a kid, it's easier to pick up the Landspeeder from Mos Eisley Cantina and zoom it around on the carpet, then return it to "base" than to just stay within the confines of a playset without a vehicle.

#25 The Legonater

The Legonater

  • Can NOT Ctrl + Alt + Delete the Past


    Posts: 4538
    Joined: 09-December 09
    Member: 8515
    Country: Canada.

Posted 30 January 2010 - 11:12 PM

 Defi, on Jan 29 2010, 11:15 PM, said:

As a kid, it's easier to pick up the Landspeeder from Mos Eisley Cantina and zoom it around on the carpet, then return it to "base" than to just stay within the confines of a playset without a vehicle.


And that exsactly is the problem. Sure, people want a better Cantina. Who desn't? But from the beginning, LEGO has been about playablity. But if you take even an iconic sceane like the Cantina, playability goes down. Take out the landspeeder and make it bigger, sure you have a great sceane, but kids will buy it, build it, and go "What o earth do I do now?" Even if you swarm it with new figs, people STILL won't see the playbility. Eve a Nebulon would fare better, because it's a ship that you can fly around. It's the precise reason LEGO hasn't yet realeased would-be stunning sets such as the Jedi Temple or Kamino. Look at Cloud City. Gret Set, but it didn't sell well because there ws next to no playbility. Cloud City was one of the most memorable places in Ep.5, but next to nothing exiting happens until the end, and then it's only a few blasters firing and a lightsaber duel. It's the same reason why we don't have a proper Yoda's Hut yet. What playablity is there with a hut? The best you could do is re-make the LUL! We all want more playsets, but I don't se it happening in the near future.

Memory is the Key

A Christian and not ashamed.

Posted Image
Dyric Rone, Assassin of the Light

Level 28 1/3 Assassin

Theodor Legion, 73 year old ex-Bonaparte in Cruel Angel's Thesis




Reply to this topic



  


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users