Recommended Age Range

[IAmWillGibson]

I'm sure this has been discussed before in the hundreds of years since LEGO's inception, and if there is one great debate on here, please kindly direct me to it, but something that's been bugging me since, well, I was 9+ was why LEGO places the suggested age range on most of their products. Now, I get the lower age, that makes perfect sense, but more often than not [i know it's not 100%] they slap an upper-end on there too, and I've never quite known why. Is there a reason there's a "You're too old for this" cut off? Was it only there to give my dad a talking-point during the great "When are you gonna grow up?" debate? Despite the strong legacy of LEGO as a respected product, I can't help but feel some twinge of... embarrassment, maybe, buying something that clearly says I'm almost 20 years too old to be buying.

With some further thought, I see that some of the sets I have here that remain unopened [for the time being] are 7-12 and 7-14, which is a little older than I thought was the norm for non-Technic/non-Exclusive stuff. Maybe it's there to give kids older than 7 but younger than 14 some level of confidence that they're not playing with a toy for a 7 year old? But what about all the 17 year olds out there? So many things to ponder.

[Big Cam]

I try not to post simple posts like I sgree, and I came into this thread wanting to add my thoughts, but honestly I just plain agree with you. A cap doesn't make sense. No other toy does this. A mnimum age is on evrything for safety reasons, but to my knowledge, LEGO is the only one with a cap on age. Very interesting, I hope someone knows why.

EDIT: I did a bit of searching and everything I find sahys it's an age suggestion that the set was designed for, whether it's an actual age limit or suggestion, I still think it's odd that LEGO thinks adults are not interested in LEGO, at least with their age ratings.

[mikey]

I think it is simply to give relatives of children who look for gifts a guide on what to buy them. If you do not have kids yourself and buy Christmas/ Birthday gifts for a extended family, you may be in uncharted water in the Toy Store, so the upper age can give you the idea that perhaps the child is to old for this type of Lego or Toy.

Removing the upper age limit printed on sets would not affect the wider publics perception of Lego, as everyone knows it is a Toy for Children. Obviously we as Adults still buy and play with Lego, but that is our choice to choose an interesting past time. Lego are fully aware of the AFOL market, and release sets specifically for this niche market (with 16+ guidline, etc.), alongside the core market of the committed KFOL and the gift buyers who give kids Lego.

Also I don't think anyone really cares what you buy- the shop owner wants our money and the girl on the checkout is just waiting for her shift to finish. I doubt that much attention is paid to the upper age guideline!

[Jan]

I'm sure this has been discussed before in the hundreds of years since LEGO's inception, and if there is one great debate on here, please kindly direct me to it, but something that's been bugging me since, well, I was 9+ was why LEGO places the suggested age range on most of their products. Now, I get the lower age, that makes perfect sense, but more often than not [i know it's not 100%] they slap an upper-end on there too, and I've never quite known why. Is there a reason there's a "You're too old for this" cut off? Was it only there to give my dad a talking-point during the great "When are you gonna grow up?" debate? Despite the strong legacy of LEGO as a respected product, I can't help but feel some twinge of... embarrassment, maybe, buying something that clearly says I'm almost 20 years too old to be buying.

With some further thought, I see that some of the sets I have here that remain unopened [for the time being] are 7-12 and 7-14, which is a little older than I thought was the norm for non-Technic/non-Exclusive stuff. Maybe it's there to give kids older than 7 but younger than 14 some level of confidence that they're not playing with a toy for a 7 year old? But what about all the 17 year olds out there? So many things to ponder.

Well mainly I think the upper age range is to give a view on the expected period of use. (see it as an period for investment). For instance to help people decide when to switch from giving Duplo to Lego. Aside from that there are also a lot of themes (Harry Potter, Star Wars, Indiana Jones for instance) which I guess have age tags corresponding to the film age ratings.

I don't think it has a lot to do with the building challenge itself anymore. The manuals are so well layed out today that virtualy anyone can build anything of the current productrange.

So mainly I think that the age range is just not there for you, but for the less informed customer, parent, grandma etc..., keep in mind that it is also a toy.

[Enpaz]

My opinion about this is the following.

Without the "age suggestion on the higher end" most mothers would look at a "7+" set and think "Hmm, it's nice, but he's already thirteen... should I really? No, he's growing out of that stuff... and this is intended for seven-year-olds!" and so on. Come to think of it, what do we AFOLs and TFOLs and all kinds of "advanced" lego fans think of the Duplo "4+" line? Formally we are actually included in the target age range (Well... not me sadly, but hopefully all of you! ) but we see it as kids' stuff, don't we? At least I do.

But with the box saying "7-14" she will rather think: "This toy is suitable up to the age of 14! My boy will definitely have fun with it. And it's surely good for him... better than playing that silly computer games all the time!".

We can't have it all ways. I'm satisfied already with the 16+ markings on some products!

Enpaz

[Big Cam]

See now the duplo line is clearly aimed at younger children, so a maximum age seems more appropriate on the duplo line.

I would really like to hear TLG's official word on this.

[Captain Becker]

I agree whit everyone else. I dont care about those Age ranges at all, my parents are wondering at "These sets are age of 7-12 and you are almoust 18"

Lego is my hobby, and i dont care about those age ranges at all as i said, i just buy the set wich i want to get and thats all, so it wont bug me at all.

Captain Becker

EDIT: Fixed some typing errors

Edited December 1, 2010 by Captain Becker

[vexorian]

But with the box saying "7-14" she will rather think: "This toy is suitable up to the age of 14! My boy will definitely have fun with it. And it's surely good for him... better than playing that silly computer games all the time!".

We can't have it all ways. I'm satisfied already with the 16+ markings on some products!

Enpaz

And that works great, until you turn 15 and suddenly no relative will imagine that you may actually like that one box with 7-14. I feel it should be 7-99 for some sets. It is ever so hard to go to a store to buy a sets that says 7-14 and get looks or assumptions that it is a gift for a kid ... When the set itself is something large that can be easily enjoyed by an adult.... The 100 USD sets are not just for children and teens, seriously. Jig Saw puzzles are way a lot more boring for an adult than a large LEGO set and they have 7-99 written...

Edited December 2, 2010 by vexorian

[IAmWillGibson]

And that works great, until you turn 15 and suddenly no relative will imagine that you may actually like that one box with 7-14. I feel it should be 7-99, for some sets. Because really. It is ever so hard to go to a store and buy sets that are 7-14 when you could seriously enjoy them at any age... The 100 USD sets are not just for children and teens, I mean, seriously. Jig Saw puzzles are way a lot more boring for an adult than a LEGO set and they have 7-99 ...

Am I drunk, or have LEGO made the upper age 99 on some products before? I'm sure I've seen it.

[Jan]

"Jig Saw puzzles are way a lot more boring for an adult than a LEGO set and they have 7-99 ..."

The Lego games series don't have these agemarks, but similar to the mentioned jigsaw they have 7+ or 4+ or 5+ on the box. Maybe there are more exceptions

[prateek]

I've been a victim of this age cap. My mom uses the 7-14 as an excuse to get out of me getting Lego, since I am clearly over that range. I don't think it's sensible to put these on toys. As Cam said, the minimums are fine for safety reasons, but a cap is useless. I think the cap actually reduces sales/profit for Lego, and a prime example of this is me

Edited December 1, 2010 by prateek

[Aanchir]

I think the main reason is not for people who are buying the sets for themselves, but rather for gift-givers. Suppose you're a grandparent who's totally out-of-touch with whatever the kids are into these days, and your eight-year-old grandson starts talking about how he'd love the LEGO Toy Story train set. He's eight years old, and he's probably just mentioning it offhand, so he doesn't go into much detail. And you can't ask him later on what he meant, because then he'll know you're getting it for him as a gift.

So which do you get him? This set? Or this one? This is a very specific example-- oftentimes, a gift-giver might not get any information other than that the person they're supposed to get a gift for likes LEGO sets. And not being "enlightened" like us AFOLs about what the LEGO experience is like, they might to eliminate as many possible gifts as they can if they want to get something that will be appreciated.

The "maximum age" on the Duplo one tells you what ages LEGO feels might enjoy these sets. Perhaps there are six-year-olds or older who like LEGO Duplo sets (I never hesitated to play with my Duplo pieces when my little brother used to enjoy them, and he's seven years younger than me). Perhaps there are five-year old child prodigies who can build a System set of average complexity. But these recommendations help people know what not to get as gifts. And while we're all adults who can probably appreciate a set of any complexity (at least for its parts), some kids do grow out of traditional System sets entirely.

Also, to those who brought it up, the 4+ line isn't Duplo sets at all. It was a System line at the same scale as Jack Stone sets. So there's just further info why LEGO can't just assume that "Only Duplo needs an age cap" (or alternatively, that "System sets don't need an age cap"). LEGO wants to create lasting customers, and making sure gift-givers have a clear understanding of what ages will appreciate sets is critical (or the kid might end up deciding prematurely that "LEGO is just for little kids"). Once someone's an AFOL (or even a kid with his own allowance), this is no longer an issue, and the age cap can just be ignored. Until then, though, people with little to no understanding of LEGO sets might be making the purchases, and they need all the help they can get.

[CP5670]

Am I drunk, or have LEGO made the upper age 99 on some products before? I'm sure I've seen it.

Yes, around 2003-04 many sets had an upper limit of 99 prominently shown on the boxes.

The UCS and modular building sets are presumably meant for an AFOL audience and don't have any upper limits, only a lower limit of 16. In the early 90s, I also recall that the Model Team sets were advertised in the catalogs as being "ages 9 and up" while all the other themes (even Technic) had upper limits.

Edited December 1, 2010 by CP5670

[JimBee]

I think it is simply to give relatives of children who look for gifts a guide on what to buy them. If you do not have kids yourself and buy Christmas/ Birthday gifts for a extended family, you may be in uncharted water in the Toy Store, so the upper age can give you the idea that perhaps the child is to old for this type of Lego or Toy.

I agree with this one - it's probably for people buying gifts for children, who are wondering, "is this child too young/ old for this toy?". Of course, Lego does not add age "limits" because they ignore AFOLs. Truth is TLG pays a lot of attention to the AFOL community for (mature) feedback, makes sets designed for an older audience, and even looks for new set designers within the AFOL community.

[lisqr]

I absolutely hate the age range thing. It gave my mom an excuse to not buy me any lego.

Not an issue now, but still brings back bad memories.

[meyerc13]

A mnimum age is on evrything for safety reasons

In the USA, the only minimum age that is listed for safety reasons is 3 yrs old. Sets will be labeled "not for children under 3 years of age" if there is a choking hazard, but any other minimum age listed has nothing to do with safety and everything to do with developmental milestones and interest levels.

So when you see a toy with a '5-8 yrs' or '7-12 yrs' range, it only means that children under the minimum age might not have the physical dexterity or maturity to handle the subject matter, it isn't a saftey issue.

The upper ranges aren't unique to LEGO toys, although perhaps LEGO is the only toy with an upper range that is typically collected by adults. As a parent of two children five and under, there are many toys with an upper and lower suggested age for children in this range.

[Enpaz]

I feel it should be 7-99 for some sets.

/signed

7-99 would be perfect indeed! Maybe set the lower limit a bit .. lower on some sets, but 99 is really ideal. I am wondering, the "age range" had in fact once been something with "up to 99" (-99), hadn't it?

Enpaz

[The Yellow Brick]

Every time I ask to buy some more lego my mum would usually say "Don't you think your abit old for lego now" just because the age is something like 6-12.

Also when I go out to shops, I would ask someone where is the lego and the first thing they say is "your abit old to be playing with lego" and I was actually so annoyed by this I said back "aren't you abit old to be stacking shelves" and then I walked off

[Enpaz]

I was actually so annoyed by this I said back "aren't you abit old to be stacking shelves" and then I walked off

Fair thing, bro! Crush them! Make them sufferrrr!

Sorry for the off-topic, but I had to get rid of that...

[Arigomi]

Reminds me of this:

http://www.youtube.c...h?v=JtFvQ4BEk0M

The age cap means a lot to adults buying gifts for children of relatives or friends. Unlike the parents who spend a lot of time with them, it can be hard to know what kids like because their interests can change over the course of a year. The last thing they want to do is buy something that the child thinks is for "babies". 

EDIT: Fixed some typos.

Edited December 3, 2010 by Arigomi

[Stank]

Well those age ranges are truly pointless because they lead into dark ages.*Someone (not necessarily employee or a parent but a friend) looks at the box, sees the age range* and says like : "When will you stop buying toys for children and grow up?" and you think about it and stop buying.

Also when you go to the store and want to buy another Lego set and employee asks that well known: "Should i giftwrap it? Is it for someone?" I say the truth. It's for me, don't giftwrap it, then i pay, take the set and go.

Like Arigomi said they're useful when you want to buy a present and see the age range and think: "Hmm... he has 8 years and here says 6-12. I will buy this".

[captainsamus]

I tend to ignore the age range thing, but I definitely think that it could be restructured to show that it's intending to show difficulty of the build.

Something like Basic/Moderate/Advanced.

[fred67]

Also when I go out to shops, I would ask someone where is the lego and the first thing they say is "your abit old to be playing with lego" and I was actually so annoyed by this I said back "aren't you abit old to be stacking shelves" and then I walked off

%$#$ them. How can they just assume you're there for yourself anyway? Jerks.

That's really a great comeback, though... no offense to those of you stocking shelves, but that was a high school job for me.

It's hard to hide it at the LEGO Store (not that I'd want to) when you pull out your VIP card. But the great thing about TLS is most of the people working there are LEGO enthusiasts, too, so I stand there feeling up collectible minifigure packs and chatting with them about what we're working on. Even adults who come into the store... and it's funny as we're all standing there feeling up minifigure packs - some admit it's for them, some have kids in tow who want a specific one; we all know what the others are looking for and it's like "Here, I think I found the snowboarder you wanted..."

Nice community, overall.